Date

2010-6-15

Author

Yılmaz, Ahenk

Metadata

Show full item record

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Item Usage Stats

342
views

242
downloads

Cite This

Memorialization as the reification of past experiences crystallizes the bi-directional relation between memory and architecture in its pure form. Memorials, because of this long-established relation, constitute an expense area of knowledge where the theories of diverse -such as social, psychological, cognitive, urban or architectural- studies intersect. Addressing that interdisciplinary area, this study proposes a new approach derived from classical memorising technique of the art of memory (ars memoriae) to analyse different examples of architectural memorialization (1). Beyond being just a technique, the art of memory has been considered as a form of art in the western tradition for centuries (2). As an essential part of rhetoric it was developed in the Classical period as a practical instrument by orators to perfectly memorize their speeches. In spite of the Renaissance elaboration of this art, its initial principles were very simple: putting the imagines (images), which were mental representations of memorised things, in well-ordered and mentally completely constructed loci (places), which could either be a part of a known building or an imaginary designed spatial organisation. Going out on a mental journey through these places provided the rhetoricians to memorise and remember their speeches. Furthermore, throughout the ages, this art has been embellished by diverse individuals not only who aimed at inscribing specific things to their personal memory, but also who wanted to affect the interpersonal memory of groups of individuals in order to generate particular modes of collective remembering (3). In comparison, the historical background mnemotechniques of modern times seems just a simplified form of this classical art par excellence. In this study, I claim that if one looks at a memorial as the representational image of a specific event in a well-defined place built to remind the observers of that event, and then one can see the act of architectural memorialization as the materialisation of the basic principles of the art of memory. From this conceptual framework, mental representation becomes the physical form of the memorial and locus becomes the place where that form exists. This basic definition covers not only conventional commemorative structures, which are erected to preserve the memory of the past, but also existing buildings or natural formations, which are dedicated to remind the observer of a specific event or person. Considering that the art of memory provides a long lasting remembering about a chosen subject, this study argues that the analysing method derived from that art makes it possible to evaluate memorials in terms of the remembering they propose. The objective here is to remodel the modus operandi of the art of memory as a method to analyse the effectiveness of memorials in creating specific modes of remembering for their observers. Undeniably, the design strategy in an architectural memorialization depending on the principles of the art of memory enhances not only the particular mode of remembering during the occurrence of experience but also the permanence of that remembering on memory. The initial structure and principles of the art that was firstly defined in Ad Herennium -first autonomous survived work on the art- constitutes the theoretical basis of the method.

Subject Keywords

Architecture, Memory, Collective remembering, Memorial, Memorialisation, The Art of Memory (Ars Memoriae)

URI

http://jfa.arch.metu.edu.tr/archive/0258-5316/2010/cilt27/sayi_1/267-280.pdf
https://hdl.handle.net/11511/50886

Collections

Department of Architecture, Article