I am Andy Maseck, I am president here, the acting president at the Colorado Historical Society, and it's my pleasure to welcome you to the Historical Society. This organization has been around since 1879; we've been collecting Colorado and Western history since that time and now operate thirteen museums in the State of Colorado. This happens to be our headquarters where we have our research library on the second floor; we have exhibits on the lower level and about two hundred thousand objects, artifacts collected over the last hundred and seventeen years, stored downstairs as well. We're pleased to be the host institution for this exhibit put on by the National Park Service and the Little Bighorn Memorial Committee that worked so hard over the past three years to get top architects and artists from around the country to submit for the new memorial at the Little Bighorn.

Before we get started tonight I would like to invite you to see the Cheyenne dogsoldiers exhibit which is right around the corner from this lecture hall. The Cheyenne Dog Soldiers exhibit was a project that was done in cooperation with Cheyenne people; it's taken us a few years to put it together but we're very proud of the finished product. It's a ledger book history of coups and combat, it's based on a ledger book that was captured by the Fifth Cavalry and Buffalo Bill Cody and the Pawnee scouts at the battle of Summit Springs, Colorado, in July 1869. This ledger book, as far as we know, is the earliest known Cheyenne Ledger book; it contains 107 drawings done in the year 1865 by Dog Soldiers, Cheyenne dogsoldiers who recorded their victories, their battle honors in the turbulent period following the Sand Creek Massacre of November, 1864. So the exhibit that you see will trace the Sand Creek Massacre from the Cheyenne point of view, you'll see a wonderful video done in Oklahoma with the descendants of the Sand Creek victims. Then you will go on the pursuit of the Dog Soldiers to Summit Springs, Colorado where you'll see objects that were excavated on the battlefield and you'll see the actual ledger book that I just spoke of. And then in the final room of the exhibit you'll see some of the Cheyenne warrior artist drawings interpreted with the help of our Cheyenne consultants and with anthropologist Gene Apton and historian David Hollis and myself; we spent the last few years interpreting or attempting to read each of these drawings which we believe is a true account, a true history of the battles that followed the Sand Creek massacre.

So please do take the time to see that exhibit and be aware that a book is coming out. It will be here in June called "Cheyenne Dog Soldiers: A Ledger Book History of Coups and Combat", and we are also working on a CD-ROM, a virtual museum tour of that exhibit. So you'll be able to walk into the exhibit, turn around 360 degrees, focus on any object that you're interested in the exhibition and then when you click on it with your mouse you'll actually be able to pick that object and tumble it over and turn it around and see what the backside of that shield looks like or what the inside of Buffalo Bill Cody's hat looks like. So watch for that, it will also be out in June!

Let me say that there is coffee in the back, I think you're welcome to get up and help yourself to that at any time during the evening. Following the presentation here you will have an opportunity to see some of the other entries in the competition on this level and also down-stairs; just at the foot of the stairs, I think, there are another sixty or so entries that are available to you. Well, I won't take up any more of your time. I'd like to introduce the master of ceremonies for tonight, a member of the jury for the competition, Dennis Sun Rhoades. (applause)

Dennis Sun Rhoades, Master of Ceremonies:
I'm going to have a limited mc role. Hopefully tonight we're going to make this as informative and entertaining as possible. And what I like to do is first of all introduce the jury members and then I'd like to give an overview of what we're going to do tonight and so on. The jury members are--and I'd like to have them stand up and wave--Arthur Amiotte, Paul Andrew Hutton, A. Gay Kingman, Richard K. Pohl, and Kevin Red Star--is he here? Couldn't make it--. And Carol Redcherries--is in the back--and myself, I'm Dennis Sun Rhoades. (applause)

While this presentation and the overview is happening we're going to show a sampling of the other entries that were submitted for this design. We want to do this because we felt that this was outstanding response. We got really, really good response from many, many people from across the country and it was a very, very difficult process to come down to the final selection. And Paul when you get a chance when Arthur gets up here; and Arthur Amiotte is going to give an overview of the congressional act, the Advisory Committee, and goals and purposes. And I'll come back and talk a little bit about the context of the entire process of the competition, talk about the context of what was sent out to the designers; and then we'll have a history of the battle and how it is viewed today from Paul Hutton and Gay Kingman; and then Bob Burley who was the chairman of the jury--Bob, please stand--will come in and talk about the jury process. And then I will come back in and introduce the winners and at that time they will talk specifically to their designs, and I think that'll be very informative. And then we will open it up for discussion and questions from the audience.

Arthur:

AA: Thank you, Dennis. As you may or may not know this was not an idea merely thought up by the National Park Service or a group of Indian people but it rather is an official act of Congress. And I would like to share this act with you, Public Law 102-201, December 10, 1991 because it's at the very foundation and heart of a process that has been on-going since this battle began. Perhaps many of you know do not know that there were a series of annual reunions that took place; some of them formal, some of them informal--certainly the 1926 fiftieth anniversary wherein Native people from the Plains who participated in the battle of the Little Bighorn gathered and literally did indeed have a peaceful ceremony at which time White Bull, the Hunkpapa, gave a very fine blanket to--Paul, he wants to talk about this--. And there were expressed wishes by numerous people at that time that there be a monument, a memorial established for the Indian people at this site who were the victors. And through a long process and more immediately in the Eighties and coming into the Nineties then there were many, many groups and I don't wish to go into them now because this was very well covered yesterday, I think, through this presentation.

But rather I wish to share with you the intricacies of the bill itself, portions of it. It says:

"The Custer Battlefield National Monument in Montana shall on and after the date of enactment of this Act be known as the Little Bighorn Battlefield National. (hereafter in this Act referred to as the "monument")... The Congress finds that -- (1) a monument was erected in 1881 at Last Stand Hill to commemorate the soldiers and scouts and civilians attached to the Seventh United States Cavalry who fell in the battle of the Little Bighorn; (2) while many members of the Cheyenne, Sioux and other Indian Nations gave their lives defending their families and traditional lifestyle and livelihood, nothing stands at the battlefield to commemorate those individuals; and (3) the public interest will be served by establishing a memorial at the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument to honor Indian participants in the battle...

The Secretary of the Interior shall establish a committee to be known as the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument Advisory Committee (hereafter in this Act referred to as the "Advisory Committee"). Membership and Chairperson. -- The Advisory Committee shall be composed of eleven members appointed by the Secretary with six of the individuals appointed representing Native American tribes who participated in the battle of the Little Bighorn or who now reside in the area, two of the individuals appointed being nationally recognized artists and three of the individuals appointed being knowledgeable in history, historic preservation, and landscape architecture. The Advisory Committee shall designate one of its members as Chairperson..."

For your information: the formal process as it came to be was that Native Indian people were nominated in these categories as nationally known artists, as architects, and as landscape artists by national organizations, national entities, and also tribes.

They submitted names of people that they thought should serve on this committee to the Secretary of Interior and through the process of elimination attempting to find those people with the specific qualifications; that is qualifications as artists, as architects, as landscape artists, as historians, as educators. With those qualifications a long process of delineation took place. And the people who were eventually selected--oddly enough all the Indian people are direct descendants also, in addition to having these professional qualifications--are also direct descendants of Indian people who fought at that battle: Arthur Amiotte, myself, I'm an adjunct professor of Native Studies at Brandon University; I am a professional artist, art historian, author and educator. I am also a veteran of twenty-three national, regional, and international judging competitions, that is having judged them, not only participated in them.

