ABSTRACT
It would seem inherent in the purpose and the expense of public memorials that they would seize our attention, explain events from the past, and help us remember those events. Because public memorials are generally intended to represent people, events, and values of lasting importance, one might assume memorials would always be designed as obvious, legible, physically durable objects in prominent locations. There is something strange, then, in the fact that many contemporary memorials are invisible, insubstantial, or illegible. Since Musil (1987) first noted, in 1927, the problem of monuments becoming unnoticed and their purposes being forgotten, the subject matter, design, and location of public memorials have diversified greatly. Memorials can often be found in very marginal, leftover spaces. Contemporary memorials may be small, insubstantial, fragmentary, or even ephemeral; many lack explicit symbolism and explanatory text. Some memorials take the form of voids, rather than solid objects. The purposes and messages of contemporary memorials are often unclear. As a consequence of these vagaries, people visiting commemorative sites do not always recognize their intended significance and sacredness. Contemporary memorial designs thus reflect two distinct aspects of terrain vague that are identified by Solà-Morales (1995): many of them are evacuated spaces, physically empty and available; and they are often spatially, experientially, and semantically vague spaces, which suggest liberty of interpretation and use.
