1

Erik Sandman

Research Paper

HIST 320

UWEC

War Memorials, Monuments, and Public Memory

Throughout the United States and Canada, war memorials and sites to remember the

men and women who fought in them have become increasingly prevalent over the last century

and a half. This memorial boom has been fueled by the wars and conflicts that have taken place

over these years and the feelings of nationalism and patriotism that these events often invoke.

Though some of these memorials have not been without controversy, change, and debate. I

would like to examine the effects that war and the subsequent memorials that follow them has

had on public space and memory in the United States and Canada and how it has evolved over

the years.

Following the Revolutionary War, the new nation of America was very anti-memorial and

monument as that was something the British did, so the people of the United States didn’t have

very much interest in it. The real surge in monuments and memorials in the United States came

after the Union victory in the American Civil War. Following the bloody conflict, there was a

huge increase in public spaces that commemorated and remembered the war. Some examples

being war cemeteries, battlefield areas, and various monuments. Looking at the outcome of the

war, one might have expected there to be many more Union memorials and monuments.

However, in the decades following the war, despite the loss, statues and monuments rose up all
2

over in former confederate states honoring leaders and soldiers who fought for the south. Some

of these monuments were a figurative slap in the face to newly freed African Americans. These

monuments were promoting the memory of slavery, racism, and “Lost Cause” ideals that were

no longer mainstream.1 Fast forward to modern times and many of these monuments and

memorials to Confederate figures are still standing impacting out public space and memory. I

think there is a big difference between a cemetery or memorial remembering your average

Confederate soldiers who gave their lives in battle, and a large statue to leaders of the

Confederate for example. These statues often invoke ideas and memories of the Lost Cause

movement which aims to remember the old ideas of the Confederacy and paint their defeat in

the best possible way. This line of thinking is outdated and can often be intimidating to African

Americans even to this day. In the last decade or so, debate over many of these monuments has

heated up exponentially and following the white power attacks and events in Charlottesville in

2017 and the murder of George Floyd in 2020 it reached a boiling point in many areas. These

two events coupled with many others has shown that there is still a lot of racism and

discrimination in our country and many of those Confederate monuments promote those ideals.

That is why we have seen the removal of hundreds of these monuments and memorials in

recent years. While it has probably taken far to long for this process to get moving, I think that

these removals and debates regarding the statues in most cases show that many Americans are

trying to change the perception of public memory that the Confederate monuments help to

promote. Hopefully we can continue to have discussion and examine these monuments to

determine if they were created to try and promote the Lost Cause Myth and then be able to

1
Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Durham: Duke University Press,
2018).
3

remove them if it is deemed necessary. While removing these memorials will not instantly

remove racism or discrimination, I think that it can help to change public memory and

perception and show that we as a people and a nation do not promote those ideals or views any

longer. Hopefully as a result we can continue to become a more accepting country to all people.

As the United States and Canada moved into the 20th century, we saw the Great War

play out in the years 1914-1918. This war was a very big event for Canada as a nation. Unlike the

United States, Canada was in the war from the beginning. Following the confederation in 1867,

this war was sort of the first event in which the Canadians were able fight for their country and

many ended up playing the ultimate price. It is often said the Canada entered the war as a

territory and emerged as a nation. 2In 1925 plans began to create a memorial for the war. The

National War Memorial was created to look realistic with Canadian soldiers dressed in World

War 1 gear passing through a large marble arch marching towards battle and death in sacrifice

to their country. The unveiling of the monument in 1939 was attended by a whopping 100,000

people. In 2000 the remains of the Unknown Soldier were moved from France back to Canada

and placed at the memorial which gave in another meaning. The monument invokes collective

and public memory of the conflict and the sacrifice that was made by the brave soldiers. It was

strategically placed in in Confederation Square in the Canadian capital of Ottawa with other

national buildings and monuments and really allows it to be at the center of public and

collective memory in the nation.

Following the allied victory in World War 1 feelings of nationalism and patriotism

increased in both countries. The day the armistice was signed became a national holiday known

2
Szpunar, P. M. (2010). Monuments, mundanity and memory: Altering ‘place’ and ‘space’ at the National War
Memorial (Canada). Memory Studies, 3(4), 379–394
4

as Armistice Day, which eventually became Veterans Day. Eventually as we know in the coming

years the largest war in history was about to take place and the US and Canada both

participated in it. The Second World War was really when the United States started to establish

itself as a global military superpower, and in the years following we engaged in multiple

different wars around the world. Following the war those feelings of nationalism and pride in

our military only increased. In the past 70 years following the end of World War 2 we have

constructed many memorials in Washington D.C spanning many of our conflicts. Millions and

millions of people visit these memorials each year. Many of the conflicts that the United States

has participated in have generally been considered “popular”, or that most of the general public

supported America participating in the conflict. However, for the Vietnam War, this was not the

case.

