Out of Ground Zero’s

Exploring the Formal and Non-Formal (Re)construction of Memory

Christian Lange & Jean-Paul Hitipeuw

Postgraduate William Kinne Fellows Traveling Prizes

Spring 2003 Columbia University GSAP
Abstract

With the event of September 11th the notion of “Ground Zero” re-emerged into the
global language use. Almost everybody who is confronted with this term is instantly
aware of its meaning and relates it to the disaster that happened in New York in
2001. The term for itself turned into a reminder of the past or so to speak a linguistic
memorial. Memory has become a critical and widely used meaning of examining the
past. By “memory,” we refer to the collective remembering or cultural memory of a
specific culture rather than the memory of an individual. With the events of September
11th the wish for memory instantly occurred. Symbols of memory like flowers, letters
and pictures of the victims were posted on the fence of St.Pauls chapel. People tried
to express their sorrow and console it with corresponding gestures. The fence of the
chapel, a self-organized memorial erected by the community served more or less for
over a year as a place of remembrance. Everybody was convinced that there should be
a place for memory in the future on the site of “Ground Zero” and with the World Trade
Center Site Memorial Competition the public was confronted with the visualization of
this memory.
Originally the term “Ground Zero” appeared after the disastrous events that happened
in 1946 in Hiroshima and Nagasaki where the first cities in human history were
destroyed by an atomic bomb. “Ground Zero”, the point directly above the nuclear
explosion occurred, changed the society of Japan immediately and will last forever. In
1993 the cenotaph at the peace center in Hiroshima listed the names of 181,836 people
who had died by the effects of the atomic bomb. Hiroshima is known as a city for world

peace and remembrance of the horrific disasters of World War II. Looking back on this
event the society and the government in Japan were even more confronted with the
issue of memory and how to represent and visualize this phenomenon on a local and
global scale.

With our proposal for the postgraduate William Kinne Fellows Travel Prize, we would
like to compare and study the different characteristics of memory according to
culture, space and time. How did the Japanese culture back in this time address the
issue of memory? What were the ideas for the phenomena of memory in relation to
image and space, archive and map, trauma and event? How has it been formulated
in the realm of architecture? According to these questions we would like to analyze
the design proposals for rebuilding the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and to
research the transcripts of the historical “Think-tanks” by visiting the archives and
libraries in these cities. Politicians, architects/ planners and artists have articulated
emergent phenomena of spontaneous, individual acts of memorialization into more
“institutionalised” desires for collective memoralization. Furthermore we would like to
analyze how those formulated goals, both formal and non-formal, are still maintained
or have vanished or mutated over time.

Christian J. Lange & Jean-Paul Hitipeuw

Spring 2003, Columbia University GSAP

Historical Background

On the morning of August 6th, 1945 the American B29-bomber, Enola Gay, dropped
the atomic bomb, named Little Boy, onto the city of Hiroshima. Between 60,000 to
80,000 people were killed instantaneously. Three days later, on August 9th, Nagasaki
became the target of Fat Man, the second atomic bomb. The events of these days,
took an enormous toll on human life, not to mention the urban fabric. The traditional
Japanese buildings mostly wooden structures were burnt immediately. Only a few
reinforced concrete buildings survived. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were more or less
the first urban centers to suffer such mass destruction. After Hiroshima’s relative
anonymity, the destruction of the city marks a pivotal point, as the Japanese “Ground
Zero” became a universal symbol of horrific and unprecedented form of modern
warfare and the international focal point of an important project of reconstruction and
memorialization.
The manpower needed to systematize the reconstruction of Hiroshima was absent
and therefore the prefectural governor organized a reconstruction committee in
November 1945. By 1946 the Hiroshima Reconstruction Bureau was established, as a
continuation of a basic plan, which was formulated by local governmental authorities
and residents of Hiroshima. Round Table discussions of “think-tanks” of politicians,
architects/planners and artists were organized and many people questioned the wish
to rebuild the city in its origin location. The feeling was expressed that the site of so
many victims was unsuited for reconstruction.
In 1946 the central government’s Reconstruction Office dispatched urban planners to
several cities, including Hiroshima. The main focus of the reconstruction debate quickly
turned from visionary ideas into pragmatic issues. The discussion related these issues
to rebuilding plans largely conceived during the 1920’s and 1930’s. For this reason
the planning of symbolic gestures to remember the events was combined with the
reconstruction of roads, infrastructure and services.