Leonard Bruguier is a Ph.D Sioux, director of Institute of American Indian Studies at the University of South Dakota. He's assistant professor of the History Department and he is an historian; and he also is a descendant from a Sioux person who fought at that battle.

Dr. Paul Hutton, Ph.D, is a history professor at the University of New Mexico and executive director of the Western History Association.

A. Gay Kingman is a Sioux and she has her M.A. and is ABD for an Ed.D., she is director of public relations and Seminar Institute for the National Indian Gaming Association. Her great-grandfather was one of the Sioux who lost their life at that battle.

Donald Malnourie who is Arikara is a member of the Arikara Scout Society, an elder, and singer of his community.

Linda Pease Crow is an educator and artist at the Little Bighorn College, and she is descended from White man Runs Him, one of the Crow scouts.

Richard K. Pohl is associate professor of landscape architecture of Montana State University.

Carol Redcherries who is Northern Cheyenne is chief justice for the Northern Cheyenne Appellate court system and also a direct descendant.

Kevin Red Star is an internationally recognized artist, studied at the Institute of American Indian Arts in San Francisco and at the Art Institute in Mon--excuse me, the San Francisco Art Institute and Montana, Montana State University.

Dennis Sun Rhoades is Northern Arapaho; he is a principal architect of Amer-Indian Architecture of St. Paul, Minnesota and maintains residence also on the Wind River Reservation in Wyoming.

Chauncey F. Whitright who is Sioux, is from the Fort Peck Indian Reservation in Montana, and he is the chairman of the Strongheart Society and an advocate for Indian rights.

"The advisory committee shall advise the Secretary to ensure that the memorial designed and constructed as provided in section 203 shall be appropriate to the monument, its resources and landscape, sensitive to the history being portayed and artistically commendable...

"Members of the Advisory Committee shall serve without compensation but shall be entitled to travel expenses including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as persons employed intermittently in Government service..."

So mind you, this has all been public service by this board.

"The memorial itself: In order to honor and recognize the Indians who fought to preserve their land and culture in the Battle of the Little Bighorn, to provide visitors with an improved understanding of the events leading up to and the consequences of the fateful battle, and to encourage peace among people of all races, the Secretary shall design, construct and maintain a memorial at the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument.

"The Secretary, in consultation with the Advisory Committee, shall select the site of the memorial. Such area shall be located on the ridge in that part of the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument which is in the vicinity of the Seventh Cavalry Monument, as generally depicted on a map entitled "Custer Battlefield General Development Map"; dated March 1990...

"The design competition: The Secretary, in consultation with the Advisory Committee, shall hold a national design competition to select the design of the memorial.

"The design criteria shall include but not necessarily be limited to compatibility with the monument and its resources in form and scale, sensitivity to the history being portrayed and artistic merit. The design and plans for the to the approval of the Secretary.

"Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, the Secretary may accept and expend donations of funds, property or services from individuals, foundations, corporations or public entities for the purpose of providing for the memorial. There are authorized to appropriate such sums as are necessary to carry out this Act..."

It was thus the advisory committee's task to design the competition and those of you who participated, you saw the design competition package which took many, many hours and many, many months. The one thing that occurs in this document is the theme PEACE THROUGH UNITY.

In our preamble, the living descendants of the people who participated in this battle realized that in 1926 and in successive years that our people on the Northern Plains have become increasingly more and more dependent upon each other for our survival; and hence peace has existed among us as individual tribes, indeed intermarriages have taken place. And if our own tribes confined a certain kind of power through unity and peace through unity as we have lifted these last one hundred and twenty-one years then we decided that essentially this as a national monument should carry a message that would also be appropriate to the world, that perhaps in a peaceful fashion people can live in a unified manner or by living in a unified manner people may seek and find peace.

There were two people on the committee who fought long and hard before the legislation took place, Leonard Bruguier and Chauncey Withright, among others. And at that time they encountered elders who were essentially second generation; that is people who were born directly from those who participated in the battle. And this theme appears, it says:

"Respected elders, Enos Poor Bear and Austin Two Moon identified the theme of PEACE THROUGH UNITY. This theme was recommended by consensus of the Indian Memorial Work Group on May 3rd, 1989. The Little Bighorn National Monument Advisory Committee established in 1994 has ratified and adopted this theme. Although the memorial will be located on a historic battlefield the theme of peace should be prevalent.

"The theme of peace is expressed by the actions and words of Austin Two Moons in his prayers for world peace.

"Unity is expressed in the following quote by Enos Poor Bear:

'During the time of our elders, things were better for our Indians than they are today. The way that our elders made things better was through unity. Unity of purpose; unity of dedication; and unity of effort. When we look back over the pages of time, we observe that major accomplishments of Indian people were brought about when unity was present. The major victory which our people enjoyed here at this very battlefield was the result of a unified effort among Indian people.

'Major progress among Indian people will come about only when there is unity of effort. The failures that we Indian people have experienced have come about when we were not united and then divisiveness was the order of the day.

'If this memorial was to serve its total purpose, it must not only be a tribute to the dead; it must contain a message for the living. I earnestly suggest to you that power through unity would serve us well as an interpretive theme for this memorial.'"

And as a further extension of that then in considering other things and other issues and other ideas, then, the committee chose PEACE THROUGH UNITY as a kind of universal message.

Thank you. (applause)

DSR: I wanted to introduce myself. I've been in the architectural business for over thirty years. My experience has been more the designer than architecture and I've been involved with competitions; and so I really felt good that I was part of this jury, was selected in this two and a half year's process. One thing I did learn from this process was that the whole element that goes into when you select these winners; it's a long drawn-out process; it's a very heavy mental experience. One thing we did through the last two and half years was to organize this statement in the competition package that went out. And one thing we tried to do which is the nature of competition is to put everything in the competition package to allow the design competitor to spend as much time working on his or her entry and less time on research. I think this is really a key thing because we wanted the designers to just start designing, use their talent etc. And one of the things besides all the technical data that were part of the package--the site maps, the criteria line the competition is being held--we made some statements as Indian people; and the preamble which was put together by Arthur kind of created the energy, the spirit that was necessary to get the creative juices going. We also put two other stories together, one that had to deal with the past which linked into that statement was we emphasized the architectural icons of the Plains Indian; because in the package itself and the committee we wanted this piece of architecture to represent, look like Plains Indian culture. And the contemporary statement developed a need of a memorial in order that future generations of Plains Indian people, both Indian and non-Indian continue to know the story of the battle. These two statements provide information on the heritage, symbolism and cultural lifestyle of Plain Indian people who took part in the battle. And the sacred spirit and personal life images expended to them on the day of the battle and emotional impact of the battle as it is felt today. We made sure that a lot of these statements were part of that package because it's important for these people when you went to design this thing that they get to know the Indian spirit and we wanted it to come out. And I think that's been very evident in a lot of the competition entries; is that the spirit was there and in respect to winning entries, you'll see that the spirit is there also. Now I'd like to have Paul Hutton and Gay Kingman come up and do their piece. Thank you.

Paul Hutton: It's always very dangerous to have a college professor come forward and speak and give him the time length because it's impossible for us to speak in time segments less that forty-five minutes; (audience laugh) but I'll do this in five.

