| Author |
 Replies: 26 / Views: 3,248 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2563 Posts |
Poll Question
This has been on my mind for some time, but I have never sat down and wrote it out. Since 1947, Lady Liberty has not appeared on the coinage of the United States (except for commemorative issues). The artistic potential that Lady Liberty produced caused our coinage to be more than beautiful. Our coinage is now bland and almost blatantly ugly, with low relief designs and real life presidents on them. I believe that by putting these presidents on our coinage, we have idolized them in a way that even our founding fathers were opposed to. So, in short, I am most certainly for bringing Lady Liberty back to our coins. Why? Reason #1: Our coinage would be much more beautiful and artistic. If you asked people which coin looks better between the Roosevelt and Winged Liberty or "Mercury" Dimes, I am almost certain they would choose the "Merc" every time. The sheer beauty that she brings to a coin is incomparable. Artistic potential would also increase. This would cause many designs to be considered, and would ultimately lead to some beautiful coins. Reason #2: Lady Liberty is indicative of all things American. Yes, she might have been designed by the French, but her appearance is almost universally tied to the United States. Just look at the design of the Walking Liberty half dollar, where Lady Liberty is holding the American Flag. Reason #3: No one in their right mind could start a controversy over a fictitious symbol of liberty. Every one dogs on Lincoln, Jefferson, Washington, etc. for all the things they did during their lifetime. Lady Liberty has no past, except to symbolize liberty and freedom. Also, it's a woman, so no gender-equality people could really complain. Final Reason #4: It would lead to us no longer idolizing our past presidents and historical figures. We constantly idolize our past presidents, which should not be done. With Lady Liberty on our coins, this idolization would vanish in favor of artistic beauty. I know that I sound kind of weird when I say this, but Lady Liberty is the face of America. She was on our coinage from the very beginning. She was there when we fought the War of 1812, and when we fought our brothers in the Civil War. She was there when the Lusitania sank and we were dragged into World War I, and when we celebrated our victory with the Treaty of Versailles. She was there when we went through the worst economic depression in our history, and when we pulled through. She was there when the Pearl Harbor naval base was bombarded by the Japanese, and she was there when the United States had to make the dreadful decision to drop two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. She was always there, until we abandoned her in 1947. I say that we bring her back, so that our history can once again be shaped with the face of Liberty. I posted this on facebook, and I wanted to see what all of you thought. I hope it's not political, even though I kind of said somethings that are border-line.
Edited by CoinCollector2000
07/18/2016 9:13 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2023 Posts |
As much as I agree with everything you wrote, I stumble a bit on "it's a woman, so no gender-equality people could really complain." There are relatively few truly artistic depictions of male figures on American coinage, and those are mainly commemoratives. The Oregon Trail commemorative is the first of the classic commemoratives that I bought, for that reason. The 1925 California commemorative was my second. Generally speaking, I find male portraits to be artistically boring (though there are some exceptions).
That said, it is far easier to depict "beauty" with a female figure, and that does have appeal. So a strong "yes" vote from me for all your other reasons, but I'll still snap up attractive males when they come out (so to speak), and I'd be perfectly content if those are only on commemoratives.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2563 Posts |
 with you there, Alpha. I'm just saying that in this day and time, a male portrait would probably be received unfavorably. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2843 Posts |
Though I agree that we should bring her back, I don't think we could.
You see I believe that our coinage is truly indicative of our "liberty health"
America used to be a country of true liberty, but is no longer. I am not going to start the blame game, but our current coinage fits who we have become.
I always tell people,
Liberty used to sit on our coins, then she stood up, then she began waking, then she walked right off.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3843 Posts |
As much as I enjoy my coins that Lady Liberty graces, it is time for new ideas and designs. We shouldn't cheapen history by blatantly copying successful design from the distant past.
