Messaging of Malcom W. Martin Memorial Park’s “Contested Terrain”

An Exploration of the Complex Narrative a Public Park Enforces

The Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park in East St. Louis, IL

Across the river from the Gateway Arch, one of St. Louis’ main attractions, is the Malcom W. Martin Memorial Park. The Arch park was originally meant to encompass both sides of the river, but it was not until decades after the Arch’s completion that the plans for the Metro East, the Illinois side of the St. Louis community, were finally brought to reality thanks to the vision and work of Malcom W. Martin. The park, which is named for one of its main contributors, mainly serves far-flung tourists as a place to see and photograph the Gateway Arch while memorializing Martin’s contributions to the area. Although there is an apparent positive intention behind the park and its messages, the park is located in a historically taken advantage of area and is connected with the Arch’s complicated history of celebrating exploitation and forced removal in the United States. Langhorst’s (2014) idea of “contested terrains” and the complexities found in urban spaces such as the Malcom W. Martin Memorial Park lead to an understanding of the park as, overall, communicating a reinforcement of the exploitation of the Metro East and a valuing of St. Louis city over its Illinois counterparts as being deserving of resources and economic gain.

Malcom W. Martin was many things – St. Louis native, attorney, and active community member. Through his community work, he became involved with the planning of the Arch, leading him to eventually chair the committee of the federal commission that was established in 1987 to plan the Arch’s Illinois extension. Martin was chosen for this work as it was his personal goal to ensure Gateway Arch architect Eero Saarinen’s original plan for the Arch to encompass both sides of the river, and both parts of the community that make up St. Louis, was completed. Martin also established the Gateway Center of Metropolitan St. Louis, the organization that would eventually complete the work of the park, and donated $5 million to continue work on the park after his death (Memorial Park, n.d.). It is fitting, then, that the park was named in memory of Martin upon its completion.

Located in East St. Louis, Illinois, the Malcom W. Martin Memorial Park is comprised of the Gateway Geyser, the Mississippi River Overlook, and a statue of Martin looking out at the St. Louis skyline. The park also includes walking paths and “passive open green space”, making up a total of 30 acres. The Gateway Geyser was the first part of the park to be installed in 1995, while the Mississippi River Overlook came later in 2009. Although the park was technically not completed until the construction of the overlook in 2009, it was officially dedicated to the memory of Martin in 2005 (Memorial Park, n.d.). The park was completed by the Gateway Center of Metropolitan St. Louis, who, although they later donated the land to the state of Illinois, still contribute to expenses related to the maintenance of the park (GuideStar, n.d.). The park was funded largely through donations, including those of Martin himself.

The website dedicated to the park and its history is rich with the intended message the creators of the park had in mind for its audience as well as the values the park’s existence is meant to uphold. Through the words used to describe the history and vision of the park, we get a sense of many of these values, such as in the sentence, “The Gateway Center worked tirelessly for 40 years to protect the property from commercial development,” (Memorial Park, n.d.). The use of the word “tirelessly” evokes a sense of activism and grueling efforts in order to keep this park from the hands of, in the park’s perspective, the wrong people. The word “protect” also suggests that the park and its completion is something of value to a community and something worth fighting for. This sentence, altogether, gives us a sense that the park intends to communicate the value of passive, public green spaces and, more specifically, values those public green spaces for the St. Louis area and its tourists. The effort with which the park’s land was protected from other potential futures is meant to, according to their website, convey that both sides of the St. Louis community are important enough to have access to well-maintained and un-commercialized land for their use. It is also made clear via the website that this well-maintained park land is often used for community celebrations and gatherings, demonstrating an intended message of the value of community and coming together (Memorial Park, n.d.).

Another prominent message exhibited through the website is that the park is a great, if not the best, place to see and photograph the St. Louis city skyline. This is communicated so plainly by the park as, “…the best place to photograph the Gateway Arch and St. Louis Skyline!” and, as their tagline, “The park with a view!” (Memorial Park, n.d.). The prominence of such statements and the frequency with which they are seen throughout the website seems to suggest that the park intends to communicate values of appreciating and capturing St. Louis beauty, as well as the value of accessibility to that beauty. This seems to further reinforce the intended message that the Illinois side of St. Louis is of value to the St. Louis community, as the view of the St. Louis skyline is made accessible to them and the view even deserves a dedicated space for which that beauty can be appreciated and looked upon by not just members of the Missouri side of the St. Louis community, but also those community members who live across the river in Illinois.

