Honoring heroes vs. promoting an agenda

[+Gamaliel]

Also, many times caches are placed and information given, but historical aspects are removed because they may not fit the current desire of the Groundspeak owners and reviewers. In one case, a featured series of caches on local towns talks about the history of the towns, but leaves out the fact that one town was a 'sunset town' which mean black people would be arrested if they didn't leave the area before sunset. Does describing the correct history mean it's an 'agenda'? Probably, but then again, is it wrong to educate people to the full and correct history, even if a few people at Groundspeak don't want to talk about it.

 

I have no comment about whatever Groundspeak's position is, but I suspect people would be a lot happier if such caches as the one you mention and the one being discussed attempted to mention both or all sides of the relevant historical event. I think that cache you bring up should mention the fact that it was a sunset town. History isn't just log cabins and butter churns and powdered wigs.

 

I placed a cache at (well, just outside the fence of) a historical cemetery from an long-gone sawmill town in the next county. I would have been remiss if I didn't mention that the cache was at the town's white cemetery and blacks weren't allowed to be buried there. Instead they were buried at the black cemetery on the other side of the tracks (literally), which was until very recently in the middle of a ranch and the headstones were being stepped on by cows.

[+narcissa]

 

I have no comment about whatever Groundspeak's position is, but I suspect people would be a lot happier if such caches as the one you mention and the one being discussed attempted to mention both or all sides of the relevant historical event. I think that cache you bring up should mention the fact that it was a sunset town. History isn't just log cabins and butter churns and powdered wigs.

 

I placed a cache at (well, just outside the fence of) a historical cemetery from an long-gone sawmill town in the next county. I would have been remiss if I didn't mention that the cache was at the town's white cemetery and blacks weren't allowed to be buried there. Instead they were buried at the black cemetery on the other side of the tracks (literally), which was until very recently in the middle of a ranch and the headstones were being stepped on by cows.

 

I think the *best* way to use a geocache to get people to notice something historical is to incorporate it into a puzzle or multi. Many cachers don't read the cache descriptions for traditionals, because they don't have to.

 

Getting people to read a plaque or take note of some other detail allows them to take in the information and come to their own private conclusions about it. People who aren't interested in doing the work can avoid the cache entirely. Just spouting off a bunch of facts within a cache description just isn't effective, AND it runs the risk of violating guidelines.

 

If there's no monument and you want someone to learn about a historical figure, create a puzzle/unknown that requires some internet research about that person. As long as you stay away from horribly biased questions, it won't violate the guidelines and won't cause the same controversy that a "HONOUR THIS WAR HERO" traditional will.

[+Too Tall John]

I think the *best* way to use a geocache to get people to notice something historical is to incorporate it into a puzzle or multi. Many cachers don't read the cache descriptions for traditionals, because they don't have to.

Problem with that is that while there are some who don't read the cache description, there are also some who would ignore the cache altogether if it were a Puzzle or Multi:

I have a reliable method of dealing with ALL puzzle caches. I filter em out. Works like a charm.

If you want to bring people to a historic location, which is going to bring more people to the spot? A Traditional cache.

[+narcissa]

Problem with that is that while there are some who don't read the cache description, there are also some who would ignore the cache altogether if it were a Puzzle or Multi

 

We all know that there are people who avoid multis and puzzles. In fact, I put out puzzles and multis in part *because* it lowers the traffic. There are plenty of traditionals out there for people who like them. Around here, no matter what kind of cache you put out, there will be a race for FTF the moment it's published and a steady stream of traffic thereafter.

 

In any case, I still think that if your intent is to get people to read the plaques or otherwise learn more, and not just visit the site, a multi or puzzle is a better way to do that than writing a bunch of stuff in the cache description for a traditional. Puzzles and multis get people more engaged in the information.

 

A traditional is perfectly fine for getting people to the site, but it doesn't encourage that extra level of engagement that some people seem to be after.

[james__12345]

They offer their life to protect their country as the military leaders see fit.

 

Minor quibble. They may have been drafted back during the time of that war.

You're right. The draft was before my time, so when discussing this type of topic i tend not to refer to the draft, because usually i'm discussing a more modern conflict where there wasn't a draft. Thanks for the correction.

 

Back to the major point here, I agree that the stuff in the description is a QUOTE from a HISTORICAL EVENT. That is history, regardless whether the person who originally made the statement had an agenda or not. Refering to a quote from history, is not promoting an agenda, it is education. If further statements are made agreeing with the statements or supporting them, thats another story, but quoting history is just quoting history, nothing more, nothing less.

