● Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy; Christopher Columbus?

Michael Aquilino English Journalist

“In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue.” The world would never be the same.

With Columbus Day having just been “celebrated” on October 10th, and Halloween not too far down the road, I took the liberty of exploring the oftentimes glorified, but nonetheless historically grim, story of Christopher Columbus. Born sometime in 1451 (his precise date of birth, unknown) in the port city of Genoa, Italy, Columbus is world-renowned for his momentous voyages across the Atlantic Ocean. Paving the way for further European exploration of newfound territories, as well as for the exploitation and colonization of these, Columbus’ activity upon arrival in the Americas is perhaps of particular, frightening, notability. In this article, I look at a variety of communal perspectives on Christopher Columbus, from a variety of different stakeholders; his behaviour; and his legacy, including memorial initiatives. I attempt to amalgamate these views in ways that may see accordance. Columbus is a complex historical figure, one that has been admired and detested for many reasons. The facts of history, however, cannot be refuted. Some of these historical facts, concerning Columbus, are horrifying—raising the question of his honourability. I believe there is a consensus that the topic of Christopher Columbus, who “[h] olds a pivotal place in American foundational mythology” (p. 43), according to Heike Paul (2020), is a highly controversial one. This is the case whether or not the topic is discussed in the context of Columbus Day celebrations. According to Ivan Pereira in his article, “Christopher Columbus Statue Debate Rises as Controversial Statues Fall Across the Country” (2020), Columbus is “[f]ar from the heroic, noble explorer portrayed in some history books”. All in all, I think that, in spite of Columbus’ oftentimes frowned upon, and perhaps alarming, historical reputation, he is representative of much greater historical value than only himself. Thus, memorials and celebrations in his name should be granted a continued existence. William J. Connell (2013) eloquently states, “[t]he connection between holidays and real history is usually problematic, and it helps if the two are considered separately” (p. 137). While society cannot change a historical figure’s past, nor previous celebrations of any particular holiday, nor even the act of erecting any particular historical monument, it can certainly change their nature in both the present and the future. For this reason, I believe that while the past is irreparable, the present and the future certainly are. Connell spends a great deal of time explaining the historical origins of the Columbus Day celebration in the United States, as well as justifications for the construction of Columbus monuments across the country. He provides insight on the seemingly altruistic interests of these holidays’ and monuments’ architects, stating, “[h]olidays were chosen as occasions to bring everyone together, not for excluding certain people” (2013, p. 138). While such origins are important to know and understand, the alternative meanings, which such holidays and monuments have since come to embody, cannot be disregarded nor underemphasized. Connell’s article posits, “Columbus Day was supposed to recognize the greatness of all America’s people—but especially Italians and Native Americans” (2013, p. 140), two, to varying extents, historically oppressed populations in the United States. Thus, this day may hold more significance to some groups of people than others, as Columbus was “[n]ot only an ancestral figure for different ethnic groups, but was also considered a patron by Catholics in Protestant America” (Paul, p. 67). Although having been geared toward a sweeping embrace of diverse cultures, Columbus Day was not received as such by everyone. Christopher Columbus is an antihero in the eyes of many people, particularly of Indigenous roots—a man who, upon arrival in the New World, oversaw atrocious, merciless, and nefarious activity. He was a man who terrorized Indigenous populations, exploiting them to his own benefit—staking claim in a land which was not, with the pre-existing presence of Indigneous peoples, his to stake. Opponents of Columbus’ supposed glorification may thus be warranted in their opinions. Nevertheless, in my opinion, it is the exact arguments of Columbus’ opponents, highlighting his horrid behaviours, that sway me in believing that Columbus should remain an American symbol. Columbus’ image has become so besmirched by his despicable reputation, that to erase him from social

Photo par Sebastiano del Piombo, wikipedia.org

exposure, would also be to erase, and possibly forget, all of those who have been victimized by him—we simply cannot let the lives lost, and lives forever worsened, have been lost in vain. Unfortunately, a European figure is likely not the best representative of Indigenous histories. That being said, society must shift their perspectives on Columbus, remembering him not for who he was, but for what he has done. Columbus’ memorials should remain in place, not as a token of respect, but one of ridicule and shame. Memorials can be altered in a manner that would help to express such notions. As Pereira suggests, statues and monuments “[w]ill have to have some changes to educate the public on the figure’s nuances, and to help people understand the nation’s history” (2020). In doing so, statues and monuments can include new explanatory signage that touch upon the figure’s dark history, remembering the populations of people that Columbus helped destroy and enslave⁠—with supplementation of the statues and monuments with other diverse historical figures, if feasible. Therefore, is it clear that, as Connell declares, “[i]f the Columbus Day holiday is to survive [...] it needs to find ways of embracing the new and different” (142), i.e. it needs to adapt to an ever-changing and evolving world. In one article from USA Today, Grace Hauck describes how some American states have begun to, and some have already, change the name of the Columbus Day holiday to Indigenous Peoples Day (also known as Native Americans Day). A facilitator of one such event in Chicago, Illinois commented, “[the change in name] isn’t a way to erase our history or erase what was done, because we want to make sure what happened is taught [...] It’s wrong to spread false narratives of what actually happened” (Hauck, 2019). In light of this, I would argue that erasing Columbus is erasing history—and that supplemental education can be done, in Columbus’, the perpetrator’s, name. On a concluding note, from the same article, the Governor of Oklahoma has recently signed an innovative bill declaring both holidays, Columbus’ and Indigenous Peoples’, to be celebrated on the same day. Immense progress has thus been made, but there is still much left to be done. How such progress unfolds will be interesting to see, as it attempts to rectify the events of the past, a tremendous endeavour in itself.

References Connell, W.J. (2013). Who’s Afraid of Columbus? Italian Americana, 31(2), 136–147. Hauck, G. (2019, October 14). “Columbus Day: Celebrating cultural heritage, or the colonization of Native Americans?” USA Today. www.usatoday.com/story/news/ nation/2019/10/12/columbus-day-in-digenous-peoples-day-why-some-changename/3932258002/

Paul, H. (2014). “Christopher Columbus and the Myth of “Discovery.” In The Myths That Made America (Vol. 1), 43–88. https://doi.org/10.14361/transcript.9783839414859.43

Pereira, I. (2020, June 10). “Christopher Columbus statue debate rises as controversial statues fall across the country.” ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/US/christopher-columbus-statue-debate-rises-controversial-statues-fall/story?id=71172075