Abstract
This article takes a point of departure in Denmark’s decision to use
the armed forces as a tool of foreign policy, even when this implies
deployment to regions where combat and casualties must be
expected. Since war, combat, and violence contradict traditional
self-understandings of being Danish, recent experiences in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and elsewhere have implied renegotiations and reconstructions
of the national ‘we’. In this article, I examine how this is
reflected in the emergent memorial landscape by focusing on one
national monument, two grassroots memorials, and 20 individual
tombstones. All memorials, I argue, relate to a recent public discourse
about the ‘war-fighting nation’ and the ‘warrior generation’. The
national monument eschews references to war and violence to
produce a national narrative focusing on ‘effort’ as the core collective
value. One grassroots memorial subtly challenges war and insists on
possible alternatives. The other silently accepts war, but demonstrates
that, apart from the ‘fallen soldiers’ who are commonly memorialized,
war produces many other kinds of suffering that remain
officially and socially unrecognized. The individual graves and tombstones,
which have been designed by the soldiers and their families,
memorialize soldiers as professionals with a military belonging as
well as persons with numerous social attachments. And they most
directly address the war, violence, and suffering that the emergence
of a ‘war-fighting nation’ and a ‘warrior generation’ inevitably implies.
Assembling different kinds of memorials that represent different
positions of authority and power in the same analysis, I argue,
provides a unique insight into how Denmark’s recent military adventures
are ascribed meaning, contested, and negotiated.
the armed forces as a tool of foreign policy, even when this implies
deployment to regions where combat and casualties must be
expected. Since war, combat, and violence contradict traditional
self-understandings of being Danish, recent experiences in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and elsewhere have implied renegotiations and reconstructions
of the national ‘we’. In this article, I examine how this is
reflected in the emergent memorial landscape by focusing on one
national monument, two grassroots memorials, and 20 individual
tombstones. All memorials, I argue, relate to a recent public discourse
about the ‘war-fighting nation’ and the ‘warrior generation’. The
national monument eschews references to war and violence to
produce a national narrative focusing on ‘effort’ as the core collective
value. One grassroots memorial subtly challenges war and insists on
possible alternatives. The other silently accepts war, but demonstrates
that, apart from the ‘fallen soldiers’ who are commonly memorialized,
war produces many other kinds of suffering that remain
officially and socially unrecognized. The individual graves and tombstones,
which have been designed by the soldiers and their families,
memorialize soldiers as professionals with a military belonging as
well as persons with numerous social attachments. And they most
directly address the war, violence, and suffering that the emergence
of a ‘war-fighting nation’ and a ‘warrior generation’ inevitably implies.
Assembling different kinds of memorials that represent different
positions of authority and power in the same analysis, I argue,
provides a unique insight into how Denmark’s recent military adventures
are ascribed meaning, contested, and negotiated.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Critical Military Studies |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Pages (from-to) | 27-49 |
| Number of pages | 23 |
| ISSN | 2333-7486 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jun 2016 |