Analysis - Preserving Memory: The Struggle to Create America's Holocaust Museum
Preserving Memory: the Struggle to Create America’s Holocaust Museum gives an excellent, in-depth, detailed look into the struggles and controversies that arose throughout the creation of America’s Holocaust Museum, beginning with its committee planning in the mid years of the 1970s to the location selection and construction of the Museum, its collection, and the memorial itself fifteen years later. The first portion of the book examines the constant disagreements that existed between politicians and survivors, survivors and museum professionals, architects and politicians, and so on and so forth. A common theme, which Linenthal highlights throughout the first half of the book, is the difficulty present when constructing a shared memory.
Linenthal followed the dialogue that existed between the core creators and shapers of this living memorial. He focused on their discussions of the appropriateness of the Holocaust in American life and national memory, who owned the Holocaust (was it the six million Jews who perished, or the five million others?), how the Holocaust should be memorialized, and with whom the story would be shared. This conversation would shift at times, focusing on the appropriate location of the memorial, what the memorial should consist of, its appearance, the storyline of the Holocaust and its definition, who would have ownership of the memory, the inclusion of controversial artifacts, and so on. Linenthal portrayed effectively that there is great difficulty in creating and constructing a shared memory, especially in regards to constructing a share remembrance of the Holocaust.
Edit:
If I had to come up with one criticism it would be that I believe the book could have been better organized. Linenthal’s information was so inclusive, and his chapters were so full of information that at times I felt overwhelmed with facts and names. If I were to give one recommendation it would be to either organize the book either solely thematically or chronologically, but not both.
On a more personal note, as someone who visited the museum a couple years ago, I found it very interesting to read about what ideas came forward that did not stick. And at times I recalled very clearly images of artifacts Linenthal discussed towards the end of the first portion of his book.
3 comments:
Since I posted it also in my blog, I definitely agree with you on the lack of organization in the book. There were just too many names in order for me to keep track of what they all did. Also presented were too many councils and committees. Honestly, the only people I was able to keep track of was Carter and Wiesel.
The dates also confused me too because I was never sure what was decided in what year. He seemed to bounce back and forth in time based on his current argument. After reading the first 166 pages, the only year I'm sure of is 1993 which was the year it opened.
Despite this, this book made me regret that I didn't visit the museum this summer while I was in D.C.
Like you, I agree that Linenthal portrays the difficulty of successfully creating a shared memory. It overwhelmed me when I realized how many opinions are really considered in a public history project. I felt that this reading really put into perspective last week's readings, and how historians, or other authorities of public history projects, need to consider the concerns of the public. I also thought Linenthal's portrayal of Elie Wiesel as chairman of the Commission very interesting. To see how one individual can totally influence the content, layout, and overall execution of a public history project made me realize the types of characters public historians work with every day.
I completely agree with you about the organization of the book. It became frustrating at times trying to keep up and to remember things, and then at times it seemed overly repetitive.
I absoluetly love the book, but I agree with your criticism and am glad that others felt that frustration as well. Perhaps, Linenthal did that on purpose to further illustrate the difficulty of the process behind making the memorial.
Post a Comment