It was interesting to learn more about the artistic and architectural process that went behind the OK City bombing memorial. I was actually in the city last summer for a service trip and received an amazing tour of the memorial at night from one of the city's residents. He told my group about the day of the bombing, how his church across the street had turned into a first aid center and he was there helping out and saw a lot of injured, brave people.
The memorial itself was breath-taking, especially at night. Goldberger was right in saying that "the most important decision Johnson's task force made was to articulate the intentions of the memorial before thinking about any kind of physical design", and you can see it in the simple yet profound design of Hans and Torrey Butzer. The project of building a memorial is no easy task that can be done by five architects- it has to open its doors to the community affected by the tragedy, because the community is essentially a victim, too.
I'm not quite sure where I stand with memorials. The obvious necessity for a community to receive closure is evident, as well as the remembrance of lives lost. But I think, overall, memorials are for the people left behind. It's not a bad thing, but when building a memorial people must be very honest with themselves about what their intentions are. They should ask the question, "What do we want people to take away from this experience? Do we want them to feel more despair about the past that we can't change, or do we want them to feel like there is still reason to not lose hope in humanity because of this tragic act of violence?"
I know other people have chosen to show pictures of the Vietnam War Memorial, but I've had a close connection with it since I was young. My family and I went there when I was roughly 11 years old, and it was the first time I had ever seen my Dad visually upset. Later I learned it was because he had missed the 1969 draft of 19 year old men by two years. I realizedthat the memorial wasn't there just to remember those who lost their lives, but to provoke a feeling of gratitude and respect for life for those who still remain.
I think it's very insightful of you to discuss and analyze your personal experience with your father.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the community should be involved in the creating of the memorial, they are the ones affected and the ones seeing it everyday, remembering what happened.
A part of me wants to say that memorials aren't always a good idea, they only remind the people of the pain, at least that's how I would feel, but on the other hand, if I saw a building where something horrible happened that affected me personally I would feel like no one cared, and I would want there to be a memorial. I think this is a controversial issue, which takes a lot of work and people to be done right, and this memorial shows that.
I do think that memorials are a good installation to symbolize remembrance, but also a symbol of hope. However, I completely agree with you when you say that people need to be honest with themselves and have their intentions in the right place. I think that may be why the Oklahoma City memorial is so successful. They waited 6 years before ever constructing a memorial because they made sure that the memorial was constructed with the right intentions and right message. They not only planned out their intentions, but they wrote them in a mission statement. With this as a guideline, I think that the memorial following could only be a success.
ReplyDelete