 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-06-07 06:11
The Berlin Holocaust memorial has been opened for the public recently. As You all know, it consists of a fiel of more than 1200 upright slabs of very dark, densely compressed concrete of various sizes (beneath this is placed an information centre), and it was conceived and realized by Eisenman, after a (though necessary) debate lasting 17 years.
Visitors to this memorial react, confront themselves and assimilate those slabs in various ways, the old, or mature, in silence, walking in between the rectangular collumns, some iterate the Jewish (and Hindu) rite to place little stones on top of the graves (which they interpret the coffin-like steles to be), or flowers, and there´s the apparently unavoidable group of youngsters and children who hop on top of the columns and conduct some sport which was called "column-jumping", there´s people who sit themselves on the slabs like on benches and have a go at their coke, children play hide-and-seek...
Now what I wanted to ask is, and since we as musicians/performers/composers do not live outside history/society/other hermeneutical horizons different form ourselves,
- music and tact being always related to each other by way of, I don´t know how to name it properly, empathy, care, attention to other-ness, - am I (and the others,usually older people) wrong to find "column-jumping" and picknicking an abomination, there, at this place? I had a confrontation with a visitor there, a "hopper", in shorts and sunglasses,smoking, and he said "it´s there for the people" (obviously not realizing that those people he referred to were 6 million murdered Jews, and not "now let´s visit this Holocaust -thingy, and boy I want something to eat afterwards"-guys like him), and me going "oh yes, but not as playground" etc...the newspapers hold it that this sort of discussion is followed to the letter many times, klichee-ing itself already.
What do You think of that?
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Viking
Date: 2005-06-07 08:28
I find that these memorials affect me very deeply, and I would be very much on your side with chastising anyone who was in effect desecrating the monument by their attitude or behaviour.
On a recent visit to the Arc de Triomphe in Paris I broke down and wept, thinking about my grandfather who had been at the Somme in The Great War and the friends he told me he had seen die there. The misery and hardship, and the sacrifices made for all of us who are now free, really get to me when confronted with a memorial of that type. I am 49, and while I sat quietly in a corner to recover myself I could see that many other people felt the same, whereas some were totally oblivious to the meaning of what they were looking at. I felt sorry for those who did not understand, for I truly believe that without a feeling of hurt and pain when we look back at those sacrifices, we cannot properly focus on building a better world for the future, yes even the future of those who don't care.
Sadly, we seem to live in a world where gentleness, emotion, caring, decency, honesty, selflessness and thoughtfulness are looked down on by many people in society as some sort of 'weakness'. Personally I find such attributes wonderful in people, and would seek to foster them in everyone.
The selfish behaviour of only a handful of people can affect the lives of hundreds of others in only a short time, and yet nothing seems to get through to some of them.
A lot gets through to me, but then I have what is called "an artist's temperament". I would rather have that than be cold to the world.
Take care
Graeme
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2005-06-07 09:11
I would have hoped that people would behave at the memorial much as they might in a church, with respect and decorum.
If they do not, perhaps it is a sign that the memorial itself has been badly designed, that it fails to elicit the right emotions. I haven't seen it, so can't comment.
I visited Berlin for a week in 1983. It was a very different city then, of course. There were things I found very moving: the ruins of the Kaiser Wilhelm Gedaechtniskirche, the little crosses commemorating people killed while fleeing over the Wall. I wonder whether those crosses are still there? I hope they are: I fear they were cleared away when the Wall was cleared away.
I also saw one or two things that seemed downright insensitive and bombastic.
The monuments that worked for me were the ones that happened almost by accident, that were there because that was where history had happened. Nobody decided to build a ruined church. Still less did they decide that it would be nice to have a monument to the Kaiser: the utterly inappropriate name of the church itself just adds to its impact.
It is always a problem to know when we should remember and when we should move on. When I lived in France in the early eighties it was not uncommon to see street signs referring to people "murdered by the Germans". I wonder whether all those signs have gone now? I think it is probably time for them to be removed.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Viking
Date: 2005-06-07 09:44
You raise a good point, David, about when we should 'move on'.
Remembering in a way that is done to continue predjudice, racial tension and bigotry is clearly wrong, and should not be allowed to continue.