Edited February 26, 2010 by james__12345

[+swope2bc]

..... Honouring a soldier is glorifying the war, and that's an agenda. ...

 

No - it honors the soldier and what he/she did. War is not pretty, not likeable but it has happened in the past, is happening right now and will happen in the future. In all such battles - some individual actions will stand out. Some markers will recognize that - placing a cache nearby noting the marker should not be a big deal.

 

Placing the cache noting the marker isn't a big deal.

 

Using the cache description to provide an interpretation of the historical facts is promoting an agenda.

 

What the soldier "did" is subject to interpretation. To some people, that soldier is a hero who should be honoured, to others that soldier is an enemy who should be forgotten, to others the entire war is a disgrace that shouldn't be honoured in any way.

 

Geocaches are not the place to make these determinations. Geocaches can and should lead people to places of interest, and that's it. The geocache should not be placed with the intent to promote a particular interpretation of history.

 

I think intent is the key here. Is the simple mention of an event promoting an agenda? If I place a cache in a national forest and mention the name of the forest in the cache description am I promoting the agenda of the Nation Forest Service? I think not! Historical things happen good and bad. the mere act of placing a cache in a particular location to draw people to that location is an agenda. As for the OP's questions about this particular cache; in my opinion it probably is promoting an agenda but it's not blatant and it is historically accurate (at least according to the winners who get to record history as they see it).

Is it tasteful? irrelevant.

Is it a guideline violation? no

Would you publish this cache if you were a reviewer? yes

Would you publish a similar cache for a Japanese soldier at Pearl Harbor? yes

 

 

Well I do not post much, but as I searched for other less controversial information I became intrigued by this discussion. I do not even know if it is still going on, but I felt the need to put in a bit of my perspective.

 

The cache description honoring a soldier who (whether drafted or not) served his country willingly and payed the price of his life for it would not in my opinion constitute such controversy as has been raised in this post. There are a lot of pacifistic people in the world and in some way I agree, war is bad, but to claim that honoring a man who lost his life in the pursuit of liberty seems nonsensical to me. No where on the cache listing did the CO say he was in favor of war or its effect. He simply took the time to recognize those who go above and beyond in the call of duty.

 

Did WWII happen? Yes. Did good men die on both sides? Yes. Was the soldier in reference given a medal of honor for his service? Yes. Was his sacrifice worthy of being remembered? Yes. Why people believe that a desire for peace means we forget those who have died in battles of old is sad. As a people we learn from our mistakes, we learn from history, and we learn from the sacrifices made by others in history.

 

I suppose the question at hand is, should this have been put on a cache page? Well I personally have found several caches that contained a fair bit of historical information. Some of it I found very interesting, others I thought to be a bit lengthy and I simply skimmed past it and went to find the cache. If you don't want to read the history of a man honored for his service, don't. But get off of the back of the one who does. We are all entitled to our opinions and some of them should be kept to our selves. That is the interesting thing about peace, peace comes when people are willing to stop looking at the things in others that they don't agree with, and simply coexist peacefully. This is one thing that even your average pacifist has not come to understand yet...

 

I love Geocaching, and one of the things I love about it is the diversity of caches out there. There is always something new.

[golfgunny]

The suspect language in the cache description is merely a direct quote of the Medal Of Honor citation. This is a great cache, and there's nothing wrong with it.

 

There are many caches hidden at points of interest that somebody, somewhere, for some strange reason, will be offended by. The rest of us will simply find them and log a smiley.

 

By the way, I enjoyed finding this one, and re-reading the citation.

[gitarmac]

 

This cache to me seems very distasteful, and disrespectful. There is a large American military presence on Okinawa, and it is a source of significant tension between Japan and America. The local population complains that the Americans are disrespectful of Japanese laws and culture, and has been agitating for a reduction in the American presence, while Washington and Tokyo have been doing their best soothe the Okinawans and make the American military presence less obnoxious. This cache seems antithetical to the spirit of peace that the Okinawan government seeks to promote, and potentially insulting to the local people. To me, it doesn`t seem like an appropriate cache for a guest to hide in a foreign country.

 

 

Do they get as upset about the march of death, the comfort women, or the millions of chinese and philipinos that were killed? What about all those medical experiments, you know, the ones where they disected people alive, froze their limbs, then aputated them, and continued until there was nothing but a torso left, then did biological experiments on them?

 

You DO know that the japanese where more sadistic and killed millions more than the nazies did didn't you?

[Clan Riffster]

You DO know that the japanese where more sadistic and killed millions more than the nazies did didn't you?

Shhh! History is supposed to be all sweetness and light.