Archive

Monthly Archives: February 2016

Hansen-Glucklich, Jennifer. Holocaust Memory Reframed: Museums and the Challenges of Representation. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

Libeskind, Daniel, and Hélène Binet. Jewish Museum Berlin. S.l.: G B Arts International, 1999. Print.

Rosenfeld, Gavriel David. Building after Auschwitz: Jewish Architecture and the Memory of the Holocaust. New Haven: Yale UP, 2011. Print.

Schneider, Bernhard, and Daniel Libeskind. Daniel Libeskind: Jewish Museum Berlin: Between the Lines. Munich: Prestel, 1999. Print.

Young, James Edward. The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning. New Haven: Yale UP, 1993. Print.

Zelizer, Barbie. Remembering to Forget: Holocaust Memory through the Camera’s Eye. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1998. Print.

Advertisements

51cqopF5kBL._SX373_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

 

 

 

pg 45- THe meaning we find in buildings – even when absent – is determined subjectively by the the differing expectations we bring to them. These expectations are largely informed by our social class, education, and aesthetic taste, but they are also shaped by the historical eras in which we live.

pg 184 – Libeskinds invocation of the Holocaust was influenced by Eisenman’s ideas about the need to rethink architetural practice in wake of Auschwitz. In an essay published in 1984 entitled “Peter Eisenman and the Myth of Futility,” Libeskind criticised Eisenman’s claim that the Holocaust provided the ground for renouncing architecture traditional desire to base its legitimacy in myths. Arguing that this claim risked becoming a new mything in and of itself.

pg 185 – [Libeskind’s unrealised project the City Edge of 1987] directed attention toward the city’s most famous historic wound, by extension,to its origins in Germanys defeat and division, Libeskind refused to efface the scars of German history as had been attempted by other, more revivalist postmodern works at the IBA by Charles Moore, Robert A.M. Stern, and Rob Krier

pg 185 – ” I suggest not rebuilding. I believe the HOlocaust is not something you can get awway from. The placelessness [of berlin] should not be be moaned” [jenks,new modern 269 ]

pg 202 – we are “struck not by signs of amnesia, but rather by a veritable obsession with past.”.

pg 205 – This is vividly seen in the recycling of the two terms most directly associated with atrocity – Holocaust and genocide. The term Holocaust has been widely overused, to the point that it no longer displays a direct link with the events that originally thrust it into the public eye. Now invoked”by people who want to draw public attention to human-rights abuses, social inequalities suffered by racial and ethnic minorities and women, environmental disasters,AIDS, and a whole host of other things,” the word “has become flattened [so that] any evil that befalls anyone anywhere becomes a holocausts.”

pg 194 – The museum boom of the eighties and nineties created an additional memory agent that helped revive the atrocity photos. Museums generated additional venues in which to visually contemplate the holocaust.

pg 195 – “might be inappropriate for display in the entrance of a museum where all would have to confront it, whether they chose to or not, but would be appropriate in a show which was properly labeled and hung so that only those who chose to confront the photographs would be required to do so.”

pg 195 – Such an issue came to a head in 1995, surrounding a photographic exhibit of the camps in Israel’s Holocaust museum, Yad Vashem. The long – standing exhibit of images showed naked women and generated a debate over whether the pictures violated ultra religious Orthodox notion of modesty. When the Orthodox Jews demanded that the photographs be taken down, questions persisted as to whether removing the graphic images in effect sanitized Nazi atrocities.

Recycling the Pas into The Future.

They sit in our consciousness as half-repressed photographs and newsreels, the first images – always present reminders of what is now called the Holocaust.” [Abzug, Inside the vicious p ix]

pg 200 – Susan Sontag said long ago that the atrocity photos had lost their power as vessels of recollection, reaching “a saturation point” and revealing that “concerned’ photography has done at least to deaden conscience as to arouse it.”

pg 201 – In empowering both those who seek authentication of Nazi atrocities and those who deny them, atrocity and those who deny them, atrocity photos thereby threaten to become a representation without substance . [susan sontag , On Photography (p 21)

pg 171 – By the end of the seventies, the HOlocaust drifted to the forefront of public conciousness, making its recollection increasingly at issue. In scholar Lawrence Langer’s words “to enter the [next] stage of Holocaust response, moving from what we know of the even to how we remember it,”

pg 171 – Holocaust newly establish as both an academic subject … such a “re-elaboration” of the past” drew attention as much to the act of remembering as to the issue of what was being remembered.

pg 173 – The interest in the Holocaust that reemerged in the late 70s crystallized across settings as wide-ranging as museums, official commemorations and media retrospectives. In 1979, the US began officially commemorating the HOlocaust in national ceremonies, at the same time as the concentration camps of Europe became pilgrimage destinations of those seeking to remember Nazi atrocity.

pg 174 – Elie Wiesel noted in his 1995 memoirs, “memory is a passion no less powerful or persuasive than love… what does it mean to remember? it is to live in more than one world, to prevent the past from fading and to call upon the future to illuminate it”. in the NEwyorktime view, Wiesel’s use of a “wide-angled lens” addressed familiar issues of remembering the holocaust but broadened them to look at memory itself as a form of representation [ elie Wiesel : between memory and hope]

pg 174 – “The use of symbols often means that people do not necessarily know the precise detailed answers to normal, logical questions: When did the Holocaust begin? when did it end? where did it happen? why did it happen? The whole point about a symbol is that it allows one to possess cultural knowledge without having the totality of the facts

pg 175 – The screening of Claude Lanzmann’s Shoah in 1985 lent renewed cogency to the centrality of memory and to the role of survivors in shaping that memory, though the camps were featured through their absence rather than their presence: Shoah  was acclaimed precisely because it did not feature visual depictions of the atrocities.

pg 175 – When Schindler’s List won awards for best movie in 1993, making the subject of the Holocaust “accessible to ordinary people”. The suggest that popular culture was giving new life to the act of bearing witness, sometimes eroding it via its recontextualization

 

pg 87 – Like reporters, photographers found the camps a horrifying experience. Photographers struggled with their own necessary intrusion on the dignity of their camera’s targets. Whether depicting victims or survivors, dead or living, perpetrators or traumatized, the photographers normally prying behaviour proceeded with a certain insensitivity to the boundaries between public and private that was intensified by the challenge posed by the scenes of the camps to common standards of decency and civility.

n.q [was it insensitive or a right of duty to capture this for future selves]

 

tumblr_o2acbeKxaB1uhvuado1_1280.jpg

pg 113 [how an image not showing the brutality but has multiple layers of meaning]