Tragedy and Museums

Museums that are established at sites where great atrocities take place like 9/11 or Auschwitz must balance the history of the atrocity and the victim’s stories. It can be tough and almost impossible to do it all justice. The sites are important to have so people can grieve and remember what took place there. I have visited both Auschwitz and the 9-11 sites and museums. Both were overwhelming, powerful, and necessary.

I did notice at the 9-11 museum that there was a tension between the victims’ families, survivors and first responders. They developed and opened their own museum and tours next to the national site (which has since moved to a bigger space.) Their mission is “to unite and support all victims of terrorism through communication, representation and peer support.” Most families complained about the commercialization of the national site which is a final resting place for many people’s remains. This was one of many controversies to surround the 9/11 memorial and museum. They did succeed in building the museum and many people come to this site to visit and reflect every year. Was it worth the cost to isolate those families? Where was the shared authority? It seems the NYC government and the owners of the site wanted to control the narrative of the site from the beginning.

I bring this up because a similar controversy is brewing over a $40 million dollar museum in Orlando to be be built on the site of the PULSE nightclub shooting. It is to draw in visitors and to commemorate the victims’ lives. The families and friends of the victims and survivors want no part of it. They want people to give money to LGBTQ organizations to help the survivors and others in the community.

This museum hasn’t been built yet. Should the families and friends have the final say this time around? What do you think? I’m leaning to their side on this one. The PULSE shooting can be explored in other venues without building a museum on the site.