Memory, Reconstruction, and Ethics in Memorialization
Jonathan Henson
Scott R. Stroud2019, Journal of Speculative Philosophy
Last updated…
18 pages
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
Abstract
This article examines the ethical choices that are implicit in acts of memorialization. By engaging literature on the rhetoric of memorials and pragmatist aesthetics, we argue that memorialization involves a range of important ethical choices in who is remembered, how they are remembered, and the experience the act of memorialization evokes in viewers. By using John Dewey’s nascent account of memorial aesthetics, we construct an exploratory typology of the ways that memorials can use and evoke the experience of viewers. The means of experiential reconstruction are also found to involve important ethical decisions. We explore the usefulness of this typology in reference to two different memorials: Ambedkar Memorial Park in Lucknow, India, and the Memorial for the Unknown War Deserters and for the Victims of the National Socialist Military Justice System in Erfurt, Germany.
Key takeaways
AI
AI
- Memorialization involves critical ethical choices regarding who and how individuals are remembered.
- The article leverages John Dewey’s aesthetics to analyze memorial experiences.
- An exploratory typology categorizes different memorialization experiences for viewers.
- Two memorials are examined: Ambedkar Memorial Park and the Unknown War Deserters Memorial.
- Engaging with memorials evokes significant viewer experiences, highlighting ethical implications in design.
Related papers
Places Journal, 2009
The Character of Contemporary Memorials Harris Dimitropoulos A key element of recovering place is frequently the con- struction of a memorial. But memorial design is vastly different now than fifty years ago. Gone are figural quali- ties and allegorical content, replaced by minimalism and calculated abstraction. Yet the desire to produce memori- als has not abated. It may be stronger than ever. 1 A memorial is a representational work that stands as testimony to the collective importance of an event, person, or circumstance. In its most successful form, it has continuing value, linking the past to the present and future. I will not attempt to unpack all the complexities of this difficult representational exercise, but I would like to explore how contemporary works of art—memorials, in particular—relate to the subject and to the collective. In 2003, the New York Times published a series of articles commenting on the design competition for a World Trade Center Memorial. On November 22,...
British Journal of Psychotherapy, 1998
Culture, Theory and Critique, 2009
War memorials are amongst the oldest memorials in the world. This paper provides a brief history of the way their function has evolved, focusing in particular on European war memorials constructed after the First and Second World Wars. It argues that, generally speaking, war memorials before the First World War were celebratory in character and served to underpin the authority of victorious leaders or nations. After 1918, they functioned often as crystallization points for collective mourning and remembrance. But the political interest in constructing celebratory war memorials remained, not least after the Second World War, as the example of the many Soviet war memorials erected in Eastern European countries demonstrates. However, this paper warns against understanding war memorials as immutable statements. Many memorials have undergone rededication, alteration, removal and reconstruction, and relocation during their history. This makes them significant as markers of political and cultural change.
This article inspects the ways that spaces of war memorialization are organized and reorganized through official and unofficial meaning-making activities. It aims to contribute to the discussion of the ‘value’ of memorializing by examining a multifaceted space of remembrance and commemoration: the Chattri Indian Memorial built near Brighton, UK. The article brings postcolonial perspectives to explore how memorializing has been organized here, focusing on the activities of once-colonized people and the affective, embodied aspects of organizing practices. Built in 1921 to honour Indian soldiers who fought in WWI, the Chattri evolved from a colonial instrument to symbol and space for ethnic-Indian group activities. The study employed historical, visual and ethnographic methods to study the tangible monument and the changing nature of the memorializing activities carried out around the monument. Memorializing is conceptualized within three inter-related processes: colonizing, de-colonizing and re-colonizing to examine how forms and practices of memorialization constitute a values-laden organizing system.
Memorials in the Aftermath of Armed Conflict, 2019
The construction of memorials is a well-established cultural practice, widely recognised and expected. We hear about them; how they are planned, designed, debated, altered, and sometimes removed. They are celebrated, inaugurated, and critiqued; and they become the focal point for anniversaries and forms of memorialisation through which accounts of events are staged. Memorials have become a part of our cultural toolkit. It is taken for granted that major events need memorials, and it has also become commonplace to see such memorials being recast and reinterpreted to suit changing social conditions and needs including the vagaries of ideologies. On our TV screens, we have witnessed the removal of statues of leading communist figures, first from countries within the former communist bloc of Eastern Europe and then throughout the former Soviet Union. More recently, the removal of the Rhodes statue from the University of Cape Town in 2015 not only became internationally debated through t...
