Advertisement

Sacralized Spaces and the Urban Remembrance of War

  • Janet Ward

Abstract

It is at the point of rebuilding highly symbolic sites after urban trauma that problems of signification can occur, converging concerns of public history, memory studies, and architecture alike. Reconstruction can fall prey to an overly redemptive and cathartic sense of closure: it can signal the loss of memory, an over-inscription of the memorialization that the ruined site called forth. In Germany’s case, fears about urban reconstruction appearing too seamlessly constitutive of a past prior to the Nazi regime and the urban bombardments caused by the Second World War amount, on the most basic level, to fears about a collective loss of inherited responsibility for the Holocaust. The restitution of German urban icons destroyed in the air war has had to be measured (whether directly or indirectly) against this call to Holocaust memory, and has generally been found wanting by comparison. Germany’s reunification process and its concomitant reconstitution of the German capital as well as the myriad urban, economic, and cultural infrastructures of the former East German state — all still ongoing after 20 years — have only highlighted this set of comparisons. In his account of reunified Berlin’s architectural transformations, for example, Gavriel Rosenfeld has usefully demonstrated how the ‘Architects’ Debate’ of the 1990s (about the role of historical authenticity in post-war and now post-Wall rebuilding) is itself an offshoot of West Germany’s longstanding ‘Historians’ Debate’ of the 1980s (when conservative scholars advocated a comparative genocidal relativity over an understanding of the uniqueness of the Nazi Holocaust, and left-wing scholars stressed the consequences of any loss of uniqueness for German collective memory and responsibility).1

