Disbursed ostensibly for public memorials, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey in collaboration with the September 11th Families’ Association processed hundreds of applications from non-profit organisations, prompting two questions: now that we know the process of distribution, what public forms have been created with these loaded objects, and what ethical issues of nomenclature have arisen? More specifically and as a corollary to assessing one-time architectural supports variously as remnants, residue, relics and artefacts, when it comes to public memorials, what challenges arise from the attribution and negotiation of value assigned by particular nomenclature?
Or is it just the sort of web slippage we have to expect?
Personally, because I’m the artist working on a long-term public installation incorporating this World Trade Centre artefact (the current set-up is a temporary mounting) I must ask: how important is it to know the original configuration? More pertinently, how relevant is architectural origin and historical context in the design for public placement of World Trade Centre artefacts? Many of the existing memorials feature bronze, or cast plaques, leading one to wonder if they are an ethical imperative or, instead, a trope? Other familiar adjuncts comprise sculptures or reliefs of the Twin Towers, along with bronze firefighters or figures: but again, are these classical reincarnations, or simply common denominators the likes of which it would be ethically problematic to debate? For artefact J0006 at The Military Museums, the object incurs additional consideration regarding how to incorporate the role of a museum and its art gallery?
For instance, what are the boundaries or obligations in creating such a memorial?
Is it a monument and does the site become one of commemoration, and if so for what and whom?
Is there room for a counter-monument?
Is it possible to not just reflect on memory and the fixity of bygones, but respond proactively to related events and create the possibility for a different future? Can one even foster more active public participation in the act of contemplation perhaps by situating an artefact within a dynamic architectonic structure that enables dare I say it, a more authentic, physically engaging, tactile, experience? Acquisition guidelines indicated that ‘the steel must be used in a memorial open to the general public such as in parks, training grounds for uniformed personnel or places of public assembly’ while also ‘educating future generations about the events of September 11, 2001’, but are these only deeds of trust and how widely have they been interpreted? In the instance of the Saratoga Springs sculpture Tempered by Memory (2011, John Van Alstine and Noah Savett), this assemblage of twisted steel some 20+ feet high precipitated an imbroglio regarding aesthetic appropriateness for its site: so do we now have a controversy because it’s an artwork? The firefighter’s 9-11 memorial in Hummels Wharf, Pennsylvania, features World Trade Centre steel encased in glass: it also contains Flight 93 memorial soil and Pentagon limestone, but does the vitrine form constitute a shrine? In a similar vein, a review of many of the artefacts (you can visit websites such as waymarking.com — 9/11 Memorial Sites) repeatedly indicates steel mounted on plinths and pedestals: so are these now altarpieces? Waymarking.com also features a display at The Military Museums in Calgary, describing the artefact as a steel beam when in fact it is an exterior wall column, yet is this really critical?
And as a tri-service venue (Army, Navy, Air Force) with a large education program, how is the history of conflict interwoven?
For instance, why does the interpretive panel for J0006 demur from referencing the War on Terror, instead invoking the historically revisionary nomenclature, Overseas Contingency Operations?
Will the final public installation enable a revision to the revisionary?
Conclusions from exercises such as this might seem hard to fathom, but the handling of a 16 foot long, 2800 pound architectural column with World Trade Centre provenance has many ethical considerations; how to ensure it is about more than broadcasting hulks of rusting metal? In posing as many questions as possible (adopting the style of Padgett Powell’s book The Interrogative Mood ) here’s a penultimate thought: is there a sense that there is a rather generic nature to the many completed artefactual memorials?
67
67
And if so, might the role of the counter-monument, while maintaining respect, recalibrate the status quo? c
Or is it just a problem for architectural purists?
Dick Averns
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator