Bradley Simmons

AP Lang
2-24-19

When memorializing a person or event, some consider a memorial to be gaudy or

unnecessary. Part of this is due to not taking other accounts and opinions into consideration. As
far as considerations go, location should be taken seriously. Along with that, when the physical
monument is being created, the monument should reflect the wants and needs of the people.

As far as location goes, it should be one of the top considerations when making a
monument. The location needs to be perfect, no place too obscure and no place to irrelevant.
Now what place fits that description perfectly? The answer: Washington, D.C. Of course, there
can be many other suitable cities and states for such big states, but it is very logical that much of
the nation’s history is encapsulated in the parliament’s hometown. Think about it, D.C. is a
tourist attraction simply for their plethora of monuments. As stated, “Washington functions
somewhat like a pilgrimage site, where communities of believers actually come together in the
act of occupying a holy site, seeing a relic, reenacting a sacred event”(Source A). Even though
some events did not happen directly in Washington, they are all politically based, which means
that they all have a home in D.C. Finally, this city of Washington serves more of a purpose than
to house politicians. It’s vast array of monuments serve as, “A unity between the nation’s past
and present”(Source G). Just because of this, location is a consideration that should be number
one and a decision based on logic, not anything else.

When it comes to the wants and needs of the people, there will no doubt be some outcries
of support and possibly backlash from the people, whether they want the monument or not.
Let’s go back to Washington, D.C., the land of many monuments. Notable figures and events are
memorialized all around The Mall. There are events that are big enough, you won’t ever forget
them. One event that has been added in the last 10 years is the National Holocaust Memorial
Museum. As stated, “The supporters of the museum felt that building a museum on The Mall
would enhance The Mall’s already diverse stories”(Source E). This seems like a great add to the
collection of monuments because it is a very significant event in history. What could go wrong?
Well, first of all, the people don’t want it. Furthermore, “The controversy grew from Jewish and
non-Jewish communities, primarily due to the fact that a museum dedicated to the memory of the
Holocaust would be built in the United States, who did little to stop the Holocaust from
occurring”(Source E). That undoubtedly, is an opinion that can go either way, but it is clear that
the people don’t want, Jewish or not. Similarly, over in South Dakota, a monument is being built
to commemorate the great Sioux leader, Crazy Horse. The Native Americans are a very diverse
group of people that have faced countless hardships, so it only makes sense that the Sioux tribe
gets a monument dedicated to their leader. Of course, they were treated poorly by the Americans,
which can be a catalyst for their reason for not wanting it, but, their main reason for not wanting
is, “There were probably better ways to help Indians than a big statue”(Source C). Furthermore,
another reasoning for not wanting it is, “It is most definitely an unnatural landmark”(Source C).
Lastly, to correctly memorialize a nation’s past event, the want and the need must be justified
and won by the people before anything is to be done.

In conclusion, the factors that should be considered when memorializing an event or

person is, the location and the wants and needs of the people. These two considerations make the
creation of a monument all the more important, as the monument will leave a lasting effect on
the country it is designed for.