Now with a few hours to think about the remarks by "bk in ky"
concerning the Vietnam Veterans' lack of art appreciation, I would
like to suggest that the veterans who felt the need to raise money
to place a more traditional memorial in the area of the black wall
point us to the unfortunate failure of the Vietnam War Memorial as
a memorial. Now, before you get upset with that statement, I must
explain that I, like most of you, feel the wall and walk is a
wonderful space full of powerful symbolism on many levels. It is a
commanding work of art, but is as successful as a memorial? The
fact that those, or at least some of those, who were to be
memorialized by the spot must have felt it lacked something or they
would not have turned to find funding for the traditional bronze
added near the primary memorial.
Twenty plus years ago, these men, enlistees and draftees alike,
were quietly, too quietly, being discharged and distributed back
into a social environment filled with a thick fog, national
embarrassment and shame. No hero's welcome. Nothing, but the
occasional jeer or spitting hippie. For the majority of our
society, the war had been an agonizing "MEDIA EVENT."
For those who had been in combat, it had been an unmentionable
PERSONAL gauntlet where one struggled with both the physical and
psychological limits of the species. Nobody really won
in the depraved struggle, but some made the "freedom bird"
more alive and less broken then others.
As one who was drafted against his will and who chose not to go to
Canada out of a sense of family and national respect, the fact that
the armies were not allowed to fight in a traditional sense, made
the experience surreal and perverse. Then quickly came the
realization that you were picking up the pieces of buddies and
putting what you could find into bodybags to be sent home to their
mothers, all for nothing. A seething rage found its place in the
pit of your stomach. Even the task of keeping that fury under
control became a PERSONAL struggle. On occasion you find yourself
envious of the dead.
But war was good business so the Nation invested its sons (and
daughters), or at least those sons and daughters who would not or
could not run. When the dead and living came home, the arbiters of
taste for the Nation chose a memorial for these veterans which was
a work of Art, full of symbolism and silence.
As we know, the corporate world of the past two decades has
preferred dispassionate and nonobjective examples of art for their
collections to avoid possible conflicts which can result when
figurative and more specific effigies are affiliated with their
corporate images. Was the Vietnam Memorial more of the same?
Was it the perception of some subliminal need with the returning
Vietnam Veterans who felt the memorial grounds needed something
else, something figurative, something PERSONAL, something
biomorphic or at least, human like the struggle they were trying to
move beyond? Perhaps, as they tried to make the adjustment back
into this society, the memorial space had to have some tie with
memorials of previous wars. Was the figurative addition to the
grounds a token gesture of nationalistic honor to cover up the
horror, the lies and the human waste which was that war? Has the
addition served to complete the space as a MEMORIAL for those who
saw the war via. TV, for the Veterans who died, their families, and
those who continue to try to put it behind them and search for a
trace of patriotic pride in the whole affair?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Fromme Salado Middle School / East Central I.S.D.
rfromme@xxxxxxxxx Adj. Fac. Palo Alto College / A.A.C.C.D.
S.M.S. 210-648-3310 Adj. Fac. Southwest Craft Center
Home 210-393-4176 San Antonio, TX
concerning the Vietnam Veterans' lack of art appreciation, I would
like to suggest that the veterans who felt the need to raise money
to place a more traditional memorial in the area of the black wall
point us to the unfortunate failure of the Vietnam War Memorial as
a memorial. Now, before you get upset with that statement, I must
explain that I, like most of you, feel the wall and walk is a
wonderful space full of powerful symbolism on many levels. It is a
commanding work of art, but is as successful as a memorial? The
fact that those, or at least some of those, who were to be
memorialized by the spot must have felt it lacked something or they
would not have turned to find funding for the traditional bronze
added near the primary memorial.
Twenty plus years ago, these men, enlistees and draftees alike,
were quietly, too quietly, being discharged and distributed back
into a social environment filled with a thick fog, national
embarrassment and shame. No hero's welcome. Nothing, but the
occasional jeer or spitting hippie. For the majority of our
society, the war had been an agonizing "MEDIA EVENT."
For those who had been in combat, it had been an unmentionable
PERSONAL gauntlet where one struggled with both the physical and
psychological limits of the species. Nobody really won
in the depraved struggle, but some made the "freedom bird"
more alive and less broken then others.
As one who was drafted against his will and who chose not to go to
Canada out of a sense of family and national respect, the fact that
the armies were not allowed to fight in a traditional sense, made
the experience surreal and perverse. Then quickly came the
realization that you were picking up the pieces of buddies and
putting what you could find into bodybags to be sent home to their
mothers, all for nothing. A seething rage found its place in the
pit of your stomach. Even the task of keeping that fury under
control became a PERSONAL struggle. On occasion you find yourself
envious of the dead.
But war was good business so the Nation invested its sons (and
daughters), or at least those sons and daughters who would not or
could not run. When the dead and living came home, the arbiters of
taste for the Nation chose a memorial for these veterans which was
a work of Art, full of symbolism and silence.
As we know, the corporate world of the past two decades has
preferred dispassionate and nonobjective examples of art for their
collections to avoid possible conflicts which can result when
figurative and more specific effigies are affiliated with their
corporate images. Was the Vietnam Memorial more of the same?
Was it the perception of some subliminal need with the returning
Vietnam Veterans who felt the memorial grounds needed something
else, something figurative, something PERSONAL, something
biomorphic or at least, human like the struggle they were trying to
move beyond? Perhaps, as they tried to make the adjustment back
into this society, the memorial space had to have some tie with
memorials of previous wars. Was the figurative addition to the
grounds a token gesture of nationalistic honor to cover up the
horror, the lies and the human waste which was that war? Has the
addition served to complete the space as a MEMORIAL for those who
saw the war via. TV, for the Veterans who died, their families, and
those who continue to try to put it behind them and search for a
trace of patriotic pride in the whole affair?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Fromme Salado Middle School / East Central I.S.D.
rfromme@xxxxxxxxx Adj. Fac. Palo Alto College / A.A.C.C.D.
S.M.S. 210-648-3310 Adj. Fac. Southwest Craft Center
Home 210-393-4176 San Antonio, TX