They Served, They Were Paid, They Left — Why Are Indiana’s Former Governors Getting Permanent Statehouse Wall

NO COMMENT....WELL, BIRDS OF A FEATHER?

By Hoosier Enquirer Staff

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana is giving its former governors a more prominent place in the Old Statehouse in Indianapolis, moving portraits that had been scattered through government offices and museum storage into public hallways on the second, third and fourth floors of the Capitol. Some were collecting dust in storage, too.

The project will eventually put roughly 50 official gubernatorial portraits before visitors, along with historical placards explaining the men and women behind them.

Most Hoosiers would rather see a portrait of Curt Cignetti, or Bobby Knight even over these self-dealers.

State officials say the purpose is educational: school groups and other visitors will no longer have to enter working government offices to see the collection, and portraits that have spent years in storage will become publicly accessible, like any school kid cares or will remember any of these has-been's names.

It is a reasonable historical argument. It also raises another one: How much permanent reverence does holding elected office entitle somebody to receive? HE is not a fan of many and too many questions have never been answered. ONLY THE CURRENT GOVERNOR SHOULD HAVE HIS OR HER PICTURE ON DISPLAY.

Indiana governors were public employees entrusted with considerable authority. They were compensated for doing the job, exercised power that affected millions of Hoosiers and, like governors everywhere, left records containing accomplishments, controversies, mistakes and political disputes. An official oil portrait displayed permanently inside the Statehouse can easily move from preserving history to appearing to canonize the people who once occupied the office.

There is a difference.

Indiana Has Been Painting Its Governors Since 1869

The tradition is old. Gov. Conrad Baker began collecting likenesses of his predecessors in 1869 after the Legislature authorized portraits of Indiana’s territorial and state governors. The collection later expanded, and state law now requires the Indiana State Museum and Historic Sites to oversee, preserve and display official gubernatorial portraits. (Indiana Government)

The modern collection therefore is not something Gov. Mike Braun simply dreamed up this year. It is a legally established state collection with more than 150 years of history behind it.

Nor are these paintings necessarily being purchased directly from ordinary operating dollars each time a governor leaves office. Indiana law permits appropriated or other funds to support the collection, while recent portraits have often relied on private contributions for the artist’s commission and framing. Eric Holcomb’s portrait, for example, was privately funded, as was Joe Kernan’s earlier portrait. (Indiana Government)...WELL THEY SHOULD BE USED FOR KINDLING, SERIOUSLY. OR BETTER YET, SEND THEM TO CHINA.

The state nevertheless bears responsibility for preserving, transporting and displaying the collection, and Indiana maintains a dedicated Governors’ Portraits Fund for preservation and exhibition. (Justia Law)

That makes the portraits public property, but it does not automatically answer where they belong.

Storage Was Not Exactly a Historical Emergency

Until now, some portraits hung in the governor’s office, some in other state agencies and some remained in Indiana State Museum storage. Braun administration officials say that arrangement made the collection difficult for visitors to see, particularly when meetings prevented tours from entering the governor’s office.

The new plan solves that problem. Portraits are being installed in public corridors, high enough to protect the paintings, with explanatory plaques eventually placed at eye level. Officials hope the project will be completed before the end of the year, although there is no firm deadline.

There is, however, nothing inherently disrespectful about museum storage. Museums preserve thousands of historically important objects that are not continuously displayed. Rotating exhibitions are standard practice precisely because every artifact cannot occupy permanent wall space forever.

Indiana could preserve every portrait without necessarily hanging every former governor throughout the Statehouse indefinitely. It could rotate them through exhibitions, maintain a dedicated gubernatorial gallery, loan them to museums around the state or, where legally possible, explore whether families want reproductions while originals remain properly preserved.

MOST ADVERTISER HAVE TO PAY A FEE NOT THESE ONES.

Those are public-policy alternatives, not attacks on history.

AND JUST JUSTICE FOR THE MANY LOOSERS WHO SERVED A TERM OR TWO.

A Portrait Should Not Become a Halo

The more interesting issue is how the accompanying placards will describe the governors.

The Braun administration has assigned six fellows to research and write the historical descriptions with assistance from Indiana State Museum experts. (Indiana Capital Chronicle)

That work matters more than where the paintings hang.

A portrait alone naturally flatters its subject. Governors selected poses, clothing and objects intended to convey how they wanted future generations to remember them. Mitch Daniels appears with a pen rather than a suit jacket. BUT HE NEEDS TO ADDRESS HOW HE APPOINTED LORETTA RUSH OVER BETTER PEOPLE? AND HOW HE ENDED UP AT PURDUE AND WHY SHE INTERVIEWED HIM?

HOW MANY COLLEGE DRUG DEALERS/USERS BELONG ON THE PUBLIC HALL WALLS? HE SHOULD BE BURIED SOMEDAY IN A PINK CADILLAC ALLA FLUKIE STOKES, AND WHILE YOU ARE AT IT, PUT HIS PAINTING IN THE BACK SEAT, TOO!

Mike Pence included law books, a Bible and a family photograph. Holcomb’s portrait includes cowboy boots, a globe and imagery connected to Hanover College.

The labels should therefore provide history rather than hagiography.

Indiana governors presided over consequential decisions involving taxes, schools, prisons, public health, highways, universities, appointments, economic-development incentives and the exercise of executive power. Some decisions remain celebrated; others remain heavily disputed. A genuine historical exhibit should tell visitors enough about both to understand why each administration mattered.

Putting a governor’s likeness on a wall should not mean placing the governor above criticism.

Public Service Is Not Sainthood

Indiana officials describe the portrait collection as a way to teach visitors about the state’s history, and there is real value in that. The governors’ portraits span generations of political change and include works by notable Indiana artists. Four additional paintings by famed Hoosier artist T.C. Steele, commissioned for the 1916 centennial, depict William Henry Harrison, Jonathan Jennings, Oliver P. Morton and Thomas A. Hendricks.

But historical importance and public admiration are different things.

Some governors are remembered warmly. Others are remembered principally for particular controversies, policy battles or periods of political division. Most are probably not “revered” by contemporary Hoosiers at all; many younger visitors could not identify them without the placards state employees are now preparing.

That may actually be the best argument for retaining the paintings as educational objects rather than treating them as monuments.

The office deserves historical documentation. The person who temporarily occupied it does not automatically deserve permanent adulation.

Keep the History — But Tell the Whole History

The strongest case for the new display is that taxpayers already possess the paintings and that public access makes more sense than hiding valuable historical objects where almost nobody can see them. The strongest criticism is that rows of flattering portraits can turn a