Monuments to the second world war are looking increasingly dodgy

Most monuments are literally set in stone — or cast in bronze to better survive the weather. Being enduring, they arguably become ‘prisoners of history’, as this fascinating series of essays by Keith Lowe is titled. Conversely, perspectives are like the weather, constantly changing, as relationships between and within nations, and views on social and moral norms, shift over time, as we are seeing particularly at present. The inherent tension between the human desire for monumental permanence, especially after the upheaval of war, and the natural transience of social values, proves fertile ground for this examination of the lessons that can be drawn from second world war monuments around the world.

Lowe applies his critical gaze to 25 of them, from 16 countries, marshalled into five sections: heroes, martyrs, monsters, apocalypse and rebirth. These are the ideas, he argues, that underpin our collective memory of the second world war. It is soon clear how interconnected these concepts are; but more fascinating are the paradoxes he reveals. Over time, heroes once admired for their strength actually become the most vulnerable figures, Lowe contends, inevitably open to criticism as power shifts, and often conferring difficult noblesse oblige responsibilities on their home nations. Once the ultimate sacrifice has been made, however, ‘a martyr is forever’, and ‘a nation of martyrs is free to be as selfish as it wishes’.

Such a provocative perspective makes Lowe’s choice of monuments important. The well-balanced range here enables the retelling of some remarkable war stories, while also providing fascinating insights into the ways different nations have remembered or denied issues around national identity and the glory and horrors of war. There are memorials erected by various governments on home territory and on foreign soil; there are poignant shrines, started as spontaneous acts of remembrance; and others defiled by the inclusion of war criminals.