Critical Essay

The WWII Memorial: Through the Eyes of Casey

The World War II Memorial in Washington D.C. is a public space that is meant to preserve and celebrate the sacrifice and valor demonstrated by the citizens of the United States during World War II. Located opposite the Lincoln Memorial on the National Mall, the space is designed with a circular and open layout composed of white granite with a large reflection pool and fountain at the center. In consideration of Edward Casey’s “Public Memory in Place and Time”, the World War II Memorial participates in “Public”, “social” and “collective” memory.

In my application of Casey’s theories about public memory to the World War II Memorial, I encountered certain challenges with the memorial design: what is being remembered by the memorial? What strategy is being utilized to convey that message of remembrance? And how effective is that strategy? According to the official website of the World War II Memorial, the memorial “is a monument to the spirit, sacrifice, and commitment of the American people to the common defense of the nation and to the broader causes of peace and freedom from tyranny throughout the world.” When I visited the memorial I read the inscriptions as I traveled around the circular pavilion; from those inscriptions along with the other adornments of the memorial I got a sense of what the memorial was remembering: the unity and communion of the American people during the war. One way this was evident to me was through the recognition of each individual state and territory with its own pillar and wreath. Another way this message was conveyed was with the Freedom Wall located behind the rainbow fountain. the During WWII the Gold Star was a symbol for familial sacrifice. The Freedom Wall is adorned with 4,000 gold stars to symbolize the 400,000 American lives lost. These are few of the many adornments and symbols throughout the memorial which remember the event World War II.

The space becomes problematic with the way the event is being remembered through the spatial design. The intention of the memorial is to remember the way in which the nation came together. One argument is that the communal space emulates the united effort of the United States during the war through a memorial that is open and vibrant--full of visitors congregating at the fountain. However, I also examine the way that the invitation extended to visitors to sit with their feet in Rainbow Fountain’s pool takes away from the respect of the memorial. While children playing in the fountain is not condoned, it is not deterred by the offer of cooling feet off in the fountain. It seems that the memorial needs to distinguish between the public memory that is being created: one that celebrates community, or respects the sacrifice of the nation and individual Americans?

Another aspect problematic to the public memory with the memorial’s design is its layout. The openness of the space allows visitors to look past the memorial down the National Mall. I would argue that this too takes away attention from the message of remembrance. Frequently, I witnessed people take pictures in front of the memorial for the view of the National Mall; after their photoshoots, most people traveled around the memorial into the park to go visit the Lincoln Memorial. There is confusion on if visitors are appreciating the beauty of the memorial for its location and design or for what it represents and is remembering?

Perhaps the best way to address the two seemingly contradictory memories being created by the World War II Memorial is to look at them like night and day. There is a significant change in mood from daylight to night fall. In sunlight, the World War II Memorial is a vibrant and inviting space to congregate and cool off by the fountain. In daytime hours visitors stop to rest and enjoy the panoramic view of surrounding monuments that the memorial offers. However, at night the pillars and fountain are flooded with light; by night the memorial becomes a space that is more somber and reflective. The remembering is one of quiet pensiveness and respect for the loss and sacrifice that the memorial represents. The change in tone upon sunset might possibly stem from the emphasis drawn to the pillars by nightfall. The eye is immediately drawn to the pillars, not for their white color and size in an open space, but for their brightness in the dark of the night. The light shining on each pillar draws the eye to their faces, which are adorned with the name of each state, territory, and a wreath--the very adornments that explicitly convey the message of remembrance.

Casey introduces public memory as a space which brings the memorial of an event from the past into the present; in some cases even stretches the remembering to the future. He specifically mentions the way concrete memorials in Washington D.C. solidify “the intime tie between past and future” (Casey, 17). By his logic, the physical site of the World War II Memorial represents continuity and permanence into the future; whereas the inscriptions of states and territories paired with the wreaths, the Freedom Wall, the plaques and quotes, etc. all tie the concrete space that is in the present and will last through the future--back to the past. The World War II Memorial links the past to the future; it remembers and memorializes the war along with the valor and sacrifice of the United States. In today’s digital age--it is important to consider the amount of visitors that actually take time to read each inscription of the memorial in order to understand its message. We want to know things and we want to know them in the fastest and easiest way possible--thus there is less of an appeal to walk around in a circle reading words written on stone when the answer is at our fingertips. But without reading the inscriptions, what is the extent and meaningfulness of the remembering taking place. Through my Omeka site I would like to utilize digital technology to create a space that appeals to the masses and aids the public memory the memorial is trying to create.

There is a challenge to keeping the memory relevant and meaningful with the passage of time; arguably, as time goes on there is a loss of connection to the event. It is important to look at the timing of when the memorial was constructed in relation to when the actual event that took place is being memorialized. “Social” and “Individual” memory by Casey’s definition in some way incorporate their own sense of personal connection and reflection to the event. World War II ended in 1945. However, the construction of the memorial did not begin until September 2001; it was opened to the public in 2004. It is interesting to consider this timeline of events. Individuals who might remember the event of World War II are becoming few and far between as time goes on. Perhaps a personal connection to the event can be drawn from the children, grandchildren, great grandchildren. Casey refers to this as the “social memory” or a memory that can be drawn from “kinship ties” (Casey, 21). The World War II Memorial demonstrates the way the families memory of those veterans and other persons who experienced the war became “public property” (Casey, 22). It is through education and family members of those who lived through the war that the memory lives on.

The event of World War II is arguably a “collective” memory in the United States. Casey argues that collective memory need not occur at the same time. Today’s population may have heard about World War II from all different sources: personal experience, shared stories, education, film, art, literature, etc. Casey would classify the event of World War II as the “focus” in the nation’s collective memory; the nation’s attention may be drawn to that focus from “disparate directions” and at different times. In understanding collective memory through the World War II Memorial, the memorial’s message through its many symbols and inscriptions offers a space for collective memory to form or grow by the immense and diverse groups of people who visit the memorial year round.

Individuals who lived through the period of the war--Americans that made the sacrifice that the memorial attempts to recognize and remember--are few in number. This presents a significant challenge to truly create a meaningful public memory of the event with the memorial. For those who visit in present day and will continue to visit in the future, the challenge of keeping the space from losing its meaning continues to grow--if we assume that it hasn’t already been lost. For this reason, within my exhibit, I included clips from movies which depict battles scenes from World War II as well as songs. These visual and oral aids provide more accessibility and understanding of what is being honored and remembered with the memorial. The point of the memorial is to provide a permanent space to honor a war, that as years goes on becomes more distant to the past, but still has access to our future through the actual memorial as well as the items which contribute to the memory.

My goal in creating the Omeka project is to create a digital platform of scholarly material that will contribute to the memory and provide oral, visual and textual modes of remembering World War II.