Posts about Memorials

In a press conference today, Mayor Gray announced plans to host an IndyCar race as soon as the project is complete. "DC is joining the ranks of other world-class cities like Toronto and Monaco in hosting a race on our city streets," the mayor said. "The same cars and drivers that race at the Indianapolis 500 will be racing here."

IndyCar officials expressed surprise that a city would build what appears to be a purpose-built racetrack. "Usually for our street races, we make do with city streets that people use every day, like in Houston or Long Beach. To have a city build an oval for us is a real treat. I mean, clearly that circle can't be great for moving pedestrians or cars, can it?" said Mark Miles, CEO of IndyCar parent company Hulman & Company.

IndyCar drivers on hand for the announcement praised the course layout. "It looks to be fast and very wide, which should make for some great racing," said driver Will Power. "It's almost perfectly built for us."

Indeed the course has a very similar shape to the New Hampshire Motor Speedway in Loudon, New Hampshire, which is known as a "paper clip" oval as its long straights and tight turns resemble a paper clip.

This is actually not the city's first foray into auto racing. In 2002, DC hosted an American Le Mans Series race in the parking lot of RFK Stadium. You can still make out the outline of the track today. The race only ran one year after noise complaints from neighbors. "We don't think that will be an issue here," said Gray. "People here are used to cars whizzing by."

National Park Service representatives said they should have no objection to using federal land for the racetrack, as their regulations only make it very difficult to place playgrounds, food vendors, or pleasant places to sit in federal parkland, none of which the racetrack requires.

Meanwhile, the National Capital Planning Commission chairman Bryan Preston said the race will work well with their plans to put another memorial in the circle, which will probably be unappealing for people to interact with as a city park but will be perfect for cars to drive around and around all day.

Even though a crowd of people might be on the other side of that wall, interacting with the memorial, talking about their experiences in the Ukraine, talking about hunger problems, whatever it might be, if you're on the other side of that wall, nothing is going on.

I think we suggested at the time of the commission meeting that it might be ameliorated with a lower hight so that you can see that there are people on the other side of that wall, or maybe some porosity or transparency, so that it wasn't just a blank wall. I think the pattern that was picked is very lovely; I like the interplay of the shadows of the trees on the wall, but it doesn't really take away from the fact that it's a public space deadening element.

One thing that might make a difference is in the new design, the deeper landscaping is also clearly a front and a back. So you have a low wall, but people are not going to be inclined to be facing out toward F Street because it seems like in that landscaped area, no feet should be in that area, no people should be sitting and facing that direction.

Wells worried about the potential for the blank wall to attract crime at night:

I am a strong believer and agree that we use public space when we can as teaching spaces, especially in the nations capital, and this fits into a vision for what our city should be. But I am also concerned this is an area where we have a lot of tourists, where folks are walking at night. There are not a lot of eyes on the street as you have in some other areas. This clearly creates potentially a nice hiding space.

Peter May, of the National Park Service, defended the design:

I understand the concern, but don't necessarily agree that it is as negative an effect as Ms. Tregoning suggests. Given the full range of things we have looked at for this memorial, this is by far the best concept. Some of the suggestions for making it more porous or lowering the height would significantly diminish the concept.

Given the expanse of F Street, and the liveliness of what happens along F Street along its entire length, particularly across the street, I don't think this is particularly deadining.

It's certainly not without precedent to have a 1-sided memorial ... it does exist in other circumstances with memorials in certain settings. This is a lot more successful than those in setting the memorial confortably on the site.

It is admittedly a 1-sided experience, but frankly, the concept doesn't work when you try to make some of the changes that were suggested. I think it is an excellent design and am very very pleased with it as it is.

May wasn't the only person less concerned about blank walls; Presidential appointee John Hart said, "Having a blank wall is not necessarily a detraction."

