The trauma of Memory Transmission through the 911 Museum

The trauma of Memory Transmission through the 911 Museum

The US experienced one of the most traumatizing events on the 11the September 2001 when terrorists hijacked a passenger plan and turned it into a missile, which they aimed at the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon house, leaving behind several people dead and destruction of property. The bomb attack on the World Trade Centre was the more devastating between the two because it took place during the day, when the building was fully occupied and activities underway[1]. The devastating impact of the attack left the US with a lot to analyze. The images captured of the WTC coming down and scores of people injured while several dead crated a traumatizing scene for the people of the US[2]. Regardless of the interpretation of the event, the attack on the US territory by terrorists was inhumane and caused serious trauma to the people at survivors as well as people that saw the event online or in images. As a means of remembering people that lost their lives during the event, the government sought to construct a museum where photographs, images, and captured videos can be preserved for future references. While the government’s intention was to have a central place where information about the event can be retrieved, some people believed that the construction of the museum was symbolically awarding the terrorists that caused havoc in the US.

Trauma is defined as the physical or psychological injuries to the victims. However, the trauma can also be understood from the concept of encoding the historical event in the US. The sociopolitical use of the construction of the museum would play the greatest role in understanding the opposition that the government encountered from various quotas. The 9/11 archive offers the visitors to the museum an opportunity to witness the actual event as it unfolded during the day of the attack. To begin with, the artifacts are composed of images of people mourning and asking for help from the people nearby[3]. The social implication of the images is that the society of the US is desperately in need of help, and instead of the government providing the much-needed help, it engages in collecting the images to keep in the museum.

The event that took place on September 11^th caused a global turned the perception and narrative of terrorism in the world[4]. The ordeal left the country under tight surveillance and concerns raised over the homeland security and the people of the US. Given the nature and the impact of 9/11 on the US land, the federal government constructed the museum as a way of remembering the victims and survivors of the event in the country. The media was increasingly involved in spreading the images and video of the event, causing a global panic that created instant fear among the people that were directly or indirectly affected by the event. The nature of the attack exposed the US to the global debate about the preparedness of the country in protecting the citizens against international threats such as terrorism. Most importantly, the role of the media in exposing the victims of the attack was questioned because the media showed videos and images of people calling out for help, the tall buildings coming down, and some images of dead people. Therefore, the decision by the federal government to construct the museum was considered a measure in futility because it would traumatize the survivors of the event. When people sit to see what happened during the attack in the museum, it is possible that the memory would come back in full and that they are likely to experience emotional distress. In addition, people that lost their close relatives and friends would consider the museum as the place where they could relive the event as it occurred.

While the government’s initiative to build the museum was purely on the heritage concerns, the interpretation would differ from one person to another; some people questioned the significance of the museum in protecting the vulnerable population. On the other hand, some people considered the construction of the museum as a national contribution towards remembering people that lost their lives and the one that was injured during the attack. What became apparent is that there were varied understandings about the nature and reasons for constructing the museum. Subsequently, the question as to the significance of the construction towards the history of the US arose.

The historical perspective of the American people makes it clear that the country had the right and obligations to remember the people that lost their lives in the attack. Historically, countries have, for a long time, been engaged in building and preserving their historical artifacts for the future generation. Namibia, for instance, preserved Herero and Nama skulls as a way of remembering the victims[5]. The reason for preserving the culture should not be linked to psychologically torturing the victims or survivors, but as a national heritage and for historical reasons. Most importantly, the people of Namibia can own the skulls as a national pride because they managed to access and keep them for the future generation[6]. Similarly, the US has an obligation to preserve historical events for the future generation and for historical purposes. However, there was the need to create awareness among the victims, the affected population, and the survivors of the event to enable them to accommodate the unending distress and memories of the event. Psychological preparedness of the victims and survivors would be instrumental in making them to accept and to prevent the traumatic experiences that they would go whenever the museum’s name was mentioned or if the historian cited the presence of the images at the museum.

