DOUBLE VISION
DOUBLE VISION
Evgenia Vlachaki ARC322 Special Study Student Registration No.:110175500 The University of Sheffield Academic Year 2013-2014
Contents
The Artist / Researcher: methodology and tools An introduction to the exhibition
Engaging with death through commemoration Theory on the Psychology of death
Berlin; a city of commemorative culture Setting the scene
“Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe” Background information on the memorial
Commemoration versus Play A reflective journal on the “Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe” visit
“Window of Remembrance” Background information on the memorial
Ambivalence versus Realness A reflective journal on the “Window of Remembrance” visit
“Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany for the Victims of War and Dictatorship” Background information on the memorial
Empathy versus Hope A reflective journal on the “Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany for the Victims of War and Dictatorship” visit
Bibliography
6
8
12
14
18
22
24
26
28
30
5
The Artist / Researcher: methodology and tools
The issue I am engaging with is the emotional and spatial engagement of people with memorial spaces for the departed, i.e. places of commemoration where visitors engage with death at a collective as well at a personal level. In order to understand the impact of such spaces on the human experience, my investigation started with research on memorial spaces and the Psychology of death, which addresses the human understanding of the inevitable state of non-being. It is the complex way people deal with death, which allows and propels the construction of memorial spaces for commemoration. On a personal level, memorial architecture allows people to deal with loss and gain reassurance that they too will be remembered by their loved ones when their time comes. On a societal level, memorials usually serve as a means for the state to establish power relationships, identity, and to maintain certain memories with the premise that remembering events and past mistakes could help improve and educate the citizens and inform the visitors. In order to explore how people experience memorial spaces I felt the need to experience these types of spaces in person. Berlin, being a city of commemorative culture, became my destination and after researching its various memorials I decided to select three memorials of distinctly different forms. Two of the case studies, the “Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe” and the “Window of Remembrance” part of the “Berlin Wall Memorial”, are contemporary examples of the city’s memorial landscape while the third case study, “The Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany to the Victims of War and Tyrrany” known to most as the “Neue Wache”, dates back to 1816. Visiting each space, I employed photography as my main tool, asking visitors to take pictures of the memorial and especially the parts, which had the most impact to them. The lens captured the specific interests of each individual and thus the exhibition presents the three memorial spaces not through mere visual documentation, but through the emotional and spatial experience of a sample of visitors, including myself. The photography activity was followed by a short interview for discussing impressions and emotions felt and thoughts or memories emanated during their visit. 6
The Artist / Researcher: methodology and tools
The visual analysis of all the information gathered in Berlin will present peoples’ and my own personal thoughts and views on the emotional and spatial experience of each space. The overlay of qualitative information will reveal the value of these memorials to people and allow observations on how the form of each memorial resulted in different patterns of spatial interaction across the memorial spaces. The set of panels including photographs taken by the participants and their thoughts will be read in comparison to my personal set of panels aiming to create a dialogic relationship between individual interpretations of the memorial spaces (see diagram on the right).
Diagram of intended exhibition arrangement
Finally, my study suggests that the overall emotional engagement with the memorial spaces is rarely a mere result of what we perceive through our vision. Initially, our expectations are unavoidably influenced by any prior knowledge of the traumatic past events being commemorated. That is why we often approach these spaces with a preconceived notion of what we should feel and experience. After engaging spatially within a memorial, it is often that the original notion will shift and the visitor will experience a different range of emotions. This is due to the dual relationship of the memorials to the past and to the present. When experienced through memory the emotional impact is usually characterised by negative thoughts and feelings, but their presence in the current cityscape simultaneously allows these spaces to be experienced from a much more quotidian, lighthearted perspective. The reflective journals included in this booklet will intertwine the experiences of visitors’ with mine, revealing the prevalent observations and emotions per memorial space.