Tregoning took exception to May's point:

I am underwhelmed by the argument that we've done worse in other parts of the city. I'm sure that's true, but I think that by creating a back to this memorial that's hidden from everything that happens on the other side, it does create not just safety issues.

These are areas where people can undertake activities unobserved by people on the other side of the wall, whatever those activities might be. If you create a blank wall that's clearly the back of something, given the other activities that take place in the area, you will find that it attracts some amount of disamenity in terms of how it ends up getting used.

Another commissioner noted that there are homeless shelters in the area, and Tregoning added that she was referring to the two Irish pubs nearby.

Tregoning also suggested the applicant use a lighter colored stone for the paving and benches. That would keep the surfaces cooler in the summer, she noted, and make it a more enjoyable place to sit for lunch.

Former DC Councilmember and mayoral NCPC appointee Arrington Dixon suggested a translucent wall to create less of a barrier, and noted that "wheat grows in sunlight." Architect Mary Kay Lanzillotta, from Hartman Cox Architects in DC, replied that the design came out of a design competition, and the entry called for a bronze sculpture, so her firm did not explore that type of option.

Lanzillotta gave some insight into her thinking around the issue:

I think the prominent elevation here, and the way that people will experience this—many people—will be driving down Mass Ave and North Capitol. Those are the 2 prominent streets here, and that is why the memorial was turned towards that direction as well.

We can certainly hope Lanzillotta was not saying that she was more concerned with the experience for those driving through the area than those walking through the site or trying to use the plaza. A design philosophy centered around a "drive-by" experience instead of the pedestrian scale was responsible for many of the worst planning mistakes of the past, like L'Enfant Plaza, mistakes NCPC is now trying to correct.

Urban designers have learned through painful experience that blank walls can be some of the most destructive elements that get created with good intentions. This isn't a very large blank wall, but it's a blank wall just the same, and it's disappointing to see this level of unconcern from NCPC staff, NPS, the architect and others.

The empty public reservations in DC will turn into memorials over time. That's appropriate. These can be memorials that either contribute to the urban experience or detract from it. Each piece matters, even small ones, because they add up to a whole. NCPC and the federal commissioners will rightly put interpretive experiences foremost in their priorities, but they should also take great care to respect and enhance the pedestrian experience as they review and approve new memorials.

Here is the video from the meeting. The presentation about the memorial starts at 14:48 in the video and the question and answer period starts at 26:55.

The National Capital Planning Commission sees most empty triangles like this one as spots for future memorials, and Congress likes to authorize memorials, like this one. These spaces are also part of a city, whose people need spaces to sit outside, eat a snack, run around, and more.

Fortunately, the two don't have to conflict. A number of memorials work well as public spaces at the same time. An oft-cited example is the Navy Memorial, at 8th and Pennsylvania, NW. It's an attractive fountain which sports a mast with naval flags, quotations from famous commanders, a map of the world's oceans, and more. Plus, it's a great spot to sit outside on a nice day and eat lunch.

The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial isn't bad. Others do little; the memorials to Samuel Hahnemann (founder of homeopathy) and Daniel Webster (statesman and orator) in the triangles next to Scott Circle are just large statues in the midst of some grass and paths; their presence doesn't create any usable public space. Some of the fears around the proposed Eisenhower Memorial involve design elements that could detract from people actually using the square.

The Ukranian famine memorial will sport a 6-foot bronze wall, with a bas-relief facing Massachusetts Avenue. In front of the wall will be a plaza, open to Mass. Ave. and with benches on 2 sides.

NCPC, DC historic preservation officials, and the Commission on Fine Arts all pushed the memorial designers to improve the way it backs onto F Street. The original submission lacked any design for the back of the wall along F, and tall cylindrical trees might have "create[d] a large vegetation wall that might overwhelm pedestrians."

In response, the designers moved the wall farther from F Street, reducing its visual size from the sidewalk, added some texture to the back, and changed the trees to ones that will leave open space at eye level. It's still not ideal; it's still a blank wall with some ground cover in front, but it's an improvement and the whole wall is not very large.