There were concerns over the types of images that were preserved at the museum as some people mentioned the actual messages and images as displayed in the museum potentially created a state of fear and apprehension as it exposed the US as a weak and unprepared country in terms of protecting the people. As the images are displayed as they were, it contains the images of people under debris, the images of the building collapsing, and the passenger plane producing huge smokes as it hits the WTC[7]. This is a concern for the majority of the opponents of the construction of the museum. According to Greenberg, the preservation of the images puts the country at a global shame as many countries that hold the US highly in terms of the preparedness to protect its people perceived the event as a lapse in the homeland security and the overall readiness to counteract any terrorist activities in the country[8]. As such, the images of the event, as displayed in the museum, would significantly create a state of fear among the citizens of the US.

Another key concern for the opponents of the construction of the museum is the overall effects of the museum on the activities of terrorism. According to Sturken, the images of the terror pilot directing the plane to the target building is a display of making the criminals heroes in the face of the international community. It displays the terrors as people with skills and the power to manipulate the US and cause terror as they wish. The overall effect of displaying the images of the terrorists at the museum is that it gives the survivors the impression that the terrorists have power over them and that they can still attack and succeed in creation suffering in the US. Showing the face of people that caused distress and mourning in the American land was an act of glorifying the terrorists at the express of the survivors. According to Sturken, showing the images of the terrorists would potentially create the impression that the country has finally surrendered to them and that the people that were adversely affected by the attack are more vulnerable. Concerned individuals suggested the country to eliminate the images of the terrorists from being part of the historical contents in the museum. Construction of National September 11 Memorial Museum was specifically meant for preserving the country’s historical heritage and not to glorify the terrorists. In this regard, including the images of the killers was a way of showing the future generation about the success of the people in causing havoc in the country.

Another study by Sturken considered the construction of the museum as a mockery for the people that lost their lives during the September 11. According to Greenberg, the government ought to focus on the future protection of its citizens rather than engaging in remembering an event that clearly was traumatic to many people. The trauma that people experienced during the event should not be preserved in any part of the country because it creates a bad memory for the people of the US. Most importantly, the nature of the event showed that there was a need to create awareness among the private citizens on their role in preventing terrorism and helping people during the crisis. However, as the images of the victims being helped out of the collapsed building and the population scampering for safety is not only traumatizing to the victims but also a national show of helplessness[9]. It gives the impression that the people victims and the people of the US had failed in their role in protecting their territory and also in helping the victims out of the problem. Consequently, the article reiterates that the US government ought to have concentrated more on the future of the people rather than dwelling in the past.

The reason for displaying images and other artifacts in the museum is to develop historical materials for future generations. However, little or no consideration for the psychological aspects of the construction of the museum was considered. What would befall the victims when they can come to the museum and find their images all over, showing a state of helplessness, or displaying their relatives and friends as they scamper for safety or cry for help? Instead of creating the national pride that is the overall objectives of the federal government in constructing and preserving its historical events, it will increase the distress and the suffering of the people that survived the ordeal or the ones that witnessed the event as it unfolded[10]. Most importantly, the victims would perceive the move as a way of showing them that they do not matter many nuts what the government would gain by exposing their vulnerability.

Another key concern for the construction of the museum is the criteria for employing the people that would work in the museum. It is worth noting that some of the individuals that survived the attack during September 11 are still alive are able to provide much-needed assistance in the primary source of information to the public. Studies have shown that the best way to forget about a traumatizing event in one’s life is to talk about it openly with people that are concerned. As a way of helping the survivors of the event to come to terms with the event is to allow them to heal through engaging them in activities that include talking about the event openly with people — in this regard, employing them to be part of the planning team and the implementation of the building of the museum and also as part of the workers at the museum to help in explaining to the visitors what they experienced. Despite this, the federal government did not consider including the survivors in the planning execution and operations of the museum.

