After finishing Preserving Memory, I now know the hard work and frustration that goes into building and creating a museum. Not only is there the physical building to contend with, but also the historical and social aspects that often comes under conflict with one another. This last chapter and conclusion of the book deals mostly with what memory of the Holocaust should be presented to the public and the efforts for and against expanding this memory. Arguments over how the museum should begin and end, along with the eternal argument, what should be in the permanent exhibition, provides readers with an important look into how complicated building a museum from scratch can be.
While reading, I was reminded of a discussion we had in class last week. We talked about the institutionalization of history that occurs when a museum is built and what that meant exactly. It was said that this allowed the historical event to become legitimized in the eyes of the public and deemed “worthy” of commemoration. While I do believe this is so, I also believe Linenthal's book shows the downside that can come from institutionalizing history. When memory is placed within a realm of a museum, the full story is no longer allowed to come forth. Things must be left out, stored away, or avoided in order to make the museum cohesive and not take days to go through. Things or events that may be important to groups may then be left out because they are not seen as essential to the “center” of the museum, as Linenthal puts it. This was shown to me by his discussion of the Armenian and Romani victims. Both groups were seeking (and still are) a voice among the Holocaust museum that was often denied or influenced by political issues. Linenthal mentions several times the influence the Turkish government had in keeping the Armenian genocide out of the museum even though many saw this event as a precursor to the Holocaust. Because the Romani were not Jewish, they were relegated to being “others” who, while still victims, could not compare to Jewish suffering. For me, the institutionalization of the Holocaust caused many layers of understanding and history to be weeded out in a effort to find a sense of cohesiveness that the Jewish community wanted.
Linenthal's conclusion was a very interesting look at the memory of the Holocaust. Rather than merely pointing out what good the museum has done or the reactions once it opened, he broadens its impact onto the American stage and seems to suggest that America was found wanting. Actions going on in Bosnia at the time of its openings provided what many thought a way through which America could show it had learned its lesson on indifference in the face of genocide. Instead, America took much the same course and, to survivors, exhibited that they had learned very little in the face of Holocaust memory. Linenthal does show improvement though on the individual level as shown through Billings, Montana in which a whole community, Jewish and non-Jewish, banded together as a way to show Nazi-followers what they had personally learned from the horror that was the Holocaust.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree with you that the obvious downfall to the Holocaust Museum is the fact that the committee members did have to narrow the Holocaust narrative as much as they did. But as you also mentioned, including the Armenian and Romani story into the exhibit would have resulted in the visitor spending days at the museum to fully appreciate the magnitude of the story. It may even have been too intimidating for visitors had the committee included the full story of all the ethnic groups influenced by the Holocaust.
I also liked your overview of the last chapter of the book. After reading half of the book last week, I did not even think that there would still be controversy to write about! I thought that Yaffa Eliach's efforts to commemorate Ejszyszki through her picture gallery was the most interesting. It was nice to know in the end that the committee members listened to her and took into consideration her vision of the space.
Yeah, I understand paring down the information included in the museum for time's sake but it was still disheartening to read about other victims of the Holocaust not being allowed a voice.
I too was glad that Eliach was somewhat forceful with the direction of her picture gallery. Finally someone I agree with getting their way!
I agree with your post. I cannot get over how much effort goes into establishing a museum! It's slightly scary, to be honest. But, in all seriousness, I really liked your statements on the institutionalization of history. I agree fully that when a history enters the sphere of the museum often times things are left out.
And I also agree with what you said about the conclusion. It's unfortunate that a museum, which strived to encourage social dialogues and affect public policy, appeared to have such little impact in terms of a country's response to modern acts of genocide.
I too agree that the one of the downsides to the Holocaust Museum is that its exhibits had to be narrowed down by committee members. It is understandable why this had to be done though it must have been difficult. The point that if there were more exhibits it would have resulted in the visitors spending days at the museum to fully appreciate the magnitude of the story is alarming. Most large museums exhibits can not been seen all in one day so for the word days to be mentioned goes to show how large of impact the Holocaust has had on society. It is true that it may even have been too intimidating for visitors had the committee included the full story of all the ethnic groups influenced by the Holocaust but I believe the main reason they were left out is the Holocaust is most commonly associated with Jews and the fear that offending others if they were the odd group out played a major factor.
I was also happy you included the fact that Eliach was somewhat forceful with the direction she wanted for the creation of her picture gallery. She wanted to depict life over death. This is an issue I agree with and was glad she got her way.
Post a Comment