Remembering, with affection, respect and gratitude, those who have given of themselves to enable our lives to be fuller and freer, is our priviledge, at least in my opinion.
Tellingly, my grandfather remembered the Great War not with hatred or violent thoughts towards the people he had fought, but with sadness for those he had lost and a desire that he could have lived with his enemy in peace and forgiveness. He had several German friends after the war, and I am sure he didn't feel bitterness to them, just the human bond of existence together on the same planet. He felt very moved by those the German people had lost too, but had felt constrained at the time to be part of the boundary that was set up by the Allies to stop the Kaiser's dictatorship. He was a truly remarkable man, but his feelings were echoed by many others of his generation, especially once they had time to stop and think about it all.
Graeme
Post Edited (2005-06-07 09:53)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda
Date: 2005-06-07 11:33
Societies need to move on in the sense of not remaining stuck in the past, in order to progress. However, if one can move along and still remember the lessons that must be remembered from the past, then those mistakes don't need to be repeated. That's the vital part of history.
There's something about growing older and having been broadsided a few times by ugly experiences in life to make us empathize with others. Perhaps a memorial won't mean a lot to ourselves, but a deep respect for others would call for decency and empathy in how we treat their feelings and their monuments. We might not feel what they feel but humility would tell us that we have to believe them when they tell us the depth of the pain, the same experience could very well occur to us sooner or later. From personal experience I've found that I didn't know the extreme pain of death until it almost happened to our family. It's something no one should have to go through, but happens all the time.
Perhaps as artists we're by nature more sensitive to these things. We can show by example the respect that's due to others, and perhaps ease the pain by our music when the opportunity arises.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2005-06-07 12:20
Graeme writes "those who have given of themselves".
Often there was little giving involved. Most of the troops killed in both World Wars were conscripts. They didn't _give_ their lives, they had no choice, or very little.
Most of the Holocaust victims didn't give either. They were not willing, nor even unwilling, victims of a battle for freedom. They were just ordinary people with the misfortune to have the wrong ancestry in the eyes of the German state.
The guys whose names who see, or used to see, on French street corners were mostly resistance fighters. Some were just the passive victims of reprisal killings.
What story does the Holocaust memorial tell? Does it say: "Let us remember these heroes?" "Let us remember these people who died for no reason whatever?" "Let us remember the villains who did this thing?"
How does the ordinary Berliner in the street react to it? Does he think: "It is right to have a memorial in the city from where this crime was organised?" "This is all a long time ago and we don't need it forcing down our throats now?" "This is good publicity for Germany but really it means nothing to me personally?" "This is all very well, but it would have been better to spend the money on the living?"
I'm asking questions, not giving my answers. No hate mail please.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Viking
Date: 2005-06-07 12:47
Ok, 'gave their lives' was an imprecise expression. Perhaps I meant 'sacrificed their lives', or maybe those 'whose lives were taken from them'. My meaning was clear, I feel, and semantics are not the way forwards in fostering human peace and social compatibility.
Sadly I think most 'civilised' countries have been involved in committing genocide in their history.
Britain is certainly very far from guiltless of such crimes - slave trade, North American Indians, Australian Natives, Indian Sub-continent natives, spring to mind immediately.
France and Spain are guilty too, with attrocities in South America, etc.
Genocide is going on now as we speak, in several African countries, in Indonesia in places, etc.
To me the point is to remember what has happened, with a view to helping prevent it happening again, if we can.
No easy answers to your questions, David, but no way of dodging the future either. Better to at least try and learn from the past, even if that is hard to fathom.
Graeme
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2005-06-07 12:58
My point was not really to argue with your choice of words. But Markus's original post asked why the Memorial was not respected. I was trying to suggest that one possible reason might be that it fails to tell the story accurately, or maybe it fails to tell any coherent story at all.
I don't know. I haven't seen it. Maybe it does a brilliant job and the kids climbing on it are just mindless idiots.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2005-06-07 13:11
Seems that we have finally run out of clarinetting topics.....................
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Berger
Date: 2005-06-07 14:12
True, Wm, except for the possibility that some of the musical "groups" at the Holocaust "death camps" might have had wind inst. [cl?] players as well as strings, have often wondered. Right here in Okla City, we have a "fitting" memorial to the Murrah Building Bombing of 1995, based on Empty Chairs, but happily have not ever heard of any disrespectful behavior. When I visit/drive by, I think of the Holocaust and the mess in Iraq/Afgan., and ask myself "how can this have happened in a civilized world", and share at least a twinge of guilt. Thots in the AM . Don
Thanx, Mark, Don
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2005-06-07 14:41
Right on, Don, and no disrespect was intended by my posting, but a topic of this importance and scope needs have its own website for complete and adequate dicussion. This could open a whole new "box of reeds" that could leave no room for what we all come here for--to share the "agony and the ectasy(s)" of making music with our clarinets. I share the concerns of all of the above, but consider where all of this could lead........
(just trying to remain focused this AM--exits for more caffine)
Post Edited (2005-06-07 15:03)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Viking
Date: 2005-06-07 15:37
Willaim and Don
Agreed, not best place for this discussion, so I will drop it now, and my apologies if I was prolonging the issue.
Now, where did I put that hunk of wood with strange bits of metal brackets and lots of silly holes in it??
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2005-06-07 15:42
I'm trying to think of a different perspective that could cast just a little redemption for the casual treatment of the memorial by some.
I suppose the memorial in a sense, could be seen as an art work. As do many worthy art works, it makes a statement. Perhaps the people using it as a playground could be seen as ADDING to the art work - i.e. be seen as being PART of it, making an additional statement...
Perhaps they make the statement that in spite of the horrors, the world carries on, with some people managing to leave those horrors behind, and move to a more positive and optimistic present. They overlay the memorial with the hope of a better future, like the child who emerges unhurt from a site of devastation.
In this light they could be seen with more acceptance. We all have different roles to play. For some, their role is remembrance. For others, their role is to help us move on - stop nurturing the hurt of the past, even if they do this unwittingly.
My apologies if this suggested perspective offends anybody.
It was offered in the hope of less hurt all round.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: crnichols
Date: 2005-06-07 18:51
War memorials are a profound expression of deep felt loss and respect. I don't think their discussion is out of place anywhere.
Christopher Nichols
1st Infantry Division Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-06-07 19:13
crnichols wrote:
> War memorials are a profound expression of deep felt loss and
> respect. I don't think their discussion is out of place
> anywhere.
Discussion is fine; however, as in everything, one must be willing to accept other well-reasoned points of view.
I left this thread up (rather than closing it) as it is thought-provoking and does, in a stretched sense, have to do with music.
Respect takes many forms (even in church - Go to a full-fledged, down to earth, gospel revival sometimes ...); letting small children run around and play around some memorial may be a sign of respect. For whom did those people lay down their lives, conscripts or otherwise?
Listen to Henryk Gorecki's Symphony 3 - sorrowful, yet a spark of light in Dawn Upshaw's voice singing the plaintive Polish text.
A memorial.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ron Jr.
Date: 2005-06-07 20:48
Markus,
As musicians, I ague that we often draw from our emotions to create more beautiful music. (Think about how we will play a piece over and over changing dynamics, tempi, etc., just so that we can coax every ounce of musical beauty from the piece.) I also think that musicians in general are more sensitive to both the beauty and the ugliness in the world. We are often offended by things, especially sounds, that others can ignore.
So of course when we enter hallowed ground like a memorial, musicians are struck by the depth of emotion, and the magnitude of suffering.
However, what is sacred to one person is inconsequential to another. And over time most things become inconsequential to most everyone.
For instance, at one time the pyramids were the sacred resting place of the pharaohs. These pharaohs were GODS to many people and the pyramids the graves of the gods.
Today we look at the remains from the pyramids and admire their beauty, and workmanship. Inwardly we may even chortle that early humans actually worshipped these people as gods.
So perhaps by accepting that some people are more sensitive than others and some people move on quicker than others allows us to understand why someone can see a memorial from a purely physical perspective.
It is our openess to our emotions through our connection with music that makes us inherently more sensitive to our beautiful, and sometimes ugly world.
Ron Jr.
Post Edited (2006-03-06 17:33)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 3dogmom
Date: 2005-06-08 01:04
I was reading these postings and thinking basically what Gordon expressed - that for the memorials to exist in today's space and link today's people, in whatever way, to the event has some value. Hope I said that essentially correctly, Gordon. Apologies if not, it's late.
I think as musicians and artists we have a sense of what a memorial means, having played for many such occasions. We therefore are imbued with a sense of correct decorum for a "solemn occasion". Not everyone else in the world has this, nor are they necessarily taught it. More's the pity.
Sue Tansey
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-06-08 06:37
Yes, the crosses for those who were killed by trying to flee the GDR are still there, flanking the river Spree´s arc there where now the houses of parliament are. / As far as I see it, the memorial by Eiseman tries to get beyond the paedagogics of "moving" or "evoking emotions", precisely because those are of finite duration, because they are, though justly so, not more than movements of the psyche - the slabs offer no consolation, no explanation, no names, no reference points where the visitor can contemplate-and-then-move-on. The Eisenman memorial blocks. that´s what it does, blocks the view, the enlightened thought of something like that will never happen again, blocks the hypocrisy of the all so easy "Man, glad not to be living back then, those were bad times under the nazi regime..." etc. The columns stand there, slightly,nauseatingly tilted, as if threatening to move and topple over, You loose Yourself all so easily in that maze-without-a-maze, can hurt badly there. The memorial doesn´t speak, it reverberates what enters it. The terror, the mourning, the accusation, the loss, and, yes, the ignorance.
Gordon´s thoughts mark an important point here: Ignorance and bluntness are in fact also a way of dealing with the past, and of course inevitably so "column-jumping" and the "that money could have been spent on something else" - blase of the Berliner are becoming a part of the memorial themselves. I don´t know, but to me a human being should at least try to deal with her/his bloody stains on his/her jacket, especially if the cloth never has been really yours but was handed down to oneself. It´s a "wurstigkeit" that drives me mad.
As far as examples go - Górecki is a superb one, but just try to listen to Schoenberg´s "A Survivour from Warsaw", one of the most important pieces I´ve been given the opportunity to perform, with the percussion performing the clubbing to death of so many lives, the ragged choir accompanying the singstimme of alternately an old man´s paternoster and a faschist spitting words. There was an old woman there at the memorial, who just uttered these words "six millions" to her probably great-nephew, and this child did hop around. One can hear the great modern pieces performed at the "Jüdischer Kulturverein" there, and art is certainly never a shelf to put "those moving moments" on and then be the same wolfe to one´s fellows as usually/before. Art, and especially music, for one cannot "hear away", must hurt, stop and shake, must be utterly demanding and excruciating, must never be a harmonizing answer but always be a most complex and confronting question. For everything else there´s chocolate. If the Arc in Paris doesn´t move one to tears anymore, this loss of the ability to cry in the face of those dead for us, something irretrievable is lost, because having what before here has been called an artist´s temperament is hardly a subject to teaching (perhaps scraping away the skin over our nerves is).
I brought this topic up and am grateful that it was allowed to because this confrontation with an other, with my own helplessness and frustration, and of course, just as my teacher,a benedictine monk, called a jesuit´s rush, my wanting to hit the "column-jumpers" over the head when they romp aroud there with the ears clogged with some tralala, all this messy melange of feelings and demands as a performer I wanted to relate, and I´m grateful to You that we met there, at this topic, whereas in strictly musical terms we wouldn´t want to know each other more closely, perhaps.
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: crnichols
Date: 2005-06-08 10:15
I wasn't actually commenting on behavior around war memorials, someone's post implied that this subject had no place on the clarinet bulletin board. As I recall, one of our masterworks, Messiaen's quartet for the end of time, was composed and premiered while he was a prisoner of war, and I think Markus' posting ultimately opened up a discussion of music and how it relates to war. Anyone who has experienced one of Murray Sidlin's presentations, especially the Defiant Requiem (Verdi Requiem) or the Britten War Requiem, understands how relevant war is to music. Some of my colleagues have collected songs written by deployed soldiers and are working on contracting major artists to record them. Artistic expression is a human reaction to the emotional effects of war.
Christopher Nichols
1st Infantry Division Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
