Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.

Accepted Paper:

The 'agency' of monuments: revisiting the concepts of 'monument' and 'monumentality'  
Eleana Yalouri (Pandeion University of Social and Political Sciences, Athens)

Paper short abstract:

In this paper I will discuss some theoretical developments in the field of material culture studies which, I believe, may introduce some new and interesting ways of approaching ‘monuments’ and ‘monumental sites’ allowing us to reflect not on their ability to represent a ‘History’ isolated in the past, but on their capacity to act upon and be part of ‘histories’ and present stories. The paper will include some thoughts on the selective workings of memory and forgetting and the role of ‘materiality’ and ‘immateriality’ in this process.

Paper long abstract:

The discussion in this paper derives from a series of questions, such as:

1. Do monuments and monumental sites constitute fixed and unchangeable markers of an objective 'History' or are they places of multiple 'histories' with malleable and negotiable content?

2. Should the concepts of 'monument' and 'monumentality' be linked to an exclusively visible, structured space? Isn't 'monumentality' after all a quality which can be attributed not only to architectural or other 'material' structures but also to other 'immaterial' aspects of culture such as music or language?

3. What are the factors and the processes contributing to define something as a monument? Are 'monuments' made to become monuments in the first place or do they become such in the process? If the latter is true, can anything potentially become a monument? How do different monumentalities succeed each other and how are they transformed in different historical and cultural contexts?

4. Is 'oldness' a necessary prerequisite for something to become a monument, and if so, what is the role of history and memory in this process?

5. Are monuments 'museal' in the sense that Theodor Adorno used the term to describe objects that are no longer in a vital relationship with the observer, but in the process of dying? Are monuments anchored and bounded on a particular site, passive objects of our gaze simply illustrating human action or can we recognize in them a different kind of dynamics in the way they participate in the social lives and actions of people?

Panel P18
Monumentalising the past, archaeologies of the future
  Session 1