Memorializing battlefields, of course, is a tradition not only of the American people but is a universal tradition of all peoples throughout the world. Battlefields are often places where decisive action takes place; sometimes they emerge to sacred places to us, other times they emerge as places where we may interpret our past. History, of course, is not static and neither are battlefields, neither are historic sites. When the battlefield of the Little Bighorn was first memorialized it was memorialized by the army, and they made it into a National Cemetery to honor those American soldiers that had given their lives in combat there, along with the scouts and civilians who perished with them. In time it was passed on to the National Park Service and when that occurred it became important that it have a broader interpretive spin and that it be able to speak to the greater issues of the American Indian wars and the movement of European peoples onto the Plains and their conflict with the Native Americans. In this process, of course, there has been great change in interpretation; that is at it should be. Otherwise we would not be evolving as a people; it is clear that we are not the same people we were in 1876, and in 2076 we will not be the same people we are today. The interpretive spin at the battlefield will change again. This is not a response to any sort of political correctness or to be the momentary tone of a period; but this is a response to how a people evolve, how the American people have evolved, all American people, no matter where they come from. Almost all of our battlefields memorialize both sides that fought. And certainly we see this in the many battlefields in the East that memorialize the American Civil War. A place like Gettysburg, for instance, tries to be quite neutral and present both sides; and someone from South Carolina can go to Gettysburg and come away feeling proud of the sacrifice of that people from that region made, no matter what they feel about the cause they fought for, just like people from Pennsylvania can go there and come away feeling proud. And it's the responsibility of the Federal Government to memorialize both sides. So, too, with the Little Bighorn. Little Bighorn was a struggle between Americans, it was a struggle between Native Americans and the new Americans that were coming. Many of the Americans who fought with Custer, of course, had only been in the country for a matter of months, some of them--including the man he sent to reinforcements--hardly even spoke the English language, he spoke italian. They were in conflict with people who, of course, had resided in this area for quite some time, for generations; and they were aided in this struggle against the Sioux, Cheyenne, the Arapaho by their allies, the Crow, the Arikara; and to the South with other columns; the Shoshone. This was a civil war not only between Euro-Americans, as they are often called now, but also between Native Americans, to decide the fate of the Western United States. It was an epic struggle, it was an epic moment, it was one of the great moments in American history; it's one of the most important battles ever fought on the North American continent; and indeed by this victory, in fact, the victors sealed their own fate because the forces of the East were then marshalled against them. Well, in our own time we have now come to memorialize the victors, and that victory, as well as memorialize those Native Americans who fought alongside Custer; the scouts who fought and died with him fighting for the future of their people.

And we want it to be sensitive at the same time to White America and to what they see in that place so that hopefully, hopefully in the next century --which is going to be a very different America from this century just like our century has been different from the 19th century. All Americans will come to this place which for so long has simply memorialized the cavalry and their sacrifice, and for many years, I think, memorialized Custer as an American hero. They'll come to this place and be able to see the great struggle, the heroic struggle that very diverse Americans from very different cultural backgrounds engaged in to decide the fate of a nation, and hopefully in time. It, too, will be a neutral place where all Americans can come together and feel pride in the sacrifice of both sides at the Little Bighorn; that's one of the things we try to do with this Indian memorial and time will see if we have succeeded. We hope we have! (applause)

Gay Kingman: Thank you, Paul. For over a hundred and twenty-one years the people of the Northern Plains have taught the children and grandchildren what happened on June 25th-26th, 1876. It's always been a time where we set aside to pray in respect what happened there. I want to personalize it a li~ttle bit because for myself as a Minnecoujou Lakota it's been an emotional time to come this far where we are now with the monument. My great-grandfather was killed there, his name was Dog's Backbone.

My grandfather was a boy of ten years old when it happened, and he tells about breaking camp and moving away from the battle. And this is the kind of thing that's been carried on down through the generations a hundred and twenty-one years ago. And so when the first piece of legislation started going its way to Congress I had the opportunity of being the executive director of the National Congress of American Indians and was able to provide testimony at that time; and then when that piece of legislation didn't make it through that first Congress and then went to the second---.
(END OF SIDE ONE OF AIRP 1486)

(BEGINNING OF SIDE TWO OF AIRP 1486)
---To see if we could get a monument there to honor our people who fought in the battle. And it was achieved and now we've got another milestone that has happened. This committee has made the selection of what will be the monument there. It's so meaningful to us but I think the thing that the jury and the committee has decided---
DSR: Before Bob Burley comes up I wanted to say that the committee has really enjoyed working with Bob; he's like a good coach. He took up a whole week from eight to some - times nine o'clock at night to go through the jury position; and we'd be burned out at the end of the day and to have this man come over and have that enthusiasm of a designer architect kind of get us sort of going again; but he was also the one who made us make decisions. And I think we all go through this as designers, sometimes you have a hard time making decisions. But he says: 'You got to choose 130, get this thing going!' We did that and then he says: 'We got to get this thing down to 30! And we got to get this down to 15! We got to get this down to the top 9!' Without his inspirational discussions and talk, and talking of the competition process, I think, we could have bottlenecked and not moved because we were so overwhelmed at times; and our responsibility and also that the type of all the entries we got; I am sure you guys have seen that in the caliber show that is out there which you can look at. Just tremendous creative energies were extended to bring something forth that's very special. So Bob, you might spend a couple minutes talking about where you are from, before you did the jury, and so on and so forth. Thank you. (applause)

BB: I wish I could be as concise as Paul Hutton was, he did a real good job there. The question that I get a lot is: How does an architect from Vermont get involved with an Indian memorial in Montana? And I think it goes back to when I was actually on the Park Service Board of the Secretary of Interior's Park Service Advisory Board for four years; I was vice chairman, so I have some understanding of how the Park Service works. I'm not certain anyone knows exactly how the Park Service works--and some understand it. And also I know something about competitions, I worked with Harold Summer(?), an architect who was rather famous in the 1950s, to give you an idea how old I am. And actually I worked for him seven years and looking back every project I worked for him was a competition. I worked on the US Embassy in London, that was a invitational competition from the State Department; worked on the World Health Organization Building in Geneva, Switzerland that was an international competition; worked on the St. Louis Arch which was a national competition and that was run by the National Park Service. And since then I've been a competitor, I've been on juries; three to four years ago I actually sponsored a design competition. And so I think I have some experience I could bring to this. The Park Service asked me two, three years ago if I could help when the committee was getting to the point of actually operating a competition. And I organized a rather small committee of AIA people, American Institute of Architects, who were Architects, people from across the country; about four of us who did landscape architecture and we met here in Denver with Dennis and with Arthur, Chris Jones from the Park Service; and we discussed how this competition might actually be put together, what the ground rules would be. And I think we pretty much outlined the way it would operate. And out of that came a realization that there should probably be a professional advisor, jury advisor of some type. And fortunately I was selected and I found it a privilege to have worked with the committee. I tell many people that I probably got a lot more wisdom out of working with the committee than I gave advise; and it's been a good experience, I think they came to a very good conclusion. National design competitions are not easy. There is an awful lot of work in addition to what the competitors put into it to organize them, structure them properly, and really carry them out. Really it has been at least a two year technical process putting this together.