Respect for the dead is important in human history. One question that many people asked is whether the construction of the museum was a way of honoring the dead and creating an impression of respect for the survivors. The answer to this varies; however, it gives the impression that the dead will be greatly honored if the government can consider having their names and details at the museum. The concern is whether the preservation of the information and details of the people that succumbed to the event considered the implications of their actions on the immediate family members and the relatives of the dead. It would be more traumatizing to imagine that the remains of a relative, especially those that we’re unable to be identified, are preserved at a public place for a public function rather than at their private homesteads[11]. It is human nature to have their bodies buried or exposed according to the culture of their culture. However, the mere fact that one cannot point out where the bodies of their loved ones were buried but can clearly have the details contained in the museum is a great cause of worry because it creates trauma.

The US is considered in one of the most powerful countries in the world, with a powerful and well-equipped military. However, the event that took place on September 11 exposed the country to the rest of the world as a country that included in the war—ranged world. The dream of the American people that they are safe from their adversaries, a narrative had been preached to the citizens of the country for many years, came to an end. The initial assumption was that the US was excluded from the third world vulnerability to criminal acts and that the people of the US were essentially safe from any type of attack. In connection with this, the move to construct a museum where the federal government would preserve images and information regarding the event was proof that the country was vulnerable, just like the third world country. The consequences of the event are that it could cause a state of panic among the citizens of the US. The kissing point in this museum is that it failed to display the efforts of the US in thwarting other threats to the national security but only concentrated on the event that led to the loss of lives and destruction of property[12]. It would be proper for the federal government to have a collection of all the attempts on the American land, including areas where they were able to avert any types of threats to the country and included them as part of the historical events that formed the basis of constructing the museum. According to a study by LaCapra, the pride of a country is its ability to protect the citizens from external aggression and to display their ability to avert any possible attacks on its people. With the construction and display of the events that unfolded on September 11, the US is showing the world that it has become vulnerable like any other third world country.

The major disconnect between the museum and the event that took place in September is the preparedness of the country to combat any other similar event. While the artifacts at the museum clearly demonstrates that the people of the US suffered in the hands of the terrorists and that the event created a state of psychological and physical suffering among the survivors and caused loss of lives, the museum has failed to clearly include the steps the government has taken to combat the future occurrence. For instance, for every image displayed, there should be a counterargument on how the government can protect the people from future attacks on the same nature. This would give hopes and aspirations to the people that visit the museum. Moreover, there should also be other images of the government’s efforts in the past in combating terrorism as a way of providing the people with a clear hope of their safety.

Despite the success of the terrorists in attacking the US, there have been several cases of the federal government preventing attempts to attack the country. In this regard, it would be important to construct another museum that specifically details how the government has successfully maintained security in the country by protecting its people from external and internal aggression. In line with the event that occurred, the missing links are how the government reacted to the event and the role of the people in helping the victims and survivors of the attack. Private, public collaboration in maintaining the security of the country is crucial. The public played a critical role in reducing the number of casualties during the attack by providing humanitarian assistance to the victims. For instance, there were several cases of individuals helping in removing bodies from the debris, providing information to the law enforcement agencies, and also helping in the evacuation of the victims. The work of the private security and other government agencies in responding to the call for help from the people that were trapped in the buildings. As a way of creating a national narrative responsibility among the citizens, the museum should consist of the images of the victims, survivors, and the people that played a key role in reducing the number of casualties during the event.

Another study by LaCapra suggested that the use of the images of the victims as part of the archives at the museum should have been replaced by the patriotic people that put their lives in line to protect the US and the people during the event. In his submission, LaCapra stated that the government concentrated in glorifying terrorists at the expense of the genuine patriotic Americans who put their lives in the line by using the privately owned guns, vehicles, provided foods and other humanitarian assistance to the people of the US during the trying moment in the history of the US. In the article, the authors reiterated that the history of the US should be made of the unwavering efforts that some people put in ensuring that the terrorists did not meet their target of killing many Americans. On the same note, Greenberg maintains that the Americans showed high levels of professionalism in every aspect of providing humanitarian assistance. For instance, several professional psychological counselors provided free psychological; assistance to survivors as professional medics also created an opportunity to help people that required immediate medical attention. As a way of motivating the citizens to be more patriotic, it would be wise for the government of the US to include the contributions of the public in protecting their land and also to reduce the number of casualties by providing various humanitarian assistance.

