So I've been thinking about lecture yesterday, when Professor Hass was talking about the lack of veteran support and desire for a World War II memorial. It makes sense, because I'm not sure about the veterans in your families, but my grandpop, a tail gunner in the Army who was not only wounded but who was later captured and held as a POW for nine months (including a force march), didn't really talk about his experiences too much. Although he died in 1998 and I never got the opportunity to ask him how he felt about such a memorial, I'm sure his opinion would echo many of the opinions I found with a quick google search into opposition of a memorial. One site I found, <http://www.savethemall.org/media/scourge.html> gives the opinions of some former WWII soldiers who didn't want something so big and gaudy to remember their friends by. They would have preferred, if not nothing, than something smaller and in a different site so as not to ruin the National Mall from its original intended use: "one large, open, beautiful gree concourse, an expanse which people use and admire." One veteran said that he didn't need a memorial of stone to be repaid for his sacrifice: he got a good college education (via the GI Bill) and continues to recieve a stipend of $175.10 every month. Another GI said that "I'm not arrogant enough to think any one of us has the same right to be memorialized on this Mall as Abraham Lincoln or George Washington." Another veteran, also an architect, suggests a museum with which to educate people as opposed to a memorial, but is resigned to upset that politicians will maintain building this safe design instead of arising to the challenge of teaching America something about the war in order to remember those who fought and those who died.
It is interesting to note that the driving force behind this memorial was Bill Clinton, who wanted the building to start before he left office. Was the World War II memorial, then, just a politician's stab at leaving a legacy other than his adultery and lies in the wake of his presidential administration?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think it is interesting to hear the opinions of the veterans themselves. They as a majority did not and do not want to have a memorials in their honor. They are humble and see that there are more important things to spend money on. As for the Bill Clinton reference, I think it is important to note that Clinton did not serve in the military so he may feel obligated to pay tribute to the military to gain more support from veterans since he has little way to relate.
ReplyDelete