The whole design is definitely better for public space than the "Tear Drops on a Wheat Field" finalist design, which would have filled the whole site with tall vegetation and plopped some big glass bubbles in the center.

More memorials will keep coming. Congress has authorized an Adams Memorial to the two presidents and the rest of the Adams Family. NCPC, preservation boards, and residents can work to ensure that that memorial not only avoids being creepy, kooky, mysterious or spooky, but also serves to enhance the urban experience instead of detract as it also helps people remember.

The current site

Congress required that President Eisenhower's Memorial be located to maximize prominence, public access, and availability; ensure thematic appropriateness to Eisenhower's memory; and be feasible while avoiding undue controversy. The chosen site happens to satisfy each of these needs, but not particularly well.

The planned location, to be named Eisenhower Square, is not without symbolism. Placed between the Department of Education and the National Air and Space Museum, the site was designed to create a connection with two agencies that were established during his presidency, the Department of Education and NASA.

But the non-controversial location and symbolism may be illusory. First, the site's lack of controversy mostly reflects the fact that the site is currently an urban dead space with limited development options and a lack of a cohesive neighborhood to protest. This seems a poorly justified reason to choose a certain site.

Secondly, neither the Department of Education nor NASA serves as a key element of President Eisenhower's legacy or the reason for which he's being honored. Few would put the creation of the Department of Education or NASA at the top of Ike's list of achievements, which includes leading the Allied forces in Europe during WWII, ending the Korean War, creating the Interstate Highway System, laying the groundwork for the Civil Rights movement through desegregation of the government and two key Civil Rights laws, and articulating the "Domino System" that defined the Cold War as well as the threat of undue political influence by the "military-industrial complex."

Moreover, even this thematic justification for the location may not make sense in a few years. Departments and agencies frequently move, and while it is likely that the Air and Space Museum (which is not a part of NASA) is there to stay, the Department of Education could move or even consolidated with another agency.

Surely another consideration was proximity to the Mall and to a steady stream of visitors. But where is the value is having a lot of people visit an uninspiring memorial? The Theodore Roosevelt Memorial is far from the crowds and can only be accessed by foot from Virginia, but its sense of solitude is an enhancement to the memorial. Foot traffic should drive our decisions about where to put dry cleaners, not memorials.

The weak justification for the current site and its controversy leads to the inevitable question: Could we get a better design at a better location?

Where else could it go?

DC has plenty of sites to build new memorials. Through the Commemorative Works Acts, Congress created a Memorial Task Force that identified more than 100 locations in 2001 in the DC area suitable for a memorial. The proposed Eisenhower Memorial site made their list of 20 "prime locations." [See the list and map on pages 20-21 of the Task Force's report]

In light of the current controversy, it may be time to start looking at the remaining 19.

Other locations identified by the Task Force might be more appropriate than the current site. Perhaps the South Capitol Street terminus at the Anacostia River, just south of the baseball stadium or the 10th Street Overlook would be fitting. Both are near highways, for which Ike is well known, and the first is soon to be redeveloped and within a very short distance of a pair of military bases. The site on Columbia Island, near Arlington Cemetery and not far from Fort Myer where Eisenhower twice lived, would also be fitting.

Other sites not on the list would also be suitable. Since the Task Force report came out, the Awakening has moved from the southern tip of Hains Point. This site would be a beautiful location for a memorial and one that's within sight of the Army War College that Ike attended in the 1920s. The soon-to-be-redeveloped Southwest Waterfront also presents opportunities.

While historically we have chosen sites within the nation's capital as most worthy of our national attention, a location outside of DC might better honor President Eisenhower. Gettysburg was Eisenhower's home after World War II and where he chose to retire. Because of its prominence within American history, it is well visited and thus can easily meet the 3 requirements of the law authorizing the memorial.

