ABSTRACT
Together with truth commissions, trials, and reparations, museums and memorials have emerged as important tools for confronting the past and “coming to terms with” traumatic histories and episodes of mass atrocity. These sites typically combine traditional museology frameworks and mission statements with activist agendas and ethical imperatives (e.g., Never again!), yet relatively little is known about their efficacy, and the discursive underpinnings of their presentations are, for the most part, under-theorized. This essay takes up four museums/memorials in order to assess their potential as sites for historical dialogue and atrocity prevention: the 9/11 Memorial and Museum (USA), the District Six Museum (South Africa), the Liberation War Museum (Bangladesh); and the Legacy Museum and National Memorial for Peace and Justice (USA). Although there are important differences to consider within this small sampling, each case is framed here by the same overarching questions: How do representations of large-scale violence at these sites help or hinder historical dialogue and the promotion of democracy and human rights? And also, which kinds of representations and narratives are most likely to contribute positively to the atrocity prevention program, which is the focus of this volume? This essay argues that museums and memorials, despite certain limitations, can play a helpful role in shaping how rival groups view one another and how responsibility for past violence is apportioned, thereby facilitating the processes of reconciliation that can ameliorate conflict and stem violence.