In 1949 the desire for a new image of the city (from a military city into a symbol of
peace) led to the “Hiroshima Peace Memorial City Construction Law”.
The extraordinary nature of the atomic bomb turned the reconstruction of the city into
an exceptional challenge. Within Japan too, the city took on to symbolic meaning as a
rallying point for Japanese aspirations to nation building. The wishes of the Japanese
people to memorialize the events were shared also by the international community. As
monumental or comprehensive architectural projects and urban planning were not part
of the Japanese way of thinking, the competition for the Peace Memorial Complex in
Hiroshima, held in 1948 (prior to the proclamation of the Peace City Law), turned out
as the first and only project that came out of a competition process in this period.
Kenzo Tange’s proposal was finally chosen out of 145 entries in the competition. He
situated his design in the heart of the city, below the hypocenter (“Ground Zero”) and
designed his scheme as a public space of assembly and memory.

Main Objectives

During our field trip to Japan we plan to visit the cities of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Kobe
and Tokyo. With this trip we would like to investigate the restructuring processes that
took place after the devastating events. In this context we would like to analyze how
the issue of memory occurred in the specific locations and how this issue evolved over
time. Beyond this we would like to investigate how the process of rebuilding both
the formal and the non-formal is perceived different in the Japanese culture. Both
processes are dealing with different issues. The formal deals with more pragmatic
issues of rebuilding and restoring the urban fabric (infrastructure, green structures,
etc,) while the non-formal deals with more ideological and symbolic issues like memory
and memorialization. By visiting the archives and libraries in the cities we would like
to analyze how the issues of the formal and non-formal were implemented in the
different architectural design proposals and the transcripts of the “Think-tanks”. Just
like its American counter-part, governmental institutions to formulate, both pragmatic

and symbolic goals for the future of these cities, installed “New York, New Visions”,
think tanks in Japan of politicians, architects, artists, etc. These goals articulate the
emergent phenomena of spontaneous, individual acts of memorialization, like in the
case of St. Paul’s Chapel in New York. In addition to the historic research it would be
also interesting to analyze and actually experience how, today, those formulated goals,
both formal and non-formal, are still maintained or have vanished or mutated over
time.
Our research project goes beyond the ironical linguistic connections between Hiroshima
and New York of the terms “Ground Zero” and the “Manhattan-Project”. We don’t want
to address political aspects or raise ethical questions, since any other comparison which
is not purely focused on the process of memorialization and reconstruction, formal and
non-formal, would diminish the magnitude of the destruction in Hiroshima, both in
numbers of victims and of the urban fabric. In fact our main objectives are to analyze
the process of reconstruction the urban fabric and the appearance of memorialization.
In this perspective we will be able to compare case studies like Hiroshima, Nagasaki
and Tokyo (as destructed cities by warfare) with Kobe (as a destructed site by a natural
disaster). These studies could emerge into lessons for New York’s Ground Zero, where
the development has now reached a new threshold in its (re) construction.

During our field trip we will document our experiences and results with photographs,
diagrams and hopefully copies of the different design proposals. Furthermore after
our return to New York we would like to put together a brochure that we would like to
provide to the GSAP of Columbia University as a report of our trip.

