Clare Mulley

Monuments to the second world war are looking increasingly dodgy

Keith Lowe finds some highly contentious memorials across the world, with one nation’s heroes being another’s war criminals

Part of the memorial to the ‘Heroes of Stalingrad’, overlooking Volgograd. In the background is ‘The Motherland Calls’, Europe’s tallest statue. Getty Images 
issue 04 July 2020

Most monuments are literally set in stone — or cast in bronze to better survive the weather. Being enduring, they arguably become ‘prisoners of history’, as this fascinating series of essays by Keith Lowe is titled. Conversely, perspectives are like the weather, constantly changing, as relationships between and within nations, and views on social and moral norms, shift over time, as we are seeing particularly at present. The inherent tension between the human desire for monumental permanence, especially after the upheaval of war, and the natural transience of social values, proves fertile ground for this examination of the lessons that can be drawn from second world war monuments around the world.

Lowe applies his critical gaze to 25 of them, from 16 countries, marshalled into five sections: heroes, martyrs, monsters, apocalypse and rebirth. These are the ideas, he argues, that underpin our collective memory of the second world war. It is soon clear how interconnected these concepts are; but more fascinating are the paradoxes he reveals.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in