Durcan, Estafan, Tanner, Torza 1

Michael Durcan, Natalie Estafan, Divine Torza, and Carley Tanner

Mrs. Mckiddy

AP Lang P.3

2019 October 28

Monument Synthesis Essay

At times there can be some common factors in which a group or agency should consider

when building a monument involving the event or the person. Few factors to take into

consideration to help contribute to the creation of the monument are; the appropriateness, cost,

relevancy, and the size. (Natalie Estafan)

To begin, the memorial should be appropriate in how it remembers the event or people

affected. In source E the article states “It is not surprising that immediate and intense controversy

erupted when plans were publicized to build a Holocaust museum on The Mall in Washington,

D.C. The controversy grew from Jewish and non-Jewish communities, primarily due to the fact

that a museum dedicated to the memory of the Holocaust would be built in the United States,

who did little to stop the Holocaust from occuring… How offensive to any informed individual!”

The memorial would not be appropriate to the United States due to their history in World War II.

The memorial is not appropriate even though a memorial in itself is meant to be a place of

remembrance and respect for those affected by a remembered event. The memory of an event is

tarnished if put in the wrong place. However, how appropriate a memorial is isn’t the only thing

a memorial should have. (Michael Durcan)

The cost of the memorial at times, is difficult to achieve. In source F it states how“Maine

ran out of money” resulting in the desired goal of the monument to be changed. The loss of this
 Durcan, Estafan, Tanner, Torza 2

money, can truly ruin the innovation of the monument and the intended meaning behind it. Like

how “the artist [simply] just slapped a coat of bronze paint over the plaster model and shipped it

to New York” totally demolishing the true significance and meaning behind it. Without the true

support and beneficiary of having this key element in the production of making this, we portray

how we “truly see” heroes in “our eyes”. At times knowing the struggle of money we can rarely

see the ways of how impactful money has been toward recognizing historical figures even

regarding modern life. Seeing how this statue was “vandalized” “and ended up in a warehouse

where it was eaten by rats” we see how this statue later on becomes renovated and made whole

again. Truly resembling how we truthfully see these endowed heroes who should be highly

respected in our own eyes. (Natalie Estafan)

A memorial should also be relevant, relevant to sacred events, and to influential people

that have helped shape this country to be a better place than what it originally was. In source A

the article states,” in this way the monumental core in Washington functions somewhat like a

pilgrimage site, where communities of believers actually come together in the act of occupying a

holy site, seeing arelic, reenacting a sacred event”. The reason why monuments are revant

because monuments tie together main events and the people that changed our country. So people

could look at these events and admire the sacrifices people have done to fight for this country. In

Source D the article states,” The bones of Pallet (1796-1889) and thousands of other San Gabriel

Valley pioneers buried at Savannah Memorial Park could be moved to make way for a future

development”. Savannah Memorial Park having a rich history of 3,000 graves filling the

cemetery that had dated back in 1847, along with it also being a Indian burial ground before the

corpse of the settlers filling the Park. The El Monte Cemetery Association trying to move the
 Durcan, Estafan, Tanner, Torza 3

graveyard somewhere else along with all the dead bodies, as well as paying millions of dollars to

complete the task. With all that I agree with Bruesch argument, stating,” But Savannah is rich

history and should be preserved…”, Savannah Memorial Park that has dated in the early 1847

should stay where it is at. Why spend more money to move such a memorable and eye watering

Memorial then just spending less to keep it going? In conclusion I believe that memorials should

not be moved because they are relevant to history. (Divine Torza)

Lastly, the size of a monument should be taken into consideration. During construction of

the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C, the first design of the building was opposed by the

Commission of Fine Arts because it was “too massive” and would’ve “overcome” the Mall it

was being built in (Source E). Because of the Museum’s size, the intention of the monument,

which was in dedication of the Holocaust, becomes lost. This can take away the tribute that was

meant for a monument in the first place. Additionally, when Downes interacts with Kelly

Looking Horse, he makes it clear in source C that there “were probably better ways to help

Indians than [build] a big statue”. In their conversation, it shows that the Crazy Horse memorial

was an unnecessary and large monument that served no purpose, adding onto the fact that they

made it unrealistic. While some may think a large monument would be nice for show, it would

realistically take away the main purpose that it tried to promote in the first place. To conclude, an

element of a monument that should be taken seriously when building one is the size. (Carley

Tanner)

In summary, there are countless factors that should be considered when creating a

monument, including its appropriateness, cost, relevancy, and size. Not thinking about these

parts of a memorial can offend certain groups of people, and can even take away its initial
 Durcan, Estafan, Tanner, Torza 4

purpose or honor that it tried to showcase. (Carley Tanner)