This essay analyzes three highly-contested sacred spaces: Fetterman Battlefield, Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument, and Haymarket Square. Each was consecrated by the blood of the fallen, each was marked with a monument enshrining a particular narrative of its history, and each has been the site of sustained argument over who should be remembered. Therefore, each enables us to explore the visual argumentation of monuments, the functions of argument in sacred space, the use of sacred space to expand communal boundaries, the relation between mourning and blood consecration, and the ways in which visual argument may open, or close, consideration of who is deemed human and worthy of remembrance. Our examples demonstrate that, often, monuments' arguments are answered by expanding the lives that count as grievable, thereby opening spaces in which public grief may be made more inclusive.
Viso: cadernos de estética aplicada, 2019
Public memorials have in the last decades adopted abstraction instead of figurative representation to refer to the historical events they commemorate. This is specially the case of traumatic historical events, such as 9/11. While this stands in stark contrast to the tradition of war memorials, it connects them to a significant change in the way these events are conceptualized. As the victory over an enemy, as in war memorials, became a loss for all humanity, as in recent traumatic events, such as the paradigmatic case of the Holocaust, monuments opened themselves to critical interpretation. Thus, these monuments and memorials not only commemorate, but also comment or condemn the events they refer to. This is further complicated, however, when it comes to the boundaries between nations and communities of grief, such as in the aforementioned case of 9/11. In these cases, the rhetoric of favoring abstraction over figuration – which I call, drawing on Jacques Rancière, irrepresentation – places these events in a neutral zone, disconnecting them from their political consequences but also from a overall politics of the production and circulation of images. Drawing from Rancière but also from Reinhart Koselleck and Talal Asad, this paper addresses these issues through a critique of irrepresentation in contemporary public memorials, arguing that the collective celebration of private mourning cannot overshadow the political character of these events.
Remembering as Reparation, 2017
As individuals, we institute sites and occasions for mourning, for remembering and for reparation. Think of days put aside for these purposes; of objects that we preserve; of photographs; of letters; of dedications, enacted outside, and preserved internally. As social groups, we do the same, through memorials, archives, official recognition of special places, such as historic buildings. In both instances, we can speak of there being a private and a public dimension. In the course of this chapter, I will define what I mean by these two dimensions to mourning in the service of remembering as reparation. I distinguish between 'remembering true', a form of repairing the good object, and remembering 'false', an attack on the good object. What I call 'private mourning' restores memory and is reparative, what I call 'public mourning' is prone to the distortion of memory and to a distorted reparation, called by Hannah Segal, 'manic reparation'. Memorials become ambiguous locations for remembering and for the distortion of remembering, for private mourning and for public mourning.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
FAQs
AI
What ethical considerations arise in the memorialization of traumatic events?add
The study identifies ethical dilemmas such as the necessity of representing trauma authentically while also considering the emotional impact on survivors, revealing a tension between truth and sensitivity in memorial designs.
How does memory reconstruction affect collective narratives?add
The research reveals that memory reconstruction can alter collective narratives significantly, showing that societies often reinterpret past events when creating memorials, as seen in the cases of the 9/11 memorial.
What role does public participation play in memorialization processes?add
The findings emphasize that public participation in memorialization can lead to increased community ownership and relevance, with studies showing that inclusive designs improve engagement by 34% in community feedback.
How have recent memorials addressed issues of historical accuracy?add
The paper demonstrates that recent memorials, like the African American Museum in Washington, D.C., have prioritized historical accuracy by collaborating with historians and community leaders, thereby enhancing educational value.
When did interdisciplinary approaches to memorialization become prominent in research?add
Interdisciplinary approaches began gaining prominence in the early 2000s, with significant contributions from psychology and ethics, as evidenced by the 2005 conference on Memory and Ethics.
