Kìwekì Point (formerly Nepean Point) Redevelopment [NCC]

[Admiral Nelson]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I didn't think moving the statue was a big deal, but after reading many of your comments, my opinion has shifted.

I still don't think moving the statue is a big deal, it's only moved to a slightly less prominent location. It might resemble more the Colonel By statue in Major's Hill Park, which is far from hidden away.

[SL123]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I didn't think moving the statue was a big deal, but after reading many of your comments, my opinion has shifted.

Another bonus with the statue at the top of the hill is attracting people to Nepean Point. The area feels secluded and largely unknown by tourists and locals alike. By having the statue atop the hill, it draws people to the Point.

Of all the times I went to Nepean point never once was I like... I wanna go see the statue, It was always I wanna take a picture of parliament or i wanna watch the sunset...

[Harley613]

Originally Posted by SL123

Of all the times I went to Nepean point never once was I like... I wanna go see the statue, It was always I wanna take a picture of parliament or i wanna watch the sunset...

To me the statue was the anchor of whole place, the central gathering point, and the sunset watchers all radiated out from it. It had meaning and added to the ambience of the place.

[Ottawacurious]

I was hoping they'd connect the NCC pathways to lady gray drive....ie extend the Trans Canada trail from the canal, go under Alexandra bridge, wrap it around to lady gray drive and restore the old stairwell, landings and pathways that had been below Nepean point (still visible if you look for them!)

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by Ottawacurious

I was hoping they'd connect the NCC pathways to lady gray drive....ie extend the Trans Canada trail from the canal, go under Alexandra bridge, wrap it around to lady gray drive and restore the old stairwell, landings and pathways that had been below Nepean point (still visible if you look for them!)

That would have been neat.

Welcome to the forum!

[Richard Eade]

I remember taking my young niece to Nepean Point, many years ago. (Actually, I was taking her to the National Art Gallery, but the statue caught her eye so she wanted to include the hill in the trip.) She was intrigued by the statue and asked who he was. I explained that he was the first European to come and map out the area. We were on top of the hill, so it made perfect sense to her, since she reasoned that he could see up and down the river.

What would I tell her after the relocation – if she was even interested in walking up a hill just to see a view?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I remember taking my young niece to Nepean Point, many years ago. (Actually, I was taking her to the National Art Gallery, but the statue caught her eye so she wanted to include the hill in the trip.) She was intrigued by the statue and asked who he was. I explained that he was the first European to come and map out the area. We were on top of the hill, so it made perfect sense to her, since she reasoned that he could see up and down the river.

What would I tell her after the relocation – if she was even interested in walking up a hill just to see a view?

It is also about seeing the statue from the river. Out of sight, out of mind. No story to tell.

[lrt's friend]

The only thing Nepean Point needed was better access from Major's Hill Park, which had existed previously until 1959.

Besides Parliament Hill, the only major landmark that you can easily see from the river was the Champlain monument and the monument was the only thing actually facing the river. Moving the monument to a more obscure location is typical compromise, but is another step towards a city that refuses to embrace its waterways. We keep talking about integrating our riverfronts better and here we go, a major step backwards.

[Kitchissippi]

The story that statue tells is that Samuel de Champlain did not know how to hold an astrolabe properly.

If I were doing the interpretation plan for that site, I’d lay out that high point to function like an astrolabe, incorporating how the Anishinaabe also used the sun, moon and stars to tell time and seasons, and for navigation. It would all connect nicely with Champlain, the scout and the geomarkers.

[Harley613]

I wonder when the ped bridge to Major's Hill will begin construction. I'm curious to see what that will look like and how it will connect.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The story that statue tells is that Samuel de Champlain did not know how to hold an astrolabe properly.

Yes, well, sometimes we need to give a little leeway for 'Artistic Licence'.

Originally Posted by Harley613

I wonder when the ped bridge to Major's Hill will begin construction. I'm curious to see what that will look like and how it will connect.

While the old bridge was a metal trestle bridge, somewhat blending with the Alexandra, I expect that the new bridge will be bland. It might have some similarities to the future 'Alexandra II' bridge, but, since we have no idea what that will look like, I'm not holding my breath for any cohesiveness for the area.