7
Engaging with death through commemoration
Engaging with death on a personal level Death has always been a preoccupation of the living due to its omnipresent and inevitable nature. The human mind is different to the mind of all living creatures in the sense that it is powerful enough “to imagine a world in which we are no longer alive”1. Death is “inevitable, incalculable, ubiquitous, the tabooed limit of human freedom, thus generating fear of a real danger”2. Stereotypes of death started to form from the ancient times to the present and have begun to inform our understanding of why we feel the need to celebrate it and preserve the memory of the departed. According to the French medievalist and historian, Philippe Aries, stereotyped images of death include: a. the idea of an “absolute negativity, a sudden irrevocable plunge into an abyss without memory”, b. “a radical metamorphosis, a passing over, an inter-itus”, c. a passage to the “afterlife”, and finally d. an “eternal sleep” 3, being the most ancient and popular stereotype of all. The majority of the aforementioned stereotypes should logically lead to a negative stance or sentiment towards death and its reminders, but it seems that the human species are most likely to be drawn to and captivated by these reminders. When experiencing loss we tend to surround ourselves with objects and photographs of the departed. The question is why do we feel this compulsion to ‘build’ for the departed, thus reminding ourselves of our finite nature? According to a number of psychologists and theorists, images of the dead, objects and architecture, which trigger our memory, generate subconscious emotions related to our own death. Reassurance is one of them. In a way, art and architecture for the dead provides a certain control over the natural world and becomes a means of coming to terms with our own death. By creating images of our ancestors, we try to convince ourselves that death is not so grim after all. According to Jeff Greenberg, professor of psychology at the University of Arizona, mementos of the dead are “a comforting effort to keep the dead present after their life is over”4. And if they reside in some form in the present, this means that they do exist in a way after life. Therefore, the spaces or objects of commemoration we build are actually our way of overcoming the sentiment of fear and reassuring ourselves that if we retain our memories of the departed, when our turn comes we will be remembered and brought to life through the memories of our loved ones. On the other hand, thoughts about death could generate fear instead of reassurance. As stated by the Swiss psychiatrist and founder of analytical psychology, Carl G. Jung, “the curve of life is like the parabola of a projectile which, disturbed from its initial state of rest, rises and then returns to a state of repose. The psychological curve of life, however, refuses to conform 1 Ben McPherson, dir. To death and back, “How Art Made the World” TV Series. BBC, 24 Jul. 2005. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgAVfQyIO0Y> . 2 Feifel, Herman. The Meaning of Death. New York: Blakiston Division, McGraw-Hill, 1959. 71. Print. 3 Ariès, Philippe. The Hour of Our Death. New York: Knopf, 1981. 22. Print. 4 Ben McPherson, dir. To death and back, “How Art Made the World” TV Series. BBC, 24 Jul. 2005. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgAVfQyIO0Y> . 8
Engaging with death through commemoration
to this law of nature.”1 Emotionally, man struggles to accept the end of life of his loved ones, not only due to the unpleasant feelings of loss and abandonment but also due to the realization that the same will happen to him at an undefined point in the future. He does not even refer to death as death, but instead employs elaborate euphemisms such as “passed away” or “passed on” or “departed.” This, according to psychiatrist C. W. Wahl, is an attempt to “preserve and prettify the corpse and endeavor to create an illusion in it of momentary sleep”2 instead of obliteration. This anticipation of the state of not being is what causes fear and is in fact the main source of existential disorientation and anxiety. The combination of fear and reassurance when engaging with the concept of eternal sleep is what keeps us from existing in a constant state of terror. The terror management theory (TMT), introduced by social psychologists Jeff Greenberg, Sheldon Solomon, and Tom Pyszczynski, explains how instead of becoming paralyzed by our fear of dying, the human brain protects our consciousness by blocking the highly negative emotions when we think about death and shifting to more pleasant ones3. This mechanism allows the person to not only deal with other peoples’ death but also to moderate his fear and anxiety about his own extinction. This allows for death to be celebrated and for public spaces of commemoration to become a significant reassuring and soothing means of dealing with loss. Engaging with death as a society Western societies’ views on death have changed multiple times in the past and they were largely affected by socio-political events. Philippe Aries, who studied the shift of western attitudes toward death, had observed that during the Middle Ages, when death was intrinsically linked to the everyday life experience, society was accepting of the fact that ‘we shall all die’ (Et morie mur). In the twelfth century, there was gradual importance given to the self, to ones own experience. This attitude was expressed by the phrase ‘la mort de soi’ (one’s own death). Until the 18th century death was merely a concern for the individual threatened by it. From that point on, society and individuals become less concerned with their own death than with ‘la mort de toi’, (the death of the other)4. During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, loss and memory inspired a new wave of funerary architecture and a more romantic treatment of the concept of death. People started to perceive society as a composition of both the dead and the living and the erection of public memorials stand to this day as evidence of the permanence of the departed. 1 Feifel, Herman. The Meaning of Death. New York: Blakiston Division, McGraw-Hill, 1959. 5. Print. 2 Feifel, Herman. The Meaning of Death. New York: Blakiston Division, McGraw-Hill, 1959. 18. Print. 3 Newsweek Staff. “Psychology: How We Live With Death.” The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 14 Oct. 2007. Web. 03 Dec. 2013. <http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2007/10/14/get-lost-grim-reaper.html>. 4 Aries, Philippe. Western Attitudes Towards Death: From the Middle Ages to the Present. London: Marion Boyars, 1994. 54-55, 63 Print. 9
Engaging with death through commemoration
In our day and age, preventive medicine and technological innovations have significantly raised life expectancy. Consequently, natural death has become a fairly unusual incident in daily life. At the same time though, violent death has increased dramatically with wars, revolutions and concentration camps annihilating entire cities or communities1. It is therefore expected that in the wider community context, the focus shifts from memorializing the tragedy of an individual to memorializing the tragedy of a collective event. Public memorials are now one of the most prominent expressions of bereavement and commemoration for societies. In many western cities, such as Berlin, there has been a great production of war related memorials over the last decades propelled by the atrocities of World War II and other devastating events such as the Holocaust. For societies that suffered mass destruction, the actual construction of a memorial was in itself a way of recreating the bonds of community after the war. The function of the memorial thus becomes socially therapeutic. The community activity of commissioning, planning and taking decisions about a built form seeks to re-establish to some extend the relationships within and between families and communities.2 It should be noted that state involvement plays a significant role in the construction of public spaces of commemoration especially since such projects are usually either state funded or paid by public institutions. According to English anthropologist, Geoffrey Gorer, memorial architecture becomes the tool through which the state establishes power relationships and works to reproduce certain cultural values that seem to be forgotten by society. Additionally, places of commemoration are often built in order to establish and maintain the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s identity. As stated by German landscape architect Joachim WolschkeBulmahn, socio-economic and political interests determine what is remembered (or forgotten), by whom and for what end. Such interests and power relations are often pivotal in deciding whether to build a memorial and how to design it3.
