Memorial Sprawl

Platapus · 11-10-09, 08:56 PM

First a confession.

I am not a big fan of memorials, especially large ostentatious ones. In my opinion, memorials should be small, dignified, and understated. The emotional power of a memorial should come from that which is being memorialized not the structure/design of the memorial.

Living near Washington DC, I have seem what, in my opinion, is a disturbing trend to make new memorials bigger and more ostentatious than the previous one. It is almost like unless it is a huge memorial, the event must not be that important.

If anyone has seen the second FDR Memorial, you know what I am referring to. Notice I wrote the second FDR memorial for evidently the powers to be have forgotten that there already existed an FDR memorial in DC. I guess it was too dignified and small.

But recently in the news, you may have read about the construction for the Flight 93 memorial near Shanksville, PA. I think it is most approprate to erect a memorial at that location. But does it have to be that big?

The memorial will rest on over 2,200 acres total. For those who can't envision 2,200 acres it comes out to be about 100,000,000 square feet. A hundred MILLION square feet or almost 4 square miles.

Truly is the only way to memorize flight 93 is with a hundred million square foot memorial area? For comparison, the Pentagon, the worlds largest office building is just over 27 acres ( about 1 million square feet).

Should a memorial be 100 times bigger than the Pentagon?

I just think that making these huge ostentatious memorials cheapens the memorialized event.

Would a smaller memorial not be sufficient? Is the size of the memorial linked to the emotional size of the memorialized event/person.

I can only speak for DC, but if this trend keeps up, we may run out of space for future memorials.

Personally, I have a memory. I don't need huge ostentatious memorials. But I guess I am in the minority. To me, bigger memorials does not mean better memorials. I like my memorials small and dignified, not amusement park-like.

Just wanted to get that off my chest.

Sailor Steve · 11-10-09, 09:59 PM

How many Americans care if there's a Flight 93 memorial at all? I mean, I care, but I haven't thought about it since the last time somebody mentioned it to me, which was probably when the movie was released. What I'd like to know is who pays for these things? If it's me I'd like to have a say in it. If not, well, I guess they can build whatever they like.

GoldenRivet · 11-10-09, 10:23 PM

usually, mass mailings go out to individuals who are deemed likely to be interested in a memorial's construction.

these mass mailings have a sales pitch of sorts and ask for a donation.

for example, a lot of airline pilots or licensed pilots are likely to receive the letter on the flight 93 memorial.

some guys toss it in the trash, others send in $100

get enough of them to respond with $100 and you build whatever memorial you can afford.

usually how it works but not always.

Aramike · 11-11-09, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Personally, I have a memory. I don't need huge ostentatious memorials. But I guess I am in the minority. To me, bigger memorials does not mean better memorials. I like my memorials small and dignified, not amusement park-like.

Well-said, Platapus. I couldn't agree more.

Platapus · 11-11-09, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

What I'd like to know is who pays for these things? If it's me I'd like to have a say in it. If not, well, I guess they can build whatever they like.

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_...ional_Memorial

Quote:

The cost of the permanent memorial is estimated at $57 million, and will be covered by $30 million in private donations, plus federal and state funds.

Yes it is you paying for it and no you don't have any say in it.

11-10-09, 08:56 PM	#1
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,360 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Memorial Sprawl First a confession. I am not a big fan of memorials, especially large ostentatious ones. In my opinion, memorials should be small, dignified, and understated. The emotional power of a memorial should come from that which is being memorialized not the structure/design of the memorial. Living near Washington DC, I have seem what, in my opinion, is a disturbing trend to make new memorials bigger and more ostentatious than the previous one. It is almost like unless it is a huge memorial, the event must not be that important. If anyone has seen the second FDR Memorial, you know what I am referring to. Notice I wrote the second FDR memorial for evidently the powers to be have forgotten that there already existed an FDR memorial in DC. I guess it was too dignified and small. But recently in the news, you may have read about the construction for the Flight 93 memorial near Shanksville, PA. I think it is most approprate to erect a memorial at that location. But does it have to be that big? The memorial will rest on over 2,200 acres total. For those who can't envision 2,200 acres it comes out to be about 100,000,000 square feet. A hundred MILLION square feet or almost 4 square miles. Truly is the only way to memorize flight 93 is with a hundred million square foot memorial area? For comparison, the Pentagon, the worlds largest office building is just over 27 acres ( about 1 million square feet). Should a memorial be 100 times bigger than the Pentagon? I just think that making these huge ostentatious memorials cheapens the memorialized event. Would a smaller memorial not be sufficient? Is the size of the memorial linked to the emotional size of the memorialized event/person. I can only speak for DC, but if this trend keeps up, we may run out of space for future memorials. Personally, I have a memory. I don't need huge ostentatious memorials. But I guess I am in the minority. To me, bigger memorials does not mean better memorials. I like my memorials small and dignified, not amusement park-like. Just wanted to get that off my chest. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

11-10-09, 09:59 PM	#2
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	How many Americans care if there's a Flight 93 memorial at all? I mean, I care, but I haven't thought about it since the last time somebody mentioned it to me, which was probably when the movie was released. What I'd like to know is who pays for these things? If it's me I'd like to have a say in it. If not, well, I guess they can build whatever they like. __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

11-10-09, 10:23 PM	#3
GoldenRivet Subsim Aviator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 8,726 Downloads: 146 Uploads: 0	usually, mass mailings go out to individuals who are deemed likely to be interested in a memorial's construction. these mass mailings have a sales pitch of sorts and ask for a donation. for example, a lot of airline pilots or licensed pilots are likely to receive the letter on the flight 93 memorial. some guys toss it in the trash, others send in $100 get enough of them to respond with $100 and you build whatever memorial you can afford. usually how it works but not always. __________________