Tilburg University Postponed, monuments in the Netherlands Faro, L.M.C. Publication date: 2015 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in Tilburg University Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Faro, L. M. C. (2015). Postponed, monuments in the Netherlands: Manifestation, context, and meaning. [s.n.]. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 27. sep. 2021 Postponed monuments in the Netherlands Manifestation, context, and meaning PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan Tilburg University op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof. dr. Ph. Eijlander, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties aangewezen commissie in de aula van de Universiteit op woensdag 28 januari 2015 om 16.15 uur door Laura Maria Catharina Faro, geboren op 6 oktober 1957 te Rotterdam Promotores: prof. dr. P.G.J. Post prof. dr. M.H.F. van Uden Overige leden van de promotiecommissie: prof. dr. W.E.A. van Beek prof. dr. J.E.J.M. van Heyst prof. dr. P.J. Margry prof. dr. E. Venbrux prof. dr. T.A. Walter Cover design by Ridderprint BV, Ridderkerk Cover picture by Michiel Faro Pictures by Laurie Faro (except indicated otherwise) Layout by Carine Zebedee ISBN 978-90-5335-994-5 © Laurie Faro, 2014 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any other means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without permission of the author. For Alof …and life is just a simple game…1 1 From the song ‘A simple game’ (1968) by the British rock group The Moody Blues. Table of contents Preface 1 Acknowledgements 3 1 Introduction 5 1.1 Introduction: grassroots memorials and postponed monuments 5 1.2 The panorama of monument culture in the Netherlands: the example of Amsterdam 8 1.3 Understanding developments in the Netherlands 18 1.3.1 Views on Amsterdam monument culture 18 1.3.2 A historical perspective 18 1.3.3 Statuomania and Denkmalkultur 19 1.3.4 The Netherlands 21 1.3.5 The caesura of the First World War 22 1.3.6 War monuments after the Second World War 23 1.3.7 New ‘categories’ of monuments 24 1.4 The focus on postponed monuments 25 1.5 Central research question 26 1.6 Case studies 27 1.7 Research method: qualitative, explorative study within the field of ritual studies 30 1.7.1 The objective of this study and the appropriate research method 30 1.7.2 Qualitative research and ethnographic research method in ritual studies 31 1.7.3 Research method in this project 31 1.8 Outline of this thesis 32 2 Theoretical exploration of the key concepts 33 2.1 Introduction: memorial culture, space and place 33 2.1.1 Key concepts of this project 36 2.2 First key concept: monument 36 2.2.1 Introduction 36 2.2.2 Alois Riegl’s exploration of the concept ‘monument’ 37 2.2.3 The term ‘monument’ and cultural heritage 38 viii Postponed monuments in the Netherlands 2.2.4 Monument or memorial? 39 2.2.5 Public monuments 40 2.2.6 The (intended) and practical function or meaning of a monument 41 2.2.7 Dialogue between monument and audience 42 2.2.8 The perspective of public art 43 2.3 Second key concept: ritual commemoration practices 45 2.3.1 Introduction 45 2.3.2 Rituals 46 2.3.3 Commemoration rituals 49 2.4 Third key concept: place 53 2.4.1 Introduction 53 2.4.2 Monument, place and space 53 2.4.3 Monuments and the place ‘where it all happened’ 55 2.5 Postponed monuments: memory, place and time 58 2.5.1 Individual memory 59 2.5.2 Social memory 59 2.5.3 Collective memory 60 2.5.4 Public memory 60 2.5.5 Postponed monuments as ‘media’ of memory 61 2.5.6 Postponed monuments and the current ‘memory boom’ 63 3 Monument Vrouwen van Ravensbrück 65 3.1 Introduction 65 3.1.1 First impression 65 3.1.2 The monument 66 3.1.3 Museumplein Amsterdam 68 3.1.4 Ravensbrück concentration camp 69 3.1.5 After the war: the remembrance of Ravensbrück in the Netherlands 74 3.2 Construction of the monument and ritual commemoration practices 77 3.2.1 Initiative for the monument and development 77 3.2.2 Artists and design 79 3.2.3 Symbolism 82 3.2.4 Place 82 3.2.5 Unveiling ceremony and opening expositions 83 3.2.6 Monument Vrouwen van Ravensbrück: a postponed monument 85 3.3 The yearly commemoration at the Museumplein: experiences of former Dutch prisoners 87 3.3.1 Introduction of former prisoners 87 3.3.2 Description of the yearly commemoration: 2012 89 Table of contents ix 3.3.3 Participants: the importance of the yearly commemoration 90 3.3.4 Attending the ceremony: place 95 3.3.5 Place: ‘neutral’ versus ‘where it all happened’ 96 3.3.6 Form and symbolism 97 3.3.7 Male or female remembrance? 