Research Method

Tokyo
From our “research base” in Tokyo, where we have been already offered a workspace
at the University of Tokyo, by Professor Hidetoshi Ohno and Mr. Koen Klinkers
(Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, Division of Environmental Studies, Socio-
Cultural Studies Course), we would like to start acquiring material from the university’s
resources to prepare our further research. Then we will expand our exploration into
the historical archives and libraries on the process of reconstruction by analyzing the
documents of the various “Think-tanks” in each city and the entries for the design
competitions.
Mr. Klinkers is also helping us to meet Hajime Yatsuka, a Japanese architect and
writer, who is an expert on Kenzo Tange’s work, where he also worked for several
years.
We will meet Florian Idenburg, project-architect of SANAA (Kazujo Sejima + Ryue
Nishizawa) to discuss their proposal for Ground Zero, for which he was the project
architect.
We are still awaiting confirmations for visits to the offices of Kenzo Tange and Shigeru
Ban.
Hiroshima
Mr. Yoshinori Matsumoto, director of the International Peace Promotion Department
of The City of Hiroshima. has agreed to help us access the transcripts of the “Think-
tanks” in Hiroshima and the entries for the design competition for Hiroshima.
We have also arranged a meeting with the deputy director of the Hiroshima Peace
Memorial Museum, Mr. Y.Yamamoto and the curatorial director, Ms. Kahori Wada.
They both have shown their interest in our proposal and will assist us at our visit to
the museum to further elaborate on Kenzo Tange’s architecture of the Museum and
the Memorial Park and how the exhibitions extend the architectural affects and vice
versa.
At the Hiroshima Peace Institute we will meet Michiko Yoshimoto to discuss the role
of Hiroshima as an international “Peace City”, as envisioned by Kenzo Tange.
Furthermore, we are awaiting a confirmation from Professor Ishimaru of Hiroshima
Kokusai University to discuss the history of the reconstruction of Hiroshima, of which
he can be considered an expert.

Nagasaki
We will visit the Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum and its library. We will also visit
University of Nagasaki and City Hall. Mr. Hideto Ogushi, director of the Peace
Promotion Office Nagasaki City, has confirmed that he wants to meet us.

Kobe
Next to visiting the Kobe Port Earthquake Memorial Park and visit other reconstructed
parts in the city of Kobe, we will visit Hokudan-Town Earthquake Memorial Park.

After having visited Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Kobe, we will return to the University of
Tokyo for final consults with professor Ohno and Mr. Klinkers before our return to New
York.
Itinerary:

Day 1

Flight New York - Tokyo

Meeting with Mr. Klinkers and Professor Ohno at University of Tokyo

Day 2

Research at University of Tokyo at Ohno Lab

Meeting with Hajime Yatsuka

Day 3

Research at University of Tokyo at Ohno Lab

Meeting with Florian Idenburg, SANAA

Day 4

Train Tokyo-Hiroshima
Tour around Hiroshima

Day 5

Meeting with Mr. Y.Yamamoto and Kahori Wada at Hiroshima Memorial Museum
Guided tour Hiroshima Memorial Museum and Memorial Park
Meeting with Yoshinori Matsumoto, director of the International Peace Promotion
Department of The City of Hiroshima

Day 6

Meeting with Michiko Yoshimoto, Hiroshima Peace Institute.

Meeting with Professor Ishimaru University of Hiroshima
Day 7

Train Hiroshima-Nagasaki
Tour around Nagasaki

Day 8

Meeting with Mr. Hideto Ogushi, director of the Peace Promotion Office Nagasaki City
Visit Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum and Memorial (Park?)

Day 9

Visit University of Nagasaki

City Hall
Train Nagasaki-Kobe

Day 10

Tour around Kobe

Visit Kobe Port Earthquake Memorial Park
City Hall

Day 11

Hokudan-Town Earthquake Memorial Park

Train Kobe-Tokyo

Day 12

Meeting with, Kenzo Tange Architects

Consult with Mr. Klinkers and Professor Ohno and further research at University of
Tokyo

Day 13

Meeting with, Shigeru Ban Architects

Finishing up research at University of Tokyo
Final consult with Mr. Klinkers and Professor Ohno

Day 14

Day off in Tokyo

Return flight Tokyo-New York
 Budget per person:

Airfare roundtrip New York - Tokyo v.v.: 1100.00 $

Japan Railpass : 375.00 $

Local transportation: 56.00$

Accomodation (youth hostel): 630.00$

Museum admission: 140.00$

Food: 700.00$

Total Budget: 3001.00$ *

Requested Budget 2500.00$

* we are fully aware of the regulations of the postgraduate William Kinne Fellows Trav-
eling Prizes and therefore we would like to request the maximum budget of $2500.-
per person
Bibliography:

Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Kobe and Tokyo:

