The Wall, the Screen, and the Image

Marita Sturken's essay on the Vietnam War Memorial gives an overall negative commentary on the wall. I found this particularly interesting because I had seen the memorial for the first time a little over a year ago. My impression of this war memorial was a powerful one. First, the day we went in was pouring, and I nearly lost my life sliding down its slick marble path in my flip-flops. Next, there were a few other things really resonated with me. I noticed as slid down the memorial that people still put flowers by specific names on the memorial or were stopped praying at a specific spot. This is unlike any other memorial in D.C. Second, I noticed that it was more hidden than any of the other memorials. Even the Korean War Memorial, which is apparently "the forgotten war," is larger than the Vietnam Memorial. Sturken mentions something similar when she says, "The memorial does not stand erect above the landscape; it is continuous with the earth" (p.490). She also discusses how the color of the memorial had been under scrutiny. She mentions that some feel that the color of it, "...evoke shame, sorrow, and dishonor..." (p.489). I seem to agree with that. Whereas most of the monuments in D.C. are white marble or limestone, the Vietnam Memorial seems to be this shameful color of black. As if, we are trying not to draw attention to it simply because it is a war we didn't win. Maybe all of these criticisms of the Memorial are just coincidence, or perhaps it is the whole nation asking to forget the terrors of the Vietnam War.