Both Arthur and Dennis talked about the program in the competition. I think any competition depends basically upon the program that's written and you won't get a better winning entry than the program you can write. If you put false information out, incorrect, if you don't state the goals and purposes concisely and correctly you won't get the right solution out of it. It's rather unusual here that the committee itself wrote this program. Now they had a lot of help from the Park Service but basically the committee went over every word that went into the program, they went over every word that went into the flyer that went out. And that's rather unusual for design competitions; and I think it may be one of the reasons for the success that, I think, is going to be achieved here. They did publish the flyers, you know, early to attract attention. It was really an invitation to compete. I remember we had a meeting about two weeks before the registration period was closed; we only had about two hundred entries at that point. And everyone was saying: 'We don't have enough entries; we need more entries for a national competition!' So we extended the deadline by two weeks. I think during that period there was a professor down at Princeton who put this on the internet and two weeks later we had eleven hundred registered in the competition. It might also explain why two winners are from Philadelphia, that's real close to Princeton. (laughter in audience) So I think that was successful; then the fact that we actually had five hundred fifty-four entrants in the competition is also a very high number for a national competition. The jury met in Billings and that was last month during February. I think we are fortunate that we have a building that was suitable to judge five hundred and fifty-four entries in. You need a lot of space to exhibit those entries and you need the right conditions with the jury to meet, you need security, you need certain support means; there was a freight elevator in the building, inside loading docks so we could get entries out of trucks, bring them up to the exhibition space. The Parmalee Billings Library was very cooperative and I think we're very fortunate we have that space to do this in. The jury did meet for five and a half consecutive days, as Dennis explained. I was very pleased that every jury member was there, you know, for every session that we had. That is sometimes unusual to do. Seven jury members is a fairly large jury but everyone was there, everyone worked extremely diligently. One secret was that we gave everybody breakfast in the morning and also lunch. They weren't allowed to leave the room, you know (audience laugh), until six or eight o'clock at night! So they put in a five and a half day period of coming to conclusions on this. The jury process started with a day and a half of jury members looking independently at all the entries, everybody walked around. I separated them on purpose so they were all in different sections in the exhibit, didn't want them talking to each other in the beginning. Sometimes on a jury there were will be one or two people that dominate the discussion on it. And I wanted everyone to have a chance to look at the entries, read the design statements and come to their own personal independent conclusions on it; that took a day and a half. After the day and a half we started an elimination process on it and we did try to reduce the number of entries that we were looking at; each person picked about fifteen or twenty, and that produced a group of around a hundred and sixteen entries. Then we began to focus on those, discussed those, and by balloting--working always with numbers--and honestly we cut that down to forty-five, I think in the next group, then we got down to about twenty, and we got it down to nine; when we had nine entries we went out to the site and we took the nine, the last nine entry panels with us so we could look at the ridge, look at the Custer Monument, the Seventh Cavalry Monument, and compared each entry to the actual site, walked around the site and imagined how each one of these would fit. That was a tremendously helpful exercise, I think, for the jury! We came back from that and we narrowed it down to six, four, three, more dialogues, and finally came up with first, second, third place and then we covered the honorable mentions that would be awarded. One thing I can tell you is in that voting process when we came to the last vote the first place winner was by point of margin; you know, sometimes you have juries like this and they're very close.

And there is a lot of arguing back and forth, there was a lot of discussion here; but I think the discussion was basically respecting each others view points because this jury had a lot of different view points on it. And that was the reason for having seven people and the particular backgrounds that they have. So I felt very good about the conclusion that they came to, personally been very pleased with the results on this; I would attribute it to the committee itself which worked very hard on it. Leonard Bruguier is here and he's the chairman of the committee. Leonard, some place--where is Leonard? Back there, Leonard standing. I don't think this would have ever gotten to where it is now if Leonard Bruguier hadn't been chair. (applause)

The jury itself was a tremendous group of people,

I'm thinking of hiring them out for other design

competitions! (audience laugh) And finally I thank the

National Park Service and the support team; no one will know

how many hours, weeks, months they put into this

competition; all the logistics of trucks, and packing, and

logging in entries, producing flyers and programs and

printing them, everything else. It is a very large effort

but I am very pleased with the results that have come from

this; I think we'll try to get on to the winners now instead

of giving you more background. Thank you. (applause)

DSR: I have been give the honor to officially introduce for our

presentation the first, second and third place winners. But

before I do that I just wanted to make mention that the jury

members themselves, we come into the final day, final two

days we could do a good movie on what we went through the

discussions about our own viewpoints, about aesthetics,

about viewpoints about whether it met the program or

viewpoints about whether it had the Indian spirit. So we

did really work hard and allow our spirit that went in to

this selection process and we were very happy to be part of

it. And I'm going to introduce you guys but we want you to

come up here and then we want you to, you know, in your

presentations talk to the people here like you were giving

it _____ there is a lot of students here who want to learn

from this process, and what inspired you from the language

of the package itself, and what inspired you about the

Indian spirit and those type of things we'd like to cover. I

know you could just talk about your design and get into

minute things but you're welcome to do that and please take

your time explaining your entry as thoroughly and comfor-

tably as you like. The other thing, too, is that at the end

of their presentation we'd like to have the jury members

come up here and sit here--couple chairs up there--because

we would then like to have you address both questions to the

actual participants and also the jury members and then your

questions will be both to them and to us. So I'd like to

introduce the third place winner, Robert Lundgren. Please

come up, take your seat. Richard Alan Borkovetz, second

place. And the first place for two people, and they are

John R. Collins and Alison Towers. (applause) -- We will

open the floor to you and the mike is open there and perhaps

we just start with the third place and second place and work

up to the first place. Go ahead and give your presentation:

Robert Lundgren, third place winner:

I've always been interested in history, in the outdoors and

in the fine arts; and I found that this led me to landscape

architecture really, and now I am in the University of

Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia; that's where I do my work.

And having visited the West I've always been impressed by

the open prairie, and open sky, and I felt that the history

in the local Indian cultures was very impressive to me. I

first visited this battlefield in 1989 and I felt that what

impressed me the most was--it struck me that how the Seventh

Cavalry Monument--the way it was situated on the ridge top.

And it's really silhouetted against the sky so intensely

that it's a very blocky structure and it's really is the

only thing you can see for miles around. Let me just get

over this, these are the two boards. (showing slides) There

is some detail shots that I photographed here. And the way

it was silhouetted to me really pointed out the fact that

it's such a vast space that it was very powerful; and my

design from far from the distance is just a three large

forty foot tall stone plinths made of natural material that

basically emerges from the earth and signals the stand that

the Indians took here. These represent the three tribes who

fought and won this battle back in 1876. Basically my

design complements the blocky Seventh Cavalry Monument in

that it's the same material of stone and hence has

permanence to it, but also contrasts it in the fact that

it's an open structure. And it almost creates a space

almost architectural in nature. When you come a bit closer

to it what I proposed was an outcropping--also of native

material--a circular outcropping of stones surrounding a

paved space. And these stones essentially are blocky in

structure, they start out sort of naturalistic in a sense

and then turn into blocky sort of human size or maybe

slightly larger than human size, real stones, some like 8

feet, 10 feet tall maybe. And in using universal language

of images, and graphic images, I felt that the stones

themselves would be carved with sacred images, family life,

great leaders, pictures of the battle, and after the battle,

and twentieth century events would also be included as well

as room for future stories. What impressed me the most I

went out to the symposium in September of this past year and

I was impressed by the story that everybody told; the

descendants of the battle itself, then of the villagers that

were there at the Little Bighorn; and they spoke of all

these things, of the sacred images and the leaders, their

family life, and bravery, and the earth and things; and to

me I thought that that was the real point of trying to

convey a message and to educate the public on how this

culture exists and how it just survives. -- The plinths also

rise form this outcropping of stone, surrounding a central

space which I should go back here. -- There you go. They

strut a central space which is shaped in the form of a

buffalo robe which was the original story, or one of the

story boards of the American Indian with a simple structure

or a simple symbol, a victory symbol in the center. The

whole memorial place is East so I guess South-east is down

this way, which allows one of the plinths to cast a shadow

across the space onto the boards where these stories are,

story stones, where the depiction of Custer's last stand or

where he was defeated--this shadow be cast across that every

anniversary of the battle in June. -- The theme PEACE

THROUGH UNITY to me represented a--to me unity was best

achieved through the education process of sharing know-

ledge; and this knowledge to me was gained primarily by the

stories that people told. And these stories to me were

really very poignant and no real language was used, written

language that was used of most of these images and all these

images really non--there is now language involved so that

really anybody can understand what happens here. And to me

that knowledge that you would gain from the different cul-

tures and learning about this culture is what gives us all

the realization that we really are inter-connected and that

all our human cultures are really very similar. Knowing

that we are all similar or really have the same basic needs

and wants to me would encourage an understanding and there-

fore would encourage a peace through unified understanding

of each culture. That's basically it. -- I think that's

about all the slides. Thanks. (applause)

