Holocaust Memorial History
In the late 20th century, Germany faced the problem of creating a shared identity for the Holocaust. Germany set out to create memorials that could help German citizens recognize the atrocities of Hitler's reign, mourn the deaths of more than 6 million Jews and avoid fascist dictators in the future. James E. Young was a member of a five-man committee that would decide which memorial sketch to construct. The process was troublesome because the memorial had to be accepted by the Jewish community and have the Germans not feel targeted. Young was Jewish, so he would be responsible of the criticism for either accepting or denying a memorial sketch. What was significant in the article was that the topic of the Holocaust had been talked about more
…show more content…
On the other hand, the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe is not as specific with what it is trying to represent, the observer has a greater chance to expand their thinking and view the memorial with a critical eye. Secondly, both these memorials differ in the way they give information. For example, stumbling stones are specific in the background they include; victim's name, death dates, and cemetery that they are located in. Unlike the stumbling stones, the concrete slabs have no information on who should be mourned. In the article “Stumbling Stones”, Harjes argues that if the people are not educated, then they will not get the purpose of the memorial. “The designer of the national Holocaust memorial expects visitors walking among the thousands of narrowly spaced stelae to experience feelings of claustrophobia and oppression reminiscent of the experience of Jews in the concentration camps” (Harjes p.142). Without background the memorial becomes inefficient because people do not know what they are seeing or experiencing. The most important difference is that stumbling stones allow the German citizens to create their own national identity and historical responsibilities, instead of having their identity influenced by the state or government. Kirsten Harjes called this process “authentic memory” because it originates from the individual. Even though, these two memorials are very important in acknowledging the Holocaust and helping create a collective memory, in the process, both memorials create different
On the other hand, the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe is not as specific with what it is trying to represent, the observer has a greater chance to expand their thinking and view the memorial with a critical eye. Secondly, both these memorials differ in the way they give information. For example, stumbling stones are specific in the background they include; victim's name, death dates, and cemetery that they are located in. Unlike the stumbling stones, the concrete slabs have no information on who should be mourned. In the article “Stumbling Stones”, Harjes argues that if the people are not educated, then they will not get the purpose of the memorial. “The designer of the national Holocaust memorial expects visitors walking among the thousands of narrowly spaced stelae to experience feelings of claustrophobia and oppression reminiscent of the experience of Jews in the concentration camps” (Harjes p.142). Without background the memorial becomes inefficient because people do not know what they are seeing or experiencing. The most important difference is that stumbling stones allow the German citizens to create their own national identity and historical responsibilities, instead of having their identity influenced by the state or government. Kirsten Harjes called this process “authentic memory” because it originates from the individual. Even though, these two memorials are very important in acknowledging the Holocaust and helping create a collective memory, in the process, both memorials create different