Monumental Moments

Monuments serve the purpose to remember and reflect on either someone or something. That is what the monuments in Washington DC seem to do at first glance. However, after the process of observing, analyzing, and discussing the class' experiences at the monuments, I have come to a new conclusion: Washington DC's monuments say a lot without actually saying anything at all.

I think that the first time I went to the monuments my experience was in a way biased because I had a teacher from school explaining the significance of each one. However, this did not allow me to develop my own thoughts on the monuments and their placement with one another. After many years have passed and after having gone there without a tour guide, I was able to realize that not only does each monument's structure play a role in the identity that it represents, but the order of the monuments is also integral as well.

What I found most striking was the differences between the Vietnam and WW II monuments. The Vietnam one seems to have been placed far away from the rest of the monuments and I found this distance to be symbolic of our nation's desire to distance itself from this war in general. Not only that, but this monument is not at all appealing to look at nor is it inviting, and I think that this relays that it really was tragic that all of these soldiers died, as some would say even now, a lost cause. The reflective nature of the wall also forces one to feel a great sense of sadness when walking along the wall, and the way in which the monument curves up and down parallels the nature of the war, going from low- scale involvement, to full escalation, to taking troops out near the end of it.

Contrastingly, the WW II, particularly at night, is beautiful, and one forgets that it is commemorating the lives of all of those who were lost during the war. The circular structure of the monuments creates a sense of unity with all of the states being represented equally, so as to convey that every state and every person played an important role in WW II, and victory could not have been achieved without the nation coming together as one. Also, the WWII monument is inviting and people are actually able to sit in it, whereas the Vietnam was structured so as to keep one moving along the pathway.

Such differences between not only these two monuments, but all of them in general, I find striking, and though I was very skeptical at first about this ethnography process (and I am still very worried about the ethnography project) I think that it was a very interesting process to take part in.