Bushfire catastrophe in Victoria, Australia : public record, accountability, commemoration, memorialization and heritage protection

In Australia, 7 February 2009 has become known as ‘Black Saturday’ because of the bushfire catastrophe that took 173 lives and devastated communities in the central parts of the State of Victoria. The paper considers how the 2009 fires have been recorded, how the issue of accountability has been dealt with, particularly in relation to the State and its agencies but also individual residents in the fire-devastated areas, and how bushfire deaths and other losses have been commemorated through remembrance events and museum collection projects and memorialized through the creation of new monuments and the protection of remaining physical structures as official heritage. Despite the major impact of bushfires on the State, to date few bushfire-related places have been protected. The former Cockatoo Kindergarten, which acted as a community refuge during an earlier catastrophic Victorian bushfire on Ash Wednesday, 16 February 1983, is an exception. Inscribed in 2012, the former kindergarten is the only bushfire-related place inscribed on the Victorian Heritage Register, in this case for its historical and social value as a place resonating with other communities affected by other bushfires and helping the broader Victorian public to come to terms with bushfire catastrophe. But, while bushfire commemoration activities and physical memorials, like those relating to war, help many societies remember individual and community pain and suffering, they can divert attention from the more fundamental questions of why they were there in the first place and what must be done to ensure the same catastrophe does not recur in the future. In this regard, the paper questions the oft-cited claim that bushfires are embedded in the Australian psyche, seeing links between the rhetoric around bushfire survival and Australian myth-making and nation-building.

Negotiating memory and identity : the Hyde Park Holocaust Memorial, London

In 1983, 38 years after the end of World War II, Britain gained its first public memorial dedicated solely to victims of the Holocaust: the Hyde Park Holocaust Memorial Garden. Organized by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, this campaign revealed the ways that memorialization of the Holocaust in Britain during the 1980s was cross cut with issues of identity, memory and history. In attempting to restore the «biography» of the memorial, this paper examines the way the memorial's relationship with its potential locations is important in the making of meaning and shows how debates over the perceived appropriateness of the sites were structured by, and in turn structure, various discourses concerning Anglo-Jewish identity.

Heritage of war

The Heritage of War is an interdisciplinary study of the ways in which heritage is mobilized in remembering war, and in reconstructing landscapes, political systems and identities after conflict. It examines the deeply contested nature of war heritage in a series of places and contexts, highlighting the modes by which governments, communities, and individuals claim validity for their own experiences of war, and the meanings they attach to them.

From colonizing violence in South America to the United States’ Civil War, the Second World War on three continents, genocide in Rwanda and continuing divisions in Europe and the Middle East, these studies bring us closer to the very processes of heritage production. The Heritage of War uncovers the histories of heritage: it charts the constant social and political construction of heritage sites over time, by a series of different agents, and explores the continuous reworking of meaning into the present.

What are the forces of contingency, agency and political power that produce, define and sustain the heritage of war? How do particular versions of the past and particular identities gain legitimacy, while others are marginalised? In this book contributors explore the active work by which heritage is produced and reproduced in a series of case studies of memorialization, battlefield preservation, tourism development, private remembering and urban reconstruction. These are the acts of making sense of war; they are acts that continue long after violent conflict itself has ended.

Messages from Long Tan, Vietnam: memorialisation, reconciliation, and historical justice

This article explores the changing ways in which Australians and Vietnamese remember and memorialize their involvement in the Vietnam War and how these processes intersect with notions of reconciliation and historical justice in postwar contexts. It uses the Battle of Long Tan of August 1966 as an entrée into these considerations and questions how heritage-making and memorialization processes can facilitate the achievement of reconciliation between parties formerly in conflict. Not surprisingly, the Australian and Vietnamese veterans of the battle and the two states, the Commonwealth of Australia and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, have different motivations for wanting to remember Long Tan. On the Australian side, a sense that reconciliation and atonement are needed is often reflected in official government and veterans’ statements about the war and Australia-Vietnam relations, in the memorialization process at Long Tan and in the involvement of Australian veterans groups engaged in local economic development and community building in Vietnam. On the Vietnamese side, where the Vietnam War played out as a civil as well as an international war, efforts by those who actively supported the former Republic of Vietnam based in Saigon in the south and among the overseas Vietnamese (Viet kieu) to memorialize their engagement in the conflict have been frustrated. The usefulness of the notion of seeking historical justice is therefore questioned in post–civil war situations where people are locked into fixed histories and are unprepared or unable to revisit and retell personal and collective memories and histories.

Remembering the first world war today

‘Remembering the First World War’ is an ambitious topic, and one that has already produced an extraordinary and diverse array of scholarly inquiry. The centenary of the First World War has naturally been a matter of considerable debate for a long time before its realization in 2014 and beyond. That debate has been premised on the obligations, opportunities and not infrequently the anxieties that are entailed in the determination to mark the centenary of the first of the twentieth century’s two catastrophic global conflicts.

The ghosts of ravished Armenias: pastiches of genocide

Ravished Armenia – an eight-reel, eighty-five-minute, silent dramatized film based on actual events – first screened in New York City in 1919. It was primarily for the purposes of fundraising. Aurora Mardiganian was a survivor of the Genocide and played the lead role in this film. However, the entire full-length feature film was thought lost until recently, when a twenty- minute segment of the film was found in Armenia. Following the separate discovery in Yerevan in 1994, the twenty-minute segment was incorporated into two new films (although both used the same footage). Even though both films are distinct in their notions of filmic representation, memory and the sacred memorialization of the Genocide, it is no oversight that one rendering is titled Ravished Armenia in order to pay homage to the original film and the Genocide. The second rendering, titled Credo, aims to separate itself from the initial film.