Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Critics' Forum Article - 07.14.13

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Critics' Forum Article - 07.14.13

    Critics' Forum
    Visual Arts
    A Monumental Purpose: Armenian Heritage Park
    By Jean Murachanian

    After 12 years of planning and hard work, Armenian Heritage Park (also
    referred to as the Park), located in downtown Boston, Massachusetts,
    on the recently created Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway (hereafter,
    the Greenway), was finally dedicated on May 22, 2012. Built on public
    land, the ambitious project was conceived and funded by the Armenian
    community as a gift to the City of Boston and the Commonwealth of
    Massachusetts. The purpose of the project is to represent the
    contributions of Armenian immigrants, acknowledge the Armenian
    Genocide, and recognize the immigrant experience as a whole. The mere
    location of the Park signifies these intentions in explicit terms -
    situated in the heart of Boston's historic district near the Freedom
    Trail and within walking distance of the New England Holocaust
    Memorial, itself dedicated in 1995 to foster reflection on the Jewish
    Holocaust.

    With the completion of Armenian Heritage Park, I took the opportunity
    to include it in an art history undergraduate seminar I led this
    Spring on Holocaust/Genocide Museums and Memorials at the University
    of New England. Our class made a field trip to Boston to visit the
    memorials, as well as the Armenian Library and Museum of America
    (ALMA) in Watertown, Massachusetts. It was a fruitful day, made even
    more memorable by our private tour of ALMA by curator Gary
    Lind-Sinanian. I was proud to have such prominent Armenian sites to
    take my students to and pleased with the prospect of direct comparison
    afforded by the juxtaposition of Armenian Heritage Park to the New
    England Holocaust Memorial.

    I find it noteworthy to add some important but telling facts about the
    class. My course was fully enrolled because the students were
    fascinated by the Jewish Holocaust, but ... they had never heard of
    the Armenian Genocide. The students were primarily seniors, from a
    variety of majors, who were taking the class in fulfillment of an
    advanced class outside their majors.

    Perhaps I should not have been surprised that my students had not
    heard about the Armenian Genocide, but it still gives me pause,
    particularly as an educator, that university students, even at the
    senior level, do not know about our greatest tragedy. Have we been so
    immersed in our collective pain and our quest for recognition that we
    have failed to make known the Armenian Genocide to the general public?
    Or have we simply not been vigilant enough in insisting on its
    acknowledgement? What is the role of each of us in this predicament?
    What can we, our institutions, and our memorials do to remedy this
    lack of knowledge outside our own community? And finally, what can we
    learn, if anything, from the example of the Jewish Holocaust?

    In comparing Armenian Heritage Park to the New England Holocaust
    Memorial, my class unanimously concluded that the Jewish memorial was
    far more effective, both in terms of its didactic program and its
    emotional resonance. I was saddened by this obvious conclusion but
    believe we can learn from this example how individuals respond, both
    intellectually and physically, to memorials encountered within the
    cityscape. In general terms, my students found that the design of
    Armenian Heritage Park was too abstract to readily convey meaning, and
    it woefully lacked information about the Armenian Genocide and the
    Armenian people. This last point is particularly important, since -
    as suggested by the make-up of my class - the public remains largely
    unaware of the Armenian Genocide. Conversely, the design of the New
    England Holocaust Memorial was meaningful both in terms of its
    allusion to the death camps and its personal references. In addition,
    even though most people are aware of the Jewish Holocaust, the
    memorial, nonetheless, provides didactic information.

    To be fair, Armenian Heritage Park is not strictly a Genocide
    memorial, but it incorporates a memorial in its design. The Park is
    comprised of two fundamental sections - an abstract sculpture and a
    labyrinth. The abstract sculpture, a black split dodecahedron
    (12-sided globe), "commemorates the immigrant experience" and is
    "dedicated to lives lost during the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1923 and
    all genocides that have followed," as noted on the monument's website.
    The sculpture is designed to allow for annual reconfigurations to
    reference "all who were pulled apart from their country of origin and
    came to these Massachusetts shores, establishing themselves in new and
    different ways." In other words, it represents the dispersion and
    continued reformation of the Armenian community post-Genocide and, in
    an effort toward inclusion, also alludes to the immigrant experience
    as a whole. The sculpture sits atop an elevated 16-foot reflecting
    pool wherein "its waters wash over its sides and re-emerge as a single
    jet of water at the Labyrinth's center." Benches curve around the
    base of the pool closest to the street, providing visitors with a
    space for contemplation, while overlooking the sculpture and the
    labyrinth beyond. An inscription along the base facing the labyrinth
    reads:

