Memorials and Museums in the USA - Essay Example

? Comparing Two Visitor Attractions Auschwitz Museum and US Holocaust Memorial Museum Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 2 2.Reinvention, Representation and Public Perception of the Museum 3 5.Conclusions 8 References 8 1. Introduction Memorials and museums are visitor attractions that serve as public repositories of the past events and remembrance, each of which is inculcated with its distinct inevitable nature of memory (Young, 1988). Museums are textual and pictorial representation of the past rather than being a collection of intransigent historical realities, which should be better assessed for accuracy. This paper compares the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum with the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum. This comparative essay will discuss the contradictory roles of these museums in forming the general perceptions of the people about the holocaust as both these museums provide the knowledge about the holocaust. This paper is divided in to two sections. The first section depicts the correlation between the evolving forms, functions ad role of the museum in explaining and remembering the past events. Specifically, this section will describe that how the holocaust has been explained through the layout, architecture, content and methodologies used in these museums. On the other hand, the second section of this paper identifies the issues specific to the portrayals of the holocaust as it outlines the difficulties encountered in the presentation of the pertinent ending to the holocaust and the problems related to the geographical and political context of the museum. 2. Reinvention, Representation and Public Perception of the Museum The contribution of the museum in developing the public perception of the holocaust (in the context of this essay) or any other historical event must be considered as the change in the perception and objective of the museum itself. In the nineteenth century, Michel Foucault recognized the concept of ‘heterotopia of time’ for the museum with the emergence of the idea that a place of all times should be developed that is actually outside time and thereby, preserved and secured from its destruction (Lord, 2006). Hence, the state run museum institution was formed at that time for the purpose of organizing a sort of permanent and infinite collection of time in a place that will not change or move (Grimes, 1999). Then the concept of museum transformed into the development of forms of representation of the past that are more socially responsive and inclusive rather than just being an ‘ivory tower of exclusivity’ (Anderson, 2004). The design, architecture, mediums and content of the museum were inspired by post-structuralism that includes the defiance from absolute truths in their representations of the history. In the era of post modernism, the concept of reality or truth is nothing more than a stuck pile of dead bodies, dead matter, and dead language (Walsh, 1992). Subsequently, the museums like the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum involve their audiences in self reflexive interaction in relation to the subjectivity of their experience and contribution of the audience and the curator towards the development of the historical knowledge (Crane, 1997). Both these museums objectively deny the general expectations of the museums and subvert the assumption that they can provide factual, unbiased and truthful knowledge related to the holocaust through easily understandable forms. 3. Auschwitz Memory and its Representations. Since 1947, Auschwitz-Birkenau is the State museum of the previous German Nazi Concentration Extermination Camp. It is known to be the world’s largest cemetery and the historical icon of the World War II that proves the Nazi genocide and reminds of the religious hatred between the Christians and the Jews of that time. This site provides great knowledge about the holocaust history and attracts mass tourism. There also used to be the times when the survivors of the Auschwitz dilemma and their families and even the families of the perpetrators of the massacre visited this museum in different guided groups. And the Auschwitz-Birkenau accommodated them all. In the last seven decades, almost, the iconography of the Auschwitz has been developed as one of the most globally distinguished and strongest symbol of the World War II and of the holocaust genocide. The witnesses of the tragedy would no longer be available with each day passing and thus, the next generations have to rely more upon such recreated scenes or secondary images related to the holocaust developed by museums, memorials, historians, and documentation centers. However, the memory is and will be regenerated at the international level through films and mass cultural activities. It is important that the official historical narration of the Auschwitz’s misery prevails through the museums like Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum. Today, the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum is a large open air museum comprising of the ruins of the Nazi’s camp structures and buildings that spread over a mass area of about 420 acres. The entire territory could be viewed through the central watch tower above the gate of the main entrance. Nevertheless, the most significant places at the Auschwitz museum are either almost not visible or barely visible since the German-Nazis eradicated the memories of their brutal crimes. Only at a distance of a kilometer from the main entrance is the site of the former mass genocide by the German Nazi. Some remains of the Gas Chambers II, II, IV and V and the ruins of the massive Crematoriums are located in the Birkenau. Deep inside the museum, the ashes of the most of the victims of the extermination camp are buried under the today’s landscape of water pond and green idyllic forest. It is at this place where the world’s largest cemetery ever known to human race is located. The serenity of the open museum is a deception that contrasts entirely with the established brutalities of the holocaust history. 4. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and Its Representation The ritual of utilizing museum for representing historical events or memories like the holocaust gives rise to the discussion about the nature, purpose and suitable-form that rightfully describe the catastrophe of the Nazi prosecution. The calamity of the holocaust was so adverse that when art attempts to portray it then it is drained of authority and rendered vacuous (Clendinnen, 1998). Hence, the representations of the historical events are often criticized of exploiting, disrespecting, exploiting or not doing justice to the millions of victims as they fail to render or assimilate the tragedy accurately or meaningfully. Moreover, the art is separated from the atrocity due to which moral and aesthetic conflict arises through the issues of style, form, meaning, content and the nature of the subject matter (Langer, 2006). The museum dedicated to the holocaust events, as public repositories of the memory, must consider the values of aesthetics of their own contexts of politics, culture and geography in developing the understanding of their audiences about them by means of the interaction between us and the icons themselves (Young, 1988). In the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the curators opt to use the photographs of the human hair taken at the Auschwitz museum instead of displaying the hair as done at the Auschwitz. This decision was partially contextual since the Auschwitz being the actual site of the calamity was justified in using the macabre objects for the display whereas the Holocaust Memorial Museum being the US national museum located at the National Mall had to represent the atrocities accordingly (Linethal, 1994). Also, the decision was partially based on the power of the survivors of the tragedy that affected the public representations of the events of the holocaust. According to the Hillberg, the rules of the holocaust speech state that any survivor of the holocaust is considered superior to the greatest historian of the calamity for not experiencing or witnessing the real atrocity (Langer, 1975). Hence, the moral conflicts arise over the representation of the holocaust memory since the subjective and commemorative portrayal of the holocaust is oftentimes as valid as the curatorial objectives and historical analyses. Subsequently, the holocaust representations often seem to be inadequate imitation in totality. Thus, besides illustrating the meaning of the enormity and the after-effects of the holocausts in both educational and commemorative ways, these museums are naturally shaped by their context, purposes and influences. On the other hand, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is temporally and geographically demarcated from the actual events or realities of the holocaust. The motivations and objectives of the Holocaust Memorial Museum are pluralistic. According to Michael Berenbaum (Former Director of the Holocaust Museum), the content of the museum should be Americanized so that the American people could be able to relate themselves with the incident (Flanzbaum, 1999). As a result of which the distinctive American dimensions of the holocaust are emphasized in the museum. The logo of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is an American eagle that is holding a bundle of spears and an olive branch in each of its claws having the words written ‘for the dead and the living, we must bear witness’ (Crysler and Kusno, 1997). The visitors entering the Holocaust Memorial Museum first sight the footage and hear the sound clips of the Americans rescuing the prisoners and the victims at the concentration camps that evidently identify the visitors as being among the rescuers and the victors. Moreover, the Holocaust Memorial Museum endeavors to demonstrate the American democratic principles and concepts by incorporating the democratic government systems against the regime of the Nazi control. This is evident from the collage of the images that describes the United Nation making the creation of Israel (the homeland for Jews) as mandatory and the Truman relaxing the immigration policies for the Jews. This is also apparent from the location of the Holocaust Memorial Museum as it symbolically stands at the place from where the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument can keep an eye on this shrine of the victims of the brutalities of the worst kind (Crysler and Kusno, 1997). Although the Holocaust Memorial Museum portrays holocaust through the US democratic concepts however the construction of its structure is based upon the national museums devoted to American Indian or African Americans. Hence, the Holocaust Memorial Museum has been criticized to address the crime stories of the Nazi-era faithfully by fulfilling the contemporary political and social agendas of the American government at the same time (Flanzbaum, 1999). 5. Conclusions Auschwitz-Birkenau being the highly cathected visitor-attraction in the world exists in the middle of the closely layered historical events and expectations that defines, prefigures and shapes experience. As the traumatic memories fade away with time, the recreated landscape of the Auschwitz rejuvenates the historical act of cruelty and injustice. The Unites States Holocaust Memorial Museum is deeply influenced by its context as it endeavors to emotionally connect the American people to the victims and the perpetrators in order to learn some moral lessons from the history. Both the museums (Auschwitz-Berkinau and Holocaust Memorial) attempt to involve their visitors to the historical memory by enhancing their subjective and objective knowledge about the holocaust. However, the contrasting assessment of the two holocaust memorials demonstrates the different nature of memories that each museum portrays. References Anderson, G. (2004) Reinventing the museum – historical and contemporary perspectives on the paradigm shift, Walnut Creek: AltaMiraPress. Clendinnen, I. (1998) Representing the Holocaust, Melbourne: Text. Crane, S. (1997) ‘Distortion and History in the Museum’, History and Theory, Vol. 36, No.4, pp. 45. Crysler, G. and Kusno, A. (1997) ‘Angels in the Temple: The Aesthetic Construction of Citizenship at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’, Art Journal, Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 52-64. Flanzbaum, H. (1999) The Americanization of the Holocaust, US: The John Hopkins University Press. Grimes, R. (1999) ‘Jonathon Smith’s theory of ritual space’, Religion, Vol. 29, pp. 261–273. Langer, L. (1975) The Holocaust and the Literary Imagination, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Langer, L. (2006) Using and Abusing the Holocaust, Indiana: Indiana University Press. Linethal, E. (1994) ‘The Boundaries of Memory: The United Holocaust Memorial Museum’, American Quarterly, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 406-433. Lord, B. (2006) ‘Foucault’s Museum: difference, representation, and genealogy’, Museum and Society,Vol.4, No.1, pp. 1-14. Walsh, K. (1992) The representation of the past -Museums and heritage in the postmodern world, London: Routledge. Young, J. (1988) The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Read More