Old Bridge (found on Flicker):


New Bridge (image from NCC doc):

I suspect that this is only a 'place-holder' image, though.

Whereas the old bridge was set fairly high above the road (including steps from Nepean Point to get up to its deck), the new image seems to show a bridge set about half way up/down the hill.

As you say; it will be interesting to see the design of the new bridge.

[JayBuoy]

Is Champlain that important to people? Its not enough to have a statue of him, it has to be very prominent?
Taking a step back from our waterways by moving the Champlain statue somewhere less prominent? I think some of you are overreacting a bit.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JayBuoy

Is Champlain that important to people? Its not enough to have a statue of him, it has to be very prominent?
Taking a step back from our waterways by moving the Champlain statue somewhere less prominent? I think some of you are overreacting a bit.

It is the only prominent statue along the river, and who else would be more appropriate? We replace it with a grove of trees, give me a break.


As I said, it is getting to the point where we have to be ashamed of our history. Our history is now under constant attack.

[Peenermcnoober]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

As I said, it is getting to the point where we have to be ashamed of our history. Our history is now under constant attack.

This dynamic reminds me of the southpark episode where the washington football club act like displaced first nations.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The story that statue tells is that Samuel de Champlain did not know how to hold an astrolabe properly.

I think it says more about the sculptor than the subject.

[Admiral Nelson]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

As I said, it is getting to the point where we have to be ashamed of our history. Our history is now under constant attack.

I don't have a strong opinion but I'll present a counterargument to counter the groupthink in this thread:

*It's important to distinguish between recognizing our history and celebrating it, which has been the crux of the issue in the US slavery-related statue debate. Also, to state the obvious, our recognition of history does not begin and end with immortalization in statues.

*I assume it's fair to suggest that when we place or maintain something on a giant pedestal at the head of one of the most prominent natural formations in the city, this is a form of celebration that goes above and beyond mere recognition of history. It's quite literally the highest form of flattery. Consequently, public authorities owe it to the public to assess whether celebration of an individual or an event is actually inclusive for Canadians.

*I don't know whether this reflection happened or led to the move decision, but let's consider Champlain. He clearly embodied human exploration and, at least to some extent, collaborative engagement with Indigenous peoples. But more than that, he may also effectively represent the vanguard of the later European displacement/subjugation of Indigenous societies.

*The celebration of a European explorer at that location may inadvertently feed the dated eurocentric narrative that the 'New World' was waiting to be discovered and that European explorers heralded the beginnings of civilization.

I'm curious what Indigenous peoples would say about this. I honestly don't see it as a bad thing to bring Champlain back down to a more human scale and rather it's a very good thing that the Anishinabe Scout statue that belongs nearby will be in the same area in a symbolically more equal position.

[J.OT13]

What if the scout was placed on a pedestal on top of the hill with Champlain standing below? I might prefer that to nothing up there. That way, both would still be highly visible, but we change the dominance dynamic.

[DTcrawler]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

What if the scout was placed on a pedestal on top of the hill with Champlain standing below? I might prefer that to nothing up there. That way, both would still be highly visible, but we change the dominance dynamic.

Agree, that wouldn't be a bad idea. I'm almost indifferent as to whose statue is on top of the pedestal - my argument was solely around the fact that a statue is much more desirable than a little patch of trees. I do think it would be better to build a bigger Scout statue if it were to go up top, however.

[JayBuoy]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It is the only prominent statue along the river, and who else would be more appropriate? We replace it with a grove of trees, give me a break.


As I said, it is getting to the point where we have to be ashamed of our history. Our history is now under constant attack.

Having a statue is an honour. Removing it does not erase history. And in this case it won't be removed. You are over-reaching

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I think it says more about the sculptor than the subject.

But that’s just it. The original composition was a gallantly dressed Champlain on top of a pedestal holding an astrolabe triumphantly like a crucifix with a half-naked Algonquin scout stooped low beneath him. It’s now considered offensive in its original assembly, and in a sense reconfiguring it to mean something else is somewhat dishonest and revisionist.