A CANADIAN CONIFER

FEATURED OBJECT

BY: KATHERINE HANNEMANN

At this point I suppose I should know well enough that an object can contain any number of meanings -- and whether that object is living or artificial is beside the point. Sadly, I often find myself oblivious to natural elements when in “curated” spaces like museums, historic sites, or memorials, focusing instead on a building’s architecture, its interior design, and the arrangement of art and artifacts.

 

The Philosopher's Walk alongside the ROM. Source: lostphotograph

Of course, as Leah Maconda reminded us last week with her post about gardens, a natural space in or around a museum can be “a peripheral place where unique things happen and escape of a different nature is facilitated.” Leah’s discussion, paired with recent lessons on the possible interpretations of the coniferous tree, jolted me from my obliviousness and demanded my improved attention to natural details.

Learning about the potential meanings of the coniferous tree happened during a recent event at the ROM. On January 25, I attended the panel discussion “Memorializing the Holocaust in the 21st Century,” featuring the planners and designers of the National Holocaust Monument in Ottawa. The team brings an incredible diversity of disciplines and expertise to the project, and includes architect Daniel Libeskind, photographer Edward Burtynsky, landscape architect Claude Cormier, Lord Cultural Resources president Gail Lord and principal consultant Dov Goldstein, and content advisor and U of T professor Doris Bergen.

A birds-eye rendering of the National Holocaust Monument. Source: Holocaustmonument.ca

As each member of the team discussed his or her own contribution to the monument, it was clear how every square inch of it would be imbued with meaning. Libeskind talked about the symbolism of the star in this and other Jewish memorials and museums he has designed, as well as possible feelings evoked by the different angles of light and shadow the structure would create. Burtynsky ruminated on his haunting photographs of former concentration camps, overgrown after 70 years but still retaining traces of horror, which would be permanently impressed upon the walls of the monument.

A rendering of the monument from within. Source: Holocaustmonument.ca

When landscape architect Claude Cormier rose to discuss his contribution to the design using natural elements, I was struck by all the possible meanings of the coniferous trees that will surround the structure. Inspired by the resilience and persistent growth of coniferous trees in a far north climate that nurtures so little life, the trees will serve as a symbol of hope and life within the devastating context of the Holocaust. The conifers will also bring a Canadian element to the monument. Additionally, instead of soil, small pebbles will surround the trees: These pebbles were once jagged but have been softened over time, again acknowledging the years passed since the Holocaust happened but signalling its lasting presence -- and the need to continue to remember it.

Conifers in a boreal forest. Source: GlobalPost

Perhaps this approach to trees felt new to me, because whenever I have wandered through a forest or stepped through a grove, I’ve never been faced with their possible symbolic meanings -- but rather, I’ve taken the opportunity to experience them solely for their inherent features: the smell of sap, the stinging points of needles, the visual magnificence of a fully-grown fir. Now I know better to appreciate them both for their natural construction as well as their potential for interpretation.

TUESDAY NEWS DAY: NATIONAL HOLOCAUST MONUMENT

BY ALEXANDRA JEFFERY

This proposal for a National Holocaust Monument
 is from the team including David Adjaye and Ron Arad (source).

This spring, the National Holocaust Memorial will announce the winning proposal for a Holocaust monument which will be built in Ottawa near the Canadian War Museum. The monument was originally announced last April and is to be built this summer. The National Post recently wrote a thorough overview of the 6 monument proposals. Of note is the proposal by the Daniel Lebiskind team, which may be familiar in terms of its sharp angles and crystalline style -- apparently a stylized Star of David.

Daniel Libeskind and Gail Lord's design (source)

In addition to describing the designs, the article asked several interesting questions about the nature of the project. For instance, what is the best way to explain and remember the Holocaust, especially because "we are separated from those unspeakable events by an ocean and, nearly, a lifetime."

The exposed  bedrock design of Krzysztof Wodiczko andJulian Bonder (source).

I think that the questions raised in the National Post article need to be asked, and they are questions that go far beyond the representational or conceptual design possibilities proposed by each team. In fact, I have questions of my own: what is the purpose of the monument? Why now? Is there a broader political context for this?

According to the monument website and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, John Baird, the monument is meant to “[remember] the suffering of the millions of innocent victims of the Holocaust. This monument will not only preserve their memory but will also educate visitors of all faiths and traditions about the causes and risks of hate. Let us use the lessons of the past to remind us of the importance of tolerance, to inspire us to uphold human rights and to prevent future acts of genocide.”

The website notes that roughly 40 000 survivors of the Holocaust came to Canada in the 1940s and 1950s. This would imply a definite need for a memorial, perhaps particularly as these individuals approach old age. This brings up broader questions regarding the usefulness of memorials as well as the idea that perhaps memory is served in another arena. Certainly, as a fixture in the capital, the monument would attract visitors as well as demonstrate national importance. The National Holocaust Monument Development Council's fundraising goal is 4.5 million dollars. Would this money be put to better use elsewhere? If it was used in a different area to memorialize the Holocaust, would it have the same impact as a monument which is form that is recognizable in the Western world as the way to memorialize significant events?

I think this question can only be answered individually. Clearly there are supporters of the monument. If you scroll down to the supporters and friends section on the "about" page of the website, you can gauge the support for yourself. Despite this, I'm sure there are also those who do not support the building of the monument. I would be interested in hearing some other thoughts on this, particularly in terms of the Holocaust Monument but also in terms of general memorialization through monuments.