<p>NY Post reported on the VIP party held last night amid the ongoing creation of a new restaurant at the memorial. The nearly billion-dollar Ground Zero memorial and museum has been one argument after another since it was first proposed. This time I agree with the folks who say that the grounds are no place for a restaurant, given the solemnity of this particular monument.</p>
<p>The Holocaust Museum has a cafe. I think that a small cafe with a limited menu on the outskirts of the site could be appropriate, depending on how far away similar amenities are located.
But off site would be preferred.</p>
<p>A small café is appropriate - some people, while visiting the memorial, may need to sit down and have a cup of coffee and a pastry. But it should cater to people already attending the memorial, not try to draw people separately. And it should be limited in scope.</p>
<p>I’ve been reading and listening on the radio about this controversy. Should it have a gift shop? Should it have a gift shop but without stuffed animals and other tacky toy-like things, ie. just serious things like books? Should Bloomberg have hosted a society party there last night with cocktails? Is that dancing on the graves?</p>
<p>The Holocaust Museum is different because the atrocities didn’t happen on that site. 9/11 happened there and remains are still there, DNA in dust of the victims. </p>
<p>As for similar locations, Pearl Harbor, for example, it is very solemn out on the Arizona memorial. On land, away from the sunken ship, there may be a gift shop, I honestly don’t remember. It’s been a while.</p>
<p>Gettysburg has the whole shebang at its tragic site. And some of the things in its gift shop are really tacky. The worst was a doll of John Wilkes Booth!! But that was so long ago that there are no longer living relatives of the fallen around. </p>
<p>Come to think of it, I was at the Shanksville site about two years ago, shortly after that memorial to United 93 opened. There was nothing but the memorial stone and a wall with the names of the lost carved in marble. (There were plans to build a visitor’s center, however, ground had not been broken for that when I was there). It’s way out in the country. There were no restaurants, no gift shop. Actually it was very moving, A place for quiet contemplation.</p>
<p>Dachau has a gift shop and a cafeteria/restaurant. I think every museum I’ve been to has had a gift shop and most have a cafe of some sort. We were corralled in the V&A on 7/7, waiting for the all-clear (they were afraid of bombs in the vicinity) and actually spent some time in the cafe having a soothing cup of tea (we were pretty distraught). </p>
<p>Gift shops usually have information about the topics of the museum, books and the like.
For instance the one at Pearl Harbor
<a href=“USS Arizona Memorial Tour”>http://www.pearlharborhistoricsites.org/pearl-harbor/arizona-memorial-book-store</a>
Cafés onsite can also be restorative.
<a href=“Practical information | Anne Frank House”>Practical information | Anne Frank House;
<p>I’m honestly not getting the big deal here… America is supposed to be about commerce right? If X shop or business is economically viable, put it there, if not, don’t. I don’t see what else there is to consider here. </p>
<p>People’s reactions are funny aren’t they? Homes where gruesome murders took place are often bulldozed to the ground because no one wants to buy them. But at other murder sites people will buy souvenirs and sit and have a snack.</p>
<p>It’s a different building now. </p>
<p>I’m not going to attempt to make an insight into the human psyche here. It just seems that if the economics works out, do it. If not, don’t. What is there to discuss? What is the issue here that people have, that people died on this plot of land? Lots of people died at the same time? Is that worth sacrificing the commercial value of the site? </p>
<p>I suppose they considered the sensitivities of the families of the lost. As I understand it, family members were on committees involved in the planning. But if commercial value were the only consideration, cemeteries would be built over with mini malls and office buildings with no thought to the graves. But most states have laws protecting cemeteries even old ones where there is no deed or ownership of the plot.</p>
<p>Vladenschlutte, I disagree with your ‘strictly numbers’ approach. This is America, so any horrid event can be monetized, but that doesn’t mean it is appropriate to do so. At one time in this country they used to offer souvenirs at public executions and later at Jim Crow lynchings. We stopped that practice for a reason. </p>
<p>If you arrange for the graves to be reinterred you can develop the site of a cemetery.
Murders also do not need to be disclosed when selling a property.