    "Boston and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have offered hope and
    refuge for immigrants seeking to begin new lives. The park is a gift
    to the Commonwealth and the City of Boston from the Armenian-American
    community of Massachusetts. This sculpture is offered in honor of the
    one and a half million victims of the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1923.
    May it stand in remembrance of all genocides that have followed, and
    celebrate the diversity of the communities that have re-formed in the
    safety of these shores."

    As indicated on the Park's website, the labyrinth is "a circular
    winding path paved in grass and inlaid stone, [that] celebrates life's
    journey." The labyrinth, although not necessarily an Armenian symbol,
    has been utilized in the design because it is an ancient pattern that
    "has become a universal metaphor of peace, harmony, contemplation and
    healing." The labyrinth has four distinct sections, each of which is
    etched with a word marking the civic contributions made by the
    Armenian immigrant community - Art, Service, Science, and Commerce.
    Visitors are meant to walk the path of the labyrinth and contemplate
    the journey and accomplishments of these people. At the center is a
    fountain, which symbolizes "hope and rebirth" of those that
    established new lives in Massachusetts, as signified by the
    reemergence and re-formation of the water originating from the
    sculpture. While Armenian Heritage Park symbolizes the experience of
    Armenian immigrants, it is also meant to have universal significance
    because it celebrates all immigrants and their unique journeys.

    Needless to say, Armenian Heritage Park is an ambitious project, which
    involved a great deal of hard work, dedication, planning, skill, and
    financial commitment by those involved. Its funding by
    Armenian-Americans is a testament to the success and pride of the
    community. (It cost over $6 million, and another $1 to $1.5 million
    is currently being sought to fund an endowment to maintain the site.)
    Its location, on not only public land, but prominent public land, is
    significant. Symbolically, it commemorates the Armenian Genocide,
    honors the contributions of the Armenian-American community, and
    celebrates the immigrant experience as whole. These are certainly
    honorable and lofty goals, but is the Park effective? Does it convey
    meaning in a manner comprehensible to the average passerby, who, after
    all, is the primary visitor given its public location, and, I would
    argue, our intended audience given the need for public awareness of
    the Armenian Genocide? Yes, problems abound when dealing with the
    placement of monuments on public land, but let us take a look at the
    New England Holocaust Memorial for comparative purposes.

    The Jewish Holocaust memorial is comprised of six 54-foot high glowing
    glass towers, set in a row on a narrow strip of land along a
    well-traveled street near Faneuil Hall. The site is visible to
    motorists traveling along busy Congress Street, while pedestrians
    engage with the memorial by walking its length as they pass through
    the glowing glass towers, each one set over iron grates that emit
    warm, white billows of air. Each tower is named after one of the main
    death camps - Chelmno, Treblinka, Majdanek, Auschwitz, Sobibor, and
    Belzec - and they are etched with numbers which evoke those tattooed
    on concentration camp prisoners. Throughout the monument there are
    heart-wrenching quotes from Holocaust survivors. At the two entry
    points, there are didactic panels. From this brief description, it is
    obvious that the Holocaust memorial is eye-catching, symbolically
    intelligible, emotionally moving, and informative. It works on
    several levels simultaneously - the glass towers explicitly evoke the
    chimney stacks of the death camps, while the material they are made
    from alludes to Kristallnacht, and their form suggests a continued
    presence among the cityscape. Personal connections, provided by the
    six million etched victim numbers and the numerous quotes, serve to
    draw the visitor in with both the magnitude and the individual
    accounts of horror. Again, even though visitors are most likely aware
    of the Holocaust, the memorial includes information panels.