Edited by Joe2007
07/19/2016 12:22 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1314 Posts |
I like depictions of Lady Liberty, for patriotic reasons. And she is prettier than most men.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Norway
1358 Posts |
Just for the idea, we have the face of a bald king on our coins here in Norway. And we're doing fine just as well...  Lady Liberty is actually an image of the ancient Roman goddess of Libertas, goddess of liberty, and thus in itself not very American. To me it's actually not that important what or who is on the coins, as long as it's aesthetically pleasing to see, preferably even intriguing and hopefully also has added value to the nation that issues these coins, something that unites people or makes them proud. Having that stated, one thing that I do like about Liberty and also the eagles on American coins, is that they are depicting large abstract concepts by one small image. Presidents are very concrete and don't leave much to the imagination. For future coins, the USA should find a new concept like Liberty or the eagle, preferably something that represents the current nation for now and the (near) future. Quote:
we have idolized them in a way that even our founding fathers were opposed to. You do realize that you are actually idolizing these founding fathers a bit with this statement? Those were people who lived a few hundred years ago. The world has changed, evolution of the state took place since, and now you're in a place with two political parties (which wasn't their idea) ruled by religion (which wasn't their idea) and where former presidents are idolized (which probably wouldn't be their idea), just to name a few things. And still you're not doing bad, as you live in the most powerful and wealthiest nation on the planet. The USA is now a completely different country than it was almost 250 years ago. I'm not saying it's good or bad, but trying to start a monetary renaissance won't bring back the good ol' days and won't bring the USA closer to any of the ideals of those founding fathers. It's probably a good idea to look forward to the future and come up with new ideas. When making new coins, think of something that actually brings America together, like bibles and guns or so. Or Walmart and McDonald's.  Quote:
she might have been designed by the French Yes, your national symbol was designed by a Frenchman (Bartholdi), built by a Frenchman (Eiffel) and given to you by the French people as a gift. And still you didn't want John Kerry as your president? Quote:
We constantly idolize our past presidents, which should not be done. It's not just in the coins. I don't think there are many more countries in the world where former famous and/or rich people get things named after them than in the USA: even when sitting on a park bench I might very well be sitting on something that carries someones name. Taking their heads off coins would be a small step, but it doesn't 'solve' the underlying issue. Quote:
I hope it's not political, even though I kind of said somethings that are border-line. Same goes for my statements in this post, not intended political at all but more as a game of thoughts. It's good to have them, good to put them on paper and brave to be willing to discuss them, I'd say, so thank you for sharing. To conclude: yes, I like the Liberty coins quite much, yes, the current coins seem to fit well with the current American society, no, bringing her back won't solve anything and no, I think future coins would need a new design. Edited by UltraRant
07/19/2016 04:25 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Sweden
1078 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188091 Posts |
Perhaps, just maybe, bringing Liberty back to our money would be a good start, a way of saying that this is what we should be doing, fairness and equality for all. With that said, we are walking a fine line in this topic. So far we are doing good to stay on the correct side, but be careful or this topic will go bye-bye.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
You are preaching to the choir here. This question has come up many times over the past 40 years abd the answer has always been Liberty, and not just among collectors. When polls were taken for possible design choices for what became the SBA and the Sac dollar with the general public, three times an allagorical representation of Liberty won out hands down over the competitors. And in both cases special interests were able to get the results discarded. (The poll for the SBA was done twice. After Liberty won the first time the feminist groups insisted there should be more choices. So they did it again, and Liberty won again. Susan Anthony came in something like sixth.) Quote:
Reason #1: Our coinage would be much more beautiful and artistic. If you asked people which coin looks better between the Roosevelt and Winged Liberty or "Mercury" Dimes, I am almost certain they would choose the "Merc" every time. The problem is they probably wouldn't be that beautiful or artistic. Take your Mercury dime and flatten the relief down to that of the modern Roosevelt dime and it will probably lose a lot of it's appeal. Look at the gold mercury and the detail loss it had. It is nowhere near as appealing as the dimes from the teens. |
|
Moderator
United States
188091 Posts |
Quote:The problem is they probably wouldn't be that beautiful or artistic. Take your Mercury dime and flatten the relief down to that of the modern Roosevelt dime and it will probably lose a lot of it's appeal. Look at the gold mercury and the detail loss it had. It is nowhere near as appealing as the dimes from the teens. I agree. The lower relief required for our modern coinage demands really hurts the design. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1747 Posts |
isn't she on the dollar coin?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1747 Posts |
oh right that coin does not count....
|
|
Moderator
United States
188091 Posts |
She is on the back of 80% of them each year, yes. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2023 Posts |
I'd counter that the figure on the back of the Presidential dollars is the Statue of Liberty, not "Lady Liberty" as posed here. The statue is a fixed pose and likeness, and can be depicted from just about any angle (looking mainly at the platinum bullion coins for that observation), but Lady Liberty offers much more artistic flexibility. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1747 Posts |
still the same mythical person.
|
| |
Replies: 26 / Views: 3,248 |
Posted 07/18/2016 9:36 pm
