which, of course, was the favorite style for mansions in Southern Plantations in the pre-civil war south.

So while I’m all for historic preservation, I also think that Texas’ legacy of slavery and discrimination that this building represents can not, and should not be, glossed over by references to Ann Richards.

to live up to his obligations to the Texas Air National Guard. His signature on those contracts was as phony as his promise to complete his obligation as the first Texas governor elected to consecutive four-year terms, and the proof that that is true comes from your valiant and determined efforts to uncover his misdeeds.

But I find your reduction of the history that has occurred in and around that house, and your apparent willingness to dismiss all the lives lived in its 152 years, as a “legacy of slavery and discrimination that this building represents” quite condescending, sir — indeed, a slur that should not pass unchallenged.

What is your personal knowledge of any Texas governor other than W?

We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! Knowing that we’re not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

I suggest you do a little research on Texas in the 1920-1940s…

see, back then, Texas was a one party (Democratic) state — and it went to great lengths to maintaina a “whites only” Democratic party. Now, if you want to tell me that the governor of a one party state had nothing to do with that, I’m all ears…

made up of sticks and stones. It has no opinions or positions. Whatever it symbolizes is just a projection of human beings, and each of them will project what they feel and want to see; not what the building is itself, just sticks and stones.

What ever horrors people may hold in their hearts will not be changed by burning down or destroying this building, nor will they be materially strengthened or sustained by its preservation. Attacking the racism that was - and still is - prevalent in Texas as well as across the entire country by attacking a particular style of architecture is – well – just plain silly.

The British Museum is Greek Revival, as is the Brandenburg Gate, the Toronto Street Post Office and great swaths of Edinburgh’s New Town. So are the wings of the United States Capitol, the San Francisco Mint, and many thousands of other buildings that have nothing whatsoever to do with slavery. Beginning in 1820, the Greek style was the dominant architectural pattern in the United States for not only important public buildings but for affluent homes as well. Far more examples of Greek Revival construction remain today in Upper New York State and western Ohio than ever were built in the South.

Condemning unsavory behaviors is well worthwhile; condemning styles of architecture, or specific buildings, has no relationship whatsoever to that endeavor. The Texas Governor’s mansion is a fine example of Greek Revival on a grand scale; I certainly hope it can be restored and preserved for future generations to enjoy, for its intrinsic beauty.

I’m not arguing that the building should be bulldozed…

what I have a problem with is the idea that the building represents something noble.

There is a really dangerous precedent in suggesting that a building or especially a style of architecture can be guilty. A lot of people have Greek revival architecture and I don’t think they appreciate any insinuation that suggests this makes them somehow equivalent to slave plantation owners. Whether firebomb tactics are deemed OK or not, the clear suggestion is that this building is less worthy of protection than less guilty buildings.

Like making the Confederate flag a “symbol of slavery”, this is a fight that relies not just on shaming and naming a culture bad but also taking that one step further and eradicating that culture. But nobody is going to let their own history go without a fight. They’re going to defend themselves - and they are right to do so, because nothing less than their total (hopefully just cultural) genocide is likely to satisfy vengeance.

Paul, are you actually saying that because this building is like some others built by slaveholders, and because Texas has a history of discrimination (like every other state in the Union) that this somehow makes it less historical?

Well, damn. I’d better take a run to Philly and burn Independence Hall.* Or maybe the White House.* Damn slave-holders ruining all the glory and majesty of our founding… *sigh*

The Texas governor’s mansion - like Independence Hall, the White House, and many other historic buildings - represents history, in all its glory and all its infamy. Just as the White House’s historic value is not lessened by Jefferson’s slave-holding or the destruction of the Constitution under W’s reign.

- - -
*Note to the Secret Service and National Park Service: I would not commit, and do not endorse or condone, any criminal acts against public, historic buildings. Or any buildings. Or people. Or animals. Or plants.