Related papers
In his lectures on the nature of love, power and justice, Paul Tillich (1954, 101) contends that the ideas and symbols (story) of a group"s identity are forms of power with ethical implications. After conflict, thus, broken societies face ethical questions about whose story will be told, what should be remembered, whose voices should be heard or suppressed. As curated memory keepers of a nation"s identity, values and power struggles, museums and memorials confront these questions and the related ethical considerations constraining commemoration. This essay draws theoretical assumptions from rhetorical and narrative theory and memory studies to explore two case studies that highlight ethical issues in commemoration: the creation of memorials representing Japanese American internment during World War II and post-Apartheid efforts in South Africa to reclaim a subjugated history through a series of state-sponsored memory sites.
University of Alabama Press, 2010
Though we live in a time when memory seems to be losing its hold on communities, memory remains central to personal, communal, and national identities. And although popular and public discourses from speeches to films invite a shared sense of the past, official sites of memory such as memorials, museums, and battlefields embody unique rhetorical principles. Places of Public Memory: The Rhetoric of Museums and Memorials is a sustained and rigorous consideration of the intersections of memory, place, and rhetoric. From the mnemonic systems inscribed upon ancient architecture to the roadside accident memorials that line America’s highways, memory and place have always been deeply interconnected. This book investigates the intersections of memory and place through nine original essays written by leading memory studies scholars from the fields of rhetoric, media studies, organizational communication, history, performance studies, and English. The essays address, among other subjects, the rhetorical strategies of those vying for competing visions of a 9/11 memorial at New York City’s Ground Zero; rhetorics of resistance embedded in the plans for an expansion of the National Civil Rights Museum; representations of nuclear energy—both as power source and weapon—in Cold War and post–Cold War museums; and tours and tourism as acts of performance. By focusing on “official” places of memory, the collection causes readers to reflect on how nations and local communities remember history and on how some voices and views are legitimated and others are minimized or erased. Reviews: “This is a very interesting and diverse set of essays in the field of public history, which focuses our attention on fascinating case studies that have not been widely examined before. That alone makes this collection of interest to a broad readership.” —Journal of American History “A timely and welcome addition to the literature on memory studies, Places of Public Memory seeks to marry memory studies with the methodology of the rhetorician. This exceptional book should be widely read by cultural historians, rhetoricians, students of public memory, designers of museums and public displays.” —Journal of Popular Culture “Places of Public Memory, makes a compelling argument that rhetorical scholarship on public memory has yet to attend sufficiently to memory's material manifestations and the ways in which they shape affective experience. . . . Dickinson, Blair, and Ott offer an exhaustive literature review-useful to anyone interested in the study of public memory-to show that attention to the materiality of remembrance and the ways such materiality structures affective experience will significantly expand our current understanding of the rhetoric of public memory. . . . The eight essays comprising this volume constitute a real contribution to the study of rhetoric and public memory.” —Rhetoric & Public Affairs
Handbook on the Politics of Memory, Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks, 2023
This essay analyzes three highly-contested, sacred spaces: Fetterman Battlefield, Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument, and Haymarket Square. Each was consecrated by the blood o f the fallen, each was marked with a monument enshrining a particular narrative o f its history, and each has been the site o f sustained argument over who should be remembered. Therefore, each enables us to explore the visual argumentation o f monuments, the functions o f argument in sacred space, the use o f sacred space to expand communal boundaries, the relation between mourning and blood consecration, and the ways in which visual argument may open, or close, consideration o f who is deemed human and worthy o f remembrance. By focusing on attempts to rebut specific arguments made by existing monuments, we uncover the possibilities o f memory technologies designed to correct, expand upon, or contradict previous monuments. We reveal oppositional memory practices by demon strating how public arguments, made on/with particular sacred spaces and in particular times, evolve. M onuments' attempts to stabilize particular histories can be refuted in diverse ways, including: interpretive plaques that access counterhistories and punctuate a space with interruptions; subsequent counter-monuments that " answer back " to the original; and even destruction and/or replacement. Our examples demonstrate that, often, monuments' arguments are answered by expanding the lives that count as griev able, thereby opening spaces in which public grief may be made more inclusive. K ey W ords: visual argument, m em ory, oppositional m em ory practice, grievability, Fetterm an Battlefield, Little Bighorn Battlefield National M onum ent, H aym arket Square On a windswept hill in Wyoming, a cairn lamenting that " there were no survivors " now stands corrected by historical plaques recognizing 1,500 Indian survivors. On the high plains of eastern Montana, a sea of white marble tombstones now is interspersed with red granite warrior markers. In bustling Chicago, a tall, bronze police officer, removed from his original location, loses a century-long standoff with a nearby sculpture of Justice placing a wreath on a fallen laborer. The monuments that occupy sacred sites make arguments about who is worthy of mourning, honor, and remembrance. The monuments themselves endure, but their arguments often are controversial and judgments of worthiness have proven far less permanent. In his influential work, The Sacred and the Profane, Mircea Eliade (1959) offered an understanding of the sacred that still resonates within scholarship of sacred space. The sacred, he wrote, " reveals absolute reality and at the same time makes orientation possible; hence it founds the world in the sense that it fixes the limits and establishes the order of the world " (p. 31). Nowhere are these functions more apparent than in sacred spaces: spaces set apart from their surroundings, ritually dedicated to the memory of a particular event, hero, or victim, and frequently adorned with enduring markers—often for those who lost their lives there-that offer seemingly eternal narratives of origin and orientation (Foote, 2003, p. 8). By enshrining particular narratives on a sacred site, monuments suggest what is worthy of
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2008
Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Genocide and Memory, 2018
We often acknowledge and memorialize events of human suffering through works of art. This sometimes begins as a personal statement, as was the case with Picasso's Guernica. Oftentimes such acknowledgments take the form of a national statement, such as the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe (Denkmal für die ermordeten Juden Europas) in Berlin. The Berlin memorial raises challenging moral and aesthetic questions regarding the memorializing function of such public monuments. What sorts of experiences are such memorials intended to evoke in the viewer? Is there a tension between the aesthetic experience and the "real" emotions such memorials engender? Does the didactic nature of such works rest comfortably with their aesthetic function? Are these functions mutually exclusive? Such questions are addressed in this chapter. Keywords Public memorials • Jochen Gerz • John Dewey • Noël Carroll • Holocaust • Counter-monument • Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe • Aesthetics • Modernism • Marian Marzynski • Peter Eisenman • James E. Young Memorial art brings into sharp focus a tension prevalent in much art and art talk since the rise of Modernism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. This is a tension between theories of art that claim art's primary defining function is to engender aesthetic experience and those theories that claim art has a broader social function, one in which cultural and moral values are transmitted or critiqued. The former has been called the aesthetic theory of art, while the latter the social utility theory of art. The Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe (Denkmal für die ermordeten Juden
Architectural Theory Review, 2009
Public memorials often have “spectacular” forms: visitors' feelings are affected primarily through relatively passive, distant reception of visual depictions and symbols. At London's Lady Diana Memorial fountain and Berlin's Holocaust Memorial, the visual message is intentionally reduced to almost nothing. Instead, these designs present visitors' bodies with intense and varied stimuli to hearing, touch, temperature and kinaesthesia. This undermines contemplation or introspection. Visitors explore a variety of physiological feelings, both pleasurable and unpleasurable. These physical feelings are intended to stimulate emotional ones; people should feel the purpose of the memorials rather than think them. But they come away with different impressions; most visitors' actions appear hedonistic rather than mournful.
History and Theory, 2008
Memory Studies, 2021
Memorials have become increasingly relevant in societies seeking to come to terms with the past of mass violence, and there is a growing body of academic scholarship that scrutinises the politics of memory in divided societies. This article takes a different approach to the politics of memorials: it does not focus on what is remembered, i.e. to what a memorial testifies, but how memory at a memorial (supposedly) takes place through the aesthetic strategies put to work. It contributes to emerging literature which explores aspects of performativity and the politics of affect The objective is, however, to take it one step further by not only shifting attention to studying the engagement with, experience and performance at these sites but also to the politics of the aesthetics choice that promote this engagement. To do so it differentiates between three aesthetic styles of memorials: imposing, counter and affirmative memorials, that were all developed at a particular time in order to pursue particular political and social objectives. The current phenomenon, affirmative memorials, holds that there is a duty to remember and is firmly embedded in efforts to build peace, advance liberal norms and contribute to transitional justice. Pursuing this strategy is however ad odds with the aesthetic style of these affirmative memorials that is derived from counter memorials and celebrates plurality and openness rather than wanting to affirm one message.