Richard Alan Borkovetz, second place winner:

I'm a landscape architect working in Alberquerque and I

first became aware of this competition by an announcement in

the Newsletter of the American Society of Landscape

Architects. I had never been in a competition before, this

is the first one. But I wanted to be involved in this one

before for all the reasons that you heard earlier tonight.

-- (showing slides) I didn't expect to have my design

selected, I just wanted to participate. And since being

notified at second place I been pretty puffed up. (audience

laugh) But after coming here and seeing all these wonderful

ideas and designs I now feel very humbled. My design is the

series of concentric circles. I chose the circle because it

represents unity and continuity; unity from the theme PEACE

THROUGH UNITY. And if you get up closer. -- Each circle has

a different function and name; I'm starting with the outer

circle which I call the "story circle". And what I wanted,

you know, there was a set of goals in the design program;

and in addition to those, I developed my own goals that were

most important: one was I wanted this monument to be a not

so much a monument to people who died but a memorial that

would be educational, and would inform people about the

Northern Plains Indian cultural lives, and to tell a story;

also to be a "living memorial" and provide a gathering space

for ceremonial or ritual events. I also wanted this to fit

into the landscape and I wanted the landscape to be visible

from every point within and outside the memorial. The outer

circle, the story circle, is a sloping stone; you could see

from around the outside here; it's broken and it opens to

the East which is the traditional entry to the tepees and

lodges, the entry points were always located in the East.

In section here the stone ring carries a sloped surface

which would be the tablet. And this tablet would carry

carvings, would consist of traditional symbols in both the

form of pictographs with pigment and petroglyphs into the

stone, and there would be a combination of Indian language

and english. And the story would begin in the past, in oral

history, and continue clockwise and end at the other end in

the present. I also wanted to not just tell a story of the

past and present but I wanted to also incorporate an idea

which carries the memorial into the future. And I'll get to

that in a moment. The next circle is the "path circle" and

this is a stone path which conducts the visitor along the

story circle. Inside the path circle is an exposed "earth

circle"; and inside that circle are poles which would form a

tepee structure here. This is the "tepee circle" and this

is formed by about four inch diameter stainless steel poles

which would provide a kind of a contemporary version of the

traditional lodge or tepee. They flare the top instead of

crossing and the idea is that this structure would link the

memorial and the earth with the sky. The brightness of the

stainless steel would reflect the changing light of the sky.

In the top, when I was working on the design, I thought

about the end might be open and should I enclose those and

it occurred to me that the wind passing over the open holes

would create a sound; and so I thought that was a very nice

idea to incorporate the wind so that the monument would be

kind of a wind song--created and so I located small holes up

the flare shafts of these and the idea is that the wind, the

prairie wind blowing up from the valley would blow across

these tepee poles and produce sounds which would vary with

the direction and the intensity of the wind. Also the wind

is a female wind which is the element that also carries the

spirits of the warriors to heaven; and the tepee structure

forms a connection between the earth and the sky or heaven

in pointing above. The flare also suggests, recalls the

ceremonial headdress in profile. Inside the tepee circle is

another circle, the "ceremonial circle", and this is a

ritual floor of the tepee; this is could formed a granite

slabs which point towards the center. This is the floor of

the tepee, this is where all ceremonies would take place.

In the floor section is where I wanted to incorporate the

idea which would link this monument to future times; and I

think as Bob mentioned that on buffalo robes, centuries ago

some still exist. They used skins and they used small icons

on these buffalo robes to depict, it was kind of a calendar

system and they used an icon or a small design which would

illustrate the significant event of a particular year and

thus keep track of the years. So beginning at the center of

the ritual circle and spiraling outward here is a groove cut

into the floor of the circle and this groove has three

functions: it sort of knits floor slabs together, and it

provides a kind of a time line, and the idea is that along

this spiraling groove would be carved into the floor icons

for each year beginning with an icon which would---

(END OF SIDE TWO OF AIRP 1486)

(BEGINNING OF SIDE ONE OF AIRP 1486, TAPE 2.)

--Beginning with an icon which would represent the year in

which the memorial was constructed. The spiral also

prescribes the proper direction of movement to within the

tepee which would be clockwise. It exits the tepee at the

door at the East and by that it joins the spirit world with

inside the tepee located outside toward the East. In the

very center of the circle heart of the monument is the fire

circle; the source of warmth, the place where all life

within the tepee revolves. I wanted to create a place where

traditional gatherings could occur around a fire. My

thought was that the tepee could also be wrapped with a

ceremonial skin and thus provide a shelter for ritual

gatherings. The memorial is set slightly into the earth to

that it becomes a part of the earth rather than something

placed upon it. Around the monument are a series of lances

made of steel which rusts very rapidly in the environment

and then it seals itself off and then it doesn't corrode any

further. These shafts would be about seven feet tall which

would have a lean in kind of a random fashion and would

appear to have been abandoned, they would symbolize the

weapons of conflict and these would indeed would appear to

be abandoned by those who would enter the monument in the

search of peace. The site itself would be re-vegetated with

seeds collected on site in order to continue grows.---

John Collins, first place winner:

My name is John Collins, I am from Philadelphia as well. My

wife and I work a architects in Philadelphia; my wife is

licensed and I am a section away from being licensed in

Pennsylvania. I currently work for my father's firm which

is a landscape architecture firm so I've been exposed to

landscape architecture as well in my life; in fact, my

father was the one who encouraged me to go into architecture

because I feel he's sort of a frustrated architect in that

architects are sort of licensed to do both be elsewhere as a

landscape architect is sort of only licensed in that one

field. So I think that's pretty much why he pushed me in

that direction. I also learned of the competition through

the ASLA Newsletter because I'm working in the office which

is predominantly landscape architects, they receive that

kind of literature and I'd also like to commend the

committee and the National Park Service because I have done

a few competitions and that program was by far the most

thorough and informational as I've ever come across; it

really made working on the project a joy, everything was

right there on my fingertips. I had scance time to work on

the project because I was working a full-time job and I was

doing this after hour so I did have minimal sort of research

time to put into the project and I felt the program itself

was very thorough. My first task was after reading the

program to come up with some kind of form I thought was

appropriate. And knowing of some of the ancient artworks in

this country and the world over I thought that form even

though Plains Indians weren't known for building earthworks

I thought that sort of form is almost a universal in that it

was a burial form not that this competition was to design a

grave site but I thought that was a from a distance as an

initial site that might be intriguing form especially on the

Plains landscape. I thought that it would emerge out of it

and be an integral part of it, did not look like something

that was imposed on the site so that's why I really started

toying with mound images and in looking my initial sketches.