Some might be concerned that a monument to a President in close proximity to the battlefield would detract from the significance of the battle and the address that followed it. But at the same time, Gettysburg would seem a particularly poignant location for a memorial to one of our country's most decorated soldiers.

Eisenhower was a great leader, and he is worthy of a great memorial. If this site constrains his memorial to the point of making it a failure, perhaps the smart thing to do is to start over with a new site.

Indeed, the best and most beautiful, the most serene and the most magnificent, become the backdrop for the most sacred traditions and the most meaningful displays of civic duty.

What American could imagine Martin Luther King's famous speech being given from any other place than from the grand steps of the Lincoln Memorial? Would the words, "I have a dream" have carried the same magnitude and awe to inspire generations had they been spoken before a bland glass box of a federal building?

It is in our best memorials that the loftiness of the architecture not only provides a fitting setting, but also serves to emphasize the greatest ideals to which we aspire as citizens.

The Eisenhower Memorial which Gehry has proposed, pictured below, emphasizes none of the ideals of one of our nation's great heroes, but reduces Eisenhower's accomplishment to the level of the mundane.

Massive unadorned pillars serve not to inspire wonder, but rather to make one feel miniscule and inconsequential. Sheets of metal, strung up like drive-in movie screens between the enormous pillars communicate not the universal ideals of unity, sacrifice and freedom, but rather random moments picked from the President's life.

In contrast, designs chosen by the NCAS and the ICA&A and created by architects and artisans were chosen because they express through meaningful sculpture, beautiful composition and a deference to the city, as well as the civic virtues that Eisenhower himself exemplified.

The first place winner, Daniel Cook, stated that his winning design, pictured at the top of this post, was designed not as an arch celebrating the victory of a conqueror, but rather an arch of peace. The transition Cook reflects of Eisenhower as a general to Eisenhower as president and citizen evokes memories of Washington as Cincinnatus, the revered leader who laid aside his power and returned to his farm when his work was complete.

Sylvester Bartos and Whitley Esteban's second place design, pictured right, presented an arch framing the axis of Maryland Avenue, with semicircular colonnades facing the dome of the Capitol, surrounding a figure of Eisenhower. In front of this design one might contemplate the weight of responsibility faced as he pondered the invasion the night before D-Day in 1944.

Each design awarded was classical by design, but each was unique. Some chose to place Eisenhower high atop a pedestal, others placed him in a temple. In each we can see the limitless expressive capability of architecture when the designers cast off the limits of the modernist idiom. What all of the designs had in common was that they created a fitting place to honor and remember a man who exemplifies the best of what America has to offer.

Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of the President, in her remarks at the award ceremony stated that she could we could imagine this becoming a setting that every year future generations would gather to remember, as we did on Monday, the sacrifice of so many brave men on D-Day. That more than just a memorial to one man, that this place could become as the Lincoln Memorial has become, a sacred place to honor the civic virtue which we all aspire.

Below are the winners of the counterproposal competition:

1st Place

2nd Place

3rd Place (a tie)

2 commendations

Taylor, 24, was in his fourth year with the Redskins. In the twelfth week of the 2007 season he had 5 interceptions—third in the league, according to the Elias Sports Bureau. His reputation as one of the hardest hitting players in the league and his all-out style of play had endeared him to fans.

News of his death during a home invasion on November 27, 2007 quickly spread across the region, leaving his teammates and fans in a state of disbelief and grief. While the Redskins organization honored Taylor's memory on the field, an established DC graffiti artist took to the red line in a public display of deference.

"The Red Line has been a hot spot since the mid-80's, but became the spot in the early 90's," according to Roger Gastman, a Bethesda native and author of Free Agents: A History of DC Graffiti and the forthcoming The History of American Graffiti. "If you wanted to be someone in the DC graffiti scene, you had to hit the Red Line."

"The Brookland station, you can walk right up to it. It is a very good location, if you can pull it off," says Gastman.