- Hein, Carola, “Urban Planning Versus Community Building,” in Archis 5/99, p. 44-
51
- Sugimoto, Toshimasa, “Atomic Bombing and Restoration of Hiroshima,” in:
Fukui, Norihiko; Jinnai, Hidenobu, Destruction and Rebirth of Urban
Environment, Sagami Shobo, p. 17-38
- Hein, Carola, “Visionary Plans and Planners,” in Fiévé, Nicolas; Waley, Paul (Eds.)
Japanese Capitals in Historical Perspective: Place, Power and Memory in
Kyoto, Edo and Tokyo, Curzon, 6/2001
- Hein, Carola; Diefendorf, Jeffry; Ishida, Yorifusa, “Rebuilding Urban Japan after
1945”, London: Macmillan, 2003
- Kyo Maclear, “Beclouded Visions: Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Art of Witness”,State
University of New York”, 1999
- Callies, David, “Urban Land Use and Control in the Japanese City: A Case Study
of Hiroshima, Osaka, and Kyoto,” in Karan, P.P.; Stapleton, Kristin, The
Japanese City, The University Press of Kentucky, Kentucky, 1998 p. 134-
155
- Perlman, Michael, “Imaginal Memory and the Place of Hiroshima”, State University
of New York Press: Albany, 1988
- Fukui, Norihiko; Jinnai, Hidenobu (Ed.) “Destruction and Rebirth of Urban
Environmen”t Sagami Shobo, 2000

New York:

- Ockman, Joan (ed.), “Out of Ground Zero: Case studies in Urban Reinvention”, New
York, NY: Prestel Verlag and the Trustees of Columbia University, 2002
- Gastil, Raymond and Ryan, Zoe (ed.) “Information Eschange: How Cities Renew,
Rebuild and Remember”, Van Alen Institute Paperback: New York, 2003
- “New York, New Visions, Principles for the Rebuilding of Lower Manhattan”.
- Temin, Christine. “Memorializing an Iconic Moment.” The Boston Globe, January 16,
2002.
- Muschamp, Herbert. “Filling the Void: a Chance to Soar.” New York Times,
September 30, 2001.
- Muschamp, Herbert. “A Rush to Complete Plans for Downtown.” New York Times,
October 14, 2001.
- Muschamp, Herbert. “Welcoming A Return To Risk” The New York Times, November
18, 2001.
- Riley, Terence, et al. “Reimagine: What to Build.” The New York Times Magazine,
November 11, 2001.

- Young, James E, “Writing and Re-Writing the Holocaust: Narrative and the
Consequences of Interpretation”, Bloomington: Indiana University
Press,1988.
- Young, James, “Introduction” and “The Gestapo-Gelande: Topography of Unfinished
Memory,” in The Texture of Memory, Yale University Press: New Haven
 and London, 1993, p. 1-15, 81-90.
- Gillis, John, “Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship” in J. Gillis,
ed., Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity, Princeton
University Press: Princeton, NJ, 1994, p. 2-26
- Foucault, Michel, “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History.” Language, Counter-Memory,
Practice. Selected Essays and Interviews, Ithaca: Cornell University
Press, 1977.

URL:
- New York New Visions, Information Resources. http://nynv.aiga.org/
resources.shtml
- Hiroshima International School. http://www.hiroshima-is.ac.jp/Hiroshima/
bibliog.htm

Other Media:

- “Hiroshima Mon Amour”, Alain Resnais (director), Margueritte Duras (screenplay),

1959
Contacts:

Tokyo

Prof. Hidetoshi Ohno (Program Director)

Koen Klinkers (Phd. Candidate)
University of Tokyo, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences,
Division of Environmental Studies, Socio-Cultural Studies Course
Email: koen.klinkers@lycos.com

Florian Idenburg (Project Architect)

Kazuyo Sejima + Ryue Nishizawa / SANAA
florianidenburg@earthlink.net

Hiroshima

Yoshinori Matsumoto (Director)

International Relations Division
International Peace Promotion Department
Citizens Affairs Bureau, The City of Hiroshima
Email: y-kuwahara@city.hiroshima.jp

Y.Yamamoto (Deputy Director)

Kahori Wada (Curatorial division)
Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum
Email: hpcf@pcf.city.hiroshima.jp

Michiko Yoshimoto (Project Coordinator)

Hiroshima Peace Institute
E-mail: michi-y@peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp

Nagasaki

Hideto Ogushi (Director)

Peace Promotion Office,Nagasaki City
Email: n_peace@hkg.odn.ne.jp