Can we have more statues that matter to people in Glasgow, please?

The Black Lives Matter campaign and the city’s links to the slave trade has made history into a present day issue.

It has brought some names who would not be recognised by the public at large and others who would not necessarily be associated with slavery into focus.

READ MORE: Catriona Stewart: To tackle racism we must accept it exists

Unlike the street names in the city centre, not as many of the statues are linked to slavery, and certainly not as obviously and directly, but if we are to examine the history of some in closer detail then we may find facts that are uncomfortable with modern values.

Robert Burns is celebrated in George Square. Scotland’s greatest poet, celebrated in countries around the world for his works. Subject Burns to scrutiny under a 21st Century gaze however, and he might not emerge as the romantic egalitarian we celebrate every January.

James Watt, regarded as the inventor of the steam engine, and celebrated for that achievement. But his family benefited financially from the slave trade, allowing him to pursue his engineering career.

King William of Orange sits on his horse in Cathedral Square. 

The existence of the statue is insulting to many in Glasgow and it has been vandalised twice this week.  To remove it would insult many more however, and would no doubt create a public confrontation.

A number of statues have been targeted in the city in recent days

Burns and Watt aside many of the statues in Glasgow celebrate monarchs, politicians or military men.

We have had issues with statues in Glasgow before.  Should they stay in George Square or removed to a park or a museum.

Not enough women are celebrated, which is still the case, or not enough Glaswegians are remembered. The murals across the city to Billy Connolly might help address that a little.

However, the idea of a statue to Billy Connolly in George Square is something he would have ridiculed to death in his prime.

The most recent statues in Glasgow have marked a shift in focus from celebrating men of power and their victories on the battlefield to more accessible people whose legacy is felt by citizens.

The Mary Barbour statue at Govan Cross, with Mrs Barbour leading her ‘army’ in rent strikes and protest celebrates the woman taking people with her in a crusade whose aim was to benefit them more than her.

The Charles Rennie Mackintosh statue in Anderston celebrates art and someone who is synonymous with Glasgow around the world.

Another, outside Central Station, is the Citizen Firefighter statue which honours the city’s firefighters past and present, many of who lost their live saving others, something deserving of recognition now and in the future.

It is difficult to disagree with the merit of any of those.

So what does Glasgow do with its public monuments to those individuals who, at one particular point in history, were deemed worthy of civic recognition but maybe less so now.

Tearing down of statues by protesters will not solve anything. The wider citizenry has to have the opportunity to express an opinion on who we celebrate in public for posterity.

If we are to remove statues it should be done so with the consent of the city. 

That means the city taking a good look at who we have on a pedestal and having the courage to admit that some are no longer suitable. A study is already under way into the slavery links and that can be our staring point.

Removing some would be contentious because what they represent to some people is not necessarily what they represent to others.

A Billy Connolly statue? Somehow I think the Big Yin would disagree

Perhaps while we are having the debate about who deserves a statue we can remember events and collective efforts to make the city a better place, rather than a narrative of victors and vanquished.

Some of the statues in the city, if there are attempts to remove them, will provoke passions in people equal to the disgust felt by others at their existence.

READ MORE: Glasgow streets linked to slave-trade revealed in map

Perhaps we don’t need to remove them, but recognise the other points of view and that while they may be heroes to some, they are responsible for the suffering of many others.

If that means erecting memorials alongside, or plaques to explain why they are not seen as heroic by everyone.

History is rarely simple and how it is interpreted often depends on which side of it you think you are on.

When we erect any new public works of art in Glasgow, maybe we could try, for once, to be all on the same side.