1 Gorer, Geoffrey. The Pornography of death, Encounter, October 1955. 49-52. Print. 2 Tarlow, Sarah. Bereavement and Commemoration: An Archaeology of Mortality. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1999. 31. Print. 3 Wolschke-Bulmahn, Joachim. Places of Commemoration: Search for Identity and Landscape Design. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2001. 2. Print. 10
11
Berlin; a city of commemorative culture
“All sites of memory are mixed, hybrid, mutant, bound intimately with life and death, with time and eternity; enveloped in a Mobius strip of the collective and the individual, the sacred and the profane, the immutable and the mobile whose purpose is to stop time, to block the work of forgetting, to establish a state of things, to immortalize death, to materialize the immaterial.”1 -Pierre Nora 1 Tilley, Christopher. Handbook of Material Culture. London: SAGE, 2013. 486. Print.
Berlin is a city of rich commemorative culture and its range of memorial architecture aims to provide spaces for not only ‘remembering’ but also ‘forgetting’. For centuries, memorials have become the medium of marking socially significant events for present and future populations and of sustaining social memories. In so doing, they have acquired an educational function and have been promoting learning through their habitation. Interaction with such spaces encourages and provokes spectators to reflect on the process and tradition of commemoration itself and help them deal with loss at both a community and personal level. State-led memorials cater for the moral responsibility of society to assert remembrance and show respect to the departed. This type of architecture also allows for the state’s desire to position itself relative to the past and future and form the city’s identity through a rather selective process of commemoration. Over the last decade, Berlin’s memorial production has been excessive, with hundreds of memorials and monuments commemorating the atrocities of the Second World War. War memorials have acquired great significance as they shape the symbolic definition of the cityscape and provide meaning to the otherwise unfathomable instances of mass slaughter. Their function has been described as “the means of legitimizing the war experience”1. War and devastation is what led to the rebuilding of Berlin, a palimpsest where all surfaces were erased for new buildings to emerge. Part of the city’s history vanished along with its demolished buildings so commemorative architecture was seen as the solution to retaining the traces of social history. According to architectural theorist, Dolores Hayden, layers of memory and trauma, will inevitably reside in the construction of the present. Respectively, through memorialization the past becomes a part of the contemporary city and its topography while providing platforms of discussion on topics of national significance 1 Wolschke-Bulmahn, Joachim. Places of Commemoration: Search for Identity and Landscape Design. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2001. 215. Print. 12
Berlin; a city of commemorative culture
Contemporary examples of war memorials in Berlin differ both in intent and form from the early twentieth century historicist commemorative architecture. Public memorials prior to the twentieth century had a clear didactic purpose and aspirations of framing the memory and social mindset of the city and nation. They often acted as a “celebratory representation of a leading politician, a long-dead military leader of monarch”1. Today, state-led commemoration spaces often represent deprived communities or individuals and the memorial trend has shifted from the ethnocentric celebration and glorification of ‘heroes’ to the remembering of ‘victims’ or even a nation’s own crimes. Progressively, citizens and pressure groups engage in public debates in order to ensure that commemoration has a significant meaning for particular groups rather than merely for the state. In terms of their form, contemporary memorials are no longer restricted to specific typologies of the obelisk, column or statue, which used to be the norm of commemorative spatial expression. Berlin’s recent memorials vary in style and have become more abstract while their form is usually influenced and inspired specifically by the event or individuals to be commemorated.
1 Jones, Paul. “Architecture and Commemoration: The Construction of Memorialization.”The Sociology of Architecture: Constructing Identities. Liverpool: Liverpool UP, 2011. 99. Print. 13
â&#x20AC;&#x153;Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europeâ&#x20AC;?
Focus of commemoration All Jewish victims of the Holocaust Built form Outdoor vast landscape of concrete columns of different heights positioned in a grid Design intention -To cause isolation and disorientation and obscure the sense of time -To propel individual reflection and self-improvement -To encourage respect to and defense of human rights
14
“Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe”
The Holocaust Memorial designed by architect Peter Eisenmann and engineer Buro Huppolt, was conceived in 1987 but not constructed until 2004. It is positioned at Cora-Berliner-Straße, a space located over Hitler’s former Ministry Gardens. The erection of the sculptural memorial was extremely delayed due to the numerous social and political debates and the constant questioning of the appropriateness of its form. Funded by the state to commemorate the six million Jewish victims of the Nazis, the memorial has become a central symbolic place for the German community. Its function contradicts most state-led memorial projects of the past due to the fact that it does not represent its ‘heroes’ or great acts of a dynasty, but its victims and one of the largest crimes against mankind perpetrated in the name of Germany. Not only its intent but its entirely unprecedented form too challenges the tradition of national memorials of the nineteenth and twentieth century when memorialization took on hierarchical monumental forms. It’s blunt formal presence can not go unnoticed by passers-by, with 2.700 concrete plinths or stelae, each 95 centimetres wide and 2.375 metres long1, arrayed on a grid, reminiscent of a extensive burial ground, or as described by sociologist Paul Jones, an undulating bed of nails for the German conscience2. The architect designed the pillars of varying height from a few centimetres to 4.5 metres placed on the uneven topography of the site. The positioning and scale of pillars aspired to create a landscape that would isolate and disorient visitors in order to propel individual reflection and to obscure their sense of time. The upright stalae point to the heavens in remembrance of the dead, and at the same time allude to the sarcophagus since their proportions are approximate to that of the human body3. The patterned repetition of the concrete columns although highly abstracted is reminiscent of a cemetery. Eisenmann proposed an artistic, sculptural intervention, which would become part of the citizens everyday life by allowing twenty-four hour accessibility to pedestrians. He aspired to provide a space of reflection where citizens could potentially learn to become better people by reminding themselves of the past mistakes4.