So in one way it was a mound in one way it was really just

working with the native landscape and sort of making it a

subtle imposition on the site in my mind. One of the other

things I thought was important was to address the cavalry

monument. And the way I addressed that was to--now that I

had the idea of a mound structure--I thought once you

penetrate this and you come into this space how can I then

direct you back to the cavalry monument? And I thought a

gash into that earthen mound would be representative of the

battle; my wife is operating the pointer. So I thought that

would be a strong image and after deciding on that gesture

of having a gash into the earth and then in this case in a

design is because it is a cut in the earth what if I

introduce some kind of a water element to it which as it

stands right now I'm not all that comfortable with it

because it is sort of an artificial layer but I think those

kind of things get worked out; but I like the idea of having

this weeping gash cut into the earth to symbolize the

conflict that occurred at this site but also it that gap or

gash serves a dual purpose in that it opens up to the

Cavalry monument, sort of offering a view to it and I also

talked about that gap being a spirit gate welcoming the dead

of the Cavalry and the scouts into this monument; so it's

not exclusive, it's one that recognizes that the dead now

know the infinite in some way and they're all on the same

plane. And I thought that was a nice way to sort of tie the

two monuments together, create a dialogue. I altered the

process; I had an open central space that I thought would be

used for ceremonial dances and events. I never did find out

what diameter was required for those events and that's

something that can come later, I believe. Another thing I

sort of wrestled was the fifty-two foot diameter, the inner

circle of this monument is thirty-two feet and because it is

the prairie just sweeping up and over the mound I didn't

know where that fifty-two feet really began. As it is right

now it's right where the mound starts to incline so if in

fact it does turn out that that space really isn't large

enough for the events that might happen there I'm hoping

that the diameter might be able to increase. Another idea,

the spirit tracing on the North side, I've had that idea not

only in this competition but in other design projects I

worked but I thought after seeing the panoramic views of the

site what an opportunity you have to nothing but rolling

hills and sky and here was a chance to use that as a

backdrop. So after reading through and discovering that

petroglyphs and pictographs were a means of making a place

sacred or special I thought what this was a real opportunity

to blow that scale up and use the sky as backdrop instead of

something solid which is normally the medium; and also

typical of monuments cast, they're usually solid and very

substantive. And I thought this was a way to make something

very grand and impressive, yet have it be very transparent

and etherial, almost non-substantive. That was another

thing I wrestled with because the diameter of the circle was

fifty-two feet and I wanted these images to be at a distance

where you really couldn't sense what they were made out of,

and I eventually decided to do it anyway because as it is

right now I think you are a bit close but that might also be

something that could be addressed as we get into the

discussions of how it actually gets built. But the idea was

really to make them sort of very transparent, almost spirit-

like in appearance. One of the things I was really

concerned about was the experiential quality of the whole

memorial, how you approach it, how you descent into the

earth as you enter on the East side--I also used the idea of

entering on the East and then turning to the South to follow

the path of the sun which with a typical Plains Indian

custom; and the Southern wall of the inner circle I saw as a

being what I call the "living memorial" wall, that would be

a place to display and hang or suspend different narratives

and quotes and texts and pictographs and any kind of imagery

that might enhance the experience and tell the story of the

battle. I've had some ideas since of how to suspend the

material in front of the wall, I though the mound itself it

would make sense that to keep that a timeless piece, let

that age, let those lichens encroach on it, let it be really

part of the land and then you might have this veil of

information or artifacts what have you, that sort of is

suspended in front of that and never actually touches the

wall. I kind of liked that idea that "living" material

never touching that ancient form. The two poles that

strattle the spirit gate or gap I felt the monument did need

some recognition or presence from a distance and I thought

something like that would work well; it's not anything very

solid or substantial it has these adornments at the top

which I'm really not sure what they are yet--I'd like to

work on all these details with the committee members but I

though that was a minimal yet strong gesture at giving it

some presence from the distance and it also made it more of

a gateway, more of an element. I have more slides. (sorting

through slides) -- This is a blow-up plan of the whole

memorial. Getting back to experiential quality of this

monument: this is the entry panel so you're gradually

descending into the earth even as you come along this way

and then when you make this turn here you really descending

even more in the ground that is sort of rising on either

side of you so you almost feel like you are entering the

burial mound which this thing might appear like from a

distance, the cold earth is rising on either side of you and

I wanted to make this gap as narrow as possible and still be

wheelchair-friendly and passable. So I like the idea of the

ground sort of rising around you as you enter and then you

sort of emerge out into this open space which is sort of the

opposite of what you expect after this path down this narrow

slot; and then that is when the speared warriors are

revealed to you you might come across starting here and

reading through the narratives and all the things that are

suspended on the wall, and you get to this gap and this is

the reminder of why this is here. You site back to the

Custer monument which is this sketch here and that's a

reminder and that was the idea behind that. -- This is the

view from the Custer monument level looking down at the

memorial. So you see the mound structure and the poles that

strattle that gap. -- This image is really where the idea

for the speared warriors came from; I love the delicate

touch of these images and I thought how could that be made

not really three-dimensional but how could it be made at a

grand scale to produce these--these are shadows in this

image--but the riders as you can see in my model. Or sort

of two-dimensional really. -- There is an even larger blow-

up of that view back. Another thing I thought of since was

that I think these kind of images are much more appropriate

than what I've shown in the drawings; mine are too Western

and their realism I think that this kind of imagery which is

captured in the abstractness of the model--wire sculptures I

think that might be even more appropriate. -- This is the

model that you can all see in person at the rear of the room

or in front of the room. But this shows the relationship

again between the Cavalry monument which is really just an

access that starts from the center of this monument and goes

straight through, cuts straight through to the center of

this element, the fifty-two diameter circle was a given in

this very area so that access was really set off in the

program. -- This is a view from the North looking back the

other way, the speared warriors really are secured against

the wall they're really not meant to be viewed this

direction, this gives me a feel of the memorial's

relationship with the Cavalry monument. -- I think the rear

wall are focused in the riders sacrifice. -- That's better.

-- So I really hope--my biggest hope is that this memorial

has real meaning for the people whom it's for. I still feel

a little bit the outsider in the whole process and hope to

gain some real knowledge in working with committee members

to develop what kind of form this thing actually takes. And

I really look forward to that process. Thanks. (applause)

DSR: Thank you for entering the competition and thank you--I'm

sure all of the committee thank you that you entered and

we're very pleased with the end result and I just wanted to

say, Alison, do you have anything to say? (Alison laughing)

It's the age of equality here. I'm sure you were

instrumental in discussing good ideas and those types of

things.

JC: Alison was the critic on the project; I would show whatever

I came up with each evening and she would slice and hack at

it. (audience laughing) She's very good at distilling an

idea. I tend to take an additive approach whereas she can

get at the heart of what's real.

DSR: And we're going to open up to questions and answers and what

I'd like to have you do because we're taking a record of

this whole entire process so when you ask a question please

state your name and that way we'll get it for the record and

I'd like to have the jury members come up and join us up

here and you're welcome to ask the designers the question or

if you have a reference question to the jury members, please

address your questions to us or to the designers. --- Are

there any questions that you like to ask the jury or the

design--You have a question then? You want to state your

name.

Shari: I have a question for the committee in general. If you

can just go over the next steps in the process and how

you take the winning entry and actually turn them into

the memorial.

