Talk:Gutzon Borglum

Fathers bigamy

Gutzon Borglum's father had two wives, not more. The fact is, he was a bigamist not a polygamist. Wetman 17:27, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Agreed. However, the practice (if he was indeed LDS) would have been called Plural Marriage or Polygamy from his viewpoint. That is why the change was made. I'll change to plural marriage with an explanation. Thanks. Visorstuff 23:16, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

That's fine now. Wetman 10:48, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Rushmore timeline

How Long did it take him? (Anon.)

He was still hard at work at mt Rushmore when he died. his son quickly wrapped up the project, pretty much complete as it was. --Wetman 21:50, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image

I uploaded Image:Gutzonborglum.jpg from the Library of Congress to replace the first image of the article, which has an obselete PD tag. Problem is, I forgot to remove the frame of the image (and I don't have Paint Shop Pro or other Graphics software). Can somebody quickly remove the frame and re-upload it? Thanks, AndyZ 00:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

KKK 'sympathetic connections' or 'membership'?

The article says: "At Stone Mountain he developed sympathetic connections with the reorganized Ku Klux Klan, who were major financial backers for the monument." But according to Stone Mountain, he was a Ku Klux Klan member, which is more than just having sympathetic connections. The two articles should be resoved. --Mmathu 07:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

It says he's a member in the Mount Rushmore article, as well. Glitterglue 23:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

According to the Shaff's book on Borglum, Six Wars at a Time, which includes about 20 references to the KKK in the index, he was a member. As with most things surrounding this complex man it is not a simple as it might seem wher we talking about joining the KKK in 2006. The KKK was being reinvented starting in 1915, the time at which Borglum was spending a lot of time in Atlanta trying to get funding for his Stone Mountain project. He saw the newly emerging KKK as being a source for such finincial resources. He also saw the KKK as being a rural populist movement, set up to hopefully wrest power from the urban capitalists who were running the country. Long story short, Gutzon Borglum was a member of the KKK. Carptrash 14:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I suggest that the 'sympathetic connections' comment in this article be changed accordingly. Any disagreement? — Mmathu 07:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Here is what 6 Wars says.

By joining and trying to mold the Klan, Gutzon was not seeking personal power. He did not want to wear a hood and robe , stand before a burning cross or preach a morality based on fear or floggings. Gutzon was a Klansman, but not for the reasons held by most other Klansmen. p. 197

So my guess is that a lot of foks will view his being a member in terms of the Klan today, but oh well. Carptrash 15:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC) PS I wish you'd register as a wikipedian, Mmathu.

While there isn’t proof that Borglum officially joined the Klan, which helped fund the project, “he nonetheless became deeply involved in Klan politics,” John Taliaferro writes in Great White Fathers.

John Taliaferro is a graduate of Harvard College and a former senior editor at Newsweek Darkhumor67 (talk) 22:12, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

I just moved this to discussion

"(anscestor of elizabeth jean troyer who currently resides in boise idaho. her father was his favorite nephew) "

If it is to stay in the article - - -- well we need to discuss it. Carptrash 14:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Poop on him?

One S.O.B has written the following:

(John) Gutzon de la Mothe Borglum (March 25, 1867 – March 6, 1941) was the American sculptor famous for creating the monumental presidents' heads at Mount Rushmore, South Dakota, as well as dozens of other impressive public works of art. POOP ON HIM

I somehow couldn't find it in the "edit this page". Can someone look into it?

You were looking at an older, already fixed version of the article. Or perhaps it was getting fixed as you saw it. Borglum gets a fair amount of these sorts of edits, which is the price we pay for allowing Jr. high school kids to edit. Who was it that said said that " eternal vigilance is the price of freedom"? Anyway, this is why many/most dedicated wikipedians do vandalism patrol. Carptrash 14:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I just cut this sentence out

and we can talk about it here (I added the bold).

and the Stone Mountain carving in Stone Mountain, Georgia, which is the largest Confederate monument

The Stone Mountain fiasco is discussed in the article, but since none of Gorglum's work there remains, the sentence (opinion) does not really belong in the introduction. Carptrash 06:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Harvard Technical College

What is Harvard Technical College? I've never heard of it. I can't find search results outside of this article. Schear (talk) 17:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Mount Rushmore

What is the source for the statement that the entire Louisiana Purchase was sacred Native American territory? There were a lot of tribes in the Mississippi/Missouri River drainage, and the sentence implies that all of them thought that the whole area was sacred.