A final (official) message communicated by the park website is the very obvious value of Malcolm W. Martin himself. Seeing as the park is named entirely after him, the audience can only interpret that the park finds him, his work, and his values to be something worth communicating about. Knowing that Martin was a St. Louis native and was heavily involved in the community, including his work on the park, this dedication to him communicates that the park values active community participation and St. Louis natives, but also that the park, quite simply, values him and what he accomplished in his lifetime enough to memorialize him via the park’s name. Martin’s life and work is also detailed on the park’s website, further communicating this message of what the park means to say about its values to the community it serves.

Although the park’s thorough website can give us a good sense of what the intended and official messaging of the park is, there are always going to be other, unofficial messages to be interpreted by the audience. Considering the actual messages of spaces such as public parks that are to be interpreted by an audience are, according to Langhorst (2014), complicated, because public parks in urban spaces, such as the Malcom W. Martin Memorial Park, are situated between the two conflicting ideals that shape how parks are perceived. These ideals are that of rejecting commercialization and urban development by maintaining such a large amount of passive green space and that of the political, economic, and capitalist interests that can lurk behind urban renewal projects such as dedicating space to be a public park. This makes these seemingly neutral passive spaces become, “highly contested terrains, and force a reconsideration of ecology from an objective construct of descriptive science focusing on biophysical aspects to a contextually complex hybrid, involving cultural, political, economic and biophysical aspects,” (Langhorst, 2014, p. 1112). It becomes clear, then, that public green spaces are not as seemingly simple as merely ecological spaces open for community, but rather spaces that exist in complicated human communities fraught with political, cultural, and economic implications. This idea suggests the need for a further, critical look at the park, using the idea of “contested terrains” as a guiding principle for analysis.

One of the main considerations Langhorst (2014) makes about urban spaces is the areas they are found in and the environmental justice implications that follow. According to the U.S. Department of Energy (n.d.), environmental justice can be defined as, “…the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies,” (para. 1). It becomes clear, then, that providing access to passive green spaces, such as the park, is an act of environmental justice, and these spaces become even more important in cities that have been disproportionately affected, due to their being predominantly poor, black, or otherwise discriminated against, by processes such as industrialization, and as a result, tend to have more severe issues of environmental quality. East St. Louis is one such city, with extreme cases of poor air quality and other effects resulting from climate change and pollution (Schmid, 2021).

In the context of Langhorst’s (2014) considerations about the positive effects of urban spaces in cities disproportionately affected by issues of environmental injustice, East St. Louis is a perfect candidate for a well-maintained and large park, speaking to the park’s initial intended message of valuing community and community space. It is made clear by the deserving and oft underserved location of the park that the park does intend to communicate a message about the value of community improvement and development, however, this message is complicated by the use of the park primarily by tourists (Delach Leonard, 2015). Although the park is located in East St. Louis, it does not appear to be for East St. Louis, rather, its main function seems to be bringing people to the area to see and photograph the Arch and St. Louis city skyline. This is complicated further by the fact that those who owned the park’s land worked to protect it from commercial development for multiple decades, even as the problems of environmental disaster and industrialization in East St. Louis worsened and they could have easily given the space up for other, more direct capitalist interests. Yet, they maintained the land and worked towards the fruition of a park that could serve tourists and other East St. Louis non-locals, in the process putting resources into creating and maintaining the park rather than building up the surrounding community.

Langhorst (2014) furthers this idea of the complex economic and capitalist contexts in which urban spaces are situated with concerns about urban development as a means to capitalist ends or exploitation of an underprivileged community. Seeing as the park occupies space in a city that has historically had numerous economic, racial, and infrastructure issues, there is warrant for such a concern with the Malcom W. Martin Memorial Park. As mentioned, monetary and environmental resources are put into maintenance of the park, which serves mostly tourists, rather than the surrounding area that serves local residents. This communicates by the park a greater value of tourists and the maintenance of an aesthetic view of St. Louis over the real lives and issues of those whose community the park takes advantage of. Although the park does not generate money for those who own it, as there is no fee to enter or enjoy the park and the park’s maintenance is funded largely by donations, it does not actively add to the economic wellbeing of the community or perpetuate the community’s own capitalist interest.

