The third section of this book is certainly a lot to take in. After reading the story of Bradley McGee, I looked at several online news articles, as well as several sites dedicated to the tragedy. With regards to this story, it certainly seems like people have embraced the idea of a MEmorial. There were dozens of sites that were designed for the sole purpose of making people aware of his passing and that Sheryl Coe currently had custody of another child. If constructing a MEmorial is designed to form a type of collective intelligence to create awareness of national tragedies, shouldn't more people be aware of this? Shouldn't this have played out differently? After reading that and the stories after it, I found it difficult to focus on the concepts that Ulmer presented. It may be because of the recent allegations associated with Penn State, and the fact that I have heard about that story repeatedly for over a week. This is a very taboo and heated subject in our society, and reading so much about it is rather difficult.
I would have preferred a different example to use with his concepts, although this one definitely makes them stick. The idea of everyone having two different identities was very interesting to me. I like the relation he makes with gender and the emblems of the male and female on the doors of public bathrooms. We are taught our entire life that gender and our sexuality should be kept private, although his breakdown of the fifth grader's trip is probably a little farther than I wanted to read into this separation.
I completely agree with Ulmer that we memorialize certain tragedies in our society but do not link others together. I think the disdain for child abuse is universal, but I do wonder why it is not viewed in the same light as war casualties. Child abuse isn't really a result of something we have created, so if anything it should be memorialized even more. I don't think it can be classified as a sacrifice either, so comparing it with war may not necessarily be comparing apples to apples.
Ulmer first sentence of chapter 6 may be the most significant statement I have read so far in the book. Transitioning from thinking to feeling the situation should be the source of constructing a MEmorial. I think what he is referring to is what makes monuments, memorials, and any other image substantial. Most of the powerful images I can think of that display some sort of tragedy stand out because of the feelings they generate. In a way, Ulmer leads this thought by example. When I first began reading chapter 5, I could feel the situation before I had even read anything external about it. The way Ulmer described it and questioned the universal knowledge of the events in the text made me feel each of those stories. I didn't enjoy reading them, which should be the point in a MEmorial to child abuse.
The idea of $incere was particularly interesting to me. Ulmer used perfect examples to describe this term. I think this term is a combination of sincere and what is politically correct, with financial incentive. O.J. did
No comments:
Post a Comment