Lee Chapel Thoughts- Ralston Hartness

I found our time at Lee Chapel today to be quite interesting and salient in particular to our reading last night from Doss and Shanken regarding memorialization and living memory. These thoughts emerged and connected in my mind as I thought about the stark contrast between the "Shrine of the South" and Washington Hall, though they stand mere feet apart. I understand that there are profoundly different cultural-historical contexts from which these structures and memorials emerged, but I find it curious that Washington's memorialization in Washington Hall has been absorbed by and coalesced with learning, intellection, and leadership. There is a didactic exhibit in the entry to the building that memorializes Washington and explains his relationship to this place, but because most students have classes and administrators have offices in this place, it feels that the memorialization falls away as daily life picks up. However, even as we may bemoan the loss of memory in this place, it seems to be (and this is merely speculative, but moderately well-founded, I believe) the case that Washington's memory is preserved in a productive way that Lee probably (or even could have) wished his memory to be preserved. That being said, although the school maintains the name of the hall, the exhibits upon entry, and other memorialization measures, it is Lee's memorial that is evocative, compelling, and contested- not Washington's living memorial. I believe that this is a display of the way that living memory is absorbed, constructed, and adapted to social and individual affect, as Washington Hall now means as much or little to us as group of individuals as we wish for it to mean. Lee chapel is much, much different, and Shanken's reading leads me to suggest that this is due to its contrasting approach to memorialization in a much more traditional and sacred way.