BB: I think I've got some answers to it. One thing this

competition was basically a competition for an idea. WE

wanted to find the best idea for the memorial. There's

quite a bit more work to do in developing that design, I

think that John has indicated. And I think the jury feels

confident but as it is developed it will get richer and

better in the process. Then there is the process of raising

the money to build it is going to take time to do that but I

don't think too long. I think our feeling was that this was

a very buildable design solution. You'll find some of the

entries are tremendous things, maybe they could be built

maybe they couldn't. This one is built in quite traditional

methods and I think the possibility of developing a design

with more artistic input into it and having a constructable

solution, raising the money and having it built is very

possible. I'm very encouraged by it.

DSR: Another question. State your name.

CM: My name is Carrie Mae Mencros(?). I'm a journalist, I'm

writing a book on the Northern Cheyenne Nation and in my

research I been wondering with this particular memorial: are

you going to make sure that there is history in the

writings? Is that going to be part of that? Are you going

to work in conjunction with the committee to make sure that-

-because I visited some other sites and sometimes the

history has been inaccurate which has been really

disappointing; I would hope that every effort would be made

to make sure that the story is told whether it's--even

though you're trying to pursue unity that the story would be

told reflecting all aspects of what took place.

AA: (Arthur Amiotte) I think that's also falls within the

expertise of the committee because we also have nationally

and internationally known scholars and authors who are well

aware of the historical dimensions but one other thing that

we wish to emphasize this is a monument to and about Native

people is that their stories get told, more often that which

has not been told in the past. So we wish to be very clear

about that and of course with certainly historical scholarly

objective as well.

J: My name is Joni. Was it not important after the designs

were submitted to follow the criteria listed in the packet

because I noticed pretty much most of them don't. So that

was just a question of mine--that the criteria was not

followed as far as I have seen.

DSR: Are there any specific points?

J: Like the size of the design statement was supposed 8 1/2 x

11; it was not on several of them. Several of the drawings

were not included that were specified; dimensions were

not put on the drawings as shown on the things that

were mailed.

DSR: Those are good questions and I guess Bob will begin to

answer. (audience start laughing)

BB: I answer the embarrassing questions. One thing that we all

felt on the jury was that this was a very open competition.

We purposely made it so that many people could enter it

whether they were registered landscape architects,

architects, recognized sculptors or what. School children

could enter it and many, I think, did. We thought in

interpreting the rules we also had to have some flexibility

in it. We felt that there were some major requirements and

also some minor requirements; where there was a major

irregularity where a project exceeded the boundaries of the

site, for example, definitely disqualified. If there was a

drawing which was critical to the jury being able to

understand what the design is about, drawing wasn't there,

was missing was disqualified. If something wasn't quite to

scale, minor, we probably let it in. On the design

statements in particular there was a lot of variety of--in

fact--shapes of design statements and in some cases numbers

of words and we allowed captions with as many words as you

wanted in; we didn't feel that the design statements, how

many words, is it exactly 8 1/2 x 11, but that was a major

problem that we disqualified entries that might come from

someone who's just put months of work into it they didn't

dot an "i" you know, so we tried not to disqualify for that

kind of reason. But where we had something which was really

affecting the design, was a design limitation, like site

boudry, that was important to disqualify because they didn't

follow that. But I think a lot of the other requirements

were actually to help the jury to get consistent entries,

consistent scale to the drawings, design statements that

weren't too long if they couldn't read them , it was mostly

to help the jury, didn't affect the design; and so we did

exercise some discretion in the applicational rules.

??: And then there were ninety that got disqualified?

BB: There were actually we got five hundred and fifty-four

entries; there were less than five hundred qualified entries

that we actually chose. Quite a few times we did pass the

disqualified entry, so that certainly happened.---You are

welcome to ask the designers questions, too. Are there any

more questions? I know we tried to cover a lot of material

tonight and it's an exciting process.

DSR: I have a question for one designer, Robert Lundgren. WE all

like the arches very much, Arthur Amiotte talked about that.

But we were concerned because they weren't made totally

stable out of stone and we argued that there were ways to

make them stable with steel reinforcing or something but on

the other hand if you did that would you have a really

honest structure? That was something that concerned us but

I wonder what your thought were relative to the structural

capabilities of the plinths.

RL: I see that they could be built like you said to reinforce

concrete or steel--

(END OF SIDE ONE OF AIRP 1486, TAPE 2)

(BEGINNING OF SIDE TWO AIRP 1486, TAPE 2)

RL: I also thought of the big pillars out in the Black Hills--

The Neddles. They're big chunks of stone. I guess I

thought that it is possible to go into the quarry and get

these longs things the but they probably wouldn't be able to

get these forty feet tall and be able to bury them ten feet

into the ground to hold them up. But my whole point was

trying to be naturalistic in appearance more than completely

historically accurate. So they still do appear naturalistic

more than how we actually do that. You know, most important

is really just know or care where reinforced or not.

AA: I would like to add one thing to the idea of the Plains

people not having been mound people, actually there are

mounds on the Plains which are very ancient; plus the

Mandan-Hidatsa were some of the most ancient of Plains

people, 900 A.D. did earth works--one of them--and if you

wish do defend your design as some other time you might

think of the idea of an earth lodge that has fallen down

because it has that configuration as hollow on the inside.

So there are indeed those shapes on the Plains.

PH: I also like to comment on your winning entry in the fact

that many of us were extremely taken by when we actual went

out to the site again and looked at it on site and I'm just

quite blown away by the fact that you have not actually

visited the site. For us that was real the clincher on your

winning piece, the fact that it really when you're inside

that area completely blocked from view the Custer piece from

presence. When you're on the actual site that is such a

dominating element; it just blows your mind away because it

up and above you looking down on you. And when we went out

to the site that was a very, very important aspect of it.

Also the fact that the two masts stand up so high claim the

ridge and from a long distance will be a very, very

important landmark.

DSR: A gentleman with a question.

SC: Stan Conley. I had a real problem with the theme PEACE

THROUGH UNITY because I didn't understand that, I still

don't. And maybe one of the reasons was just before I got

involved in this I read Vine Deloria's book and in there he

says: 'When you hear Indians talking about unity you better

be careful because they use it as a generality and it

doesn't in the end mean anything. And so I was never able

to resolve in my own mind this dichotomy. Anybody have any

thoughts about that?

DSR: I think our chairman who is sitting way back there has

addressed this question quite thoroughly and this is a good

question, do you feel like you want to come up and answer

it? I think it's a good question and it's in one of the

themes that we've addressed throughout the last two and half

years. It deals with the origin, where PEACE THROUGH UNITY

came from.

LB: Is that, "God is Red," the book, Vine Deloria's book?

SC: Yeah, "Custer Died for Your Sins".