    So what might be the obvious lesson here, if anything? It seems to me
    we attempted to convey too many ideas, were not explicit enough with
    our symbolization, neglected to include the personal element, and did
    not provide adequate didactic information. In our attempt at
    universalism, we simply failed to properly tell our own story.
    Significantly, the Holocaust memorial commemorates the six million
    Jews that died, even though almost six million other victims also
    perished in the Holocaust. The Jewish community emphasizes the Jewish
    loss because for them it is critical to recognize that Jews were
    explicitly targeted for extermination because of who they were, while
    other victims of the Holocaust (Poles, Ukrainians, Gypsies,
    homosexuals, the disabled, etc.) were conveniently swept up in the
    extermination plan. (See Edward T. Linenthal, "Preserving Memory: The
    Struggle to Create America's Holocaust Museum" for further information
    on this topic.)

    Yes, the meaning of Armenian Heritage Park is enhanced by consulting
    its official website and by the various programs that occur on its
    grounds, but ideally meaning should be conveyed by the site itself and
    the visitor's engagement with its various elements. My students were
    confused by the Park, even though we had discussed the Armenian
    Genocide and I had given them a print-out from the monument's website.
    As they moved through the Park, they were at a loss in making sense of
    its meaning, although they did enjoy resting on the benches and
    walking the labyrinth. However, a few did appreciate the progressive
    design of the dodecahedron and another, delighted by the labyrinth,
    later researched its meaning. Conversely, as they moved through the
    New England Holocaust Memorial, they were visibly affected. At the
    end of the semester, as one of my students, Michael Keenan, indicated
    in his design proposal for an Armenian Genocide memorial:

    "I would like there to be quotes from the Armenian [G]enocide survivor
    victims as well as any other quotes from that time period. In Boston,
    the quotes that surrounded the Holocaust memorial were where the
    message of the Holocaust was truly conveyed. The quotes were powerful
    yet short and to the point, which made the reader connect more with
    the site. This to me was very powerful and I would like to implement
    that idea into this Memorial."

    According to members of Armenian Heritage Park Foundation (hereafter,
    the Foundation), there are tentative plans to add didactic information
    to the labyrinth, which will highlight the contributions made by
    prominent Armenian immigrants, such as the Abstract Expressionist
    painter, Arshile Gorky. Apparently, details about the Genocide were
    minimized because the Foundation encountered outside political
    pressure. Hence, in an effort to appease outside parties and ensure
    that the Armenian community was represented on the Greenway, the
    Foundation made concessions and opted for a more inclusive message.
    To be fair, the Greenway, a 15-acre linear urban park created in 2008
    from reclaimed land as a result of Boston's "the Big Dig," was
    established to allow various civic and ethnic groups to enhance the
    cityscape through the creation of unique public spaces meant to unify
    the city. The Foundation also decided to highlight other aspects
    about Armenians in an effort to move beyond the Genocide.
    Furthermore, rather than holding a design competition for the site, a
    committee of less than a dozen people decided on the form.

    I leave you with several questions. Is a memorial/monument/park that
    seems to miss the mark in conveying meaning to the general public
    better than nothing at all? Have we been so overly sensitive to
    outside perceptions of our community that we have failed to be
    explicit about our suffering? Should we simply move beyond the
    Genocide, celebrate our accomplishments, and be grateful for any
    opportunity to participate in civic representation? Have we been so
    consumed with "recognition" of the Genocide that we have overlooked
    the fact that we need to educate and inform others first? Are we
    afraid to engage in heated debates about how we tell our story? As
    James E. Young discusses in "The Texture of Memory: Holocaust
    Memorials and Meaning," the New England Holocaust Memorial Committee
    encouraged "public debates on the merits and liabilities of the
    memorial." Young states further, "[W]here other communities had
    fretted over the unseemly appearance of squabbling and dissent, the
    committee in Boston encouraged it, and in so doing allowed debate to
    drive the process forward." I ask you, how can each of us make a
    difference in our legacy?


    All Rights Reserved: Critics' Forum, 2013. Exclusive to Asbarez.

    Jean Murachanian is an Assistant Professor of Art History at the
    University of New England. She earned a Ph.D. in Art History from UCLA
    in 2009.

    You can reach her or any of the other contributors to Critics' Forum
    at [email protected]. This and all other articles published
    in this series are available online at www.criticsforum.org. To sign
    up for a weekly electronic version of new articles, go to
    www.criticsforum.org/join. Critics' Forum is a group created to
    discuss issues relating to Armenian art and culture in the Diaspora.




    From: A. Papazian
Working...
X