The Forgotten Memorial: Korean War Memorial

 

The Korean War was a three-year war that known for being “exceptionally bloody” which caused over three million casualties as well as over 36,000 soldiers dying throughout this horrible war. Essentially, the Korean War was a battle between North Korea, supported by the Soviet Union and South Korea, supported by the United States. This particular war was the first confrontation between two nuclear powers. When reading the article, “Honoring Korean War,” by Alan E. London, London states that the Korean War is often called the “Forgotten War.” The “Forgotten War” was not commemorated or recognized until the Vietnam War Memorial project began.

During this time in the military for the United States, young men of age were drafted into the army or enlisted so that they could avoid the draft. Imagine being forced to risk your life for a country at war and not receive proper recognition. I’m not sure why the Korean War was not commemorated significantly before the Vietnam War Memorial. When the Korean War finally began preparations for a proper memorial, this same attitude of “forgetfulness” spilled over into the design process. London stated, “Honor service in the Korean War, but would also, by clear implication, honor future military service.” In retrospect, honoring the Korean War within itself is honoring future military services as well. However, trying to create a memorial that includes soldiers who have not served or died yet seems kind of absurd. I think all war memorials dedicated to fallen soldiers in a way honors future military service because of the respect and high regard that one war can have on future wars and conflicts for the military.

Precedingly, as the design process continued for the Korean War Memorial, survivors and veterans were asked to take a survey on what they thought the Korean War Memorial should be. Essentially, these surveys were basically put in the trash and disregarded. It’s ironic that the soldiers who actually served in the war had opinion considering London stated, “designed to engage visitors in ways to ensure that the values of the military service would be communicated and understood.” However, the exact people who are the military, opinions are ignored and not understood at all. Lastly, London also stated, “The memorial’s “compositional tension” creates a meaningful experience, but it is an experience of looking, of relating, of appreciating, of thinking, and of honoring, rather than an experience of a ritual procession through space.” I think being able to appreciate the memorial simply by engaging in a deep thought is great however, I almost wish there was something in the memorial that vividly expressed the importance and significance of the war. For instance, the Vietnam War Memorial was essentially a wall encompassed in the landscape that appeared to go infinity in both directions. The wall was encompassed with all of the fallen soldiers and represented that even though they are gone their names will live on forever. On the contrary, the Korean War Memorial included no names and essentially was just a place in a landscape rather than becoming the landscape. Not saying that the Korean War Memorial was poorly done but if this war was one of the bloodiest battles, why is that significance not shown in the memorial?

With society forgetting the Korean War, almost seems like the Modernist approach in landscape architecture and architecture at the time. Forgetting the past and pressing forward to the future.