While it could be argued that the park can help stimulate the local economy, as it is an attraction that works to bring people to the area who will, hopefully, spend money and thus help the capitalist interests of an underdeveloped community, this is not, in reality, how it typically works. Because the area is, again, underdeveloped and often discriminated against, visitors typically elect to visit and stimulate the economy of St. Louis city, which is often the place they intended to visit in the first place (Tripadvisor, n.d.). This makes the park more of a pit stop or roadside attraction than a destination, further communicating via the park’s location the lack of value the park places on the East St. Louis community. The nature of the park as somewhat of a tourist attraction has also led to discussions of revitalization efforts in the area, such as increasing accessibility to the park with better roads in the immediately surrounding area (Sullivan, 2018). While this seems to be indicative of an increase in the value the park places on the surrounding community, it is an indirect effect of the park’s existence and still works largely in the favor of tourists and non-locals, rather than East St. Louisans themselves.

Another idea integral to Langhorst’s (2014) analysis of public spaces and parks is that of the design of said spaces. Langhorst writes, “…designed landscapes are – due to their experiential qualities – capable of representing ideas, ideologies and underlying values independent of an audience’s ability to decode them, an ability that grants insidious power,” (p. 1113-4). Not only is the design important to the experience of the park, then, it is also rooted in the values and ideas of the creators of the park and can even hold a certain kind of power over those who experience, in the end, said design. To better understand the design of the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park, we can look again to the website, which describes a few keys way in which the park is meant to mimic and complement the design of the Gateway Arch Park just across the river. For one, the Gateway Geyser can rise to an impressive 630 feet, the same height as the Arch itself (“How tall is it?”, n.d.). The park also features a long walking path throughout in the shape of the Arch, with the “top” of the Arch-shaped path taking visitors to the site of the Geyser (Memorial Park, n.d.). And, perhaps most obviously, the park is situated directly across the river from the Arch, making it a clear complement to the national monument. In all these ways, the design of the park is clearly communicating the intended mirroring of the Gateway Arch, in turn communicating certain messages about the importance and relevance of the Gateway Arch.

The messages of the Arch being reinforced, then, can be understood by looking at the official and unofficial messaging of the Gateway Arch. According to the Arch’s website, the Arch was originally meant to, “…commemorate Thomas Jefferson’s vision of a transcontinental United States,” but now, “celebrates the diverse people who shaped the region and the country,” (paras. 1-2). The website names people that were the “dreamers”, “explorers”, and “challengers” who allowed for the implementation of Manifest Destiny and are memorialized via the Arch as a monument to westward expansion (“About”, n.d.). It is clear from the website that the Arch is meant to be seen as a symbol of the classic American mindset of expansion and diligence and meant to memorialize the diverse group of people that helped the United States succeed in the ways it has thus far in history.

Important to consider with the Arch and its memorializing of westward expansion, however, is the indigenous people whose land and homes were stolen from them along the way. Many indigenous people were forcibly relocated as Europeans pushed west and, as a result, none of the original Missouri indigenous tribes inhabit the state today. Westward moving settlers also forced out the indigenous groups that had already been pushed out of their native territory and forced to move east once before, further disrupting the lives of those who lived on this land before Europeans and who were treated merely as a roadblock to the vision of a transcontinental country (“Native American”, n.d.). This history complicates the message being communicated by the Arch, as the Gateway Arch claims to be a monument to the great people and outcomes of westward expansion, but in doing so fails to represent and tell the story of the suffering and pain inflicted by white settlers.

This complicated history also offers us a look into the nature of historical narratives and the one-sided stories they often perpetuate. As seen in Austin and Edy’s (2022) work on multicultural public memory, groups in power often have their side of the story reflected in official messaging and narratives while marginalized groups are either represented as a caricature or not all. This is seen reflected in the Arch’s messaging, as the monument began as a way to honor the history of westward expansion specifically through the perspective of those in power, in this case the white settlers who benefited from westward expansion and had power and force enough to remove the indigenous people who were in their way. The design and messaging of monuments such as the Arch and, in turn, the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park, demonstrates the way that public monuments and their messaging come out of societal power structures but also reinforce those power structures as the general public interacts with and learns from the narrative encapsulated in the monument. Although the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park is less directly tied to the narrative of westward expansion in the United States, it is still in some ways an extension of the Arch’s values and messages, making it important to understand the potential and actual messages communicated by the Gateway Arch to fully analyze the messages being communicated by the southern Illinois expansion of it.