John Bodnar begins his book “Remaking America” with the story of the Vietnam

Veterans Memorial. Unlike previous conflicts the United States was involved in, as the 20

yearlong war dragged on, support for the war began to wane, and eventually much of the

sentiment surrounding the Vietnam War turned negative. Anti-war ideals spread all throughout

the country, and eventually, along with other factors, the United States pulled out of the war in

1975. Following the conclusion of the fighting, many veterans of the conflict felt like they had

been neglected and betrayed by the nation and its people for fighting in an “unpopular war”. 3

In 1979, two Vietnam veterans Jan Scruggs and Tom Carhart along with other veterans in the DC

area began planning a memorial to the fallen soldiers of the war. At the current moment, public

and collective memory of the conflict was overall negative. These veterans however did not

3
1. John Bodnar, Remaking America: Public Memory, Commemoration, and Patriotism in the Twentieth Century
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2021), 1-9.
5

want to bring up any political arguments of ideals. They just wanted honor and remember their

fallen comrades and connect people with the past. Many of the other veterans of the war also

thought that this might be a good idea to try and remove the negative stigma that often

surround soldiers from the war. The fight for this monument was riddled with difficulties and

showed how many different opinions and interests had to be taken into account in order for a

public memorial to gain traction. Scruggs, Carhart and other veterans set about meeting with

politicians and other government officials in attempts to gain support for the project. The

veterans mentioned that they, through the monument could help to promote reconciliation as

well as healing. Many different viewpoints were mentioned and advocated during the

construction. While some ideas thought of patriotism and unity, most just really wanted to

honor the fallen soldiers and their families. Others sympathized with the soldiers dead and alive

who really received the short end of the stick from the government through their fighting in an

unpopular war and the poor treatment they received coming home. Once enough support was

gained it was decided that the memorial would go near Lincoln’s, which the veterans thought

would help as Lincoln was known for uniting the nation back during the Civil War and maybe

that idea would help unite a nation again.4 Once the spot was decided a design competition

took place. The design that was selected was a dark wall with all the names of the fallen soldiers

on it. After the design was selected many people had differing opinions on it. Scruggs among

other felt satisfied that the design, however other people did not. Many thought the original

black wall lacked patriotism, inspiration, and courage among other things. American Political

James Webb who was an officer in Vietnam said it looked like a “mass grave.” After much

4
1. John Bodnar, Remaking America: Public Memory, Commemoration, and Patriotism in the Twentieth Century
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2021), 1-9.
6

deliberation and many citizens writing letters to the government, some even submitting their

own designs, a flag was added, along with statues of three soldiers and the inscription God

Bless America. Once the memorial was completed in 1982, thousands of people came to

Washington to witness the dedication. Many still expressed their conflicting views of the war,

but many veterans and families who came just wanted to honor their loved ones who died and

the veterans who survived alike. National loyalty and unity were not very prevalent. Many came

to the memorial for personal reasons such as seeing the names of their fallen comrades or

family members. Since the memorials inception is has been associated with grief, loss, and pain.

With people visiting them and openly weeping and leaving mementoes. Veterans would often

keep vigil at night and pass out flashlights for people to find names. Overall, though, the story of

the Vietnam Memorial is different than many of our other ones. While there were some

concessions given to the patriots and nationalists, the main feature of this memorial is to

remember and honor the dead. As the years have gone by, I think our national sentiment

towards the conflict has cooled, and the Vietnam Memorial has become a powerful symbol in

our public space and memory. We are able to look back on the tragic circumstances of the war

as well as the way it was thought about stateside during the conflict and gain knowledge and

memory through the memorial. Though feelings of national pride and patriotism have often

dominated the creation of many memorials in the United States and Canada, I felt the need to

include the story about the Vietnam Memorial as it is an interesting and different tale on our

monuments and public memory.

I believe that the massive number of war memorials in the United States and Canada

also plays a large part in the development and perception of our military forces. I think generally
7

the military in both of these countries are respected and well liked and I think the fact that we

can go to these memorials and connect with the past and experience our collective memory it

really helps. Especially in the United States where we have one of the largest, and the most

advanced and expensive militaries in the world. The majority of our collective memories and

public spaces pertaining to our military are very positive focus on nationalism and patriotism.

This for sure helps the continued support and advancement of our military. Over the last 40

years memorials to all of the major wars as well as many other figures have been constructed in

the nation’s capital. As well as memorials to African American soldiers, women who have

served, and the many other ethnicities that have served as well.

In conclusion, we have seen a large rise in war memorials and monuments throughout

the United States and Canada over the last 150 years and I wanted to look at the evolution they

have gone through in our public memory. Many of these memorials have been fueled and

affected by nationalism and patriotism, though not all. Though there has been debate and

controversy over different monuments and memorials, and there probably will be in the future,

a majority of these sites convey a positive view on the collective memories of the history of the

militaries of Canada and the United States. This is very prevalent in the large number of

memorials and monuments in both Ottawa and Washington DC, as well as the countless

thousands of others in towns and parks across the two nations. All of these have created strong

collective memory through the use of public space and parks and will likely continue to do so.

Bibliography:

Bodnar, John. Remaking America: Public Memory, commemoration, and patriotism in the
twentieth century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2021.
8

Levinson, Sanford. Written in stone: Public monuments in changing societies. Durham: Duke
University Press, 2018.

Savage, Kirk. Monument wars: Washington, D.C., the National Mall, and the transformation of
the Memorial Landscape. Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press, 2011.

Savage, Kirk. Standing soldiers, kneeling slaves: Race, war, and monument in Nineteenth-
century America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2018.

Szpunar, P. M. (2010). Monuments, mundanity and memory: Altering ‘place’ and ‘space’ at the
National War Memorial (Canada). Memory Studies, 3(4), 379–394. https://doi-
org.proxy.uwec.edu/10.1177/1750698010374286

TEIGROB, ROBERT. Living with War: Twentieth-Century Conflict in Canadian and American
History and Memory. University of Toronto Press, 2016.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3138/j.ctvg25491.