One of the most interesting panels I’ve attended so far discussed September 11 memorials, and I was struck by some of the contrasts with atomic memorials in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. One presenter talked about the way the Freedom Tower (through its name, the rhetoric around it, and its physical characteristics) linked memorializing the tragedy with pushing George W. Bush style American politics. Nagasaki's main memorial resides in a park with statues donated by countries from all over the world (some of which no longer exist). This not only reflects the international character of the city, but asl acknowledges the bombing as an international tragedy: one that set up a new potential for destructive war. (The same thing could have been done-- and could still be done-- in regards to the 9/11 attacks.) Moreover, the smaller memorial to Dr. Takashi Nagai, featuring the hut where he spent his last years and a small museum, explicitly opposes the politics of war time Japan and in so doing joins the other memorials in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima in creating an international call for peace.
Part of this call consists of a preservation of ruins to make the effects of nuclear war more tangible: the A-Bomb Dome in Hiroshima is probably the most famous example, though the burnt and broken saints of Urakami Cathedral affected me more. The ruins in lower Manhattan are not to be preserved, though small pieces are included in various memorials-- sanitized, contained pieces, that is. The idea of preserving body parts or clothing from victims for public display wasn’t even mentioned in regards to 9/11-- and I found that to be the most moving part of the musuems in Japan. It's the sort of thing that can move you to oppose war in general: it creates a human tragedy rather than a national one.
There also seemed to be a sense among the panelists that institutional memorials gradually replace more grassroots memorials as we move further away from the date of the original incident. At the atomic memorials, however, personal tributes, some spontaneous, continue to be made. Thousands of folded cranes can be seen all over, especially at the Children’s Memorial, along with fresh flower and incense. Sometimes they express politics, as in the board adorned with cranes of different colors arranged to say “NO WAR”. This could provide an antidote to more official policy being pushed through built memorials.
Part of this call consists of a preservation of ruins to make the effects of nuclear war more tangible: the A-Bomb Dome in Hiroshima is probably the most famous example, though the burnt and broken saints of Urakami Cathedral affected me more. The ruins in lower Manhattan are not to be preserved, though small pieces are included in various memorials-- sanitized, contained pieces, that is. The idea of preserving body parts or clothing from victims for public display wasn’t even mentioned in regards to 9/11-- and I found that to be the most moving part of the musuems in Japan. It's the sort of thing that can move you to oppose war in general: it creates a human tragedy rather than a national one.
There also seemed to be a sense among the panelists that institutional memorials gradually replace more grassroots memorials as we move further away from the date of the original incident. At the atomic memorials, however, personal tributes, some spontaneous, continue to be made. Thousands of folded cranes can be seen all over, especially at the Children’s Memorial, along with fresh flower and incense. Sometimes they express politics, as in the board adorned with cranes of different colors arranged to say “NO WAR”. This could provide an antidote to more official policy being pushed through built memorials.
- Mood:
rushed