<a href=“Website Tells Who's Died At Your House - ABC News”>http://abcnews.go.com/Business/real-estate-tool-reveals-died-home-apartment/story?id=20853311</a></p>
<p>There were so many people who died at the Ground Zero site that it is almost inevitable that some of their relatives will object to any decision that is made about this site. I read that a lot of consideration went into whether to have a gift shop, and what to sell there. I guess I’d have to see it myself to decide whether I think it’s disrespectful or not.</p>
<p>There is a gift shop at the Arizona memorial. There’s one at Arlington National Cemetery. There’s one at almost every National Park I’ve ever been to, and Shanksville will no doubt have one as well when the visitor center is built. I do think sensitivity needs to be shown in what is sold.</p>
<p>Here are the rules at the United 93 memorial. No eating or drinking except in the parking lot.</p>
<p>Please help the National Park Service in its mission to preserve, protect, and tell the story of Flight 93.</p>
<p>The following policies exist to help meet that mission:</p>
<pre><code>Solicitation - No solicitation, concessions, brochures, sales, signs, or advertisements are permitted anywhere.
Overnight parking or loitering at the site is prohibited.
Planting of trees, flowers, or shrubs is prohibited.
Structures - No structures are to be installed at the site.
Trash-Free - The memorial is a trash-free park. Please respect the site by taking your trash with you. Trash bags are provided for your convenience.
Smoking is prohibited in all buildings. Memorial Plaza - permitted ONLY in the parking area and sidewalk areas leading to the plaza. Non-smoking area is posted
Pets (with the exception of service animals) At Memorial Plaza - permitted only in the parking area.
Food and Drinks - At the Memorial Plaza - permitted only in the parking area.
Respect - The Memorial Plaza is a place for quiet reflection and expressions of respect.
Tribute items left at the Memorial Plaza will be collected weekly and placed into the Tribute collection. Items may be left at the Wall of Names and in niches in the Memorial Plaza wall.
Crash Site - The crash site itself is accessible only to Flight 93 passenger and crew family members.
</code></pre>
<p>Thank you for helping to honor and respect the story of Flight 93.</p>
<p>Kitty, that’s so true regarding the re-purposing of cemeteries. In recent years a local government removed gravesites to expand a major roadway that abuts a very old but inactive cemetery. And in Manhattan 20 years ago a British Colonial Burial Ground for Africans was uncovered (re-discovered?) at the excavation site for a new federal office building. Quite a fight ensued, with the proper result being a sliver of the land set aside for a special memorial, insulated from the typical Manhattan hullabaloo.</p>
<p>I know Missouri keeps a database of old family cemeteries that are protected from being developed. Many cities have old historic cemeteries downtown. </p>
<p>I agree that hosting a fundraiser at the site, & serving cocktails is in very poor taste, cant imagine what they were thinking.
<a href=“9/11 Museum Not the Best Place for a Cocktail Party”>http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/05/911-museum-not-the-best-place-for-a-party.html</a></p>
<p>I disagree with many of the posters on this. I think people who suffered personal tragedies don’t own the circumstances or place; they own what happened in their lives. I think we’ve changed as a society from recognizing that we memorialize on a large scale, with all the impersonal implications that come with that, toward an unfulfillable sense that every memorial has to be personally “respectful” as every individual with a claim demands. </p>
<p>Imagine it’s 1875. Lots of your townspeople have died and you can see wounded men walking about trying to reclaim parts of their lives. And they put up a statue of a man on a horse with a bugle and a sword. Your loved one, your son, your husband, your father died in the infantry. Maybe he died in a hospital or in a Southern prison camp. And they want to put up a statue of a guy on horseback with a bugle and a sword - just like the one in front of our public library. </p>
<p>All memorials are imperfect. No memorial can exactly respond to the varied wishes and desires of families and participants. </p>
<p>Now we traffic in “outrage”: outrage over restaurant, outrage over souvenirs, outrage over remains, outrage over signage, outrage over any part that doesn’t fit your personal definition of what should be done. </p>
<p>I really don’t like the Boston Holocaust memorial. I don’t like that they use digital 1’s and 0’s to represent people because, to me, that’s the opposite of the meaning I see when I look at the pictures of relatives - mostly my wife’s, btw - who were murdered. When I see the beautiful young girls who never grew up made into 1’s and 0’s, I don’t like it. So what? It’s a memorial. It isn’t perfect. It won’t bring them back. </p>
<p>I’m most concerned with remembering the attack for what it was and who did it, and why. I’m in favor of anything that encourages a watchful eye, and vigilant policy. But I doubt that restaurants and trinket shops do much to encourage that.</p>