On the Pentagon 9/11 memorial

September 25, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
A few months back, when blogging about an arts-centric Washington, D.C. visit, I mentioned that one of my most memorable college moments was a spontanious road trip to the city, including a silent midde-of-the-night walk through a tourist-free Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

As I read about the intoduction of the Pentagon 9/11 memorial, I'm thinking again of that moment--the experience of a work of art helping to fuse memory and experience and right now into something powerful.

Read what Witold Rybczynski--an outstanding writer/communicator about architecture--thinks about the Pentagon site at Slate.com.

Throughout the years, there have been extremes of thought about how representational these works should be. Consider the difference between the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument (and, for that matter, the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts). Consider our own Medal of Honor memorial on the canal and the mixed imagery of the Soldiers and Sailors Monument.

What should we look for in a monument/memorial? Who should it please or engage? Which monuments, locally or nationally, do you think most effectively create or inspire?  

Your thoughts
ADVERTISEMENT
  • I've grown up with the Soldiers and Sailors Monument, and therefore take it a bit more for granted as a great signature landmark than for a memorial. Some of my more pleasant memories of being downtown usually involve eating lunch on its steps. However, other memorials have effected me in a variety of ways.

    I cry every time I've visited the Medal of Honor memorial. There's something about heoroes that get to me.

    The Washington Monument is awe inspiring. Being there invokes feelings of what man can accomplish.

    I was worried about visiting the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Even though I was with my family, I had to approach it on my own. Taking some beautiful photographs kept me somewhat detached (on purpose). But later in the dusk of evening I made a solo return trip. I was sad, but more serene. A sense of importance of individuals participating in history made me glad we have such a perfect memorial for that time.

    I feel that the modern memorial designers have all recognized the importance of emotional involvement - that we all will have our own personal experiences with the memorial. We've grown beyond statues of generals on horseback.
  • I agree with ArtistDan, and would add that I believe it's all about the subject, about who or what is being memorialized.

    I've not seen the Washington or Lincoln monuments in person, but they are imposing and timeless - and awe-inspiring - even in photos. That is in keeping with who they were built for, with what the honorees meant to our country. A memorial to someone of such vast stature should have vast stature of its own.

    I have seen the Murrah building memorial in person, and to me, what is absolutely evident is the emotion connected to that event and to the victims of that tragedy. And that's appropriate, because that memorial is not in honor of life well-lived, but instead of life cut short. Awe-inspiring is not the appropriate take-away for something like that.

    Many designers today seem to understand the distinction, and that bodes well for memorials yet to come.
  • I cry every time I’ve visited the Medal of Honor memorial. There’s something about heoroes that get to me.
  • For those interested in this monumental discussion, check out blake Gopnik's smart piece in today's Washington Post about the impact of subject on monuments.


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/29/AR2008092903006.html?nav%3Drss_print/style&sub=AR

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT