Curators make hard choices at 9/11 museum

Comments (6)

To me, the most remarkable thing about 9/11 was the huge rush of fire personnel and police into the building – and the fact that we don’t find these acts of personal human courage to be extraordinary – we expect that our civil servants will act with exceptional honor and bravery. Our biggest tribute to these heroes is that we expected -and received- nothing less than a full measure of sacrifice. We hold our heroes in high regard, for we also hold the highest of expectations. This is the message that we showed the world, is that when our enemies attacked with viciousness and no honor, that we responded by showing the nature of our culture. Our enemies sought to cut out our heart with one swift blow, but that blow fell far short of the mark. It only served to engage and enrage the nation, and it shattered only the fetters that bound the dogs of war, and left undamaged our national spirit.

Sep 06, 2011 5:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

The museum concept is disgusting. A simple memorial without the ghoulish details, any of them, no photographs of the perpetrators, no mangled effects, I haven’t seen the photos yet of most of them except I think of Atta once very early on. I have no desire or need to see any more of them. I don’t even want to know their names.

What s the point of listening to the last words of the flight attendant? Or of images of people falling from the building? For weeks after the event – the news channels couldn’t get enough of the images. Was the target audience so stupid, so dull, and unimaginative, that it couldn’t recognize the intense competition to show the most vivid images – in an attempt to capture the “iconic” image? There was money to be made, you fools.

Does 911 deserve such loving attention for an act of mass murder that has its equivalents throughout the world? Will the Iraqi’s be building a museum to the victims of the two wars – perhaps three wars – if one includes the Iran Iraq war?

I grew on up on vivid details of the concentration camps starting when I visited my Aunt in Long Island in the late 50’s and saw the first mention I had ever seen of them on a television show. It was an Ad starting with the opening of an oven door. We were children then, my sister and I. We weren’t Jewish and were living in Ohio where the subject hadn’t even been mentioned except to say that the Nazi’s killed people in Hospitals and old people, and the mentally “defective”. The Jewish issue wasn’t specifically mentioned specifically. But over the years that issue alone became the defining issues of “holocaust” studies. It seldom mentioned any other casualties of the Third Reich. It could also be presented in the most graphic images and not be considered pornography. Emaciated walking corpses were not unique to the death camps, nor to WWII and not even to civilians.

What the memorial will be is a tourist site for the self styled socially conscious. A kind of family values dead zone for people who actually love the details, enjoyed the show, and are just a little disappointed they can’t get more of it. And it is guaranteed to keep the blood on low boil for the foreign policy steam, hypocritical self serving propaganda value of it all and the sheer arrogance that can be maintained, for the price of the ticket.

The US is being manipulated by hucksters, PR experts and has no taste, no real self control, no true sense of self respect that isn’t manufactured on demand with special effects and production values for the gratification of it’s own pride.

Maybe the Lebanese have more sense after all. They built a nightclub on the site of the Shatilla massacre. Most people get tombstones. Many more – due to cemetery regulations get a stone flush with grade so the lawnmowers can pass over them easier.

W How about simply listing the names of the dead and enough with the obsessive devotion to the so-called artifacts. Done anywhere else anytime else or by anybody else and one would have reason to wonder why the survivor can’t leave the dead persons objects alone, in peace in the grave they didn’t get.

IT’S SHOWTIME

Sep 06, 2011 7:10pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

The museum concept is disgusting. A simple memorial without the ghoulish details, any of them, no photographs of the perpetrators, no mangled effects, I haven’t seen the photos yet of most of them except I think of Atta once very early on. I have no desire or need to see any more of them. I don’t even want to know their names.

What s the point of listening to the last words of the flight attendant? Or of images of people falling from the building? For weeks after the event – the news channels couldn’t get enough of the images. Was the target audience so stupid, so dull, and unimaginative, that it couldn’t recognize the intense competition to show the most vivid images – in an attempt to capture the “iconic” image? There was money to be made, you fools.

Does 911 deserve such loving attention for an act of mass murder that has its equivalents throughout the world? Will the Iraqi’s be building a museum to the victims of the two wars – perhaps three wars – if one includes the Iran Iraq war?

I grew on up on vivid details of the concentration camps starting when I visited my Aunt in Long Island in the late 50’s and saw the first mention I had ever seen of them on a television show. It was an Ad starting with the opening of an oven door. We were children then, my sister and I. We weren’t Jewish and were living in Ohio where the subject hadn’t even been mentioned except to say that the Nazi’s killed people in Hospitals and old people, and the mentally “defective”. The Jewish issue wasn’t specifically mentioned. But over the years that issue alone became the defining issues of “holocaust” studies. It seldom mentioned any other casualties of the Third Reich. It could also be presented in the most graphic images and not be considered pornography. Emaciated walking corpses were not unique to the death camps, nor to WWII and not even to civilians.

What the memorial will be is a tourist site for the self styled socially conscious. A kind of family values dead zone for people who actually love the details, enjoyed the show, and are just a little disappointed they can’t get more of it. And it is guaranteed to keep the blood on low boil for the foreign policy steam, hypocritical self serving propaganda value of it all and the sheer arrogance that can be maintained, for the price of the ticket.

The US is being manipulated by hucksters, PR experts and has no taste, no real self control, no true sense of self respect that isn’t manufactured on demand with special effects and production values for the gratification of it’s own pride.

Maybe the Lebanese have more sense after all. They built a nightclub on the site of the Shatilla massacre. Most people get tombstones. Many more – due to cemetery regulations get a stone flush with grade so the lawnmowers can pass over them easier.

W How about simply listing the names of the dead and enough with the obsessive devotion to the so-called artifacts. Done anywhere else anytime else or by anybody else and one would have reason to wonder why the survivor can’t leave the dead persons objects alone, in peace in the grave they didn’t get.

IT’S SHOWTIME
This is a corrected copy – I have no proof reader and used specifically twice in one sentence – sorry. Enough is enough is enough – the developers didn’t actually want to devote so much space to the memorial originally it should be remembered. May they figured they can make the museum pay for that very expensive real estate.

Sep 06, 2011 7:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

Here’s another way to put it for the hard of thinking. Not one object has to be put on display. If there is such an appetite for wreckage or the lurid details – photograph it and put it in a book and see if anyone would dare to buy it as a souvenir of the visit, in the gift shop?

There was an interesting movie a few years ago about an old Jewish book printer who, until he lost his mind, produced exquisite hand set volumes for collectors. He bankrupted himself to produce a sumptuous three volume set devoted to the study of “The Architecture of the Holocaust”, and lost his mind and control of the printing house to his son who still remained in the land of the living.

Coffee table books in fine leather with gilded spines on very high grade paper of industrial facilities devoted to murder, with plans and elevations of buildings and facilities never intended to be seen once they had completed their “mission” because even the NAZIs knew they were disgusting and not something they could ever admit.

Is there such a thing as narcissism for and with the dead? The wars of national aggrandizement will never end, will they?

Sep 06, 2011 7:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
John2244 wrote:

Im not so sure, I dont think the museum concept is disgusting. Being from East Asia, it happened one day and then it was out of the front pages in a month or so. But then later there was a war and then another war. It would be good to see this museum to see what the big deal is – after all there have been many episodes where 3000 of people have died since then that dont get the same attention. Why is this so special for 500 million on the planet but just a major story for the other 5.5 billion? I think the museum would be good. I recently went to India and went to a holocaust museum and saw pictures I never saw – it was very enlightening. Dont assume everyone lives in terrorist fearing world that you do.

Sep 06, 2011 11:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Hawkish599 wrote:

The museum couldn’t be gruesome enough. paintcan is talking nonsense. Show people 9/11 for what it was, a mini-holocaust in our time. Make it like the holocaust museum, a place that families with children choose to skip until their kids are old enough to realize what they are seeing.

Sep 06, 2011 12:28am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.