Yes
by Xypher Pino
Over the past couple of years, there have been tons of discussions revolving around the changing, and sometimes even destruction, of certain historical places that possess a controversial name or origin. At Greensboro College, with recent conversations about the renaming of Lea Center, we have to ask ourselves: is this even necessary? How much are we actually doing by changing the names of these places? More importantly, we must think about whether or not we are damaging history by doing things like this.
It is important to note that the names of these places which we now deem to be problematic names were, at the time they were built or named, societally acceptable and were named after certain people for good reason. As an example, let us examine the Lea Center and why it was named after Reverend Solomon Lea, GC’s first ever president, in the first place.
Solomon Lea is considered by many as a revolutionist of his time. Lea was a Methodist preacher who was a pioneer for women’s education during a time where society viewed women as inferior to men. Lea, before even going to GC, which at the time was an all-female college, was president of another all-female school – Farmville Female School located in Virginia. He was responsible for not only overseeing the administrative duties of the college and expanding its reach to other women to better their education, but he also interacted with the students on a personal level by teaching some classes himself, something that is extremely rare for college presidents nowadays. On top of that, after his time at GC, he established the Somerville Female Institute in Leasburg, North Carolina. He operated this institution for 44 years, making it one of the more respected and successful all-female colleges of the time.
As you can see, Lea was extremely passionate about women’s education and dedicated his life to improving the quality of life for women at the time. This is the main reason why Greensboro College dedicated the Main Building lobby to him by naming it in his honor – to show respect to his passionate work advocating for women and forever ingrain his name in history. If GC were to change the name of Lea Center, there is the potential that much of Lea’s work and history would be forgotten and lost. Though there will still be written records of what Lea has done, it will not have the same impact as it would have, had the name of the lobby remained dedicated to Lea.
History can never be fully erased, but we can significantly alter the past, and to a certain extent, rewrite history, through the renaming of historical places such as the Lea Center. As a democratic society that is all about freedom of expression and speech, the last thing we want to do is rewrite history just to fit the narratives and values of our society today.
No
by Breanna Adamick
In the past several years, there has been a rash of news stories about the renaming of buildings, tearing down of statues and overall examining of problematic historical monuments. More than once, the question has arisen of whether removing historical names and statues is in some way erasing history.
While removing these problematic names and statues is to some extent altering history, it is not erasing it, as the history of the figures those monuments were meant to honor remains in the history books. Furthermore, it could be said that we are not erasing history so much as we are changing the history of the present day. We are choosing to move forward enlightened of the questionable characters of some notable historical figures, and to make strides showing that what were once their values are not our own today.
The quiet renaming or even dramatic destruction of monuments creates something of the opposite effect of erasing history, as they end up making new history. Take, for example, the violent destruction of Nazi monuments by the Red Army nearly 80 years ago as Hitler’s terrible reign was halted. Far from erasing the history of Nazism and the atrocities that came with it, the demolition of the monuments made more history—it was a celebration to end a horrible period of time.
This question of erasing history is quite relevant at Greensboro College today, with the ongoing discussion of Lea Center, the lobby of Main Building named for the college’s first president, Reverend Solomon Lea. With research revealing Lea to have owned an enslaved person, conversations have taken place as to whether Lea Center should be renamed, or at least, have Lea’s name removed. At times, the conversation shifts to the question of whether this demonstrates an attempt to change or cover up aspects of the school history, but there is a distinct difference between attempting to rewrite history and simply moving forward from the controversy surrounding it.
Renaming and removing problematic historical monuments is something that will likely continue in society as we progress in our understanding of the history behind them as well as our current values. Hopefully, we are not actually attempting to erase important history in our world, nation or schools, but foster a more inclusive, welcoming environment for everyone. If tearing down some statues and renaming some buildings must be done in order for that to be achieved, so be it. It does not change the past, but it can still change the future.
The Collegian 