I am not usually one to point something like this out, but if this is truly a slave burial site I really think this sign is insufficient to say the least. Describing slaves as "individuals who lived and worked on this property" seems like a not insignificant sugarcoating of the situation, rather disturbing really...
Of course this only applies if this truly is a confirmed slave burial site.
@DelacoursLangur It is confirmed. There is a better sign, with more info, in the next photo I posted. This is the updated cemetery and signage, I don't know what it looked like before or if it was acknowledged at all. Unfortunately it's the south, and Grassmere is one of the ones that does a *better* job talking about their slaves than most. I hope there is work being done to try and identify who is buried there, and find any possible living relatives.
@TinoPup Ah now I see that, the new sign is much better. If rather undercut in my opinion by an identical sign next to it dedicated to the burial traditions and history of the plantation owners. Maybe I am being too critical, but I would think that a public institution would want to distance itself as much as possible from slavery... Then again your right, this is the south maybe playing into the plantation history is good pr.
@TinoPup What exactly are you saying No to? If the focus of the plantation house was all about remembering the horrors of slavery I think that would be great. But there is a difference between preserving the evidence of injustice, and commemorating the system and people which dealt the injustice. The whole complex still seems primarily focused on the plantation owning lifestyle. If you go to the Nashville Zoo's own website they have multiple paragraphs detailing the lineage of ownership of the plantation, and not one mention of the slaves that worked the fields.
I think that the new sign is definitely a good step. And constructing a cemetery is admirable. They clearly are trying to take steps over the past couple years to more accurately depict the reality of plantation life, and I sincerely hope they continue to do so. However considering the decedents of those slave owners donated the land the zoo is built upon, I could see how that would complicate matters.
@DelacoursLangur "but I would think that a public institution would want to distance itself as much as possible from slavery". I agree with you about preserving vs commemorating. As a whole, we're a long way off from getting to that point A few notable places have reached that goal, but they have received a lot of push back. Ultimately it's hard to make that transition, given they (non-Grassmere) mostly rely on visitors' money to stay open at all. Too many continue to turn a blind eye to it, as shown by how much people with .. certain beliefs .. don't want some things taught (very careful wording here).
Nashville's website used to have info about the slaves, a poor choice to remove it. They sadly use the location for weddings, as well; it's a big grassy area that's easy to block off without losing many visitors, sure, but my point stands all the same.