1 The Foundation for the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, comp. Materials on the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. Berlin: Nicolai, 2005. 11. Print. 2 Jones, Paul. “Architecture and Commemoration: The Construction of Memorialization.” The Sociology of Architecture: Constructing Identities. Liverpool: Liverpool UP, 2011. 113. Print. 3 The Foundation for the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, comp. Materials on the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. Berlin: Nicolai, 2005. 28. Print. 4 Berlin Topographies. Dir. Peter Shevlin. Culture of Cities, 2000. Online. 15
“Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe”
His design was considered ‘too abstract’ by many and suggestions where made for providing more evidence of the Holocaust and giving a face and name to Jewish victims within the memorial landscape1. An “Information Center”, below the field of columns, was then designed as a compromise. The centre was carefully integrated within the overall scheme and intended to offer background information on the Nazi campaign against the Jews. Overall, the memorial invites all Berlin citizens and every visitor not only to remember the deceased and honor their memory, but also to reflect on the atrocities of the past and learn from the nation’s mistakes. It is a warning directed to future generations to respect and defend human rights and to “safeguard the equality of all races and religious groups under the law”2.
1 The Foundation for the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, comp. Materials on the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. Berlin: Nicolai, 2005. 6. Print. 2 The Foundation for the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, comp. Materials on the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. Berlin: Nicolai, 2005. 6. Print. 16
17
Commemoration Versus Play
Walking at the heart of Berlin, I had finally arrived at the “Holocaust Memorial” at the area, which used to be the no-man’s land between East and West Berlin. I was astonished by the breadth of the memorial landscape and lingered for a few minutes before entering through the field of concrete columns. I observed visitors penetrating the field, d i s a p p e a r i n g i n t o t h e u n k n o w n , and suddenly reappearing from different points of the memorial.
Standing there, in awe of its resemblance to a colossal cemetery, a s e n s e o f t e n s i o n possessed me. I felt I had to be s i l e n t a n d s e r i o u s , showing my respect to the inconceivable number of people who died during the Holocaust. To my surprise, I noticed numerous children and adults playing hide-and-seek or climbing on the columns interacting playfully with the space. Passers-by would often s t o p t o r e s t o r d i s c u s s o n i t s e d g e s , sitting on the lower columns, lending the memorial an additional public use. People did not seem to feel they had to act in a certain restricted manner or to treat it as a sacred piece of architecture. I questioned whether they were aware or not of what the space was. Was their behaviour intentional? Were they aware this was a highly symbolic memorial space?
As I entered the memorial, c u r i o u s and prepared to get immersed into what seemed to be a unique spatial experience, I began to observe the memorial’s grand formal characteristics. Walking across its countless paths of uneven ground, I gradually became engulfed by the concrete columns which growing higher and higher constantly felt even more i m p o s i n g , generating feelings of i s o l a t i o n a n d a n x i e t y . Discussing with visitors, I found they shared my fascination about the space’s unprecedented scale and form: “What had the most impact on me were the parts where the concrete became high and the path wavy. Spatially, I think this was the most powerful point.”
When the columns reached their highest size, I felt the impulse to look up to the sky, a view which induced a s e n s e o f h o p e a n d p o s i t i v i t y a b o u t t h e f u t u r e .
18
Commemoration Versus Play
I felt that the large scale and abstract, sculptural form of the memorial was really successful in symbolizing the inconceivable mass murder of the Holocaust. One of the visitors commented: “While it is a minimal memorial, it has a strong artistic presence.” It was really interesting to listen to peoples’ varied thoughts on its appropriateness. Some characterized the memorial as a h i s t o r i c a l r e m i n d e r of the Holocaust: “It is a history reminder. I recalled what the city has been through and the Jewish victims throughout time.”; “I thought of what happened here and the history behind the memorial. You feel what the memorial represents, you think of all the victims. I thought of all the people killed in this city, the news and the films I have seen concerning the war.”
Others were even reminded of other devastating events: “Immediately, I travel back to the Civil War in Spain.”
As my journey in the landscape progressed, my state of e m o t i o n s s h i f t e d from isolation and tension to more positive ones of c a l m n e s s a n d r e a s s u r a n c e . Getting lost in it, as Eisenmann intended, did not feel possible for from any point in the memorial landscape I could always see its edge. The straightness of the grid was actually a b o l i s h i n g a n y p r o s p e c t o f i n d u c i n g a s e n s e o f d i s o r i e n t a t i o n . The lively voices, laughs and play of visitors now seemed more relevant. Generally though it seemed that people expected that such a sorrowful event should have been commemorated through a more ‘depressing’ spatial experience. Few felt that it did evoke sadness: “It evokes sadness. I think it is very dramatic in order to symbolize the terrible events.”
