Book review: Written in Stone. Public Monuments in Changing Societies

In his essay Written in Stone. Public Monuments in Changing Societies, Stanford Levinson explores the subject of the making of national history, and the making of its heroes and villains. His work does not focus primarily on what historians produce, but rather what official institutions – such as states – and also individuals want as historical heritage. Levinson starts with the example of the Millennium monument in Budapest. His brief but comprehensive survey of the history of that monument points right to the central theme of Written in Stone: depending on the period in time, and the political power in place, the monument was modified and rearranged so as to transmit a message that would satisfy the leaders. The author then goes on to describe more generally the interesting situation in Eastern Europe. Indeed, as the communist regimes were abolished, monuments honoring the leaders and heroes of those regimes were brought down, and destroyed. If the concept of “regime change” and the alteration in attitude towards public monuments apply when describing the situation in Eastern Europe, something else has to be found in the United States to explain an exchange in attitudes. Levinson remarks that the difficulty for our country lies in the making of one culture out of several different ones. Coups have not shaped our history, but rather its multi-cultural society. After presenting four general examples, Levinson then concentrates on his main focus: the American South. This is a very intriguing and complex case. If Eastern Europe rid itself of the monument to the glory of Stalin and the communist period, conversely the South kept its commemorations of the secession. The Confederate flag can still be found, and has been found flying above a state capitol not too long ago, and some memorials still glorify Southern icons from the Civil War. The central question is what kind of past are such monuments and symbols transmitting to the present and future generations? What is it that we want to keep from the past? And how do we want to preserve and convey it? Does the Confederate flag only symbolizes the peculiar institution, or does it also and more generally embody a certain Southern culture and identity? How neutral can a state be in commemorating the past? Levinson offers several possibilities in how to deal with certain monuments. An interesting one is to question their location, and also the raising of another monument in proximity to them, portraying both sides of a story. When concluding his work, Levinson mentions that sometimes, to commemorate an event is also a way to remember how dreadful it was, so as never to forget it and – hopefully – never to repeat it. Traces from our past should be kept, maybe in museums, or in parks for instance. But what is most critical is the transmission of this past to the future generations, to be sure that it is not the wrong message that is passed along.