October 30, 2007--Yes Virginia, There Was A Civil War

Though I confess to enjoying picking up lost coins on the street—sort of in the spirit of find-a-penny-and-have-good-luck-all-day—I don’t pay much attention to the coins themselves. Including what’s depicted on them.

I am aware of the government’s interest in the possibility of eliminating pennies since it costs more than one cent to produce one. And I know about efforts to phase out paper dollar bills and replace them with one-dollar coins. Neither of these has met with much success—we are clearly devoted to our pennies even though there is literally nothing any more available to buy for one, though for many people collecting pennies is their most consistent means of saving for their retirement. And since no one seems to want to carry around even more change in their pocket or purse, the Susan V. Anthony coin has been a bust, except when getting change from stamp vending machines in post offices.

I am vaguely aware of the fact that during the past few years each of the 50 states has had the opportunity to have their own version of a quarter. The back of New York’s, no surprise, has the Statute of Liberty superimposed over a map of the Empire State; Virginia’s includes what to me look like the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria approaching Jamestown; Washington State, the Evergreen State, has a salmon leaping out of the water with Mount Rainier in the background; and Kentucky has, what else, a race horse in a corral in front of My Old Kentucky Home.

And though I am not noted for my aesthetic sensibilities, the one thing all of these coins, and the other 40 or so, have in common is that they are, to be kind, undistinguished in design. I can only assume this is because each of them was designed by a committee where all sorts of political considerations and correctness came into play. This was confirmed for me this morning by a report in the New York Times that a committee is working on a new design for the back of the venerable penny. (Linked below.)

A portrait of Lincoln will remain on the head side, what will appear on the tail, or back side is up for grabs. What do we suppose is likely to happen? With an eight-person committee making the decisions—four members were selected by Congress; the other four “by merit” because of their expertise in numismatics and history (which of course implies that the congressional appointees lack merit). I do not have a view about what the numismatists must be advocating—presumably a quality design—but it’s already pretty clear what the historians are up to.

When reviewing potential designs the group pretty much agreed that they liked the one that depicted the legendary log cabin; and another one of the young Lincoln with work-shirt sleeves rolled up reading a book by candle light; and a third version of him making a speech in the Illinois state legislature. They couldn’t, however, agree on how to represent his presidency.

He was best known of course for leading a part of the country during the Civil War and for issuing the Emancipation Proclamation. There seems to be some reluctance about depicting either of these. Maybe showing him “freeing the slaves” would upset some citizens; perhaps a scene of him at the Gettysburg battlefield would remind people that when we are at war there are casualties and burials that take place in cemeteries. Clearly this is not the sort of thing we want the public to have to see.

So let’s stick to the more mythological stuff we learned in public school American history classes—log cabins for Lincoln, cherry trees for George Washington, and scenes of Mission Accomplished for the George W. Bush Wooden Nickel.