A final part of understanding how a space such as the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park functions rhetorically is the actual interpretation and experience of those who participate in and experience the park. Online reviews of the park are often written by tourists, reinforcing the message that the park is largely not for the benefit of East St. Louis, and consistently applaud the park for the clear view it provides of the Arch and St. Louis City skyline (Tripadvisor, n.d.). This valuing of aesthetics and photo opportunities demonstrates a parallel between the interpreted messaging and the intended messaging of the park. Also notable in reviews, however, is comments about the surrounding area and its characterization of it as a dangerous, hard to navigate, or underdeveloped city. This is often expressed as a frustration or confusion by visitors, as the park is intentionally and beautifully constructed, but the surrounding area does not seem to match. Reinforced in this interpretation of the park is one of the potential aforementioned negative messages, which is that of economic exploitation and the park’s lack of a real value for the community it is surrounded by. Although not explicitly naming it, these park reviews that mention the development of East St. Louis imply the communication of a message by the park as being a representation of the problematic and systematic issues that have led to East St. Louis’ economic struggles and underdevelopment. Although the park and such perspectives of it have sparked future plans for revitalization of the area, the current state of interpreted messaging can still be read through experiences of the park.

The function of public spaces as rhetorical situations is complicated due to the multi-faceted nature of human culture and the many histories such spaces are positioned in. The Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park is no different and is a representation of Langhorst’s idea of “contested terrains” with many sides to consider. It is clear from official messaging that the park intends to communicate positive values, but the actual implied messages of the park seem to perpetuate a message of not truly valuing the East St. Louis community as a part of St. Louis but, rather, just as a means to further demonstrating value for St. Louis via the exploitation of its Metro East neighbor. Overall, the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park’s intended and actual messages are in conflict with each other and while the park has potential for communicating values of community, access to passive green space, and development of historically underserved areas, it fully embodies the idea of a “contested terrain” and instead operates rhetorically as a reminder of the past and current transgressions against East St. Louis, Illinois.

References

About. (n.d.). Gateway Arch. Retrieved May 7, 2023, from https://www.gatewayarch.com/experience/about/

Austin, J. T., & Edy J. A. (2022). Narrating the past on fairer terms: Approaches to building multicultural public memory. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 39(4), 276-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2022.2049616

Delach Leonard, M. (2015, October 18). It's a blast: Gateway Geyser turns 20 — and, oh, what a view of the Arch. St. Louis Public Radio. https://news.stlpublicradio.org/arts/2015-10-18/its-a-blast-gateway-geyser-turns-20-and-oh-what-a-view-of-the-arch 

GuideStar. (n.d.). Gateway Center of Metropolitan St Louis Inc. https://www.guidestar.org/profile/23-7004665 

How tall is it? (n.d.). National Park Services. Retrieved April 23, 2023, from https://www.nps.gov/jeff/planyourvisit/arch-height.htm#:~:text=The%20Gateway%20Arch%20is%20one,as%20the%20Statue%20of%20Liberty 

Langhorst, J. (2014). Re-presenting transgressive ecologies: Post-industrial sites as contested terrains. Local Environment, 19(10), 1110–1133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2014.928813

Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park. (n.d.). https://www.theparkwithaview.com/

Malcolm W Martin Memorial Park. (n.d.). Tripadvisor. Retrieved May 7, 2023, from https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g35926-d3320608-Reviews-Malcolm_W_Martin_Memorial_Park-East_Saint_Louis_Illinois.html 

Native American experience research guide. (n.d.). The State Historical Society of Missouri. Retrieved May 7, 2023, from https://shsmo.org/research/guides/native-american.

Schmid, E. (2021, August 12). Environmental groups in Illinois and Missouri forge future working together. St. Louis Public Radio. https://news.stlpublicradio.org/health-science-environment/2021-08-12/environmental-groups-in-illinois-and-missouri-forge-future-working-together 

Sullivan, J. (2018, August 30). Multi-million dollar revitalization project coming to East St. Louis riverfront. KSDK. https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/multi-million-dollar-revitalization-project-coming-to-east-st-louis-riverfront/63-589004352 

What is environmental justice? (n.d.). U.S. Department of Energy. Retrieved May 12, 2023, from https://www.energy.gov/lm/what-environmental-justice#:~:text=Environmental%20justice%20is%20the%20fair,laws%2C%20regulations%2C%20and%20policies.