Talk:Perceptions of Columbus

The text in Perceptions of Columbus is very similar to the "Perceptions of Columbus" section of the Christopher Columbus article.

Yes, it was moved there, I think it's now been incorporated successfully into the main article, so I'll now change Perceptions of Columbus to a redirect page to Christopher Columbus. Below is the latest text of the Subject article before this change, followed by the remainder of the Talk page. -- Infrogmation 19:46 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

Christopher Columbus has had a cultural significance beyond his actual achievements and actions as an individual; he also became a symbol, a figure of legend. The mythology of Columbus has cast him as an archetype for both good and for evil.

The casting of Columbus as a figure of "good" or of "evil" often depends on people's perspectives as to whether the arrival of Europeans to the New World and the introduction of Christianity or the Roman Catholic Faith is seen as positive or negative.

Columbus as Hero

Hero worship of Columbus perhaps reached its zenith around 1892, the 400th anniversary of his first arrival in the Americas. Monuments to Columbus were erected throughout the USA and Latin America, extoling him as a hero.

The myth that Columbus thought the world round while his contemporaries believed it flat was often repeated, suggesting that Columbus was enlightened and forward looking. His defiance of convention in sailing west to get to the far east was hailed as a model of "American" style can-do inventiveness.

In the United States the glorification of Columbus was particularly embraced by the Italian-American, Hispanic, and Catholic communities. These groups had been historically marginalized by the USA's dominant culture, so they proudly pointed to Columbus as one of their own to prove that Mediterranean Catholics can and did make great contributions to the USA.

Columbus as Villain

Using Columbus as a symbol for the evils produced by unprincipled Europeans arriving in the New World is not a 20th century innovation. Friar Bartolome de las Casas wrote of his cruelties and suggested that the humiliations Columbus suffered in his later life were part of a just payback for his crimes.

Columbus has been used increasingly from the 1960s on as a symbol of all that was wrong with European Imperialism-- slavery, genocide, the wholesale destruction of indigenous cultures.

See also:

Vote Here

Maintain 2 separate articles

Yes - perceptions are proxy for a whole other subject: Ed Poor
No - say why here...

Complete the incorporation

Yes - Makes a smoother read:
Yes - Prevents divergence: Ed Poor
No - say why here...

Let's get rid of the slash in the title. How about:

Incorporate it into Christopher Columbus: 4 - Graft, AxelBoldt, Ed Poor, AN
Move it to Perceptions of Columbus: 4 - Ed Poor, Tokerboy, Zoe, Infrogmation
Move it to Columbus as Archetype: 2 - Ed Poor, Zoe
Move it to Mythology of Christopher Columbus: 2 - Zoe, Slrubenstein
Move it to Heroification of Christopher Columbus: 1 - Tokerboy

Vote by putting your name after each acceptable alternative (you can choose more than one!)

I moved this article to Perceptions of Columbus just to get rid of the slash. This move is not final, and my being a sysop doesn't give me any more right than anyone else to decide anything. --Ed Poor 21:46 Oct 22, 2002 (UTC)

Why does this get a separate page? Surely the facts can be determined: las Casas records plenty of what happened, as does Columbus himself in his own diary. So why should anything he did be in dispute and require a "Mythology" page of any sort? I don't get it... adding a vote for "Neither, incorporate it into the main page.". Graft 23:22 Oct 21, 2002 (UTC)

Putting it into the main Christopher Columbus page would be an option. Yes, many facts can be determined, but I guess my point was that historical facts were largely irrelevent from the Columbus of heroic mythology constucted centuries after the death of the real Columbus. I think it could be argued that the hundreds of Columbus monuments around the USA and Latin America have more to do with the 19th century legend than with the 15th century person. -- Infrogmation

I really don't think this belongs on a separate page. Almost all historical figures have some historical mythology which needs to be discussed in the main page for the figure.

I mostly agree with the objections to a separate page; however, sometimes dividing a contentious subject into smaller pieces reduces the tension and conflict that feeds edit wars. If someone wants to move this article in with Columbus and delete this article, who am I to object? Whatever works for you all, works for me. --Ed Poor

The move to Perceptions of Columbus is fine by me. If people want to move this again, I'd just ask for a bit of discussion first, please. -- Infrogmation

After five centuries, Columbus remains a mysterious and controversial figure who has been variously described as one of the greatest mariners in history, a visionary genius, a mystic, a national hero, a failed administrator, a naive entrepreneur, and a ruthless and greedy imperialist. [1]