In perhaps Ulmer’s best example from the third section of Electronic Monuments, Ulmer’s idea seems to be completely realized, at least in theory. Continuing his ideas from the previous chapters and sections of the book, Ulmer delves deeper into the MEmorial project in the chapter entitled “Formless Emblems.” I choose to focus mostly on this chapter because it was the chapter that produced a strong feeling in me while reading, a sense of disgust and attraction.
The example presented is that of child abuse, in particular child abuse that has happened in relation to potty training, child abuse that results in death. Ulmer presents first the case of Bobby McGee, a young boy who was violently killed by his mother’s boyfriend because he had soiled his pants. Ulmer writes that “the process of Memorializing begins with a sting (punctum) received from a news item, a story from the dailydose of information circulated by journalism” (118). In this case, something in the story accounts of this boy’s death and others sparked something that Ulmer could relate to, could see the “I” in the incident.
The example throughout the chapter builds, presenting other cases of child abuse and death due to potty training mishaps. While he does go into theory relating to the process of excrement and the inner you and the outer you, Ulmer relates the entire thing to the shame of America. The abject, in this case the sacrificed children, is shameful, like excrement coming from inside, and America does not acknowledge the sacrifices implicit with these shameful acts, the values underlying them. The act was created when the freedom was created.
Ulmer goes on to speak about the idea of the emblem, which is, according to Peter Daly, “a mixed form compromising a motto, a picture, and an epigram” (121). This emblem has meaning because of the event, the words. It is through the use of this emblem (that is created as the MEmorial forms) that an enigma exists.
The “purpose of a MEmorial is to witness and testify regarding the event of a public problem, to shift it from the private, individual status of one at a time, each case in isolation, to a cumulative public status of sacrifice on behalf of an unrepresented national value” (136). Again, Ulmer develops the idea of the MEmorial, pointing out to the reader, the creator of a MEmorial that it is meant to honor the sacrifice of the abject, to bring to light a problem, to affect policies, to mourn the loss so that a freedom or a value can be maintained. As stated previously throughout his book, the MEmorial is composed of two parts—the peripheral and the testimonial. The peripheral’s purpose “is to make a case for losses of life whose public, collective relevance as sacrifice are not recognized” (131). It is to make their loss known and acknowledged, to make it known that they were a sacrifice and that their death (or otherwise) was important in maintaining that hold. The testimonial dramatizes the public’s inability to see the sacrifice or why the sacrifice was necessary.
Within the second chapter, Ulmer transitions to more of the peripheral of the MEmorial, continuing with the Bobby McGee example. Stating that a MEmorial “shows us not our fate, but our situation” (176), Ulmer describes in further detail what a MEmorial is, the fact that it does not ask the “why”/Y questions. Instead, it feels, investigates without judgment. In the case of Bobby McGee, Ulmer proposes a peripheral that would go side by side with the Space Mirror at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The name of abused children would show up during a solar eclipse when the names of fallen astronauts could not be seen. The MEmorial does not call for a judgment or a question of Y. Instead, it calls for an acknowledgment of the sacrifice loss and perhaps an eventual change in policy.
Ulmer speaks about the MEmorial as not a text, but a felt. He uses felt in two ways—one in that MEmorial is to produce a response, a feeling. A MEmorial is “felt” instead of read or analyzed. And, in the second way he uses the word, Ulmer draws parallels between a felted object and the MEmorial. Like a felted object, the MEmorial has many layers and textures, composed of various aspects to create a completed thing.
Perhaps the one quote that stood out within the course of these two chapters was from Paul Compos when he says, “The next morning we read the newspaper’s account of this almost unimaginable atrocity in our midst—this act that in some sense connects and implicates us all—and then we turn the page” (174.). We witness these events, these sacrifices that strike us and render us shocked, but we easily forget them. Ulmer is calling for us to remember and bare witness.
Questions
1) Ulmer gives the example of the Marlboro icon as an emblem. Can all brand logos/slogans be considered emblems then?
2) If part of the MEmorial is to find a way in which it relates to you, to find a way in which you can relate to the event, how do we go about doing that? Especially in the case of child abuse? Or, will some of these MEmorials not really sync with some of their viewers?
3) Do you find it easy or difficult to not ask “why” when faced with headlines from the news that show something particularly horrible?
No comments:
Post a Comment