Counter memorials and counter monuments in Australia’s commemorative landscape: A systematic literature review

Over the course of the last four decades there has been a growing interest in the development and impact of counter memorials and counter monuments. While counter memorial and monument practices have been explored in Europe and the United States, relatively little research has been conducted in the Australian context. This systematic literature review examines the current state of scholarship by exploring what form counter monuments and memorials have taken and what events they have focussed on. A total of 134 studies met the selection criteria and were included in the final review. The major factors identified that have impacted on the development of the counter memorial and monument genre in Australia are international and domestic influences, historical, political and social-cultural events in Australia, the socio-political agenda of various individuals or organisations, and the aesthetics of the counter memorials and monuments themselves. The review found that Australia has a diverse and active counter memorial and monument genre, with commemorative practices honouring Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, women, victims of human made and natural disasters, the experiences of asylum seekers, and the histories and experiences of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer communities.

The Ethics of War and War-Making: A Philosophical Interrogation of African Involvement in the World Wars and Their Exclusion From War Monuments and Memorials

Wars are cataclysmic events that inflict horrendous damage on people and society. In the case of the two World Wars whose magnitudes were global, and manners of prosecution total, this assertion pales in logic. The dangers that a future global war could pose for humanity given the tremendous leaps forward in the science and technology of warfare and weapons since the last World War are tremendous. This paper aims to use the examination of the ethics of war and warfare as backdrop on the analytical assessment of the implications of the exclusion of Africans from both the memorial and monuments that honor soldiers and their service in the two World Wars, even though their service and sundry contributions are salient and tremendous. The paper calls up the issue of racial identity in both Wars in puzzles: Do African soldiers in the Wars share a common humanity with their White counterparts? If they do, another puzzle is the following: Why then is their service still being commodified, to the extent of exclusion in memorials and monuments to soldiers that served and died in both Wars? The damning extrapolation from these puzzles is that there is still the belief albeit erroneous, in the establishment circles that regardless of the facts of history about the Wars, Africans are still viewed as lacking in contributions to the resolution of the threats that the World Wars represented to global peace. To reposition that under laying mind-set, the paper recommends the inclusion of African values of complementarity and inclusiveness in the quest for lasting global peace and the prevention of future Wars.

Fear and loathing in monuments: Rethinking the politics and practices of monumentality and monumentalization

Monuments—and the function and import of monumentality and practices of monumentalization—are currently under incredible scrutiny. Should historical statues of racist figures and pasts be left as they are or removed and destroyed? Should they be rehomed in statue parks intended as final resting places for disgraced statues? Or should they be left but with additional monuments and memorials added to their surroundings to provide further context? At the root of these debates is a fundamental inquiry about not just what monuments are but, more importantly, what monuments are intended to do for and within a body politic. In scholarly dialogue with Doss, Santino, Savage, Young, and others, I assert that we need to reorient and expand our thinking about monuments. I argue that monuments function as speech acts, and although they rarely speak for an entire body politic, monuments play a critical role in shaping historical narratives and cultural reckoning with racist, brutally violent pasts and their lived afterlives. Moreover, while in many respects backward-facing, monuments are also profoundly future-facing in the values and narratives they symbolize and articulate and the kinds of spaces and community practices they have the potential to cultivate. I analyze two different monument projects: Aida Šehović’s transnational nomadic monument to the Srebrenica genocide, ŠTO TE NEMA, and Landmarked, Ada Pinkston’s embodied replacement and reimagining of spaces where Confederate and slavery monuments used to be in the Eastern United States. These monument projects, I argue, challenge us to revisit the politics and practices of monumentality and monumentalization in relation to unworked-through racist pasts and, in this incredible moment of reckoning and crisis, suggest new possibilities for how we understand—and cultivate—monuments moving forward.

RAPID DATA COLLECTION FOR THE AUDIT OF MONUMENTS & MEMORIALS IN SOUTH AFRICA

The tradition of memorialising people and events through physical constructions such as statues and monuments like in many countries, has shaped the public space of a modern South Africa. Considering the colonial and apartheid history of South Africa, these physical markers, often uncontextualized, continue to maintain positions of prominence within the modern streetscape.Since the turn of the democratic era in South Africa, a pressing need has existed to assess the impact of the markers on the heritage landscape of the country. An endeavour made more difficult by a lack of a comprehensive inventory of these resources across the country.The National Audit of Monuments and Memorials (NAMM) was designed to address this gap through a full national survey of monuments and memorials, conducted under the auspices of a job creation stimulus package designed to create short term employment in the wake of the economic fallout from the Covid-19 pandemic. Undertaking this project under this funding mechanism required that all phases of the project be undertaken within a six-month period.The compressed timeframes associated with this project required an approach that could support a level of fluidity to address the challenges of undertaking a project of this nature, whilst ensuring that the data collected by field surveyors can be monitored and included in the inventory of the national estate in an effective manner.The aim of this paper is to discuss and showcase the tools and workflows used to roll out and manage the large-scale national audit of monuments and memorials across South Africa.

Places of Memory

This chapter explores the ways in which place, and particularly places of war and wartime destruction, acted as sites of memory during the English republics. It considers three distinct memorial practices: local commemorations; folkloric and descriptive discourses; and monuments and memorials. These drew on existing traditions; but they also transformed them, producing new and, in some cases, controversial ways of remembering the recent past. It argues that, though no physical memorials were erected on England’s Civil War battlefields, sites of conflict nevertheless possessed considerable mnemonic power. It also emphasizes the important role that place played in the formation of distinct, geographically specific communities of memory. In London, the shared military experience of a large number of inhabitants provided the impetus for England’s first veterans’ commemoration, while in towns and cities that had been ravaged by war local authorities sought to enshrine their own particular, partisan version of the recent past.

Historical Memory and Practices of Monumental Commemoration of World War I in Australia (Part 2)

The authors’ research attention is focused on the specifics of the Australian memorial practices dedicated to the World War I. The statement is substantiated that in the Australian context memorials and military monuments formed a special post-war and post-traumatic part of the visual memory of the first Australian global military conflict. The features of the Australian memorial concept are clarified, the social function of the monuments and their important role in the psychological overcoming of the trauma and bitter losses experienced are noted. The multifaceted aspects of visualization of the monumental memory of the World War I in Australia are analyzed. Monuments and memorials are an important part of Australia’s visual heritage. It is concluded that each Australian State has developed its own concept of memory, embodied in various types and nature of monuments. The main ones are analyzed in detail: Shrine of Remembrance in Melbourne (1928–1934); Australian War Memorial in Canberra (1941); Sydney Cenotaph (1927-1929) and Anzac Memorial in Sydney (1934); Desert Mounted Corps Memorial in Western Australia (1932); Victoria Memorials: Avenue of Honour and Victory Arch in Ballarat (1917-1919), Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial (2004), Great Ocean Road – the longest nationwide memorial (1919-1932); Hobart War Memorial in the Australian State of Tasmania (1925), as well as Villers-Bretonneux Australian National Memorial in France dedicated to French-Australian cooperation during the World War I (1938). The authors demonstrate an inseparable connection between the commemorative practices of Australia and the politics of national identity, explore the trends in the creation and development of memorial practices. It is noted that the overwhelming majority of memorial sites are based on the clearly expressed function of a place of memory, a place of mourning and commemoration. It was found that the representation of the memorial policy of the memory of Australia in the first post-war years was implemented at the beginning at the local level and was partially influenced by British memorial practices, transforming over time into a nationwide cultural resource.

WWII MONUMENTS IN YUGOSLAVIA IN THE PRINTED MEDIA: BOOKS, TOURIST GUIDES AND A STICKER ALBUM – POPULARIZATION AND PROPAGANDA

Publications about monuments to fighters and victims of the Second World War in Yugoslavia began to appear in the late 1950s. They were dedicated to one or more monuments or memorial complexes. Over time, in tourist guides, among other sites, monuments and memorials began to be presented as a significant place worth a visit. During the second half of the 1970s, printing of special tourist guides dedicated only to monuments and memorial complexes started. Because of the popularity of monuments, a sticker album was also printed. The intention behind printing such publications was to inform citizens about monuments, but there was also an ideological side to it. Through books about monuments, the state and the Communist party wanted to emphasize again Yugoslav war efforts and the sacrifice that was made during the war. They used it as a propaganda tool in youth education, foreign diplomacy and overall state propaganda about the role of Yugoslav partisans, under the leadership of the Communist party, in the victory against fascism.