And, more specifically, what is the source for the statement the Borglum's reason for including Jefferson was that the Indians thought that the area of the Louisiana Purchase was sacred? Broadcaster101 (talk) 06:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I think what is intended here is a two part thing. One, Jefferson was added to the group because he added the Louisiana Purchase to the United States (I have a source for that ) and secondly, that the Black Hills were sacred land to some native peoples. This whole section can probably be improved. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I just moved an entire section here to talk about

Here it is:

== Controversy ==

"Controversy surrounding the alleged racist roots of the building of Mt. Rushmore is well documented. Many claim it was not an innocent gesture to commemorate George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln, rather, a warning, if not blatant threat, to any race besides white, that whites ruled the United States of America and not Blacks, Mexicans, or especially Indians.

Many claim that Gutzon Borglum, the creator, was not accepting of other races and that his contribution to the dominant ideology of the era not only exalts the contribution of whites to the making of America civilization, but tries to exclude blacks from the myth of America’s new creation. Borglum’s view of America was that of a white nation in conflict with other racial and ethnic groups, some of whom came before the Europeans, such as Hispanics and Native Americans, and others, such as Africans and Asians, who were used as laborers to build the countries material infrastructure.

While at Stone Mountain, it is said that Borglum became a senior advisor to the newly reborn Ku Klux Klan. Whether this accorded with a racist world view, or if it was simply one way to bond with some of his patrons on the Stone Mountain project, is unclear. Borglum's motivations for dealing with the KKK may be hazy, but the association has long been a matter of public record. "

I don't believe that statements such as ",,,,is well documented" can be allowed to stand without the documentation being revealed. the same is true for the statement "Many claim that ... " without at least some suggestion as to who the "many" might be. Ditto for " long been a matter of public record." Please tells us where in the record. It should not be too hard. An article on Borglum without a Controversy section is like an egg with out salt, or as my grandmother once said, "a kiss without a beard." However it needs to be done right and I believe that what we have here ain't right. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 23:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Construction of Rushmore

It took 1 million years for this to form naturally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.220.110.66 (talk) 13:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gutzon Borglum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070502105304/http://www.delamare.unr.edu/CampusOnAHill/mackay.html to http://www.delamare.unr.edu/CampusOnAHill/mackay.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Borglum and the KKK

First of all, I have been editing on this article for about 15 years or so and not just dragged in recently. Borglum has over 200 works listed on SIRIS, one is tied to the Klan - probably a few others to the United Daughters of the Confederacy. This KKK connection needs to be, and is, discussed in the article. It does not belong in the lede. It is not an important component of his life and career. I see it has been bounced around a bit, they way we deal with that sort of thing is on the talk page. This is big news today for several reasons but wikipedia is not a newspaper. I plan on removing the KKK from the lede, but you have a chance to discuss it first. Carptrash (talk) 05:41, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

I think that, given his work, we should include something about his motivations. His work was solely lionising heroes of the White colonial state, he was by all accounts waist-deep with the KKK, the Daughters of the Confederacy, and personally deeply racist. Yes, this moment is racially charged, and that's perhaps a moment to consider why we would consider including something in the lede mentioning his motivations for making this art. Even the Rushmore museum has letters from convicted a KKK racially-motived rape-murderer to him in it to highlight his complicity and motivation for sculpting it! My counterpoint is the lede to date has been lacking and his racism, which literally scars the landscape in multiple places, shouldn't be dismissed. He was part of a large campaign that successfully stripped the rights of African Americans and those organisations remain in operation today. (The offices of the DoC were burnt just two weeks ago by protesters, and they continue to put up lionising art of the Confederacy to this day - they just did so in Newport RI.) Ogress 06:37, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Can we just stop putting the reference in the lede until we hash this out? I agree with Carptrash that it was not a major factor in his life and should not be included in the lede, but that's my opinion. Also, for the love of god whomever keeps deleting ANY reference to the KKK needs to stop. It's a documented fact and keeping it out of the article all together is just wrong. zimmhead (talk) 14:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

I just chopped this section out of the lede because it was just cut & pasted from the source. In any case it does not belong in the lede.