LB: "Custer Died for Your Sins". You know, I didn't want to

impose tonight because this is the sub-committee and it's

their buisness and they're handling themselves very well and

I'm very proud of them. They came together with all their

various expertise and managed to fulfill the letter of the

law and the spirit of the slogan PEACE THROUGH UNITY. And

so I don't want to take a lot of your time but I have a lot

of time. (some audience laugh) As we mentioned it came to

Austin Two Moons and Enos Poor Bear; and both of them were

men who had beautiful wives and large families. And in

their youth they were what I would call a general raconteur

and they were probably were very familiar with all elements

of Denver. But as they matured what was in them and what

they were taught, and they're both English second language

to the end to make sense to them and so they each took a

their ways of trying to bring peace and unity throughout

Indian people that had met in that period of their lives;

they were general raconteurs. And so Mr. Two Moons started

a peace ceremony at the battlefield there. And all his life

drove into the winds on 212 and all that resolved was that

the monument of the Seventh Cavalry there. So he went up

there and he made his prayers that they would remember his

before the Cheyenne. But then he also realized that he had

to remember all people in the prayers if he wanted to be a

good Indian. So he prayed for peace for all people, through

the pipe. Mr. Poor Bear talked about unity and he believed

as most Lakotas and Dakotas and Nakotas do in that circle

that hoop life, there are four colors; we have the yellow,

red, white and black. And so his prayers for unity was to

bring not only those four colors together but in that red to

bring the tribes together. So being that as a committee

when we adopted that we understood it to be and ideal, an

ideal. And that's not accomplished, it's not accomplished

yet. We have not reached that ideal, we have not made

ourselves in Lakota and Dakota, Nakota we call it: (Lakota),

the common person. And we have not been able to expell our

egos, our pride and to be able to be common people so that

we can all recognize we're humans. So, I don't think there

are any answers even on this committee we've discussed that

because we have a lot of different races and tribes on our

committee; and I think in a sense we are probably much

closer to that because we had to face it. We've had to look

in the mirror and find out that we are the enemy. So all I

can say for that it's an ideal that we believe that Two

Moons and Poor Bear gave us; it's honorable and it's our

duty to strive for it. It's something we can do as human

beings. I hope I evaded your question. Thank you.

(applause)

DSR: I just wanted to make another comment on second place. One

thing I was interesting to the jury and I don't know if you

had a chance to really think about it thoroughly. We had a

lot of discussion on how we would make that tepee stay in

one piece, especially when a strong wind would hit it. The

other interesting discussion we had about it is that we were

in our minds we were intrigued with this singing tepee and

just going through we got into how could that be done and we

probably would have to hire a music person who would have to

deal with those pipe organs in big churches and how to

manipulate those holes to the point where they actually

would maybe sing an Indian song. (audience laugh) Kind of

intriguing and I don't know if you thought about those

things because literally in order to do your tepee you'd

have to not only--I don't think the material isn't invented

yet in order to make this thing really stand stable and how

far into the ground to ancor them. I guess those are the

type of things we got into especially as we got it down as

Bob said the prime things we wanted to do we wanted to see

them build it, you know. We don't want it like you see if

all the other top six there are a couple of those they're

fantastic ideas but could they ever be built, or would they

ever be accepted, etc.,etc? But that was one thing that we

had a long discussion on yours? Did you even think about

that? How would you actually get that thing to work as you

envision it?

RL: Well, yeah, I did think about it and it would take a lot of

experimentation. Structurally, I think, it's feasable and

could be worked out. You'd have to calculate the poles, how

much flex you'd have and how thick the walls would have to

be; in the section it shows the poles, I think, I showed

them going into the ground four feet, probably requiring

more depth than that, a larger foundation; I think that's

feasable. As far as the holes and the music that was

something I don't have first hand experience with but I like

the idea to incorporat it, design it and perhaps it could be

worked out.

DSR: Any other questions?

CG: My name is Cynthia Gooswell, my question is about the next

step with the entries. Will this first place entry--is this

what you envisioned that the final memorial will be very

similar to this proposal or when you take some of these

other ideas from your top entries and maybe tie them

together, incorporate them?

DSR: That's one part of it. We were so impressed with

practically all of the design entries that we did make a

note on the record that these designs should be made

available to other tribes when they're considering --right

now a lot of tribes are doing culture centers, doing their

memorials. A lot of these have such potential for them.

That's why I really like the idea that the show is going to

travel for two or three years so that other people could see

it across the country. And that part I know we were really

impressed with and it's kind of at the discretion of the

artist how much you can impose on that. And I think we'd

have to be very careful, respectful not to impose too much

on their original idea. Although I'm glad to hear that the

number one, John and your wife are willing to consider some

improvements; that's good to know that. Anybody else want

to ask another question?

PH: Actually one of the reasons that this submission won

was because it incorporated so many of the aspects of a

lot of the other submissions that all of us had liked

part of. And that really weighed very heavily in the

final desicion that was made; and it incorporates

monumentalism, it incorporates celebration of the

warrior spirit which we were very interested in and it

provides the ceremonial space that is so important and

so all that came together in that one. That's why we

chose it.

AA: And in that same plane the designer has left portions of it

open for interpretation which is to some extent essential

because as the committee we have a responsibility to decide

on "the integrity of the message". So there will have to be

some additional--he purposely left some things undone and

that becomes a desicion of somebody else; and that I found

very favorable as well because there were certain things

that have to be decided by this committee.

DSR: Any other questions?

??: I have another question: what is the time line for this

project to be built and then when do you expect it to be

completed? And also do you have to raise money before it

gets built or are going to get help from the Federal

Government? (some giggles in audience)

DSR: Ideally we talk as a committee it would be nice to have this

thing built in the year 2001.

DP: Can I ask you to repeat the question?

DSR: The question was: What's the schedule to get this thing

built in simplicity, you know. I know there is fundraising

but has the National Park Service in your most recent

discussion had any new time line as to when you want to

finish the fundraising? And I know we're going to start

working with the designer on some ideas and work out a

contract for specifications and all that. Good question!

(audience chuckle)

AA: Is in that plea for donations? Dates? Let's just hope it

doesn't turn out like the Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial

which is just done...

DSR: What's your name?

TG: My name is Troy George. How are you going to go about

collecting the money? I mean is this going to be a flyer in

everyone's mailbox or if we want to donate money how are we

going to donate?

DSR: I think this is a good question for the National Park

Service; they're going to handle the--

PH: There are donation forms on the table right there as you

walk out. If you want to empty your pockets today, but of

course we'll be making pitches to Corporate America who we

hope to get a good response from and we discussed this and

we really thought that if should be we would hope that any

large corporations that have an interest in Navive American

issues would anxious to help here. And it will be mostly

private fund- raising; I don't think it at this particular

time in our history we can count on the Federal Government

to help on this very much in terms of financing.

AA: The National Park Foundation will be the organization that

handles the funds, so they have a specific address; they are

especially equipped to handle these kind of funds for this

kind of operation.

DSR: We really trusted a lot of advisory capacity Carol

Redcherries and whose a member of the Northern Cheyenne

tribes and a veteran herself, and she'd like to end

tonight's session with a few thoughts and we really thank

you for coming; we hope you found this informative,

enjoyable a we look forward that you all come out and see

the thing when it's built. Carol:

CR: It's really nice to have you participate with us to sign the

real major event for the three nations that were involved in

the battle. I'd would like to answer this gentleman's

question back here concerning unity. Prior to the present

days the last battle of the Native American unity meant

survival. I can't elaborate on the Sioux or the Arapahoe

but I can elaborate on the Cheyenne nation. I'm a Northern

Cheyenne, I'm enrolled, I'm a great-grandmother, a

grandmother, I'm a mother, and I'm an Appellet Jugde for our

superior court for our nation. And that kind of a lot

envolves me with our oral history because many of our laws

we can still apply in our present day court system even

though they're unwritten, they're oral. And I have to know

those things but sometimes we don't have a law in the

english language that will fill an issue in our court

system; but we have them in our oral history and we can

still use them, and I'm really glad of that because a lot of

things they can't be resolved black on white but be resolved

traditionally. But tonight I'd like to just--

(END OF SIDE TWO OF AIRP 1486, TAPE 2.)