I’m saying that the building is a monument to hate, and while I think it should be preserved for its architecture, it should be renovated to serve as the equivalent of the Holocaust museum — a place where Texans can go and reflect on their legacy of slavery, Jim Crow laws, segregation, and discrimination.

Then so is Independence Hall, the White House, and every other historic building with ties to slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and discrimination. Which would mean we’d need to turn quite a few of our nation’s historic buildings into museums.

Historic means just that: a part of history. No, neither American history nor Texas history has been forever shining with nobility, but that history is shared with the men and women who fought to change it, who created a better place, better life for all Americans.

It hasn’t always been a dream, but it hasn’t always been a nightmare, either. The governor’s mansion, like those other historic buildings is the history of both.

Then so is Independence Hall, the White House, and every other historic building with ties to slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and discrimination. Which would mean we’d need to turn quite a few of our nation’s historic buildings into museums.

when you take the tour, you hear a whole LOT about how the founders betrayed their own principles on slavery, how all sorts of groups are NOT part of the picutres that hand on the walls of Independence Hall (like women and native americans, etc.)

Here in Philadelphia, we don’t try and cover up the past.

How do civilized people of the 21st Century handle issues of symbolism and inanimate objects? I’m pretty staunchly against it, myself. It leads to, or perhaps stems from and reinforces, a pattern of thinking that trivializes the issues enshrined therein and stifles, even blocks, attempts at dissecting and understanding them.

Allowing ourselves to imbue physical objects with abstract values leads to absurdities, like prohibition of flag burning or fatwahs over cartoons of Muhammad, because the concept itself is absurd. The Liberty Bell, the Declaration of Independence and the American flag are symbols only so far as we agree to consider them so in a sort of collective derangement; they are in reality nothing more than a hunk of metal, a colored sheet of cloth and black lines on brown paper without which liberty, freedom and independence would flourish equally well – or not.

The history of Texas is neither greatly worse nor any better than anywhere else in the country when it comes to bigotry, racism or slavery and no more deserving of condemnation than any other state. As has been pointed out, there are a whole lot of buildings with a checkered past; can’t turn everything into a museum.

The Texas governor’s mansion doesn’t symbolize anything beyond a desire of the people of the state of Texas to provide their governors with a grand and impressive residence. The residence houses not a specific individual but an office holder, the Governor, elected by the people as their temporary representative. Providing a grand house for the holder of that office is in a very direct fashion a expression of the people’s regard for themselves and their participation in the institution of democracy, as much as it is anything else. For all the flaws of Texas history, that seems noble enough to me.

And, it isn’t any of my damn business what the people of Texas do with their own property – but that’s another argument.

That aired out, good to talk with you; always is.

The Hon. David Crockett, Senator from Tennessee. Upon his departure therefrom, he said, “You can go to hell, and I shall go to Texas.”

As far as the history of the Democratic party in Texas AND ELSEWHERE between the World Wars, yes, the South had had its fill of bloody carpetbagging Republicans. The South did not do itself proud in all its dealings with the red man, the black man, or the man of Jewish origin; and nor did the Democratic Party. Texas was as much a one-party state then as it was after World War II; until the advent of that … ahem … honorable … oilman William P. Clements, Texas had had NO GOP governor since Reconstruction. Now we’re on the 4th, and while Perry is starting to show signs of being a slight improvement over the average bump on a log, the jury remains out — he has announced his intention to run again.

But if you wish to lay all that infamy upon the shoulders of a building merely because its designer favored the architectural trend of his day and the people financed his whims as a sign of their exuberance in the Texas of 1854, certainly that is your privilege.

It is mine to think your condescension undeserved.
Given that you call Philadelphia home and that as recently as the 1980s the police in Philadelphia bombed poor people out of their neighborhoods, I call it hypocritical as well, since you lay no such onus of infamy on landmarks north of the Mason-Dixon line.

We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! Knowing that we’re not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0