Arch Thoughts

Donald Trump is threatening to build a massive triumphal arch in D.C. A rendering of the proposed monument has been released:

Of course, even if the arch is built, it may or may not look like this. That details of Trump’s ballroom keep changing—not to mention his justification for the war against Iran—suggests that this project’s details are likely to be volatile.

Only yesterday, AP reported that the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, a body now composed of Trump lackeys, has approved a design for the arch somewhat modified from the image shown above. The lions—which often represent royalty—are gone, and two gold eagles have been added atop the arch. Gold remains a significant surface finish consistent with the Trump nouveau riche aesthetic. The phrases “One Nation Under God” and “Liberty and Justice for All” are to appear on either side of the monument (in gold lettering, of course).

The most obvious criticisms of the Trump triumphal arch are that (1) it would be a major piece of architecture in our capital city reflecting the desires and aesthetics of a single man. (2) no source of funding for the arch has been identified, (3) there is no obvious need or constituency for the arch, (4) it is outrageously large (more than twice as tall as the nearby Lincoln Memorial and nearly half as tall as the Washington Monument), and (5) it interrupts the sight line across the Potomac River.

The inscriptions are curious. They are clearly taken from the “Pledge of Allegiance.” (I have problems with the Pledge, particularly with the invocation of God, but we can leave that aside for the moment.) Why should we prefer “One Nation Under God” to “In God We Trust,” which, unfortunately, is the nation’s official motto? (See my essay “A Matter of Mottos.”) The Pledge has no such official standing. Likewise, the Pledge-derived “Liberty and Justice for All” is an unofficial phrase. I would prefer simply “Liberty,” which adorns our coins. Arguably, true liberty, which is in short supply at the moment, implies justice.

Historically, triumphal arches are most often celebratory of military victories and/or the soldiers responsible for them. What is Trump’s arch for? Trump has suggested that the District of Columbia needs an arch to mark the entrance to the District. One has to ask why, however, particularly as the arch blocks significant sight lines. And where should such an entrance monument be?

According to Adam Gopnik, “When asked by a reporter whom the arch would be for, Trump said, ‘Me.’” According to Gopnik, bigness is the point of the arch. He pointed out that Hitler wanted to build an enormous arch in his proposed capital city for the Third Reich. I suggest that Trump’s arch really does celebrate a Trump victory, namely, the triumph of autocracy over democracy. (Our semiquincentennial is simply a convenient excuse to build a 250-foot tall arch.) Ironically, a gold, winged Lady Liberty adorns the top of the arch. She is, I suggest, ready to fly away from the United States.