"The best writers interact with their environment," asserts Gastman, citing graffiti as the fastest growing art movement of the past forty years.

CERT

Beginning his graffiti career with the tag of "CERT" in 1992 at the age of 14, the well-known writer of the Sean Taylor mural declined an interview request for this article.

"The Red Line was CERT's backyard. He basically lived there and owned it. CERT could disappear, but, to this day he holds enough respect that his spots will remain untouched for years to come," reads CERT's profile in Free Agents that describes his graffiti as "hardcore and illegal" and "always in highly visible spots."

"Graffiti to me is my childhood, my teen years. That's what I was about 100 percent. But I'm still representing. Don't count me out. Don't forget me. I can come back at any moment and in a month I'll take king of the Red Line again," contends CERT in the 2001 book.

"Whatever his reasons for slowing down, CERT is a true D.C. king. It's time for him to sit back and let the mark he left on the city soak in. And like he said, don't count him out. With a closet full of paint and heart that's true to the game, CERT will be back," Gastman foretold in the conclusion of CERT's profile.

The mural has remained untouched since its appearance more than 3 years ago. Gastman says there is a code among writers that is being followed.

"Brookland station can be considered a museum for DC graffiti, because of the pieces that have endured over the years," says Saaret Yoseph, a graduate student at Georgetown University. "Brookland is unique in that the art is eye level. The graffiti is looking right at you as you wait for your train."

Yoseph is directing, "The Red Line D.C Project," a documentary exploring the "communal experience" of graffiti on the Red Line as a public art space. It will be released later this year.

Rider Reactions

"What struck me about that one was here was a memorial to someone we actually knew—or knew of. So much graffiti is inscrutable. Who are the people named there? What's the purpose of it? But this was one we could grasp immediately," said John Kelly, a writer for The Washington Post and Red Line rider since 1983. "And then a few years later, just across the platform was another one that fell into that category: some memorial paint for Michael Jackson."

On a recent morning at the Brookland Station, riders' reactions to the graffiti suggested a sense of pride in the station's distinction as the home of the Sean Taylor mural.

"If they cleaned it up we would be really hurt behind that one," said Milford Obendorf, a Brookland resident waiting with his wife on the northbound train to Silver Spring.

"It's been here since he passed away. People come here to look at it," said Marquette Obendorf.

"It's real creative," said LaWanda Swain, a custodian with Metro for 6 years. "He played here so they have respect for him."

"It spices things up. If they cleaned it up then you'd be staring at a wall for 15 minutes," said Mike Young, 20, a cell phone sales rep downtown. "People remember Sean Taylor because he shouldn't have died. He hit the hardest like when he cracked yungin' in the Pro Bowl."

Numerous videos on YouTube have compiled Taylor's highlights as a Redskin, including a tackle of punter Brian Moorman in the Pro Bowl that lifted Moorman off his feet to a point where he was parallel to the field.

However, some riders expressed frustration with the station's illegal art.

"It grows and grows until they clean it up," said Joe, an older man in a white dress shirt, a Brookland resident for more than two decades. "The kids that do it are talented, but they can put their talents to better use."

As a regular rider of the red line for more than a decade, I can remember the walls at Brookland being cleaned, "buffed" in the language of graffiti, about five years ago.

"The graffiti is on CSX property, not Metro property. Typically, when we become aware of graffiti, our goal is to remove it within 24 hours," said Angela Gates, a Media Relations officer with Metro.

CSX did not respond to email and phone call requests for comment.

"There have been no graffiti-related arrests or citations in the last year at Brookland-CUA," said Gates who emphasized that the property is outside of Metro's jurisdiction.

With no apparent plans to clean the walls and a lack of enforcement around graffiti, the Sean Taylor mural will continue to be a distinctive cultural landmark for the Brookland Metro station.

A print version of this article will appear in the forthcoming spring edition of The Brookland Heartbeat.