tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34247274.post115931202115998608..comments2023-11-02T03:52:02.299-05:00Comments on Lauren Burger: Inspiration revisitedlaurenburgerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13698106891612600031noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34247274.post-1159760160738920112006-10-01T22:36:00.000-05:002006-10-01T22:36:00.000-05:00Hmmm....the material culture discussion is blowing...Hmmm....the material culture discussion is blowing my mind. <BR/><BR/>In light of this week's readings, I'm interested in whether or not you think the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe (as a physical, created object/thing) in any way limits the meaning that people can assign to it.<BR/><BR/>I suppose that the range of aesthetic responses to an object can be nearly infinite, but in this case, the aesthetic object is MEMORIALIZING something. So their must be some intention and meaning within the object, even if its creator (Eisenman) tried to avoid overtly symbolic or realistic representations.<BR/><BR/>So I'm curious about what meaning you took from the memorial. You talked about using the stelae as a jungle gym- this was perhaps an aesthetic response, as sensual response- but how did that translate into your understanding of the event/memory that the memorial is memorializing?<BR/> <BR/>So, yeah- When we look at a piece of art, an artefact or even an historical event, can we ascribe ANY meaning to it that we want to (as in "willy-nilly" tagging?) Of course we CAN, but if we really attend to the object, does it somehow limit our interpretation?<BR/><BR/>I agree with you that there are many layers of meaning. There's no "right" answer, but are their some wrong ones? (eek! And I'm really interested in what meaning you took from the memorial. I wasn't in any way trying to suggest that yours was a 'wrong' one!) Keep it comin'! m.Molly MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07798286528980913221noreply@blogger.com