Download PDF - Gedenkort für die im Nationalsozialismus ...

I would like to make another point. Professor Morsch’s ideas about relicsand vestiges, which are ageless in contrast with intended messages, areidealizations. Certainly monuments are a product of their age and canbecome anachronistic. The location become memorial – the site of an eventwith its relics and vestigial clues, with the substance and space of theevent, and a certain ‘polychronological’ element, a sequence of sites, areasserted through the memorial. The memorial itself becomes the substanceof the historic site. The opposition cannot be maintained, because both –the memorial and the historical site – embody present and future statements.Finally, I would like to also address the concept of affirmation andsubversion as opposites in the way that it has been discussed here. Wehave trouble with affirmation because we have set it equal with sovereigntyand nation. But if one wants and creates a memorial, beliefs held for correctin that period are being affirmed. I resist the thought that subversion ispositive per se and ask what then is to be infiltrated? Are we not moralizingthe concept of subversion here? If a message is not to be affirmed, then isthere no message? A memorial is a statement, not an infiltration.”Dr. Wolf Kaiser spoke out in support of immediately dispensing with theterm Parcours (show-jumping course), which originated from the sport ofriding and was really misplaced in this context.Dr. Kaiser: “In contrast to Professor Dolff, I do not see a memorial as aroad to knowledge, because a memorial that is dedicated to the victims ofcrimes against humanity serves remembrance. At first this is essentiallypure. It serves neither paedagogical nor political aims. Learning must occursomeplace else. Remembrance is an end in itself. It is a cultural ritual that,in any case, if it has an aim at all, serves remembrance of the victimizedand restores the self-respect of a society lost through the deeds it committed.”Professor Mittig countered, asserting that memorials were certainly in theposition to impart knowledge even if not in the way they did in the 19th century.On the other hand, Professor Mittig said it was not necessary to letoneself be constrained by customs, which for the sake of abstraction stillhold sway in reference to memorials, and whose main contribution is theMemorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe.Professor Mittig: “Abstract (memorial) art – meantime a century old – hasits possibilities, but also its limits. It continually produces works whoseforms are devoid of statements about content. But that does not have to bethe sole opportunity for memorials, as the examples show, which containinformative visual elements and as a result are very stimulating.”In response to Katharina Sieverding’s question about how the choice oflocation was made, Albert Eckert answered for the memorial initiators. Eckertsaid that at first authentic locally significant sites such as Nollendorfplatzor the former site of the Magnus-Hirschfeld-Institute for Sexual Studies,were considered, but finally the decision was made to locate the memorialwithin the spatial context of other remembrance projects.Mr. Eckert: “The Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe is a site whichfocuses remembrance on the victims of National Socialism. At the sametime, we recognize the vicinity of the Tiergarten and will use the site with itsmany diverse references.” The choice of location is based on two postulatesenriches another member of the initiative. “We want a national memo-122