Others suggested that by creating opportunities for play, the space f e l l s h o r t o f i n d u c i n g f e e l i n g s o f i s o l a t i o n or encouraging further reflection: “I am a bit disappointed. I think the Utah Beach Memorial was much more impressive. It didn’t really evoke any thoughts, I only thought the blocks resemble coffins in a cemetery.”; “I tried to link the space with the events that occurred during the Holocaust, but it was very hard to draw any connections.”
19
Commemoration Versus Play
At the end of my journey I had concluded that to me, the memorial had a true emotional impact and unique spatial qualities which made it t h o u g h t p r o v o k i n g , although I did agree with one of the visitors’ statements that “it is more ‘fun’; you can’t really get lost in it and this disturbs the feeling of isolation.”
Isolation was partly disturbed by the surge of tourists who often unaware of the memorial’s purpose would surge to marvel at the unusual man-made landscape as part of their sightseeing. C o m m o d i f i e d in a sense, the memorial’s function to soothe the pain of citizens and help them deal with loss seemed to have shifted to accommodate the memorial’s role as a t o u r i s t a t t r a c t i o n , as an ‘interesting’ background to peoples’ photographs: “It is interesting looking... A good place to take photos and be photographed at.”
In my opinion, the fact that the “Holocaust Memorial” is constantly inhabited by people, encouraging p o s i t i v e f e e l i n g s and even provoking i m p r o m p t u , p l a y f u l s p a t i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s did not diminish its commemorative value. On the contrary, it denoted its successful integration into the present cityscape and inspired r e s p e c t a n d a p p r e h e n s i o n of the mournful events of the past.
20
21
â&#x20AC;&#x153;Window of Remembranceâ&#x20AC;?
Focus of commemoration All victims who were shot or died by accident at the Berlin Wall Built form Outdoor window display and audio columns Design intention -To overcome the trauma caused by the separation of Berlin -To create a positive green meeting space for the socially alienated districts of Mitte and Wedding
22
“Window of Remembrance”
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 had a pivotal impact on the evolution of Berlin and its commemorative culture. Today, only fragments of it stand to reignite the memories of citizens and visitors of the reunited city. These remains of the GDR’s border fortifications now act as reminders for the future generations and have become the site for numerous memorial spaces. The “Window of Remembrance” completed in 2010 is part of a wider outdoor memorial exhibition known as the “Berlin Wall Memorial”. It is located on the border strip at Bernauer Strasse at the east side of the city, on the grounds of the former Sophien parish cemetery. The memorial strip in its entirety aims to narrate the history of division of Berlin and includes the “Monument in Memory of the Divided City and the Victims of Communist Tyranny” and the “Chapel of Reconciliation”. The east side memorial ensemble is also complemented by the more factual experience of a visitors centre on the opposite site of the Wall. The 1.3 km long memorial landscape was designed by Berlin landscape and architecture offices “sinai” and “ON architektur”. Their intention was to offer a high degree of complexity and atmospheric ambivalence to visitors. While the place spatially stands as a replacement of the ‘death strip’ it becomes a tool for overcoming the trauma caused by the separation. Furthermore, it functions as a positive green meeting space for the socially alienated districts of Mitte and Wedding1. The “Window of Remembrance” focuses on commemoration of all victims who were shot or died in an accident at the Wall by displaying photos of the departed along with their names and dates. The ‘window’ installation is supplemented by corten steel columns located nearby which provide additional written and audio information on the tragedies which occurred due to the GDR border regime. The names of the border soldiers who lost their lives while on duty are listed there. The exact number of deaths between 1961 and 1989 caused by the inner German border has not yet been verified and the case rests under investigation of the Forschungsverbund SED-Staat research foundation. The corten steel 18m long window display is divided in 162 niches out of which 112 present pictures of people who died. This division allows the victims to be commemorated individually and it is often that the victims’ relatives place candles or flowers in them. A number of these niches were intentionally left vacant in view of additional victims, which may be discovered in the future.
1 “Berlin Wall Memorial.” Sinai. Web. 13 Jan. 2014. <http://sinai.de/projekt/gedenkstaette-berliner-mauer.html>. 23
Ambivalence versus Realness
“Impressively vast amount of space around the memorial objects.”
When I arrived at the “Berlin Wall Memorial” at Bernauer Strasse I admired the length of the outdoor commemorative ensemble. The green memorial belt included various memorial objects and information columns. My passage through it became a h i s t o r i c a l j o u r n e y o f t h e t e r r i f y i n g e v e n t s , which preceded the fall of the Berlin Wall. In the wider landscape, people where scattered on different points of the memorial strip, looking at the various memorial objects chatting to each other, exchanging thoughts. I stopped at every memorial piece, read every single text on the columns, clearly distracted by the p l u r a l i t y o f i n f o r m a t i o n , as if I had forgotten that my actual destination was the “Window of Remembrance”. Alike myself, two of the people I interviewed later on suggested that the e x t e n s i v e s i z e a n d o p e n n e s s of the memorial strip provoked a sense of c o n f u s i o n a n d d i s o r i e n t a t i o n : “I didn’t understand where to go to at first because of the size and openness of the space.”; “There are too many walls and objects in the space so I was confused where to go first. There was no apparent hierarchy in the landscape.”
