Memorializing the Victims of Terrorism

Abstract

The memorialization of victims of terrorism and terrorist-type events has recently been recognized as a critical component of the healing process for victims, their families and the general public. Identifying the issues associated with memorializing victims of terrorism is therefore vital towards the development of policy frameworks that effectively address their memorialization needs. This report presents a review of the international academic literature that has been produced regarding the memorialization of victims of terrorism and terrorist-type events.  The literature shows that there are many practical and conceptual challenges involved in the memorialization processes. Some of these challenges include the meanings associated with memorials, the presence of multiple stakeholders in the memorialization process, and the location and maintenance of memorials.  Hence, the successful memorialization of Canadian victims of terrorism relies in part, on the careful consideration of the various issues associated with memorializing and the memorialization process.

Executive Summary

The needs of victims of terrorism have now extended beyond the legal and health trajectories through which they have primarily been based. Today, the memorialization of the victims of terrorism is emerging as a necessary component in the general approach used to address the overall needs of those affected by terrorism.  As a relatively recent area of focus, gauging the ways in which to address the memorialization related needs of Canadian victims of terrorism becomes a real challenge. Towards establishing a framework for addressing the memorialization needs of victims, this report presents a preliminary scan of the academic literature that addresses in some capacity, the various issues associated with devising an effective approach regarding the memorialization of victims of terrorism. Some of the questions guiding this report included:

The answers to these as well as other critical questions were obtained through a review of the Canadian and international academic literature in the area. The scholarly articles utilized in this report were drawn from academic journals accessed primarily through online academic databases. To compensate for the limited scholarship on memorializing the victims of terrorism, books, research reports, government documents and Internet searches were also utilized in the compilation of this review.

A vital step toward establishing the ways in which Canadian victims of terrorism can be memorialized is to first identify the definition and context of terrorism in Canada. In general, the academic literature shows that there is no particular definition that stands as the "correct" definition of terrorism. Rather, research points to the fact that scholars generally agree that the term is somewhat indefinable, and when it is definable it is also highly malleable (Staiger et al. 2008; Fletcher 2006; Weinberg et al. 2004).  Although there is difficulty associated with establishing a sociological definition of terrorism, the legal field has witnessed some consistency in the way terrorism has been defined both within and between Western democratic states. Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union all incorporate elements of fear, violence and intimidation in their definitions. In addition, each nation identifies politics, religion, and the need to influence governments as among the primary attributes of terrorist acts. 

In terms of the Canadian context, some scholars have attempted to operationalize a typology of Canadian terrorism (Ross and Gurr 1989; Leman-Langlois and Brodeur 2005). According to Leman-Langlois and Brodeur (2005), there are four kinds of terrorism in operation in Canada – demand based terrorism, private justice terrorism, revolutionary terrorism and restorative terrorism. It should be noted however, that there are many Canadian examples of terrorism that may not fit into this particular typology. Nevertheless, this typology is one of several that have sought to explicate the historical and current context of terrorism in Canada.

Next, as an important aspect in understanding the ways in which Canadian victims of terrorism have been and are memorialized, "memorialization" becomes a central concept guiding the ways the issue is both framed and approached. Like the term "terrorism," the term "memorial" is open to many different interpretations and definitions that are dependent on the contexts in which they are used. However, there are some generalizable characteristics associated with the concept of a "memorial" – namely that it involves a space, site or form of action designed to honour, mourn and remember particular people and events that have significance in people’s lives (Foot et al. 2006). 

In general, memorializing is a complex process that involves the intersection of numerous issues. Research shows that the presence of multiple stakeholders in the process is a contributing factor to its overall complexity (Britton 2007; Couch et al. 2008). Common stakeholders in the process include victims and victims’ families and friends; community and religious groups, organizations and associations; and city officials, city planners, government officials and public agents – each of which, according to Dee Britton (2007), seek to regulate and control the production of memorials.

Another significant issue to consider where memorialization is concerned is the ways in which narratives feature during and after the memorialization process. Research shows that narratives are an inherent component of memorials. Here, memorials provide the context through which implicit and explicit messages about terrorist events and the societies in which they are established can be made (Damphouse et al. 2003; Shay 2005).  Common narratives include those regarding victimhood, politics, and war (Graham and Whelan 2007; Doss 2008; Hoskins 2007).  Unfortunately, the distinction of whether or not the attack takes place in Canada or overseas and what proportion of the victims are Canadian is not addressed as a theme in the academic literature and, therefore, was not dealt with in a substantive manner in this report.

Next for consideration in the memorialization process are the various ways victims have been, and can be, memorialized. Through an examination of academic and non-academic literature produced regarding the memorialization of terrorist and non-terrorist events, this report presents a typology of some of the ways victims of terrorism can be memorialized. It should be noted that in addition to drawing from Canadian instances of terrorism and terrorist type events (i.e., Air India bombing, Montréal Massacre, September 11), this typology draws heavily from the international scholarship that has been produced regarding the ways victims in other nations have been memorialized.

Research indicates that physical memorials are among the most common ways victims of terrorism and terrorist-type events have been memorialized (Shipley 1987; Gough 2007). Given their public nature, they are prime sites where particular narratives and messages can be expressed, especially politically based narratives (Gough 2007; Nevin 2005). In addition to issues regarding narratives, logistical issues must also be considered where physical memorials are concerned. Design, location, costs and maintenance are all components that may create challenges for the memorialization process. 

Another way that victims may be memorialized is through government responses and statements regarding particular events. These provide the opportunity for governments to publicly acknowledge the experiences of victims – a need expressed by the family members of the victims of Air India Flight 182 (Air India Inquiry 2008). Commissions and inquiries also function in a similar manner during the memorialization process. In addition to fostering the public recognition of particular events, commissions and inquiries also illustrate to victims, their families and the general public a governments’ commitment towards addressing the various needs of victims of terrorism.

Akin to government statements, the establishment of days of remembrance honouring the victims of terrorism promote both public and state based recognition of the experiences of victims. However, as research shows, the success of national days of remembrance lies in part on the extent to which victims are remembered in a capacity that reflects the severity of the event in question (Stone 2000). What is implied here is that the quality of the activities and events used to mark particular days of remembrance are just as significant as the existence of the day. 

Next, research has shown that groups and organizations also play a significant role in the memorialization process (Couch et al. 2008). Areas of the memorialization process where groups and organizations have shown to have a real impact has been in the selection of memorial sites, funding for the development and maintenance of memorials, and most importantly, advocating for and expressing the various memorial related needs of victims and others affected by terrorist events (Shipley 1987; Couch et al. 2008). However, research also highlights that groups and organization can also pose a challenge to the memorial process, especially in the instances where multiple groups and organizations are working towards the same end but are guided by opposing objectives (Gough 2007).

Finally, victims of terrorism can also be memorialized through spontaneous memorials. Examples of spontaneous memorials include impromptu shrines, roadside memorials, and memorial walls (Thomas 2006). In addition to providing the public with opportunities to memorialize these victims, research shows that the unregulated and impromptu nature of spontaneous memorial sites also provides people with the opportunity to critique their governments (Santino 2006; Yocom 2006). As with physical memorials, spontaneous memorials also require the careful consideration of logistical issues such as maintenance, public safety and the public response(s) towards unauthorized memorial schemes on public sites. 

In conclusion, there are many issues to consider when examining the ways in which to memorialize victims of terrorism. To begin, in order to effectively gauge the policy considerations associated with memorializing Canadian victims of terrorism, further Canadian research is needed on the current ways victims of terrorism have been memorialized. Beyond this task, several implications can be drawn from the Canadian and international research that already exists. First, it is important to consider the implicit and explicit messages linked to particular memorial schemes. Since the presence of narratives will be a constant feature of memorial schemes, it is critical that these messages become deconstructed so as to prevent the revictimization of victims, their loved ones and the general public. Second, logistical issues such as the location, costs, maintenance and management of memorials are critical components of the memorialization process. As such, any effective memorial scheme must also consider both the short term and long term logistical needs pertinent to sustaining memorials. Finally, the research overwhelming stresses the need to address the presence of multiple voices in the memorialization process. Although victims may take precedence here, it is also important that the roles of various stakeholders be considered not only in terms of the ways they may impede on the memorial process but also for the ways in which they can effectively contribute towards the goal to establish memorials that truly memorialize the victims of terrorism.