Caroline Klibanoff, Northeastern University
Proposal Type
Panel
Seeking
- Seeking Additional Presenters
- Seeking General Feedback and Interest
Related Topics
- Digital
- Memory
- Place
Abstract
I propose a panel on re-envisioning memorials and monuments in the digital age. Given recent roiling debates about who and what should be commemorated, can we look beyond the limited, static, single-story nature of granite and bronze and leverage the digital to imagine a new future for this important form of public history? (Related aspects of this topic of commemoration welcome).
Description
I am looking for panelists to fill a panel on this subject, with expertise on the subject of commemoration and public memory but ideally with an eye toward new forms of monuments and digital memory-keeping.
My own project, the Digital Atlas of Southern Memory, is a prototype of a new form of commemoration that uplifts local and family history. It is an intervention in the granite-and-bronze hierarchy for visualizing and practicing broad-based, citizen-driven commemoration, one that showcases a multiplicity of viewpoints rather than a single, narrow story lacking context and interpretation. It aims to be an engine for doing what public history, at its best, should do: meet modern, digital audiences where they are; help them connect with their own history, and awaken a curiosity – and usually, an opinion – about what they hope will be remembered.
Others have made significant headway on reimagining monuments and memorials, and calling for more inclusive representation. Paul Farber’s Monument Lab, the organizers behind the Ida B. Wells memorial, and of course the recently opened EJI memorial all surface new ideas about who and what and how we remember.
I am seeking general feedback on the interest in doing a panel like this and on suggestions or connections to other panelists working on these issues. I appreciate any feedback and welcome panelists!
If you have a direct offer of assistance, sensitive criticism, or wish to pass along someone’s contact information confidentially, please get in contact directly: Caroline Klibanoff, [email protected]
All feedback and offers of assistance should be submitted by July 1, 2018. If you have general ideas or feedback to share, please feel free to use the comments feature below.
Fascinating session idea! I’d suggest changing the title – as is, it suggests that the session focuses on what to do with existing memorials… Maybe “new directions in…”? You might want to include platforms like Curatescape, which offers a kind of digital memorial/digital marker opportunity.
Thank you (and loved your latest book, by the way.) That’s a great point – maybe something along the lines of “New Directions in Commemoration” or “Alternative Forms of Memorialization in the Digital Age.”
Please excuse my unintentional, auto-populated avatar – I’m really not sure where it came from (although I am *that* excited about using digital tools to re-imagine commemoration).
I am extremely interested in possibly working with you on this panel. As an MA student at Texas State University, I also study contemporary commemoration especially as it pertains to non-traditional (not material or statue and pedestal) memorials. My thesis examines 3 case studies of such non-material and non-traditional memorials: the Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail, the National Civil Rights Museum at the Lorraine Motel, and the EJI’s Memorial to Peace and Justice. These site are all similar in that they represent places of violence and black advocacy on the American landscape where such voices are typically under-represented. I argue that place, landscape, and interpretation creates a dynamic (rather than static) memorial that serves its local/national community. Such dynamic memorials with the ability to change and grow are more equipped to create spaces for discussions about history and memory rather than static, traditional memorials. Whereas I do not utilize digital methods in the same way that you do in your research, digital media and access plays a large role in my argument, and my sites are all focused in the 21st century.
I think that our research is connected in a way that could examine what collaborative and inclusive memorialization looks like for the future.
Sounds like fun! I’d think a bit about how to frame this re: our “repair work” theme. For instance, considering new possibilities for digital memory makes me think of all the old memories floating around on the interwebs: deceased folks on FB, ancestry.com obsession, eBay, etc. Can/should new modes repair old modes? What do we really mean when we talk about mnemonic inclusivity, and how might its digital possibilities expand (or not) what’s achievable in meatspace?
Lots of great ideas here! I was struck by Krista’s comment that “Such dynamic memorials with the ability to change and grow are more equipped to create spaces for discussions about history and memory rather than static, traditional memorials.” To me it raises the larger question: what are the capabilities and limitations of these various commemorative forms? Physical/material monuments still offer some things that virtual ones don’t (eg they create physical spaces where people can gather, whether amicably or not) – so what are the unique advantages of the digital? And can we envision hybrid memorial forms (eg digital projections onto existing physical monuments) that blur the line? I think the “Beyond Granite” session title gets at all of this very well, and just agree with Steve that a revised subtitle could tease out some of the broader implications.
This might profit from one or two participants from outside of the US or presentations that focus on examples outside of North America. So you might want to broaden your proposal accordingly.
This proposal is quite interesting, it can tie into the conference theme of “repair” well. It will encourage new ways forward. Best.