ACWGC
* ACWGC     * Dpt. of Records       * CSA HQ    * VMI    * Join CSA    
   * Union HQ    * UMA    * Join Union     ACWGC Memorial
CSA Armies:    ANV    AotW
Union Armies:    AotT     AotC      AotP      AotS     Union Army Forums
     Link Express
American Civil War Books, Magazines and Games for sale (See other items)
Club Forums:     NWC    CCC     Home Pages:     NWC    CCC    ACWGC
It is currently Wed Dec 13, 2017 1:45 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Gettysburg Cyclorama Building
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 4:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2002 5:51 pm
Posts: 771
Location: USA
<font color="beige"><b>Gents,

There will be a U.S. District Court Hearing on October 30 (tomorrow) to determine the fate of the old cyclorama building at Gettysburg. It was built in the 1960's to house the cyclorama painting and as a memorial to Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, the painting has been restored and moved to the newly opened Gettysburg facility, the park service now plans to demolish the old building in it's attempt to return Ziegler's Grove to it's 1860's appearance.

Tearing down the original cyclorama building is a terrible waste of resources and a loss of an historic structure, it is as much a battlefield memorial as any of the other monuments placed there.

For more information http://www.mission66.com/cyclorama/</b></font id="beige">

<center> <font color="beige"><b>General R.A.'Bob'Weir </b></font id="beige">
<font color="green"><b><font size="4">CSA Eastern Theater Commander</b></font id="size4"></font id="green">
Image
<b>ACWGC Cabinet Member</b> </center>


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 30, 2008 3:31 am 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Bill Peters</i>
<br />A building that has served for many years but they have a nice new one and the components of the building are being moved or stored.

The grove is being restored. That pretty much settles it for me. Down with the building.

Its the battlefield that is important. That and the many memorials to those that served. I applaud their plan to restore part of a battlefield that was changed by the construction of the original structure. Anytime they want to spend dollars on such a worthy cause I can do without our old "friend" the original structure.

It will mean less maintenance costs as well as less jobs needed to perform the same purpose. How many welcome centers can you have?

The Parks Dept is on a very strict budget and with the economy the way it is I fully understand their desire to want to cut the budget for personnel needed to perform a service which now will be taken care of in the new building.

Again, its not the building that is important - its the battlefield.

I would not support a move to replace the old state memorials unless those icons become so broken as to no longer be distinguishable to the eye. And there are some that feel that the memorials are out of place ... a view I dont share.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Col. Bill Peters, The Boise Rifles, II Corps Artillery, AoA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I'm with you - the battlefield is king and Ziegler's Grove restoration efforts should take precedence over an old building that probably should never have been built where it was to begin with. That grove was much, much more prominent in 1863 than it is today and its reduction has skewed many an opinion about the battlefield. The more we can restore the field to its 1863 appearance the better - plant trees, change fences (that are not private propert, of course), move roads (if possible on NPS lands), etc.

Regards,

Lt. Gen. Alan Lynn
CSA Chief of Staff
3rd Bgde, 3rd Cav Div, II Corps, AoA

God Bless <><


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 30, 2008 7:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 12:44 pm
Posts: 1200
Location: USA
I'm of the same feeling - battlefield above building...

Image
General Jeff Laub
Union Chief of the Army
ACWGC Cabinet Member
http://www.geocities.com/laubster22/UnionHQ/


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 2:41 pm
Posts: 5
Location: USA
Gents, I think your fealty to the Civil War is blinding you to other history. I happened to have occasion to look into this while researching a newspaper feature on the lack of appreciation for modern architecture, and its engangered status. One of the articles listed in the "more press" section on the Cyclorama building Web site by Gen. Weir is mine.

This building, though less than 50 years old, has significance. Though allowed to deteriorate by the park service, it is a sterling example of the modern architecture of a renowned architect. It also is one of the first, if not the first, major interpretive buildings erected to help the public connect with its national parks after World War II. For that reason, I think it deserves more consideration than it has had. Yes, it does sit at the heart of the battlefield - intentionally, so visitors could take in the sweep of the conflict from that panoramic vantage point.

Historical interpretation today is more devoted to authenticity, perhaps. That's why the park service has been working to restore the vegetation of the period - that is to say, to strip away many of the trees that have grown up and given it such a sylvan aspect. It was much more open then when it was intensively farmed and the trees were sought out for fuel.

But we do disservice to the history of a place by trying to freeze it in time, or by ignoring other historical events that took place subsequently. I'd argue for retaining the building, for the reasons stated above, or for moving it to another site. That would not be cheap, to be sure, but it would be respecting the historicity of the structure, which has helped educate so many in this country about one of the great clashes in this nation's defining conflict.

Col. Tim Wheeler
3rd bgde, 1st Div, VIII Corp, AoS


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 5:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2002 5:51 pm
Posts: 771
Location: USA
<font color="beige"><b>My feeling is moving the building would be the last resort, it's context has a lot to do with where it was built.

There may be greater historical significance to memorials placed on the field during the late 1800's and early 1900's because many of these were placed by the veterans of the battle. Those memorials placed during the 1960's to the present, I think equally represent what people at that time felt were appropriate and only add to the on going history of the battlefield.
This building is not a cheap motel or a fast food joint....the building was commissioned by the park service, designed by a renowned architect specifically for the location, it's situated in the landscape in such a way that you would be hard pressed to spot it from most any location on the battlefield. It was built to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the battle and Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.

I've been a long time supporter of battle field preservation, a member of CWPT and Friends of Gettysburg for many years. I applaud the work that has been done at Gettysburg to return the field to it's 1860's appearance and sight lines, but 1860 is long past and even the best that can be achieved is still little more than a caricature of that moment in time. Gettysburg, maybe more so than any of our Civil War battlefields is more than an area of land which witnessed a battle, it has over the years since become a testament to those that remember what happened there and how they commemorated that memory....that's why I would like to see it saved.</b></font id="beige">

<center> <font color="beige"><b>General R.A.'Bob'Weir </b></font id="beige">
<font color="green"><b><font size="4">CSA Eastern Theater Commander</b></font id="size4"></font id="green">
Image
<b>ACWGC Cabinet Member</b> </center>


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 2:05 am 
It is possible to try to keep both factions happy at the same time...the moving of a building does not mean that it has to be put in an out of context position elsewere.

The Ulster Folk and Transport Museum shows how
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Folk_and_Transport_Museum#The_Folk_Museum

Move the building to an area fit to house it...and then restore the battlefield. A compomise, that may make more happy than unhappy.

<center>Gen. Edward Stewart
[url="http://www.acwgc.org/ANV/Dossiers/Stewart_Ed.cfm"]Image[/url]

Army Commander - ANV
ACWGC Cabinet - CSA Secretary</center>


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: