How conceptual is too conceptual? What does a monument and/or a memorial need in order both to have value and to produce the memory being represented? What problems do monuments encounter when put into dialogue with (or made to dissent from) politics, perception and bureaucracy?
I've been thinking about this idea of what is in a memorial a lot of late. Especially here, in lower Manhattan, I am appalled by the in-fighting, bickering and stagnation that has delayed construction of any kind (monument, building, towers, etc...) at the location of the World Trade Center.
ReplyDeleteNow don't get me wrong, I understand and appreciate the power of memorial and monument, but sometimes isn't the action of memorializing as significant as the actual monument itself.
Nearly 9 years after 9/11/2001 we still have no major monument/memorial to the victims of that day.
I am very rarely moved by memorials, especially memorials that I feel distance from. Grand impersonal memorials have little value to me, except to say that said event happened and this monument marks that event. I am usually touched, on some level, by personal stories, and memorials of individuals. Great art is one thing but a personal account is another. Very rarely are these two features combined in order to form a great monument that moves me.
ReplyDelete