Museums are about preserving the past and evoking emotions. According to Greenberg, one of the major reasons for constructing museums is to connect with the past and learn from the past to prepare for the future. People use the information of the past to create a narrative for the future. As such, the construction of the museum. The role of the museum in this regard was to create a national narrative about the effects of terrorism on the wellbeing of society. Societies are vulnerable if they tolerate the activities of terrorists, whose primary aim is to cause destruction. However, the American government failed to consider the safety measures and the possible implications of displaying the images of the victims, terrorists, and the weapons used during the event[13]. For instance, terrorists hijacked a passenger plane, which was forced into the WTC as the suicide bombers targeted to kill all passenger on board as well as people that worked or lived at the WTC and the Pentagon. The images of the passenger plane and the WTC collapsing are a reminder that the airplanes and the American airspace are vulnerable to terrorism and that even in the future, the airplanes can fall victim to the criminals. One would expect that the citizens would be worried if they board passenger planes because of the memories of the events of September 11. Moreover, it would be more traumatizing if the survivors can see the images of the plane and at the same time, plan to travel using the same mode of transport. Essentially, the museum provides a vivid reminder to the survivors that they can become victims again using the same mode of transport as they used earlier.

Bibliography

Koga, Yukiko. Inheritance of Loss: China, Japan, and the Political Economy of Redemption After Empire. University of Chicago Press, 2016.

LaCapra, Dominick. “Trauma, History, Memory, Identity: What Remains?.” History and Theory 55, no. 3 (2016): 375-400.

Douglass, Ana, and Thomas A. Vogler. Witness and memory: The discourse of trauma. Routledge, 2012.

Sharrett, Christopher. “9/11, the Useful Incident, and the Legacy of the Creel Committee.” Cinema Journal 43, no. 4 (2004): 125-131.

Sturken, Marita. “The 9/11 memorial museum and the remaking of ground zero.” American Quarterly 67, no. 2 (2015): 471-490.

Greenberg, Judith, ed. Trauma at home: After 9/11. U of Nebraska Press, 2003.

[1] Ross, Andrew, and Kristin Ross, eds. Anti-Americanism. NYU Press, 2004.

[2] Sharrett, Christopher. “9/11, the Useful Incident, and the Legacy of the Creel Committee.” Cinema Journal 43, no. 4 (2004): 125-131.

[3] Douglass, Ana, and Thomas A. Vogler. Witness and memory: The discourse of trauma. Routledge, 2012.

[4] Ross, Andrew, and Kristin Ross, eds. Anti-Americanism. NYU Press, 2004.

[5] Koga, Yukiko. Inheritance of Loss: China, Japan, and the Political Economy of Redemption After Empire. University of Chicago Press, 2016.

[6] Sturken, Marita. “The 9/11 memorial museum and the remaking of ground zero.” American Quarterly 67, no. 2 (2015): 471-490.

[7] Greenberg, Judith, ed. Trauma at home: After 9/11. U of Nebraska Press, 2003.

[8] Sturken, Marita. “The 9/11 memorial museum and the remaking of ground zero.” American Quarterly 67, no. 2 (2015): 471-490.

[9] Greenberg, Judith, ed. Trauma at home: After 9/11. U of Nebraska Press, 2003.

[10] Greenberg, Judith, ed. Trauma at home: After 9/11. U of Nebraska Press, 2003.

[11] Greenberg, Judith, ed. Trauma at home: After 9/11. U of Nebraska Press, 2003.

[12] LaCapra, Dominick. “Trauma, History, Memory, Identity: What Remains?.” History and Theory 55, no. 3 (2016): 375-400.

[13] Greenberg, Judith, ed. Trauma at home: After 9/11. U of Nebraska Press, 2003.