Keywords

Sacred Site Sacralized Space Moral Legacy German Capital Memory Site 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    G. Rosenfeld (1997), ‘The Architects’ Debate: Architectural Discourse and the Memory of Nazism in the Federal Republic of Germany, 1977–1997’, History and Memory, 9.1–2, 208–16.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    See S. Lindquist (2001), A History of Bombing, trans. Linda Haverty Rugg (New York: The New Press).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. C. Grayling (2006), Among the Dead Cities: The History and Moral Legacy of the WWII Bombing of Civilians in Germany and Japan (New York: Walker), p. 116.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    U. Beck and E. Grande (2007), Cosmopolitan Europe, trans. C. Cronin (Cambridge: Polity Press). p. 134.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. W. Adorno (1981), Prisms, trans. S. and S. Weber (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press). p. 34.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    T. W. Adorno (1977), ‘Vernunft und Offenbarung’, in Gesammelte Schriften, ed. R. Tiedemann, 10 (Frankfurt am: Suhrkamp), p. 616;Google Scholar
  7. T. W. Adorno (1994), Negative Dialectics, trans. E. B. Ashton (New York: Continuum), p. 465.Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    See E. A. Pritchard (2002), ‘Bilderverbot Meets Body in Theodor W. Adorno’s Inverse Theology’, Harvard Theological Review, 95.3, 291–318, p. 314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 8.
    C. Caruth (1995), ed., Trauma: Explorations in Memory (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press), p. 153.Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    See M. B. Hansen (1996), ‘Schindler’s List is Not Shoah: Second Commandment, Popular Modernism, and Public Memory’, Critical Inquiry, 22, 292–312; and A. O. Scott (2008), ‘Never Forget. You’re Reminded. Collective Tragedy Becomes a Cinematic Genre That Plays to Hearts, Minds and Awards’, The New York Times (23 November 2008), AR 1, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 10.
    See J. E. Young (1993), The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press);Google Scholar
  12. J. E. Young (2000), At Memory’s Edge: After-Images of the Holocaust in Contemporary Art and Architecture (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press);Google Scholar
  13. K. E. Till (2005), The New Berlin: Memory, Politics, Place (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press).Google Scholar
  14. 11.
    For a comparison of Eisenman’s memorial design with Libeskind’s Jewish Museum and other counter-monuments, see J. Ward (2005), ‘Monuments of Catastrophe: Holocaust Architecture in Berlin and Washington’, in A. Daum and C. Mauch, eds, Berlin — Washington, 1800 – 2000: Capital Cities, Cultural Representation, and National Identities (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 155–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Webster and N. Frankland (1961), ‘Official History’, in The Strategic Air Offensive Against Germany 1939–45 (London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office [HMSO]).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Quoted in V. Brittain (1944), ‘Massacre by Bombing: The Facts Behind the British-American Attack on Germany’, Fellowship, 10.3 (March), 62.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. G. Sebald (2003), On the Natural History of Destruction, trans. Anthea Bell (New York: Random House), p. 31.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. Koshar (1998), Germany’s Transient Pasts: Preservation and National Memory in the Twentieth Century (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press), p. 218.Google Scholar
  19. 22.
    H. Beseler and N. Gutschow (1988), Kriegsschicksale Deutscher Architektur. Verluste — Schäden — Wiederaufbau: Eine Dokumentation für das Gebiet der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 1 (Neumünster: Karl Wachholtz Verlag), pp. 541–52. The remnants of this church, including the post-war ‘Madonna in the Ruins’ chapel, have since been embedded into the new Kolumba Art Museum designed by Peter Zumthor (2007).Google Scholar
  20. 25.
    D. Zifonun (2004), Gedenken und Identität: Der deutsche Erinnerungsdiskurs (Frankfurt am: Campus Verlag), p. 187.Google Scholar
  21. 26.
    D. Selz (2004), ‘Remembering the War and the Atomic Bombs: New Museums, New Approaches’, in D. J. Walkowitz and L. M. Knauer, eds, Memory and the Impact of Political Transformation in Public Space (Durham, NC: Duke University Press), pp. 127–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 27.
    Comparative historical evidence of this is charted in L. J. Vale and T. J. Campanella (2005), eds, The Resilient City: How Modern Cities Recover from Disaster (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  23. 28.
    The phrase originates with Sir Winston Churchill, who in a secret memorandum to his Chief of Staff, General Ismay, on 28 March 1945 changed his mind about the morality of the air war as a result of the Dresden raid. Memorandum cited in F. Taylor (2004), Dresden, Tuesday, February 13, 1945 (New York: HarperCollins), pp. 375–6.Google Scholar
  24. 29.
    F. Wenzel (1997), ‘Vom Mahnmal zum Denkmal: Die bautechnische Konzeption zum Wiederaufbau der Frauenkirche zu Dresden’, Deutsche Bauzeitung, 131.8, 73–82.Google Scholar
  25. 30.
    The debate over the Frauenkirche’s reconstruction project arose over doubts that the church could deliver sufficient authenticity for Germany’s post-war as well as for the city’s post-communist memory: see for example, J. Trimborn (1997), ‘Das “Wunder von Dresden”: Der Wiederaufbau der Frauenkirche. Ein Kritischer Blick auf das “größte Rekonstruktionsprojekt des Jahrhunderts”’, Die Alte Stadt, 97, 127–50; A. Ruby (2000), ‘Las Vegas an der Elbe’, Die Zeit, 46;Google Scholar
  26. A. Bartetzky (2003), ‘Nach der Frauenkirche: Rekonstruktionslust und Abrißwut in Ostdeutschland’, Kunstchronik, 56.6, 278–84;Google Scholar
  27. S. Vees-Gulani (2003), Trauma and Guilt: Literature of Wartime Bombing in Germany (Berlin: de Gruyter), pp. 57–64;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. M. Jarzombek (2005), ‘Disguised Visibilities: Dresden/ “Dresden”’, Log, 6, 73–82; H. Rauterberg (2005), ‘Steine zum Anstoßen’, Die Zeit, 44 (27 October 2005);Google Scholar
  29. G. Lupfer (2006), ‘Dresdner Imitationen im Schatten der Frauenkirche: Vom Historischen Neumarkt zu den Sandstein Tapeten am Altmarkt’, in B. Klein and P. Sigel, eds, Konstruktionen urbaner Identität: Zitat und Rekonstruktion in Architektur und Städtebau der Gegenwart (Berlin: Lukas), pp. 33–48;Google Scholar
  30. R. Goebel (2007), ‘Gesamtkunstwerk Dresden: Official Urban Discourse and Durs Grünbein’s Poetic Critique’, The German Quarterly, 80.4, 492–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    A. Huyssen (2003), ‘Air War Legacies: From Dresden to Baghdad’, New German Critique, 90, 171.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    D. Irving (1968), The Destruction of Dresden (New York: Ballantine).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    W. Benjamin (1969), ‘Theses on the Philosophy of History’, Illuminations, trans. Harry Zohn (New York: Schocken), pp. 257–8; Sebald, Natural History of Destruction, pp. 67–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Janet Ward 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Janet Ward

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations