Although recently Nigeria has been split through racial, economic, and other tensions, it is not the classic picture of a chaotic African country that we would picture. Take, for example, education in Nigeria. The adult literacy rate is 66.8%, and the percentage of children enrolled in primary (elementary) school is 74% for males, and 60% for females. This relatively high percentage of education can be attributed partly to Nigeria's extremely vast supplies of oil and the capital gained from its sale, which allow for the infrastructure and networking required for a working education system. The HIV/AIDS infection percentage for Nigeria is around 5%, as opposed to the 7% in the rest of the African Region. The use of condoms in young people is approximately half for men, and a quarter for women. This possibly shows the effects of education regarding sex, STDs, and safe sex in general.
However, looking at the other statistics for Nigeria in the World Health Organization's factsheet, Nigeria's education levels appear contradictory in relation to figures such as the relatively high infant-mortality, high amount of people living below the poverty line, low percentages of access to improved sanitation and water supplies (in relation to the rest of the African Region).
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Tanzania
In 1967, the Arusha Declaration was passed making Tanzania a socialist country. Initially this reduced the amount of corruption and stabilized the government. Tanzania seemed to be better off than many other African countries.
Even though Tanzania shared its wealth, their wasn't much to share. Inadequate soil and rainfall made agriculture a difficult center for their economy. The low resources have stunted the growth of the country and created much poverty both in urban and rural areas.
Both malaria and AIDS are huge causes of death for Tanzania and this may result from their urban poverty. Their number of adult deaths is much higher than other African countries. Part of this could be attributed to their lack of resources ie. food.
Kenya: Urban vs. Rural
I looked at Kenya, a country that opted for capitalism. Though Kenya is successful in that it has a strong middle class, this wealth is based mostly in the capital, Nairobi. Elsewhere, unemployment, landlessness, and income inequities are fairly high. From WHO I found that around 42% of the population lives in urban areas. They are probably the successful middle class, flourishing in the capital. However, this leaves over half the population to other areas in the country. According to World History, almost one-fifth of Kenya's thirty million people are squatters, with unemployment estimated at nearly 45%. Combining these statistics with the ones from WHO, you can see that, though just under half of the population is doing well, and equal amount of people are suffering--unworking and possibly homeless. According to WHO, just about 23% of the people in Kenya live below the poverty level (under $1 a day). So basically, half of the population of Kenya is doing fine. Another quarter live in squalor. All of those, plus a quarter more, are unemployed. There is some discrepancy between the WHO data and the data from Wolrd History. In World History 80% of the population is said to remain rural, while only 20% occupies urban areas. Naturally, with these different statistics, the statistics for the percent of the population below the poverty line were also much higher: 40% of Kenyans. In either case, of the people that live in rural areas, about half are moneyless--a very concerning statistic. Is the middle class so focused on "the tradition of aggressive commerce" that they do not see how bad off the majority of the rest of their country is?
Rural Life In Kenya
I decided to look at the quality of life in rural areas in Kenya, a very interesting and recently messed-up country. According to the WHO website, only 58% of Kenyan citizens live in rural environments, as opposed to a whopping 84% for nearby Ethiopia, but the information given is from 2005. On the CIA World Factbook, Kenya's urban population is listed at only 22%, and the data is from 2008. It also lists that the urbanization rate over the last five years has been roughly 4%, so people are continuing to move into the cities.
Despite this information, Kenya remains a country most recognized for its small tribal villages which have kept the same way of life for centuries. While culturally stimulating, this system has proven to be unproductive in terms of raising the standard of living for the majority of Kenyans. The national unemployment rate is around 45%, higher than the average in Africa, which is mildly surprising considering Kenya's relatively strong economy. Also, 75% of the country's workforce are agricultural workers, mostly using archaic and inefficient methods, again hampering the potential for growth.
Although the image of men with spears herding cattle is a beautiful defining image, Kenya's rural population is far too great to be efficient in moving the country towards a better future.
Ethiopia+Rural Areas
I researched the facts about Ethiopia and its urban/rural population. Ethiopia has a very low percentage of people living in urban area (16 percent). The other people live on farms and other rural areas. The adult literacy rate is 9.4 percent, which is below the average for Africa. The net primary school enrollment ratio is also below average. This is caused by not a lot of people living in urban areas where education can be provided. Ethiopia also lacks people that work in the health systems. They only have 93 dentists and less than 2000 physicians for the whole country. All of their statistics for health workers are a lot below the average line in Africa.
Central Africa at War
The basic focus point of the problems of central Africa from the textbook was that it was always at war and there was constant civil war. When I looked on the WHO for the Central African Republic's Death Causes I found it interesting that it didn't have war or fighting as one of the causes. Then I looked back in the textbook and thought maybe go more towards individual country, so I looked up the Democratic Republic of Congo and found that 5% of all of the deaths (something like 44 of 987) were caused by war. I thought that was a little amazing among itself, 5% of the country dies because of war (I think annually).
Next I looked up Rwanda and then Burundi. Again, for Rwanda, war wasn't even listed, but for Burundi it was 7% or about 8 out of 120 people. The textbook said that there was constant civil war and even with talks of peace it still continues on and on, so you would have to think that these fatality numbers are constant from year to year. This seems amazing considering all of the other potential problems that Africa has, from diseases to economic problems, to still have that many people die annually in these countries is a little ridiculous.
Ethiopia - Rural Life
In the 1970's, Ethiopia decided to instate a society based on the principles of socialism. But, they were not successful, which is clear from the large discrepancies that exist between rural and urban life. In rural parts of Ethiopia, only 11% of people have access to clean water. This number is frightening low especially compared to the 88% that receive clean water in urban cities. Also, 19% of urban people have improved sanitation, while only 4% of rural people have this. On top of this, of the 23% of people that live under $1, 65% are from rural areas.
These numbers show that the socialist government, which was overthrown in 1990, did not live up to the demands of socialism. They did not make sure that equal services were provided to all people, even in basic services like access to clean water and sanitary living conditions. There is a large difference between rural and urban life, and while urban conditions may not be the best, it is definitely better than conditions in rural areas.
But, the greatest problem that Ethiopia faces currently is not this divide, it is lack of health care. The ratio of deaths under the age of five is actually not too different between rural and urban areas. There are 1.3 rural deaths for every 1 urban death. In both rural and urban areas, the amount children dying, often of preventable diseases, is astounding (up to 20%).
These numbers show that the socialist government, which was overthrown in 1990, did not live up to the demands of socialism. They did not make sure that equal services were provided to all people, even in basic services like access to clean water and sanitary living conditions. There is a large difference between rural and urban life, and while urban conditions may not be the best, it is definitely better than conditions in rural areas.
But, the greatest problem that Ethiopia faces currently is not this divide, it is lack of health care. The ratio of deaths under the age of five is actually not too different between rural and urban areas. There are 1.3 rural deaths for every 1 urban death. In both rural and urban areas, the amount children dying, often of preventable diseases, is astounding (up to 20%).
Rural Life in Tanzania
After the Arusha Declaration of 1967, Tanzania became a socialist state. This resulted in stagnant economy, but helped cure corruption and political instability. However, Tanzania is faced with low rainfall and poor soil, worsening the life of people living in rural areas. This fits in to the larger African pattern of internal migration, where people move from rural areas to cities.
One factor that may explain the difficulty of rural life in Tanzania is the poor health services. The main health issue of Tanzania is, supposedly, the lack of outreach both in terms of medical supplies and equipment, and awareness of such diseases such as HIV/AIDS. 29% of all deaths in Tanzania are caused by AIDS. Also, malaria, the third leading cause of death in Tanzania, which mostly occurs in rural areas, accounts for 5.6% of all deaths in Tanzania.
However, urban life in Tanzania doesn't seem to be much better than rural life. The under-5 mortality rate for rural Tanzania is of 16.6%, whereas the same figure for urban Tanzania is still a whopping 14.2%. In addition, diarrhoeal diseases (4th leading cause of death in Tanzania) account for 3.6% of all deaths in Tanzania. Water quality, though, is equally poor all over the country.
Kenya's Health Statistics
Kenya has major healthcare problems. The life expectancy is 51 years, and 12% of people die before age 5. Only 4.6% of their money is spent on health care, and considering the fact that Kenya has an insanely high AIDS rate and has had several Rift Fever outbreaks, that seems like a low number.
WHOOOOO Are You, WHO WHO WHO WHO
The first thing I noticed about Cameroon is the life expectancy rate for men and women. For men its 50 years, and for women its 51 years. The WHO African Region life expectancy rate for men is 47 years, and 49 years for women. Despite the large rate of Malaria related deaths for children under 5, I calculated that the people of Cameroon can expect to live 2.5 years longer than the people of the WHO African Region. I also realized that even though the leading cause of death for children under the age of 5 is Malaria, the leading cause of death for everyone is HIV/AIDS. And with kids dying young of Malaria, and adults dying of HIV/AIDS, the amount of children being made is decreasing. To prove this, it says that the annual growth rate for Cameroon in 2004 was 1.9, whereas it was 2.2 for the WHO African Region
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Sierra Leone
When looking at Sierra Leone, which is known for "blood diamonds", and comparing it to the United States, the results are staggering. What I found was the there were 4 nurses to every 10,000 people in Sierra Leone.
In the US, there are 97. That is a huge difference. Also, the women in Sierra Leone are expected to live until they are 30. In the US they are expected to live until they are 67. That is more than double the life expectancy. Statistics like these show how different 3rd world countries really are, especially in comparison to the US. For example, the US's expenditure on health resources was a 23 while Sierra Leones was only a 7. This likely attributes to the low mortality, as less health resources means less hospitols and other medical aid.
Kenya
Kenya is an extremely poor country which is overpopulated. Out of the 30 million people that live in Kenya 52% live bellow the poverty line. As a result of the country being poor their is a huge unemployment rate, and children become more intersted in durgs, and violence. Another result of the countries situtation is that currently 80% of the population is dependent on subsistence economy. However, the problem is that 20% this food is used for marketing. People are constantly starving, and even enter refugee camps in order to not starve to death. Their is a mortality rate of 414 per 1,000 people.
Ethiopia's Education
The country I chose was Ethiopia, and the cultural issue I chose to focus on was education. While the WHO African Region had a literacy rate of 60.1%, Ethiopia has only a 41.5% literacy rate. The net primary school enrollment is surprisingly almost even between men and women. I had expected men to have a much higher enrollment than women, but the difference is only 6%. Males having a 55% primary school enrollment while Women are close behind with a 47% enrollment. However, when I researched more about Ethiopia's literacy rate, I found out that the native language Amharic is very complicated and has well over the characters in the English language, ( I found it has around 256 characters, while our alphabet has 26!). This definitely has an large influence on the literacy rate being quite low. Here is an article and video I enjoyed about, "Donkey boost[ing] Ethiopian Literacy." It goes on to tell how Donkeys are now used to drag around mobile libraries which are in fact boosting the literacy rate in Ethiopia. I am happy to see that Ethiopia has addressed their problem and found a temporary solution to gain interest and reason for people to become literate.
Colonization in Africa
The two things I researched were Dream and Reality: Political and Economic Conditions in Independent Africa and the second was Kenya. The program of the OAU called for an Africa based on freedom, equality, justice, and dignity. Soon after this was written reality set in. Vast disparities in education, income, and unemployment made it hard to truly establish democracy. The concept of "one person, one vote" was an immediate disappointment. And after many African countries gained their independence more than 70 were overthrown by violence. Kenya welcomed foreign investment and the idea of capitalism. With capitalism came it's own dilemmas. Although a substantial middle class was forming their were still many economic problems. Around one-fifth of the country's thirty million were squatters. And around forty-five percent were unemployed. In addition the population was increasing by three percent per year: one of the highest percentages in the world. The country wasn't helping it's own cause seeing that disputes between ethnic groups persisted. When looking at the current stats Kenya is doing medium to good compared to other African countries. Their population continues to grow and in 2005 34,256,000 people lived in Kenya. One stunning statistic is the fact that 84%% of adults are literate. The gross national income is still quite low, however it is far superior than other countries. I believe that since Kenya incorporated a capitalistic economy they were able to truly develop as an independent country.
Kenya and Economic Life
According to the Textbook statistics, unemployment is at its highest, one-fifth of the 30 million population are squatters, topped with a rising population by 3 percent every year to make matters worse. According to WHO, the population living below the poverty line is 22.8, while the WHO region is at 44. It says that the Kenyans welcomed foreign investment and profit incentives. This change caused a lot of economic change that is still extremely prominent in Kenya in recent years, and it currently doesn't appear to be taking a turn for the better.
South Africa: False Paradise?
South Africa is clearly better off than WHO African Area. South Africa has a GPD per capita that is about 5 times as much as other WHO nations standing at $10960, while WHO Africa stands at $2 074. The adult literacy rate is 82.4%, while WHO Africa's is 60.1% These are all, I believe the direct effect of getting rid of the apartheid in 1994. The apartheid separated the heterogenous population of South Africa based on their skin color, but it now appears that the gap is closing, and that social and economic equality is increasing.
There is also the fact that school enrollment is 89% for both males and females. This is high compared to 70% and 63% for males and females, respectively. Even though this is not due to the end of the apartheid, it is still a very large step up for South Africa.
And while South Africa seems to be the most progressive in social and economic inprovement, HIV/AIDS, infant mortality and other diseases still cost many more lives than they should were a stabler form of health care in place. For example, the life expectancy at birth is drastically low at 47 for men and 49 for women. The life expenctacy for WHO Africa is the same for both men and woman as in South Africa. Infant mortality is 67 death per 1,000 live births. HIV/AIDS affects 21.5% of adults in South Africa, while only affecting 7.1% in WHO Africa. These are staggering statistics that truly show that while some areas of South Africa are a step up from other less developed African countries, other parts are no better off.
There is also the fact that school enrollment is 89% for both males and females. This is high compared to 70% and 63% for males and females, respectively. Even though this is not due to the end of the apartheid, it is still a very large step up for South Africa.
And while South Africa seems to be the most progressive in social and economic inprovement, HIV/AIDS, infant mortality and other diseases still cost many more lives than they should were a stabler form of health care in place. For example, the life expectancy at birth is drastically low at 47 for men and 49 for women. The life expenctacy for WHO Africa is the same for both men and woman as in South Africa. Infant mortality is 67 death per 1,000 live births. HIV/AIDS affects 21.5% of adults in South Africa, while only affecting 7.1% in WHO Africa. These are staggering statistics that truly show that while some areas of South Africa are a step up from other less developed African countries, other parts are no better off.
Nigeria and Education
The population of Nigeria is 131.5 million. The literacy rate in Nigeria is greater than the WHO African Region literacy rate. It is said that out of 131.5 million people, 66.8% are literate, while only 60.1% of the WHO African region is. When it comes to comparing men and women education, men have a 74% primary school enrolment ratio, which is significantly bigger than women that have only a 60% primary school enrolment ratio.
South Africa and Education
According to William Duiker, South Africa is "perhaps Africa's greatest success story." According to South Africa's WHO statistics, the adult literacy rate is at 82% compared to the WHO region, which is at 60%. Also, the net primary school enrollment rate is at 89% for both men AND woman. And to top it off the percent of the population below the poverty line is 1/4 of the surrounding region's average of 44%. All in all the statistics show that South Africa has benefited greatly from its release from Apartheid.
AIDS in Nigeria
According to the WHO statistics, AIDS is the number 1 cause of death for people of all ages in Nigeria. 16% of all people who die in Nigeria, are on their death bed because of AIDS. AIDS is the second most prominent cause of death for children under 5 years of age. And with 70.2% of all citizens living below the poverty line, these statistics are not indicative of improvement.
Kenya and Rural Life
Kenya has a whopping 34.3 million person population, and it increases by 3% every year. 80% of the population lives in a rural lifestyle, though the rural citizens of Kenya (46%) have slightly more access to improved water sources than the rest of Africa (45%). Regarding the rural lifestyle in Kenya in relationship to the rest of Africa, Kenya seems to be slightly more well off. 43% of Kenyan's have improved sanitation, while a small 28% does for the rest of Africa.
Tanzania and its Education
Tanzania was one of the few African countries that attempted to create a socialist society, mostly through their current president at the time, Julius Nyerere. He promoted nationalizing industries, restricting foreign investments, caps on income, but after almost twenty years he left the country without much progress and rural and urban poverty. Nyerere claims that he improved the social and economic conditions, but just looking at the education in Tanzania tells us that this is not entirely true. Although Tanzania's adult literacy rate of 69.4% is higher than the average African region og 60.1% and the male and female education enrollment is 83% and 80%, if Nyerere's only claim to success is of bettering the social and economic conditions (i.e. education) than there is not much to claim.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Articles Relating to 228 Peace Memorial Park
This article covers the background of the 228 Incident, and its importance to modern-day Taiwan, especially in the way it's remembered and honored. It is a good piece of unbiased, journalistic writing. This article is a very opinionized piece in opposition to the reign of Chiang Kai-Shek, a good example of an argumentative piece. And finally, this article is another unbiased article about an effort by Taiwanese-Americans to get the US government to help promote Taiwan on the world stage and remember the 228 Incident.
Friday, April 24, 2009
1) Why is there a graffiti section called the "death strip" on the west side?
2) why were people killed trying to cross over to the west side of the wall?
3) how does the wall relate to the GDR's authoritarian rule?
4) why were only westerners allowed to visit east germany, but the east side could not come over to the west?
5) why was this made into a monument, since it symbolizes a negative period in germany's history?
Rhodes Memorial Research Question
I would like to find out several things about this monument:
1. Why does he have a memorial? After all he was a very corrupt political figure.
2. Why is his monument so modest?
3. Why is it in South Africa and is there any significance behind its location?
4. How do Africans feel about this monument
The Brandenburg Gate
I recently changed my topic so the amount of research I've done isn't as much as my previous, but from the research I have gathered, I've noticed a few things. The gate is a really important symbol for the division of Berlin and I want to explore the history behind it. My research questions are the following :
There was a long-denied freedom to walk through the gate. Why and when was this?What is the history behind the fact that this gate is a symbol for division and re-unification?
Why is this such a popular spot for leaders, such as Napoleon, Reagan, and Obama, to make speeches and gather at?
Who designed the gate and where did this architecture originate from?
I want to explore the gate itself, but more the history behind it. Since it is a part of the Berlin Wall, hopefully I can contain my information to the Gate itself.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Arc de Triomphe Research Questions
Most of my research questions, about the Arc de Triomphe in France, center around how the French people see the monument and the significance of the monument in French nationalism .
What events have occurred in history relating to the monument?
What do these events show about how the French feel about the arc?
What type of feelings does the arc convey within the French people?
Has is become more of a tourist site, or is it a more somber and reflective place?
How does the arc compare to the Eiffel Tower, in terms of conveying French pride and nationalism?
Do the surroundings or the location of the arc affect the overall feeling or purpose of the arc?
Does that fact that it commemorates many different wars make it even more important or give it even more weight to the French?
Overall, I want my thesis to express the importance of the monument to the French and the affect it had on French nationalism and pride since it was built.
The Berlin Wall
My research questions revolve mostly around what the different reasons for building the Berlin Wall were besides to stem the flow of people moving from East to West Berlin, and the hypothetical question of whether wall was built for more political reasons than economical. Here are some of my questions: If the education systems in both East and West Berlin had the same drawbacks and benefits, would this have lessened the so called "Brain Drain" and therefore prevented the building of the wall? Was the economy of East Berlin deteriorating fast enough to justify the building of the wall or were there other reasons? Was the Berlin Wall, in a way, used as propoganda to alienate the "other side"? And finally, how big of a role did the espionage during the cold war play in the decision to build the wall? I think that these questions make my project interesting because instead of exploring the straight up facts about the building of the wall, I get to look at varying opinions on the wall and put together different pieces of evidence to draw my own conclusion on it.
The Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall
If you search on any website for news regarding the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall, it is unlikely that you will get more than a few results. It is somewhat understandable for it to be relatively less controlversial, seeing as it is 1. largely unopposed by the general population of China, and 2. young (for a monument, at any rate). However, one would think that there would at least be some internationally-generated controversy surrounding the monument; There isn't. One of the questions I plan to investigate for Part 1 of my research project is: "Why is there a lack of controversial stories on the news about the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall?"
Another question I have regarding the Memorial Hall is: "What is the current situation regarding the Memorial Hall? Is there renovation, or popular culture, or other goings-on featuring the Hall?" My reasoning behind this question is that since the monument has been up for around 25 years now, and no major renovations, news stories, etc. have occured. Is the monument simply sitting "dormant", and not dynamic like other monuments?
A third question I have (which is one of the ones I am more interested in) is: "Why was the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall built so late (1985) after the end of World War II?" My preliminary research informs me that around 1985, Japanese politicians were attempting to rewrite the Nanjing Massacre in Japanese textbooks as a minor "incident", and to downplay its importance in the war. This would lead the Chinese government to create the memorial to remind the rest of the world that "We're still here, don't forget about us!", and to try to prevent other countries from following the actions of those Japanese politicians. Also, another sub-question relating to this question is: "Who exactly was behind the birth of the idea to create the Memorial Hall?"
Another question I have regarding the Memorial Hall is: "What is the current situation regarding the Memorial Hall? Is there renovation, or popular culture, or other goings-on featuring the Hall?" My reasoning behind this question is that since the monument has been up for around 25 years now, and no major renovations, news stories, etc. have occured. Is the monument simply sitting "dormant", and not dynamic like other monuments?
A third question I have (which is one of the ones I am more interested in) is: "Why was the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall built so late (1985) after the end of World War II?" My preliminary research informs me that around 1985, Japanese politicians were attempting to rewrite the Nanjing Massacre in Japanese textbooks as a minor "incident", and to downplay its importance in the war. This would lead the Chinese government to create the memorial to remind the rest of the world that "We're still here, don't forget about us!", and to try to prevent other countries from following the actions of those Japanese politicians. Also, another sub-question relating to this question is: "Who exactly was behind the birth of the idea to create the Memorial Hall?"
The Monument to Stalin - Prague
The Monument to Stalin--though it is no longer standing--is still a great controversy in Prague. My questions largely revolve around public opinion of this monument and the repercussions of building it and how they have changed over time. That is to say, how has opinion about the monument changed since it was commissioned? How has it remained the same? What is it about this monument (aside from simply who it commemorated) that allowed it to leave such a lasting mark on a society it was in for a mere seven years and that never really accepted it? (In other words, why isn't a monument that was so short-lived forgotten, especially because it was a monument many would rather not remember?)
Final Project Research Questions
The 228 Peace Memorial Park is dedicated to the thousands of protestors who were killed in government crackdowns on rioters beginning on February 28th, 1947. For a long time this topic was illegal to discuss in Taiwan, with disobeyers arrested and jailed, but it was recently, and completely unexpectedly, made discussable by the Taiwanese government. The main questions I want to answer with this project are:
1. What government was in power during the 228 Incident, and what tension led to it?
2. Why was the topic recently un-tabooed?
3. What does the architecture and design of the memorial park and statue represent?
I believe that all of these questions are intriguing, as well as relevant to an in-depth study of the park. In learning about the park, the first question seeks to uncover the details of the original event. The second question relates to the park's relevance to today, since the recent buzz about legalizing the discussion of the incident is certainly important. And the third question applies to the unique layout of the park relative to the others in Taipei, and the commemorative statues in the middle of the park.
Stalingrad Memorial Research Questions
In our research of the WWII memorial at Stalingrad, we hope to fully understand the meaning of the memorial to the world and Russian people. In order to achieve this understanding there are necessary questions to ask throughout the process. These questions include:
- What does the memorial represent to the Russian people regarding their past?
-To the Russians, is the memorial a symbol of triumph or despair, heroism or destruction, what is the general mood?
-Is the memorial more of a tribute to the general struggle in WWII, or simply a form of Russian nationalism commemorating its own efforts?
-Does Russia recognize its Stalin-era past through this memorial?
-Why is it maintained so poorly?
-Who built/funded the memorial, and who were primary backers?
-Has there been a transition in the perception of the memorial's symbolism/significance from generation to generation?
Mamayev Hill -- Why?
At the time it was built, Mamayev Hill was the tallest monumental structure Russia had ever seen. It was built after a time of seemingly endless economical and political turmoil, but still stands tall today, marking the struggles, and the victories of Russia's past. Yet there is ambiguity surrounding this monument that I plan to attack.
1) How was Russia able to invest in the massive monument, and was the population pleased with the investment?
2) How is the monument perceived today among Russians?
3) Are there other monuments of Russia that compare to it's (Mamayev Hill's) stature? If so, are they similar to the Hill in the sense that they celebrate a military victory of Russia?
4) The statue itself does not look or seem to have any connection to the battle of Stalingrad. Why is Mamayev Hill structured the way it is?
Questions 1 and 2 are challenges, for they include takes on public opinion, something that requires investigation through speaking to the population or looking through interviews. These type of questions; however, are the most rich with information, and I feel public opinion is especially important with a project that has to do with introducing a memorial to a large scale population.
Camp Norway
I have a couple questions about not only my monument but what it commemorates. First:
1. Why would the Norwegians be one of the few groups who really tried to resist the German rush?
2.Is this the only considerable monument for the Norwegians (or one of the select few?
3. Why is the monument in four different places, multiple monuments?
Although I could take a guess on the answer to number one, but I would have to do some more research to back it up. There are also probably more questions to be asked as research continues, but these preliminary ones will hopefully start me off. Norway is a very underrated country and is still pretty successful in terms of the map that we saw in class, I hope that I can do it the justice that it deserves.
The Berlin Wall
Research Questions:
Could providing different conditions have stopped the fleeing of the people from East Germany to West Germany or was the construction of the wall necessary due to the change being a radical idea to the controlling power of East Berlin?
The fall of the Berlin Wall happened in the time period of the fall of the Soviet Union. Was this a coincidence? If it wasn't, how did the cold war and the fall of the Soviet Union influence the fall of the Berlin Wall?
What did the alliances between France, Britain, and the U.S. have to do with the tensions that were introduced after the end of World War II?
How was Germany limited by this wall?
How did other countries get involved by this wall?
What makes my monument interesting is that it wasn't build to memorialize something. It was built for separation of one people from another. Even though it has long been destroyed, when we hear the words "Berlin Wall" we immediately think of a stone wall painted by graffiti. I want to know if there is something else present except the stone blocks that we see today. It is even in the news today because the painters that painted the wall the first time are being hired again this summer to repaint the wall.I am interested in this great monument because I know little about something that is recognizable around the globe.
Could providing different conditions have stopped the fleeing of the people from East Germany to West Germany or was the construction of the wall necessary due to the change being a radical idea to the controlling power of East Berlin?
The fall of the Berlin Wall happened in the time period of the fall of the Soviet Union. Was this a coincidence? If it wasn't, how did the cold war and the fall of the Soviet Union influence the fall of the Berlin Wall?
What did the alliances between France, Britain, and the U.S. have to do with the tensions that were introduced after the end of World War II?
How was Germany limited by this wall?
How did other countries get involved by this wall?
What makes my monument interesting is that it wasn't build to memorialize something. It was built for separation of one people from another. Even though it has long been destroyed, when we hear the words "Berlin Wall" we immediately think of a stone wall painted by graffiti. I want to know if there is something else present except the stone blocks that we see today. It is even in the news today because the painters that painted the wall the first time are being hired again this summer to repaint the wall.I am interested in this great monument because I know little about something that is recognizable around the globe.
Hands of Victory - Research Questions
After doing some more research about my monument, I have changed my research questions significantly. Now the main focus of my questions is how does this monument exemplify the Iraqi identity (or lack thereof)?
Iraq is a country filled with various different ethnic groups (Shi'ites, Sunnis, and Kurds), mainly because it was "created" in 1920 when the British merged two regions of the former Ottoman Empire together. Because these ethnic groups have so many differences, there had always been tensions in Iraq. After being an independant nation since 1932, one has to wonder why the people of Iraq are still divided and have not yet developed a national identity?
The Hands of Victory can help us understand this because it shows the effect authoritarian regimes have had on the Iraqi people. This monument, meant to symbolize the Iraqi victory and be a form of nationalism, contains Saddam Hussein's fingerprints rather than representing the nation. This makes me wonder what effect does national art geared towards one person have on developing the identity of a large, diverse group?
This monument is very controversial today because the Iraqi government wants it to be torn down so they can start a new country with a blank slate, but the U.S, government isn't allowing this. This leads to the question what role has Western influence played in shaping the Iraqi identity?
Iraq is a country filled with various different ethnic groups (Shi'ites, Sunnis, and Kurds), mainly because it was "created" in 1920 when the British merged two regions of the former Ottoman Empire together. Because these ethnic groups have so many differences, there had always been tensions in Iraq. After being an independant nation since 1932, one has to wonder why the people of Iraq are still divided and have not yet developed a national identity?
The Hands of Victory can help us understand this because it shows the effect authoritarian regimes have had on the Iraqi people. This monument, meant to symbolize the Iraqi victory and be a form of nationalism, contains Saddam Hussein's fingerprints rather than representing the nation. This makes me wonder what effect does national art geared towards one person have on developing the identity of a large, diverse group?
This monument is very controversial today because the Iraqi government wants it to be torn down so they can start a new country with a blank slate, but the U.S, government isn't allowing this. This leads to the question what role has Western influence played in shaping the Iraqi identity?
Chemin des Dames
I have many questions regarding Chemin des Dames; most of them deal with its memorialization over time.
1 - Was anything built on the site right after World War I?
2 - If not, was there anything there until the current museum, which opened in the last decade?
3 - What became of the site during World War II?
4 - What's the issue with the memorialization of the mutiny that took place there in 1917?
5 - What's the controversy regarding Senegalese troops and Chemin des Dames about?
6 - If there wasn't anything on the site until now, why was the museum randomly commissioned?
7 - What does reading the memorial's websites & publications tell us about the way that they want us to portray the conflict?
8 - How do two leading French newspapers, one conservative, and one liberal, agree and differ about the issue?
7 - What does reading the memorial's websites & publications tell us about the way that they want us to portray the conflict?
8 - How do two leading French newspapers, one conservative, and one liberal, agree and differ about the issue?
El Angel de la Independencia Research Questions
I have a general direction I want to head toward in my research paper, but its not very specific so I have a lot of questions in mind. I am just interested in researching a bit about the Mexico's War of Independence, but I want to look deeper at the monument and the people's involvement with it.
What is the significance or representation of each object on the monument?
What people and event is it commemorating and why?
Why was it built in 1910?
How did the people react to the construction of the monument?
How big or important was its opening ceremony?
How important is its location?
How do people use the monument in their daily lives?
What does the number of restorations it has had say about it?
What is the significance or representation of each object on the monument?
What people and event is it commemorating and why?
Why was it built in 1910?
How did the people react to the construction of the monument?
How big or important was its opening ceremony?
How important is its location?
How do people use the monument in their daily lives?
What does the number of restorations it has had say about it?
Research Questions
Questions:
1. How did the French families deal with the war?
2. How did they determine who won the battle?
3. How did they decided to make the monument?
These are my research questions for my project. My first question gives insight to the battle off the battlefield. Knowing this can be just as important as knowing what happened on the war front. My second question makes sure I have some closure on to how the battle ended. My third and final question allows me to know why this monument is important to the French.
1. How did the French families deal with the war?
2. How did they determine who won the battle?
3. How did they decided to make the monument?
These are my research questions for my project. My first question gives insight to the battle off the battlefield. Knowing this can be just as important as knowing what happened on the war front. My second question makes sure I have some closure on to how the battle ended. My third and final question allows me to know why this monument is important to the French.
Battle of the Bulge Q's
My questions are basically to the builders, the veterans that built it, and the effects it has on the community.
Where did the veterans get the money to build the monument?
What were the reasons for the lay out of the monument?
Do people visit this memorial regularly?
Who designed the monument?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Yad Vashem
What intrigues me about my monument Yad Vashem, is it's interesting shape and architecture. The shape is so abstract, that I am sure there is meaning and organization behind the way the monument appears. Another interesting question I had was why was this monument built so soon after Israel became a state? Did the citizens believe this was a good way to spend money on their first major purchase? I am not even sure if it was a major purchase, I would like to find out the cost that went into the monument and how much labor was needed. Did the amount of money spent have a positive or negative affect on the people? Also, how was the money raised to build this monument and who were the major donors? Also, I would like to research why Yad Vashem was built in Jerusalem.
Research Questions
Question: Why wait so long to commemorate the Holocaust?
Possible Answer: The memorial was to be opened to coincide with the WWII's 60th anniversary. Why such a random number, I do not know. Researching as to why it is this anniversary and not a traditional 1, 10, 25 or 50 year anniversary will be interesting.
Possible Answer: The memorial was to be opened to coincide with the WWII's 60th anniversary. Why such a random number, I do not know. Researching as to why it is this anniversary and not a traditional 1, 10, 25 or 50 year anniversary will be interesting.
Rhodes Memorial
The Rhodes memorial is located on one of the largest mountains in Cape Town South Africa, and it is dedicated to Cecil Rhodes who came to South Africa as a british entrepreneur. Eventually he became a wealthy man because he had bought land that contained diamond mines. He used this fortune to start his political career in South Africa. He ended up being kicked out of office before his term ended, so my biggest question is why they made a memorial dedicated to a political figure who used money to work himself up the ranks, and in the was kicked out of office? In order to further explore this question, I would like to find out who built and dedicated the monument to him? Also, how was Cecil Rhodes truly viewed among the public of South Africa? What are people's views on the memorial itself? Do most like it? Do people not care? Do people hate it? Based on the research I have done so far, it seems like Rhodes was a pretty power hungry leader who was just looking to conquer territory in africa for Brittan, but I am curious if this is how the people of South Africa think too. This is the direction I hope to take my project.
The David
I will be researching one of Michelangelo's most famous peaces of art, which is the statue of David also known as The David. After some research I realized that The David has is symbolic in many different ways, and depending on the resource The David has a different meaning. In addition because The David is an important peace of art, when someone thinks of Florence, Italy they automatically think of The David. I want to further investigate the meaning of The David for Italy as well as the reason that Florence is well known for having The David.
Recently Italy faced a tremendous earthquake, in Rome, and many people were killed. Along with the amount of people who died, some of Italian culture was crushed as well. I would like to do research, and see the affects of the earth quake on the culture of Italy. As well as the importance of The David, if it is more important now than before.
Over the course of the year we have learned different histories of the different countries, as well as some history of art. Since Michelangelo lived during the Renaissance and created The David during that time period, I wonder if any of the techniques he used on The David relate back to something we have learned this year. I want find resources that would describe the reasoning behind each technique that Michelangelo used, and see if anything relates to my knowledge of modern world history.
Memorial to the Victims of Communism Qs
My list covers a pretty wide range of areas regarding the memorial, regarding the reaction to its construction, the affects it had culturally if any, and the reasons it was built
What made the government/the artist want to build a memorial like this?
Why are there no women in any of the statues in the memorial?
How did this memorial contribute to the mindset of the Czechs?
Has this memorial had impacted views/knowledge towards communism?
Armenian Genocide Memorials
My original idea for Part One of our final project was to simply research Mother Armenia, a monument located in Yerevan, Armenia but then I stumbled upon The Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute. Soon after I found this site, which collects lots and lots of Armenian Genocide Memorials by separating them by country. So my new and improved project plan is to research lots of different monuments from this one site. The question I created is, "How is the Armenian Genocide of 1915 mainly portrayed? And how do different countries represent this horrific genocide?" I plan on choosing countries who actually take a role in this situation such as Germany and will try not to pick countries such as Venezuela that has no true connection. Later in my research I discovered that many of these monuments have either been destroyed or stolen which suggests that the Armenians may still be a hated race. Who is stealing/destroying these monuments and why are they doing it? Finally is there a common thread between the builders of these monuments? And is there a certain sculptor who revolutionized Armenian Genocide Monuments/did one sculptor create multiple monuments? One small factual question I look to answer is, "What is the definition Khachkar and why are there so many monuments commemorating the 1915 genocide called this?"Another question that I have recently decided to answer is whether relations between Turks and Armenians have been recently resolved or if this conflict continues? I also want to learn the reason this rivalry began and truly identify who is at fault. I look forward to researching this project mostly because my background is both Armenian and Assyrian, two races oppressed against during the 1915 Armenian Genocide.
Berlin Holocaust Memorial Research Questions
My research questions focus on the memorial's background history and the experience the memorial engenders.
-Why was this memorial chosen?
-Why was it built recently, and dedicated in 2005 to the 60th anniversary of V-E Day?
-What was the intended effect that the architects were aiming for in this monument?
-What are peoples responses to their experience of the monument?
-What, if anything, about the monument is different from the original plan?
-Why was this memorial chosen?
-Why was it built recently, and dedicated in 2005 to the 60th anniversary of V-E Day?
-What was the intended effect that the architects were aiming for in this monument?
-What are peoples responses to their experience of the monument?
-What, if anything, about the monument is different from the original plan?
Petra, Jordan
Research questions for the ancient city of Petra:
-Why was it built in the first place?
-What does it represent for Jordan and the rest of the world?
-Does it reflect any current politics in the Middle East?
-What is the attitude towards the city from Jordan, the Middle East, in particular Israel?
My questions are mostly focused on what this old, amazing piece of history means in recent times. Also how the politics in the Middle East affect the preservation and the city itself.
-Why was it built in the first place?
-What does it represent for Jordan and the rest of the world?
-Does it reflect any current politics in the Middle East?
-What is the attitude towards the city from Jordan, the Middle East, in particular Israel?
My questions are mostly focused on what this old, amazing piece of history means in recent times. Also how the politics in the Middle East affect the preservation and the city itself.
Armenian Genocide Research Questions
My research questions address the political tension surrounding the acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide as it pertains to foreign relations, as well as the genocides significance.
What does Turkey have to gain by denying the Genocide? Is it a cultural or political reason?
Why did the Ottomans want to exterminate the Armenians?
Do Armenians feel safe in Turkey today, especially since Turkey does not acknowledge the genocide?
Why was the Armenian monument in France stolen? Did someone want the memories to disappear? Was it a simple theft, or was it connected to the particular monument?
Is Turkey's acceptance into the EU hindered by Turkey failing to acknowledge the genocide?
Will Obama risk the America's relationship with Turkey in order to bring up Turkey's denial of the genocide?
Did any countries come to the aid of the Armenians back in 1915?
What does Turkey have to gain by denying the Genocide? Is it a cultural or political reason?
Why did the Ottomans want to exterminate the Armenians?
Do Armenians feel safe in Turkey today, especially since Turkey does not acknowledge the genocide?
Why was the Armenian monument in France stolen? Did someone want the memories to disappear? Was it a simple theft, or was it connected to the particular monument?
Is Turkey's acceptance into the EU hindered by Turkey failing to acknowledge the genocide?
Will Obama risk the America's relationship with Turkey in order to bring up Turkey's denial of the genocide?
Did any countries come to the aid of the Armenians back in 1915?
AIDS Quilt Research Questions
My research questions mainly focus on the effectiveness of the "architecture" of the AIDS quilt. I plan to investigate what detracts from and what adds to the sense of meaning and remembrance of the quilt. My research questions are as follows:
Is a quilt a better method to commemorate AIDS victims than a statue, building, museum of some sort?
Is it more effective to break the quilt into pieces all over the country as opposed to displaying it in its entirety in one location?
Does the fact that almost anyone can add to the quilt and that it is never truly complete detract from the sense of meaning and memory derived from the quilt?
Does it give the victims enough of a memorial and enough commemoration? Are the victims simply clumped together as a group or given individuality?
Arc de Triomphe?
Does this monument provide an impact for people today? In what ways?
Did it provide more of an impact on people in the past?
In modern times, how has the monument been described?
What opinions do people have about the arc?
How has its meaning and significance changed over time?
Is there a particular reason why its situated in that specific spot?
What's is the significance of its shape?
What's the history behind the monument?
Whose names are inscribed on the inside of the monument? Why are they inscribed there? In other words, why are those individuals so significant in French history?
Explanation:
I have a wide variety of questions that, I believe, will help me answer the fundamental question, "What's the significance of this monument for France?" I can then use the answers to create an argumentative essay about perhaps how this monument symbolizes French Pride.
Children's Peace Monument Research Questions
This monument is dedicated to Sadako, a young child who died of leukemia from the radiation of the A-Bomb. The monument was based on her story; she believed that if she folded 1000 cranes that she would be healed. I was wondering if there were any other reasons for her being chosen for the monument other than her 1000 crane story. Also, the number 1000 itself seems very specific as well and I wanted to research what the number's significance to Japan's culture was. The way the monument is set up is architecturally innovative and I wanted to analyze how the structure reflected Sadako or the message she was giving. This moneument is very different than the other monuments in Hiroshima's peace park, and I wanted to discover why they made is so interactive and if that affects its fame.
Research Questions
I have several research questions, but they are all related because they all address the same issue. The questions are:
How does the design of the Vietnam Memorial relate to the actual war?
What ideas about the war – good or bad – do the memorial give to people?
How does the Vietnam memorial compare to other war memorials?? Would it have looked any different had the U.S. won the Vietnam War?? (US was victorious in the other wars that have memorials)
I think these are good questions because they try to find out the psychological effects that the wall produces, and I think that this will result in an interesting and informative research paper.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall
The Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall (also known as the "Memorial for compatriots killed in the Nanjing Massacre by Japanese Forces of Aggression), built in 1985 by the municipal government of the city of Nanjing, does what its name suggests. It is a memorial for the estimated 300,000 people (estimation by government of China including civilians; the Japanese government estimates around the range of 200,000 all-military deaths- note the nationalistic bias) who died in the Nanjing Massacre during World War II.
Although the memorial itself is not at the center of such conflicts, the Nanjing Massacre is a source of tension and controversy- especially between China and Japan. One reason the Memorial Hall was created was due to the trend in the 1980s of Japanese politicians and writers attempting to alter Japanese historical textbooks and write the Massacre off as a minor incident; The Chinese government wanted to remind its people and the rest of the world of the event, and that such happenings would not be tolerated.
Visitors to the Memorial Hall often remark that the mood of the Hall is very somber and silent. One such experience is referenced here in a blog-post by a traveller who visited the Memorial Hall. The poster also subtly (and perhaps unconsciously) argues that the previous attempts by Japanese politicians to play down the event were bad (for lack of a better-fitting term), and agrees with the Chinese government's reasons for creating the memorial.
Recently, the Japanese government has begun to offer compensation to those who were directly affected by the Nanjing Massacre. One woman (80 years old) named Xia Shuqin won 4.55 million Yen from the Japanese government in compensation (read about her story and the rest of this story here).
Also recently, a Chinese director named Lu Chuan has started to create a film called The City of Life and Death (also known as Nanjing! Nanjing!) that will document the Massacre from many different historical perspectives (with both fictional and non-fictional characters) and attempt to further explain the struggle of the those living in the city during the Massacre. (Somewhat Off-topic: I found this quote from the article quite amusing:
" The director believes there are three ways to solve China-Japanese relationship problems.
Although the memorial itself is not at the center of such conflicts, the Nanjing Massacre is a source of tension and controversy- especially between China and Japan. One reason the Memorial Hall was created was due to the trend in the 1980s of Japanese politicians and writers attempting to alter Japanese historical textbooks and write the Massacre off as a minor incident; The Chinese government wanted to remind its people and the rest of the world of the event, and that such happenings would not be tolerated.
Visitors to the Memorial Hall often remark that the mood of the Hall is very somber and silent. One such experience is referenced here in a blog-post by a traveller who visited the Memorial Hall. The poster also subtly (and perhaps unconsciously) argues that the previous attempts by Japanese politicians to play down the event were bad (for lack of a better-fitting term), and agrees with the Chinese government's reasons for creating the memorial.
Recently, the Japanese government has begun to offer compensation to those who were directly affected by the Nanjing Massacre. One woman (80 years old) named Xia Shuqin won 4.55 million Yen from the Japanese government in compensation (read about her story and the rest of this story here).
Also recently, a Chinese director named Lu Chuan has started to create a film called The City of Life and Death (also known as Nanjing! Nanjing!) that will document the Massacre from many different historical perspectives (with both fictional and non-fictional characters) and attempt to further explain the struggle of the those living in the city during the Massacre. (Somewhat Off-topic: I found this quote from the article quite amusing:
" The director believes there are three ways to solve China-Japanese relationship problems.
'First, we destroy Japan. Second, Japan destroys us,' he says. 'Or the third way is we try really hard to understand each other.'
'I think we should choose the third way.' "
El Angel de la Independencia
This monument is located on el Paseo de la Reforma in downtown Mexico City.
Officially known as Columna de la Independencia (cite in Spanish) it was built in 1910 to commemorate to beginning of Mexico’s War of independence, but later it began to represent the most important leaders of the war. It is a victory column signifying law, war, justice, and peace. At the top of the column lays an angel bronze statue holding a crown above Miguel Hidalgo head symbolizing victory. Surrounding the column there are many statues representing the heroes of the war and characteristics such as strength and innocence. This column is a very important traditional gathering place for celebrations, especially soccer victories. In 1986 the celebrations damaged the column so much it had to go under restoration. There have been two major restorations and some have been quite controversial. The first was due to the earthquake in 1957 and the second due to a celebration of the World Cup victory celebrations.
Another article I found that is more recent said that a copy of it was made and sent to Beijing for the Olympics. It was supposed to enhance Mexico’s relationship with China and to wish everybody the best of wishes. This symbol of independence, peace and friendship was able to do just that.
Officially known as Columna de la Independencia (cite in Spanish) it was built in 1910 to commemorate to beginning of Mexico’s War of independence, but later it began to represent the most important leaders of the war. It is a victory column signifying law, war, justice, and peace. At the top of the column lays an angel bronze statue holding a crown above Miguel Hidalgo head symbolizing victory. Surrounding the column there are many statues representing the heroes of the war and characteristics such as strength and innocence. This column is a very important traditional gathering place for celebrations, especially soccer victories. In 1986 the celebrations damaged the column so much it had to go under restoration. There have been two major restorations and some have been quite controversial. The first was due to the earthquake in 1957 and the second due to a celebration of the World Cup victory celebrations.
Another article I found that is more recent said that a copy of it was made and sent to Beijing for the Olympics. It was supposed to enhance Mexico’s relationship with China and to wish everybody the best of wishes. This symbol of independence, peace and friendship was able to do just that.
The Mysterious call--Berlin Wall
There was a phone call made just before the fall of the Berlin wall by the Socialist Party, who at the time were the communists' ruling Germany regarding the fall of the Wall. There are also those who believe that the GDR took down the all to make traveling abroad possible. At the time the populating was not allowed to travel abroad so it makes sense that they might have had an uprising that had the end result of t justification he collapse of the wall. There are many theories on how the wall fell, but there is always in the wall having been taken down.
The Berlin Wall
The Berlin Wall may be one of the most well known monuments in the world. Its construction, and eventual fall were a symbol to the world of how separation in a country affects its people. In present day, some of the remaining parts of the wall are even being painted on. However, the most interesting article I found was this. It is about whether the fall of the Berlin wall was engineered by the GDR (German Democratic Republic), which was the east side of Germany, the socialist part. The controversy emerges from the statement made by Gunter Schabowski, a representative of the SED, when asked if the citizens of the GDR would be allowed to travel abroad and when it will take effect he said, "That is ... as far as I'm aware ... it is right now, immediately." Some of the press that was present at the conference took this as meaning the end of the Berlin Wall and it is interesting to see how one unclear statement can lead to so much controversy.
The Berlin Wall
After almost 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, there are still issues surrounding it. It had just received a fresh lick of paint. This summer, the wall is going to repainted by the same people that painted it the first time. This is used to cover up the past. Some might think that by repainting the wall, the wall will stand out more and make people think more about what happened in the past. However, this is incorrect. People do not want to look at one of the country's down points, so they try to cover it up by painting it. The Germans are trying to erase their past. I think that this is an incorrect approach. I think that hiding something under a coat of paint will not erase the memory of the Wall. Instead I think that it should be memorialized as a monument so that the new generation will learn from the mistakes of separation.
Another issue in the world today is whether fall of Berlin Wall due to the GDR backing it up. In my opinion, this was brought up due to the tension that is present between Russia and the United States. The Berlin Wall was build by these countries (yes I know it was the USSR back then). This is a battle for power once more. Those that destroyed the Berlin Wall are seen are the "good guys" and each country wants to be viewed as such.
Another issue in the world today is whether fall of Berlin Wall due to the GDR backing it up. In my opinion, this was brought up due to the tension that is present between Russia and the United States. The Berlin Wall was build by these countries (yes I know it was the USSR back then). This is a battle for power once more. Those that destroyed the Berlin Wall are seen are the "good guys" and each country wants to be viewed as such.
Jackie Robinson memorial
http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/nym/ballpark/citifield_overview.jsp
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/2008/04/15/2008-04-15_mets_unveil_designs_for_jackie_robinson_.html
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/15/dedicating-the-jackie-robinson-rotunda/
The Jackie Robinson Rotunda is part of the new ballpark Citi Field. The purpose is to honor the legacy and what Jackie Robinson did to not only to baseball, but also to the civil rights movement. The rotunda has famous quotes from Jackie as well pictures. Jackie Robinson had to overcome a lot in order to play baseball just because he was black.
Heres a quote from Rachel Robinson, "I'm speechless. Jack was actually a very humble man. Some of you who are baseball fans wouldn't believe that because you only saw him on the field arguing with umpires and trying to beat the other guys. But he was a very humble man. I think he would have been stunned by being acknowledged in this way and remembered in this way. It's so grand and so beautiful. And the rotunda is not just a physical space but it carries with it so many memories and so many messages."
Every year now on Jackie Robinson day, every player wears number 42 in honor of Jackie Robinson. The number 42, since it was Jackie Robinson's number on the dodgers (although 5 in the negro leagues), is retired by major league baseball, which means that no player may wear the number 42 anymore an any team.
Sharon (Jackie's daughter) said, "What the Rotunda means to me is the progress we've made in the past and how that's going to affect future generations. When fans and families and children walk through the Rotunda I hope they will reflect on not only what Jackie Robinson accomplished, but also think about themselves and think, 'What am I doing? How am I living my life? What am I doing in my community?' It's a place where I hope people will feel inspired."
At the rotunda there are pictures, quotes, video showing his career highlights, etc
Fred Wilpon is credited with coming up with the idea for the rotunda.
Govenor David A. Paterson said when talking about the memorial, "When Jackie Robinson took the number 42 for the Brooklyn Dodgers . . . he changed the course of America. Not just baseball. Baseball, our national pastime, was the catalyst for that [movement] that has made life a lot more possible for people like me to be governor for the state of New York."
http://www.newsday.com/sports/ny-spjackie1612656678apr15,0,213711.story
The monument of the battle of Verdun is of great importance. This battle took place in 1916. The people that were affected by this the most were the French and German families. The monument tries its best not to be one sided. It strives to portray that not only were the French suffering, but the German's were too. The monument does a good job of serving as an educational tool. Physically, the monument is placed in the center of the battle field. Placing it in the center helps commemorate all the soldiers that were lost during battle. All in all, the monument of the battle of Verdun, is a great monument in terms of visuals, and educational facts.
Monday, April 20, 2009
The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier
The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier is located in Arlington Cemetery in Virginia. It is one of Arlington’s most popular tourist attractions. This monument celebrates the unknown American soldiers from Word Wars I and II, the Korean War and until 1988 the Vietnam War. The first article I found called Ideas and Trends; Laying to Rest the Last of the Unknown Soldiers is about how modern science has changed the tradition of the unknowns. New methods of DNA testing have resulted in the remains of the Vietnam unknown to be identified. Americans today are less willing to accept the idea that someone who is fighting for our country will die and never be known for their bravery or valor. The Pentagon was faced with the decision to honor the sanctity of the tomb or to honor the commitment to our nation to a full accounting of those who were missing in action. The Pentagon made the right decision when they decided to examine the remains of the Vietnam unknown. He was identified as First Lieut. Michael J. Blassie, a fighter pilot. The second article I found was not as important but I thought it was quite interesting. The article explained how the marble tomb was starting to crack and what the government was going to do to fix the cracks. A man wanted to donate a slab of marble to help his country maintain the monument but government Bureaucracy got in the way.
Now it has to go through some approval process. I t has been two years and it still is not approved.
Now it has to go through some approval process. I t has been two years and it still is not approved.
Christ the Redeemer
The name may seem unfamiliar to many but I'm sure that most people have seen the monument. The monument is very well known, but few people actually know much about the monument besides that it looks cool, which I can't argue because it is magnificent looking. Christ the Redeemer is located in Rio De Jainero, Brazil. It was built in 1921 by a group called the Catholic Circle of Rio. Christ the Redeemer stands at the very top of the Corcovado Mountain and is 112.2 feet tall without its base and 132.7 feet with the base. It was build out of reinforced concrete with a soapstone outer layer, because the soapstone can handle extreme weather conditions better.The statue was made as a monument to 100 years of Brazil's freedom from Portugal. In 1990, there was work done to restore some of the chips an cracks to the statue and few years ago, there were some renovations to the mountain around the statue so that it was easier to assess the statue from the base.
Arc de Triomphe- A Symbol of French Pride
The Arc de Triomphe is a massive arc that is centered in one of the busiest streets of the already bustling Paris. Originally built as a memorial to those who died in the Napolean Wars, the monument has become a collective memorial to all of France's wars. In 1921, the Tomb of the Unknown Soilder was buried to commemorate those who died in World War I. As much as the site has become one of collective commemoration, it has also become a key landmark of French pride. Both the French and the Germans have held victory marches past the church and it has become a place of high nationalism for France. Which is why, perhaps, it can also be seen as a logical site for terrorism. In 1995, a bomb exploded near the site and wounded 17 people. Overall the monument has become a large part of France's national importance.
Brandenburg Gate
I've changed my topic for this final project three times so far because I haven't been able to find any information on my past monuments. But I am surprised on the articles I have found and even more surprised on how recently the Brandenburg Gate has been in the news. This article talks about the 20th anniversary of President Ronald Reagan's trip to the gate, where he gave a memorable speech and "dared" Gobachev to "Tear Down this Wall." Press came to so many conclusions about Reagan and not so much about his appeal for freedom, but rather on the legacy he would leave behind. This is a argumentative secondary article and the author of this piece seems to have a positive attitude towards the events of Reagan's trip to Berlin. Unlike the general attitude of the news, the author argues that the president sticks to his "lasting visions" and helped bring freedom to this nation. I also found this article, written less than a year ago, about President Obama's trip to the same monument. A conservative, German chancellor condemns Obama for using the Gate as a "campaign backdrop." Other Berliners say that Obama should feel free to speak at the Brandenburg gate, which is open to anyone. Not only did I not know that this monument has been in the news so much over the past few years, but it is also a very popular spot for our own presidents. Ofcourse the events of Obama and Reagan that took place in Berlin differ, it's interesting to see how people in the same community react so differently to how "public" property is used.
Battle at Stalingrad Memorial
At the end of Stalin's totalitarian reign in 1961, the city of Stalingrad was renamed Volgograd; a hasty initiative that attempted to wipe Russia clean of Stalin's genocidal fingerprints. Twelve years later, a memorial was placed in the city of Volgograd commemorating those who lost their lives in the bloodiest battle that humanity has ever seen in warfare. This memorial no doubt irritated the tender flesh of a Russian generation that was desperately trying to dissociate from the ominous nomenclature of Stalin. Recently it was reported that the war memorial at Stalingrad has been quickly approaching a noticeable state of erosion and ruin. But is this so surprising in a city that represents the very cesspool of poverty that Russia has waded in since WWII? How anxious is the Russia to restore and maintain a memorial that partly symbolizes their nation's undeniable state of despair, generated by none other than Stalin himself? My thoughts were coincidentally echoed in an art blog that called upon the memorial at Stalingrad as a reminder to the world of the horrors of the Communist and Soviet era. The art itself seemed to compel the author to declare that Russia is surely retracing their oppressive historical steps . It may be that this Russian commemoration has a deeper retrospective meaning to the world than it does to a country that hardly needs reminding of its past.
City of Petra
You might not know about the ancient city of Petra in Jordan, unless you have seen the Indiana Jones movies, but it is an amazing sight. It was built in the 4th century B.C.E. by the Nabataens and was a great trading city, but by the 12th century it was just ruins. The western world didn't know about the city until a Swiss explorer rediscovered it in 1812. Then in 1994, after Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty, Petra finally became the tourist attraction it was supposed to be. However, as Neil MacFarquhar argues in his article, A Fabled Place Forsaken, Contaminated by War, the combination of the Palestinians rebelling against Israeli occupation and the 9/11 attacks dramatically decreased the tourism in Jordan, especially in Petra. He also argued that due to middle eastern politics, many citizens don't want tourists, particularly from Israel to come back. One man was quoted saying, "I don't think people [the Israelis] will welcome ... it will be very difficult. It is difficult to forget what is happening there." It is astounding to me that the politcs and the turbulance of the middle east can even affect the tourism of an otherwise incredible ancient city.
Other articles:
Petra becomes one of the 7 new wonders
ancient city of Petra
Other articles:
Petra becomes one of the 7 new wonders
ancient city of Petra
Memorial to the Victims of Communism
Journalistic:
So far, I have been able to find some interesting information about the unveiling of this memorial. Entitled "Memorial to the Victims of Communism Unveiled in Prague" One of the major controversies came up when the Czech government was deciding who to invite to the ceremony, and they discovered that the president at the time,Vaclev Havel, had previous ties to communism, and he was not invited initially. I just find this relevant because it's evident that just the opening of this memorial had some impact on the people.
There was a lot of controversy going on in terms of women's presence in this memorial. When the sculptor Olbram Zoubek created it, he did not include any women in one of the many sculptures that he created for the monument. This stirred up a lot of feminism, because this women claimed that they had as much right to be honored by this monument as any men who suffered, because they suffered the wrath of communism as well. Just to give one example of a woman who suffered because of communism, this article talks about Milada Horakova and her connections to communism and the memorial.
Chemin Des Dames -- Commemoration and WW1
Chemin des Dames was once the road that the women of Louis XIV's court took to go to their summer homes, but more recently, it earned fame for the fact that it was the location of some of World War I's bloodiest battles. Because of its strategic location as the last ridge before the plains of Paris, lots of fighting occurred along it, and hundreds, if not thousands, of soldiers lived for months on end in an intricate network of caves dug into the hillside.
Even more interesting that this, though, are the soldiers who were used in the front lines of the battle during one of the main offensives when the French tried to reclaim the hill from the Germans: Confused, scared, and disoriented, the soldiers "mutinied" and refused to fight. Although they didn't harm any French, 27 of them were still shot, to set an example for any future mutineers.
It is only now, more than ninety years later, that the descendants of the mutineers were invited to see where their ancestors were shot. This is the first time, too, that they have even been acknowledged. How, in a democratic country, can such a thing happen? How, with the press, and lately, the internet, did these deaths go ignored? In a way, this re-surfacing of hidden events shows us that although we may get mad at other countries, such as Russia, for down-playing their histories, our allies, and ourselves, most definitely, have all done the same things.
However, not much other progress has been made regarding the process of memorializing these soldiers. Every town in France has a monument to soldiers who died in WWI, but the men still aren't put on them. Didn't they give their life to the war too? Don't they count as much as others? How can they be discriminated against because of their political opinion? They lived in a democratic country, right?
Maybe not. In 1998, France's prime minister, Lionel Jospin, said that it was time to re-integrate the mutineers into the country's collective historical memory. However, the president at the time, Jacques Chirac, immediately said that remembering them would be disgracing the soldiers that did die for their country in WWI. No matter your position on this issue, though, here are some relevant sites to look about this (unfortunately, some are in French, but shouldn't be too hard to understand if you're taking French):
This article talks about the mutineers, and commemoration.
This article, from 1917 (and in English!), talks about Chemin des Dames in general.
This pamphlet, published by the French government, talks about Senegalese soldiers' role in WWI, specifically mentions Chemin des Dames. If you don't understand French, it still has some cool pictures of the Senegalese battalions.
Mamayev Hill, Volgograd, Russia
Mamayev Hill is a monument commemorating the battle of Stalingrad, which occured from 1942-1943 in Stalingrad Russia (now Volgograd.) It was arguably the greatest victory for the soviets during World War 2, and Russians felt that the great battle deserved a monument in its commemoration. The linked article comes from "The Voice of Russia," and although not too argumentative, it is interesting to see the underlying pride that seeps through the words describing the intimidating monument. Through this article one will learn that according to the author the Motherland statue commemorating the soldiers of Stalingrad is the pinnacle of Russia, exuding it's superiority and somewhat troublesome past...perhaps indicating that it has overcome these troubles (true? eh not really.)
Now, a once war torn Stalingrad is now the prosperous city of Volgograd, as seen through the lenz of this author. From looking around at several documents, it has come to my attention that Volgograd is quite the "hotspot" for tourism. This would make sense, considering the "reality" of the turmoil this city once went through, the hardship it faced, yet now it is a positive, productive city.
Ironically, today; however, the monument was in need of urgent repairs to prevent it from toppling over. The beloved monument seems to be in danger of decay due to the high winds of Russia. This obviously illustrates how old the monument is, but also how important it is to the Volgogradian people.
l'Arc de Triomphe as a Symbol
The Arc de Triomphe has been and continues to be a major symbol of what France is and strives to be. This monument dates back to 1806 when Napoleon wanted to build an arc glorifying the French army, Grande Armée. It was finished in 1836, complete with four towering reliefs along each of the sides. One of the most significant of these is La Marseillaise. Similar to the nationalistic song, the artwork symbolizes the calling forth of the people of France. Not only does the Arc de Triomphe bring us back to the nationalistic roots of France, but it also has continued to be present through out the times. For instance, during WWI an unidentifiable French soldier lost his life. By burying him beneath the monument, he symbolizes both the effort and the loss of the war. In 1961, John F Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy paid their respects to the WWI tomb of the unknown soldier. Two years later, after his death, his wife requested that an eternal flame, like the one above the tomb, was placed above his grave at the Arlington National Cemetery. Being one of the major symbols of France, many events have been centered around it. More recently, in 1995 during the time of the Algerian opposition movements, a bomb went off near the Arc de Triomphe, wounding seventeen people. The Arc de Triomphe is more over a representation of the triumph of France's past, the history through their eyes and what they strive to be.
Rhodes Memorial Sources
First I'll start off with my Journalistic piece. Unfortunately there aren't very many news articles about my memorial, so for the time being I only have one Journalistic piece. I found was a Article from the New York Times about not specifically the Rhodes Memorial, but about Cecil Rhodes himself. When trying to learn as much as you can about a Memorial it is almost just as useful to research the person or event the memorial is commemorating.
Also since the Rhodes memorial is located in Cape Town, South Africa, I found the website for the Cape Times. I found a good article about a recent defacement of a statue of Cecil Rhodes. This article would have explained a lot about how the public in South Africa viewed Cecil Rhodes. However, in order to access the article you had to pay and subscribe to the Cape times, so Unfortunately this article didn't end up working out.
Jewish Rescuer's in Yad Vashem
My argumentative article discusses how Yad Vashem honors the non-Jewish rescuers during the Holocaust. Most of these non-Jewish rescuers took in Jewish children and even families while they were on the run from the Nazi's. The question my article raises is why aren't the Jewish rescuers allowed to be honored in Yad Vashem, why are they neglected? The Jewish rescuers consist of the Jews who went by different names on the trains and searching the country for a safe haven to turn to. It sounds like the author of this article brought up this issue to the directors of Yad Vashem and the answer he received was that the Jews were simply "doing their duty" and still Yad Vashem refuses to honor the Jewish rescuers. The group of people who are pushing for the honoring of the Jewish rescuers say that they are not asking for the same major recognition as the non-Jews but would like an acknowledgement of some sort.
my other journalistic articles are:
This particular article focuses on the museum's creative way to incorporate history by using film, photographs and artifacts. This article interviews Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and touches on the architecture designed by Moshe Safdi.
This article is simply announcing the opening of Yad Vashem's new museum in which leaders from 40 different nations attended. It includes the series of events that took place at the opening of the museum and the meaning behind the events such as the children's choir. The leaders of the different nations are featured with quotes and explanations of how they feel about the opening of the new museum.
Berlin Holocaust Memorial
Memorial used as public toilet
Berlin's Holocaust Memorial has attracted millions of visitors since it was inaugurated in May 2005. However, some of these visitors have shown little respect for the memorial -- and have used it as a public toilet. The article talks about the various methods undertaken to solve the behavior.
BBC News Memorial Opening
In this article about the opening of the Berlin Holocaust Memorial it talks about the many controversies surrounding the memorial
Almost 8 million visitors since 2005
This article talks about the experiences of visitors within the memorial. It also explains the ongoing evolution the memorial has experienced.
And finally, while looking through different news articles I came across a comment by a holocaust denier that I thought was laughable, but also slightly disturbing that he actually believed what he was saying. From this news site
quote: "This blatant lie named ” The Holocaust” has been exposed, and the world needs to know that fact. Though people still fear the “Scarlet ‘A’” designation when discussing this subject, they should confidently address any medium which chooses to display Holocaust historical information with pointed questions about the lack of physical and anecdotal proof of the event. For example; No Jewish Holocaust ‘expert’ (They are ALL experts on the ‘Holocaust’) will furnish ONE NAME of a Jewish person executed by Zyklon B gas in a concentration camp gas chamber during World War 2. There is a valid why reason Jews are reluctant to provide that name: Because NO ONE, Jewish or otherwise, was executed with Zyklon B gas in a concentration camp gas chamber during World War 2. No one witnessed any gassings of Jews, no training was provided the alleged executioners (And, if one learns of the difficulties encountered with the use of Zyklon B, they would realize the futility of executing people with it)., and no budget wass set aside to fund the executions. It is quite obvious that Jews simply re-circulated their World War 1 atrocity propaganda (virtually word for word..) and gave it the ‘treatment’ to perpetuate a gargantuan lie, which has survived for decades after it was first told."
Berlin's Holocaust Memorial has attracted millions of visitors since it was inaugurated in May 2005. However, some of these visitors have shown little respect for the memorial -- and have used it as a public toilet. The article talks about the various methods undertaken to solve the behavior.
BBC News Memorial Opening
In this article about the opening of the Berlin Holocaust Memorial it talks about the many controversies surrounding the memorial
Almost 8 million visitors since 2005
This article talks about the experiences of visitors within the memorial. It also explains the ongoing evolution the memorial has experienced.
And finally, while looking through different news articles I came across a comment by a holocaust denier that I thought was laughable, but also slightly disturbing that he actually believed what he was saying. From this news site
quote: "This blatant lie named ” The Holocaust” has been exposed, and the world needs to know that fact. Though people still fear the “Scarlet ‘A’” designation when discussing this subject, they should confidently address any medium which chooses to display Holocaust historical information with pointed questions about the lack of physical and anecdotal proof of the event. For example; No Jewish Holocaust ‘expert’ (They are ALL experts on the ‘Holocaust’) will furnish ONE NAME of a Jewish person executed by Zyklon B gas in a concentration camp gas chamber during World War 2. There is a valid why reason Jews are reluctant to provide that name: Because NO ONE, Jewish or otherwise, was executed with Zyklon B gas in a concentration camp gas chamber during World War 2. No one witnessed any gassings of Jews, no training was provided the alleged executioners (And, if one learns of the difficulties encountered with the use of Zyklon B, they would realize the futility of executing people with it)., and no budget wass set aside to fund the executions. It is quite obvious that Jews simply re-circulated their World War 1 atrocity propaganda (virtually word for word..) and gave it the ‘treatment’ to perpetuate a gargantuan lie, which has survived for decades after it was first told."
Monument to Stalin - Prague
Stalin's monument has been replaced with many things, and all of them have been unable to change the fact that for seven years, a 50-meter high monument to the Soviet leader towered over all that passed. There are dark stories surrounding the statue. One news report listed the tragedies surrounding it: the death of the creator, model, and even the driver of the truck that paraded Stalin's massive, decapitated marble head through the streets of Prague after the monument's destruction. Some took these successive unfortunate events as bad omens, which only darkens the clouds hovering over the site where the monument once stood. One blogger rightly points out, however, that different people are going to have different views of Stalin, and these views will affect how they view a monument in his honor. Stalin is within living memory for many, but he is also far before the time of many. The monument is much greater of a controversy for those who lived under and remember Communist government and Stalin's rule.
When I began researching this monument, I expected to find a lot of articles discussing the stain it left on Prague--even after its demolition. I guessed correctly; there are many sources that condemn the statue as "evil" or "hated". However, these sources tend to be from outside of the Czech Republic. A contributor to one travel blog site seems to have a very strong opinion of the monument, but not once does he reference a conversation with a Prague local, whose opinion would be more relevant. Although outside opinions are key when researching how views of a man with such world importance are valid, there is a distinction to be made between opinions of Stalin and opinions of the former monument in his honor. People who view the monument as having left an ugly stain are probably more concerned with who it was commemorating. While reading an article from the New York Times, however, I saw a very different viewpoint. One man protested that monuments are history, and should be kept simply for that purpose (regardless of sour opinions of who they honor). In most sources I found, younger generations were not really concerned with the site or its history. Obviously, different generations are going to have wildly different views on a subject like this, but there is a point where they meet. Everyone in Prague, when planning to meet up at the site of the former monument, says "Meet at Stalin".
When I began researching this monument, I expected to find a lot of articles discussing the stain it left on Prague--even after its demolition. I guessed correctly; there are many sources that condemn the statue as "evil" or "hated". However, these sources tend to be from outside of the Czech Republic. A contributor to one travel blog site seems to have a very strong opinion of the monument, but not once does he reference a conversation with a Prague local, whose opinion would be more relevant. Although outside opinions are key when researching how views of a man with such world importance are valid, there is a distinction to be made between opinions of Stalin and opinions of the former monument in his honor. People who view the monument as having left an ugly stain are probably more concerned with who it was commemorating. While reading an article from the New York Times, however, I saw a very different viewpoint. One man protested that monuments are history, and should be kept simply for that purpose (regardless of sour opinions of who they honor). In most sources I found, younger generations were not really concerned with the site or its history. Obviously, different generations are going to have wildly different views on a subject like this, but there is a point where they meet. Everyone in Prague, when planning to meet up at the site of the former monument, says "Meet at Stalin".
Hands of Victory - A Painful Symbol from a Terrible Regime or a Symbol with a Lesson
Although I tried to find articles from the time the Hands of Victory monument in Baghdad, Iraq was erected, I could not. But I did find many interesting articles that were more recent about the debates going on about whether to destroy this monument or leave it up. Some see the monument as a symbol of national pride or a reminder of past mistakes. They believe that it is necessary to preserve these monuments to preserve their history. Many other people see the monument as an exaltation of Saddam's regime and find this to be a painful memory. They believe that to rebuild their country, this monument and others similar to it must be destroyed.
The new Iraqi government agreed with them and in January 2007, they started the demolition. Interestingly, just a few days later the U.S. government demanded that they stop the demolition, which brings up the question of why they would do such a thing. What does it matter to them? I can see no real reason except for the U.S. government believing that this monument will discourage the same thing from happening again. This interference of the U.S. has angered the Iraqi government though.
This debate that has risen in Iraq is not a new one. Several other monuments from authoritarian regimes are being or have been removed. It is a controversial topic, and the answer comes down to the meaning of the monument. The problem is that the monument means different things to different people. Some see it as pride, others as Saddam's vanity. With this monument, they are thinking of reaching a compromise where one of the swords is left, and the rest are melted down and made into a new arch to represent their new country without losing its history.
Two Journalistic Pieces:
Both this article and this article present both sides in the debate of whether the monuments left over from Saddam Hussein's regime should be left as a tribute to history or destroyed.
Opinion Piece:
This opinion piece written by an Iraqi sculptor discusses his view on the removal of Iraq's monuments. It does not reference the Hands of Victory directly, but it is interesting to see how artists view the subject of the destruction of these monuments.
An interesting "article" to see:
Although this article, titled the Seven Wonders of the Totalitarian World, doesn't contain much information about this monument, it is fun article to read. It has pictures of monuments to rulers we have studied and other famous totalitarian rulers. I found the one in Libya especially intriguing.
The new Iraqi government agreed with them and in January 2007, they started the demolition. Interestingly, just a few days later the U.S. government demanded that they stop the demolition, which brings up the question of why they would do such a thing. What does it matter to them? I can see no real reason except for the U.S. government believing that this monument will discourage the same thing from happening again. This interference of the U.S. has angered the Iraqi government though.
This debate that has risen in Iraq is not a new one. Several other monuments from authoritarian regimes are being or have been removed. It is a controversial topic, and the answer comes down to the meaning of the monument. The problem is that the monument means different things to different people. Some see it as pride, others as Saddam's vanity. With this monument, they are thinking of reaching a compromise where one of the swords is left, and the rest are melted down and made into a new arch to represent their new country without losing its history.
Two Journalistic Pieces:
Both this article and this article present both sides in the debate of whether the monuments left over from Saddam Hussein's regime should be left as a tribute to history or destroyed.
Opinion Piece:
This opinion piece written by an Iraqi sculptor discusses his view on the removal of Iraq's monuments. It does not reference the Hands of Victory directly, but it is interesting to see how artists view the subject of the destruction of these monuments.
An interesting "article" to see:
Although this article, titled the Seven Wonders of the Totalitarian World, doesn't contain much information about this monument, it is fun article to read. It has pictures of monuments to rulers we have studied and other famous totalitarian rulers. I found the one in Libya especially intriguing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)