100 3.3.8 Jewish remembrance 103 3.4 The yearly commemoration at the Museumplein: experiences of relatives and close friends of former Dutch prisoners 104 3.4.1 Relatives and friends of former prisoners 104 3.4.2 The importance of the yearly commemoration to the next generation 105 3.4.3 The Museumplein as locus of the monument 107 3.4.4 Symbolism of the monument 109 3.4.5 Female or male commemoration? 110 3.4.6 The future of the yearly commemoration 111 3.5 Conclusions 112 4 Digital Monument to the Jewish Community in the Netherlands and the Jewish Monument Community 115 4.1 Introduction 115 4.1.1 First impression of the Digital Monument to the Jewish Community in the Netherlands 115 4.1.2 First impression of the Jewish Monument Community 116 4.2 This case study 117 4.2.1 Focus and context 117 4.2.2 Setup of this case study 118 4.3 The Digital Monument: description of data 119 4.3.1 Representation of the victims 119 4.3.2 Different ‘layers’ of information 120 4.3.3 The Digital Monument and its objectives 124 4.3.4 The initiative for the Digital Monument: its ‘founding father’ 125 4.4 The Jewish Monument Community 126 4.5 Web-based memorializing 128 4.5.1 Intentional memorializing in ‘grief-specific’ sites: the first web memorials 129 4.5.2 Intentional memorializing in ‘grief-specific’ sites: development and debate after 9/11 132 4.5.3 In conclusion 136 4.6 The Digital Monument and Community: practices, opinion and meaning 136 4.6.1 Introduction of participants 136 x Postponed monuments in the Netherlands 4.6.2 Interviews 137 4.7 First generation participants 138 4.7.1 Practices and commemoration 138 4.7.2 Meaning and opinion 140 4.7.3 Results of the interviews 141 4.8 Second generation participants 147 4.8.1 Practices and commemoration 147 4.8.2 Meaning and opinion 150 4.9 Third generation participants 152 4.9.1 Practices and commemoration 152 4.9.2 Meaning and opinion 153 4.10 Other participants 154 4.10.1 Practices and commemoration 154 4.10.2 Meaning and opinion 156 4.10.3 Results of the interview 159 4.11 ‘Postponed’ commemoration of the Shoah: context of web memorializing practices 161 4.11.1 After the war: the remembrance of Jewish victims in the Netherlands 162 4.11.2 Renewing commemoration: the activities of the Jewish Cultural Quarter 163 4.11.3 Today’s commemoration of the Dutch victims of the Shoah in other cities of the Netherlands 165 4.11.4 In conclusion 169 4.12 Concluding remarks 170 5 Monuments to stillborn children 173 5.1 Introduction 173 5.2 This case study: focus, contexts and setup 175 5.2.1 Focus and context 175 5.2.2 Setup of this case study 175 5.3 The reasons for monuments to stillborn children 176 5.3.1 Stillborn children 176 5.3.2 Grief and mourning practices over stillborn children 177 5.4 The role of the Roman Catholic Church: experiences of parents 178 5.4.1 Baptism 179 5.4.2 Lay baptism 181 5.4.3 Unbaptized 181 5.4.4 ‘Baptism of desire’ 182 5.4.5 ‘Abolition’ of the concept of ‘limbo’ 182 5.4.6 The Brabant interviews 183 Table of contents xi 5.4.7 Results of the Brabant interviews 187 5.5 Monuments to stillborn children 188 5.5.1 The initiative to erect monuments to stillborn children 188 5.5.2 Exploration of the meaning of the monuments 190 5.6 Monument voor het nooit verloren kind, Begraafplaats Rustoord, Nijmegen 190 5.6.1 Participants in the research 191 5.6.2 Results of the Rustoord interviews 198 5.7 Monument voor het doodgeboren kind, Roermond 200 5.7.1 Monuments in the city of Roermond 200 5.7.2 Initiative to the monument 201 5.7.3 Finding participants to the research 204 5.7.4 The monument in 2013 209 5.7.5 Results of the Roermond interviews 210 5.8 Een glimlach kwam voorbij, Algemene Begraafplaats, Sittard 211 5.8.1 Introduction 211 5.8.2 The site of the monument 211 5.8.3 Symbolism 214 5.8.4 Initiative to the monument in Sittard 215 5.8.5 Interviews with parents 217 5.8.6 Results of the Sittard interviews 221 5.9 Conclusion 221 6 Monument to the Harmelen railway disaster 225 6.1 Introduction 225 6.2 This case study 226 6.2.1 Focus and context of this case study 226 6.2.2 Setup of this case study 227 6.3 The