"His sculptural work was associated with his belief in white supremacy. The son of polygamist Mormons from Idaho, Borglum had no ties to the Confederacy, but he had white supremacist leanings. In letters he fretted about a 'mongrel horde' overrunning the 'Nordic' purity of the West"." Carptrash (talk) 18:18, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ogress: I feel as if I should respond to your issue laden post. Your statement “His work was solely lionizing heroes of the White colonial state” reveals a misunderstanding of much of his work. Yes, it was (is?) true, as sculptor Janet Scudder once wrote, “ I won’t add to this obsession of male egotism that is ruining every city in the United States with rows of hideous statues of men-men-men-each one uglier than the other-standing, sitting, riding horseback-every one of them pompously convinced that he is decorating the landscape.” that white guys in suits and uniforms were the most popular subjects of the day. And likely many of these men were the heroes of the white colonial state. Especially if one uses the most widespread definition of the word “colonial.” Was Lincoln a hero of the colonial state? Borglum’s bust is found at Lincoln’s tomb in Springfield, IL, and his other Lincoln’s are in probably dozens of museums, parks and the like across America. But of course if Lincoln is just another “colonial” that just proves your point. He did memorials to Gov. John Peter Altgeld, who ruined his political career by pardoning some of the Haymarket Affair convicted, he did a piece for Sacco and Vanzetti, who no one would call representatives of the “White colonial state.” He did several about the early white settlers in Newark NJ & Ohio, but is that just more “White colonial state” stuff? “Simon Bolivar?” He did some architectural angels at St. John the Divine in NYC and gargoyles at Princeton. In any case, there is enough here to suggest that his work was not “solely” . …what you said. His motivations for making his art was almost always 1) money and 2) fame or attention. His “letters from convicted a KKK racially-motived rape-murderer” - that would be D. C. Stephenson, would predate the rape murder (I can find nothing “racially motivated” about this horrifying attack on a white woman”), so Borglum is not related to that sordid stuff at all. That you are bringing up stuff happening now, in Newport and elsewhere, seems to suggest that you are working on a bigger picture than just the life and work of Borglum. He was a racist. That need s to be in the article, but not in the lede. Carptrash (talk) 20:06, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

An artist's work and not their political beliefs are what should be important in art biography pages. A sculptor such as Borglum is notable for his art, not who he was associated with in his time away from the chisel. If the work of art is directly related to an artist's beliefs and issues, such as Picasso and Guernica, then that could be mentioned on the artworks lead. Since Borglum sculpted a few Southern-oriented pieces, maybe those articles are where his affiliations might be important, but adding them to his short biography lead, let alone the first sentence, seems undue and purposely weighted towards a controversy which is unrelated to his body of unaffiliated artwork. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

I agree that having the information in the lede, especially in the first sentence, is undue emphasis. It does belong somewhere in the article. Carlstak (talk) 11:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

And I dont agree.

• First - Leni Reifenstahl... "was a German film director and actress and Nazi sympathizer." → In the lede. First sentence!
• Second - David Wark Griffith ... "was an American film director. Widely considered as the most important filmmaker of his generation, he pioneered financing of the feature-length movie. His film The Birth of a Nation (1915) made investors a profit, but also attracted much controversy, as it depicted African Americans in a negative light and glorified the Ku Klux Klan."→ In in the lede! --93.211.217.142 (talk) 00:13, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Above is the claim, "solely lionising heroes of the White colonial state." What is your proof that he only sculpted colonial figures? Jonathan Edwards? William Bradford? Myles Standish? Capt Smith & Pocahontas? Two are colonial figures: George Washington and Thomas Jefferson; not ONLY colonial: Abe Lincoln & Teddy Roosevelt are not colonial. (PeacePeace (talk) 04:36, 12 July 2020 (UTC))

References

Whether or not Borglum was a member of the KKK is disputed. Smithsonian says no proof of officially joining.

Since this is a hot issue, I think we need to have solid proof for membership in KKK before asserting it. The secondary source which claims it must be examined to see if it cites at least 2 reliable primary sources. Thus I have deleted the definitive claim in the article. Such a claim requires at least 2 reliable secondary sources, both of which document primary sources. The article records the denial by Borglum, which requires strong evidence to brush it off. A mere opinion that "it was for public consumption" is insufficient. (PeacePeace (talk) 04:27, 12 July 2020 (UTC)).

A 2023 book states: An ardent white supremacist, Borglum was closely associated with the Ku Klux Klan. There is no documentary proof that he actually joined it, but his various prejudices became more pronounced after 1923 when he became directly involved with the group. (bold mine) Schazjmd (talk) 23:11, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

References

Relationship with D. C. Stephenson

The section Public Life concludes by saying, 'The museum at Mount Rushmore displays a letter to Borglum from D.C. Stephenson, the infamous Klan Grand Dragon who later was convicted of the rape and murder of Madge Oberholtzer. The 8x10 foot portrait contains the inscription "To my good friend Gutzon Borglum, with the greatest respect."' Grammatically, the letter and the portrait appear to be the same artifact. Will someone who knows the facts please unscramble this? J S Ayer (talk) 03:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Politics ? ? ?

Other than a one liner about the Bull Moose Party and KKK speculation, there's nothing about his politics.

I'd like to know whether or not he 'belonged' to any other political party after the Bull Moose collapsed in 1920. 2600:8800:204:C400:7088:1EE1:13F1:F556 (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)