Denkmal für die ermordeten Juden Europas En analyse af debatten ...

Third Reich be included? This debate took place on two levels. First,
the problem was discussed on basis of the National Socialist’s ideology
and their historical treatment of the Jews and the gypsies. Second, the
discussion referred to the discrimination of gypsies and homosexuals
after the war and argued that now was the time to include everyone
and tear down the hierarchy of victims. The outcome was a monument
solely in remembrance of the Jews, but the decision was criticized
intensely indicating a possible decline in discrimination.
Another question posed was where to erect the monument as
every location involved a frame of interpretation. What story should
be told through the location? In the end, a site outside the old city
centre and close to Hitler’s bunker was chosen. This triggered a heated
debate about the responsibility for the Holocaust. Would a monument
for the Jews on top of the Nazi-elite’s headquarter not acquit the
normal Germans of the crimes committed by the Wehrmacht? Some
suggested erecting the monument on the square in front of the
parliament which bares the inscription “The German people”. This
would have placed the guilt exclusively on the people, which again,
would have been a ghastly mistake.
The third and last question analysed in the paper is how to design
a monument to remember the 6 millions Jews killed. Monuments are
traditionally connected to hegemony and power. This led many to
denounce the capabilities of monuments when it comes to enormous
catastrophes as the Holocaust. However, in the recent years younger
artists have challenged the traditional monument and designed
countermonuments. That is, monuments that do not convey a single
story, but are open to the observer giving rise to personal reflection.
Peter Eisenman’s Field of Memory contains these elements and it will be
interesting to see how visitors will interact and reflect on the
monuments’ space in the future.
Some fear that this memorial will end the “coming to terms with
the past” process in Germany. On the contrary, the 17 years of debate
have caused a continual focus on the atrocities of the past. Meanwhile,
16 other monuments have been erected in Berlin. This could possibly
be too many and their life will rest in obscurity to be visited only by
tourists. On the other hand, they could also be a constant source of
reflection over the past and force their visitors to ask – “how could it
happen?”
- 28 -