Feeling the c a l m n e s s evoked by the spacious landscape, I was excited to have finally discerned the “Window of Remembrance” in the distance. Walking towards the display, I noticed that the Wall’s remains, which run along the entire “Berlin Wall Memorial”, were pierced by ammunition. It seemed that t h e c r u e l p a s t s t i l l r e s i d e d i n t h e n o w p e a c e f u l c i t y . This observation brought in mind gory scenes of World War II films I had watched in the past. To my amazement, another two visitors also drew the same subconscious connection: “I thought about movies about the Wall and the atrocities of war.”; “It reminded me of] movies I have seen about the wall and war in Germany.”
Nearing the display, my emotions shifted. I felt that the memorial form was particularly powerful because of the fact i t g a v e f a c e s t o t h e v i c t i m s . Knowing the faces of those who died there, instantly accentuated my feeling of e m p a t h y a n d t e n s i o n . At that moment, it almost felt improper to take pictures of the display. 24
Ambivalence versus Realness
One of the visitors shared this h e s i t a t i o n to capture the memorial through the lens: “I felt I could take photos of the landscape, the columns, the slices of wall, the metal rods, but not close-ups of the memorial because it depicts the faces of people who died back then.” The feeling of e m p a t h y
was made even stronger when I saw that in some of the niches people, possibly relatives of the deceased, had left flowers to honor the memory of the victims. “It made me think about all the people missing family and friends. How world politics affects normal people.”
Near the window display stood information columns, which provided factual information on the terrible events, which took place along the Wall. The solemn, toneless voice of the audio recording listed the names and ages of all the victims, which left their last breath on this ground. Visitors including myself seemed very c u r i o u s and eager to learn more about the Wall and its history. I felt that the overall emotional experience was substantially e n h a n c e d b y t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s concerning the atrocious crimes perpetrated at the Wall. Visitors too suggested that the “Window of Remembrance” was greatly successful in engaging them with the traumatic historical events: “I felt the historical significance of the memorial space and the weight of all it stands for.”
On the whole, the commemorative experience at the “Window of Remembrance” was strongly characterized by the contrast between the a m b i v a l e n c e of the vast landscape and ‘ r e a l n e s s ’ of the photographs which propelled a very p e r s o n a l e n g a g e m e n t with the depicted victims.
25
â&#x20AC;&#x153;Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany for the Victims of War and Dictatorshipâ&#x20AC;?
Focus of commemoration All victims of World War I & II and Dictatorship Built form Interior space of a neoclassical building with a central sculpture positioned under an oculus Design intention -To encourage reflection by symbolizing the suffering of civilians during the World War II 26
“Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany for the Victims of War and Dictatorship”
“There is no longer pain - only reflection.”1
- Käthe Kollwitz
The “Neue Wache” is located on the north side of the Unter den Linden boulevard in the central Mitte district. From its construction in 1818, the building has survived through history and devastating events by having its function reinvented multiple times to this date. It was King Friedrich Wilhelm III of Prussia who commissioned the architect Karl Friedrich Schinkel to design the neoclassical royal guardhouse. From 1818 until 1918, the Royal Palace guard was located there. The building’s use changed for the first time when the German monarchy collapsed in 1918 and World War I came to an end. According to historian John R. Gillis, post-war Berlin was experiencing a ‘national phase of commemoration’ and it was a period where the departed, rather than the living, became symbols of the nation2. In 1931, the Prussian government announced a competition for its redesign and architect Heinrich Tessenow was commissioned to design the “Memorial to the Fallen of the World War”. The memorial hall was designed to invite reflection and a block of granite with a silver wreath of oak leaves became its central feature above illuminated by a beam of light coming from an opening on the ceiling; an oculus. Shortly before the end of World War II, the building was heavily damaged by bombing and artillery. From 1960, the communist German Democratic Republic restored the memorial and from then on served as the “Memorial to the Victims of Fascism and Militarism”. In 1969, a glass prism structure with an eternal flame was placed in center of the hall. The mortal remains of an unknown soldier and of an unknown concentration camp victim from World War II were enshrined in the building. After German reunification in 1993 until the present day, the Neue Wache was again rededicated, as the “Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany for the Victims of War and Dictatorship.” Before entering the pavilion, a passage engraved on a bronze plaque to the right of the entrance listed all peoples being commemorated as the victims of both World Wars and the totalitarian dictatorship. Inside, the GDR central memorial piece was replaced by an enlarged replica of the sculpture by artist Käthe Kollwitz ‘Mother with her Dead Son’ made by the German sculptor, Harald Haacke. The imposing bronze sculpture is positioned on the buildings sleek granite floor, directly under the oculus, symbolically exposed to the rain, snow and cold of the Berlin climate. The combination of the two central elements was aimed to symbolize the suffering of civilians during World War II3. The statue is complemented by a message inscribed on the floor next to it, which reads “to the victims of war and tyranny”. 1 “Pietà, 1937-38/39.” Käthe Kollwitz Museum. Web. 15 Mar. 2014. <http://www.kollwitz.de/module/werkliste/Details. aspx?wid=350&lid=10&head=Tour+-+War&ln=e>. 2
Gillis, John R. Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1994. 32-33 Print.
3 Forner, Sean A. “War Commemoration and the Republic in Crisis: Weimar Germany and the Neue Wache.” Ed. Cambridge University Press. Central European History 35.4 (2002): 536. Print. 27
Empathy Versus Hope
I had finally arrived outside the neoclassical “Neue Wache” building located at the Unter den Linden boulevard, in one of the busiest areas of Berlin’s city centre. I paused to observe the bustling streetscape, the continuous flow of cars, citizens, tourists, and the festive Christmas market set on the opposite side of the street. When I entered the memorial space I instantly sensed the c o n t r a s t o f a t m o s p h e r e to the lively outdoor scenery. The room was entirely empty and silent, almost obliging me to forget all about the outside world, focus on the commemorative experience and embark on a j o u r n e y o f c o n t e m p l a t i o n . Furthermore, I thought that its ‘heavy’, neoclassical envelope was contrasting the minimal arrangement of its interior, which contributed to an effective spatial and emotional experience. Visitors too reflected on the effectiveness of its minimal design: “I was surprised that the only object in the building was the statue.”; “It is an empty space, and I think they did a good job designing a space in which to commemorate the atrocities of war.”
I then approached the sculpture and remained idle for a few minutes taking in all the powerful emotions it evoked. The figure of a mother holding her son was truly m o v i n g , emanating the feeling of e m p a t h y towards the people who lost their lives or loved ones during the war. This feeling seemed to be prevailing for most individuals I interviewed, but in most cases was paired with the feeling of s a d n e s s , which I did not experience at any moment.
When I looked up to the ceiling the oculus gave me a view to the sky: “I started to look at the ceiling, not just the floor where the statue sits, I found the skylight really interesting, shedding its light on the mother and child.” Along with the bronze sculpture, the oculus was generally perceived as the focal point of the memorial: “After the sculpture the greatest contrast in the space is the skylight.”
I thought the combination of the two elements was what made the space so e x p r e s s i v e a n d t o u c h i n g . “I think the sunlight coming from above adds drama to the memorial”, a visitor commented.
28
Empathy Versus Hope
During my three-hour visit I found myself observing peoples’ spatial engagement in the room. Visitors would come in pairs or small groups and only stay for a short amount of time. I noticed that in most instances visitors’ movement in the space was very different to mine. Most people would either come in, stand silently or whispering in front of the sculpture for 3-4 minutes and then leave. Others would not even step inside as if a n i n v i s i b l e b a r r i e r was restricting them and solely gaze upon the memorial from the threshold. One of the visitors explained: “I felt I didn’t want to go inside, but look in from the door. I find it strange that other people are entering the space. It feels like I shouldn’t step inside, almost as if it is off limits!”
Maybe the reason why some people were hesitant to enter the memorial was its black, metal entrance doors, which r e m i n i s c e n t o f p r i s o n b a r s s e e m e d c o l d a n d uninviting.
Similar to other visitors, I felt h o p e a n d c a l m n e s s , and a n a l m o s t u t o p i a n s e n s e that the horrible events of the past would never again be repeated. One of the visitors even suggested that the memorial not only acted as a r e m i n d e r o f p a s t m i s t a k e s but also as a l e a r n i n g t o o l for safeguarding and appreciating peace: “These monuments are meant to remind us of the past, mistakes we made, where not to go back & to appreciate our life.”
Overall, the memorial space propelled reflections and memories linked to the traumatic past events experienced by the German society. Through this u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e p a s t , the visitor now felt better equipped to face the p r e s e n t and aim for a brighter f u t u r e .
29
Bibliography
The following bibliography refers to all documents included in the Special Study i.e. Special Study Format: a reader’s guide, Exhibition Panels, Exhibition Booklet.
Print Sources Ariès, Philippe. The Hour of Our Death. New York: Knopf, 1981. 22 96, 299-300, 346. Print. Aries, Philippe. Western Attitudes Towards Death: From the Middle Ages to the Present. London: Marion Boyars, 1994. 54-55, 63, 73,Print. Curl, James Stevens. “War Cemeteries and Memorials.” A Celebration of Death: An Introduction to Some of the Buildings, Monuments, and Settings of Funerary Architecture in the Western European Tradition. New York: Scribner, 1980. 315-16. Print. Feifel, Herman. The Meaning of Death. New York: Blakiston Division, McGraw-Hill, 1959. 5, 6, 8, 18, 28, 33, 46, 64, 68, 71, 74-75. Print. Feyerabend, Paul. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. London: NLB, 1975. Print. Forner, Sean A. “War Commemoration and the Republic in Crisis: Weimar Germany and the Neue Wache.” Ed. Cambridge University Press. Central European History 35.4 (2002): 513-49. Print. Gillis, John R. Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1994. 32-33 Print. Gorer, Geoffrey. The Pornography of death, Encounter, October 1955. 49-52. Print. Jones, Paul. “Architecture and Commemoration: The Construction of Memorialization.”The Sociology of Architecture: Constructing Identities. Liverpool: Liverpool UP, 2011. 92,95,98-100,110-111, 113. Print. Tarlow, Sarah. Bereavement and Commemoration: An Archaeology of Mortality. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1999. 20, 25, 30-31, 33, 57, 96, 131, 163. Print. The Foundation for the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, comp. Materials on the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. Berlin: Nicolai, 2005. 6-13, 28. Print. Tilley, Christopher. Handbook of Material Culture. London: SAGE, 2013. 486. Print. Wolschke-Bulmahn, Joachim. Places of Commemoration: Search for Identity and Landscape Design. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2001. 1-3, 215. Print. Young, James Edward. The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning. New Haven: Yale UP, 1993. 2-3, 5,15, 27. Print. 30
Bibliography
Online Sources “Berlin Opens Holocaust Memorial.” BBC News Channel (2005): News.bbc. Web. 10 Sept. 2013. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4531669.stm>. “Berlin Wall Memorial.” Sinai. Web. 13 Jan. 2014. <http://sinai.de/projekt/gedenkstaette-berliner-mauer.html>. “Epistemological Anarchism.” Senseagent. Web. 05 Apr. 2014. <http://dictionary.sensagent.com/epistemological%2520anarchism/en-en/>. “History of the Memorial.” Berlin Wall Memorial. Web. 13 Jan. 2014. <http://www.berliner-mauer-gedenkstaette.de/en/history-of-the-memorial-211.html>. Newsweek Staff. “Psychology: How We Live With Death.” The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 14 Oct. 2007. Web. 03 Dec. 2013. <http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2007/10/14/get-lost-grim-reaper.html>. “Pietà, 1937-38/39.” Käthe Kollwitz Museum. Web. 15 Mar. 2014. <http://www.kollwitz.de/module/werkliste/Details.aspx?wid=350&lid=10&head=Tour+-+War&ln=e>. Slagger, Hank. Nameless Science. New York: Apexart, Dec. 2008. PDF. Till, Karen E. “Staging the Past: Landscape Designs, Cultural Identity and Erinnerungspolitik at Berlin’s Neue Wache.” Cultural Geographies 6.251 (1999): 251-76. Sage Publications. Web. 10 Feb. 2013. “Window of Remembrance.” Berlin Wall Memorial. Web. 13 Jan. 2014. <http://www.berliner-mauer-gedenkstaette.de/en/window-of-remembrance-586.html>.
Film Ben McPherson, dir. To death and back, “How Art Made the World” TV Series. BBC, 24 Jul. 2005. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgAVfQyIO0Y> . Berlin Topographies. Dir. Peter Shevlin. Culture of Cities, 2000. Film.
31
Bibliography
Further sources which have informed the special study but have not been used as references: Print Sources Carrier, Peter. Holocaust Monuments and National Memory Cultures in France and Germany since 1989: The Origins and Political Function of the Vél’ D’Hiv’ in Paris and the Holocaust Monument in Berlin. New York: Berghahn, 2005. 1-2, 4, 6-7, 21-22, 29, 33, 102, 135, 137, 140141. Print. Niven, William John, and Chloe E. M. Paver. Memorialization in Germany since 1945. Basingstoke England: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. 1-3, 243-245. Print. Stephens, John. Memory, Commemoration and the Meaning of a Suburban War Memorial. Diss. Curtin University of Technology, 7. Print. Online Sources Kastenbaum, Robert, and Ruth Aisenberg. The Psychology of Death. New York: Springer Pub., 1972. 7, 9, 45. Print. Kagan, Shelly. “Fear of Death.” The Open Yale Courses Series. Yale University, New Heaven. 20 Sept. 2013. Culture Unplugged. Web. <http://www.cultureunplugged.com/documentary/watch-online/play/8566/Death>. Marcuse, Harold. “The National Memorial to the Victims of Wars and Tyranny: from Conflict to Consensus.” Reading. German Studies Association Conference. DC, Washington. 25 Sept. 1997. UCSB Department of History. University of California. Web. 13 Jan. 2014. <http:// www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/present/neuewach.htm>. “Memory Is Essential to Architecture, Says Daniel Libeskind.” Interview by Max Hofmann. DW-TV. 24 Oct. 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2013. <http://www.dw.de/memory-is-essential-to-architecture-says-daniel-libeskind/a-15482283>.
32
Bibliography
Images Special Study Format: a reader’s guide All three photographs included: Watt, Hugh. Installation Shot. Nameless Science. Apexart. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. <http://www.apexart.org/exhibitionsarchive.php>.
Exhibition booklet
-“Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe” Visitors’ Responses Panel: Photographs included on the left and right section were taken by the individuals I interviewed on the day of the visit. Berlin. 2013. Middle section: Artists’s own. Photograph. 2013. Plan of the “Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe”. Artists’s own. 2013.
Cover page “Double perception”. Artist’s own. Photo-collage. 2014.
-“Holocaust Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe” Personal Response Panels:
p.7
Artists’s own. Photographs. 2013.
Artist’s own. Diagram. 2014.
-“Window of Remembrance” Visitors’ Responses Panel:
Artist’s own. Photograph. 2013.
Photographs included on the left and right section were taken by the individuals I interviewed on the day of the visit. Berlin. 2013. Middle section: Artists’s own. Photograph. 2013. Plan of the “Berlin Wall Memorial”. Artists’s own. 2013.
p.26
-“Window of Remembrance” Personal Response Panels:
p.14 Artist’s own. Photograph. 2013.
p.22
Artist’s own. Photograph. 2013.
Artists’s own. Photographs. 2013.
Exhibition Panels
-“Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany for the Victims of War and Dictatorship” Visitors’ Responses Panel:
-Berlin; a city of commemorative culture Panel: Berlin City. 2014. Berlin. Bing Maps. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. <www.bing.com/maps/>. (Photograph edited by author)
-Visitors’ Origins Panel: Artist’s own. Graphic map. 2013.
Photographs included on the left and right section were taken by the individuals I interviewed on the day of the visit. Berlin. 2013. Middle Section: Artists’s own. Photograph. 2013. Plan of the “Neue Wache” building. Artists’s own. 2013.
“Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany for the Victims of War and Dictatorship” Personal Response Panels: Artists’s own. Photographs. 2013. 33