OnlineBookClub.org

I thought about that too. A memorial in a public place would be appropriate, but an amusement park? It would be startling to see the Vietnam Wall Memorial at the entrance to Disneyland. It's a totally different mindset, visiting a somber tribute versus taking your family for a day of fun.

I totally agree. I had problems with this, it didn't seem logical to want to put a memorial inside an amusement park, and because I felt this way, it took a lot away from the story. It seemed much more reasonable to create a memorial somewhere else within the area, especially since there were other statues etc. in other places in the town. Going to a memorial is more along the lines of going to a museum; it's a different outing than going to an amusement park. Either for different people or activities to do on different days.

I think it would have been more logical for Bridget to be fighting the amusement park from being built at all because it would take away the historic feel of the area. It would be like putting an amusement park in Gettysburg, or next to the Lincoln Memorial.

And I do agree that it should have been fairly easy to come to an agreement about also creating a substantial memorial (or a museum, or a new wing in a museum) in the town somewhere else.

Your park sounds like a small haven for family members to remember their loved ones.

I agree. No one going to an amusement park would be willing to even look at a memorial when they are there to have fun.

Josephe-Anne wrote: ↑03 Mar 2020, 18:57 I agree with you. A somber memorial like that would be better suited to a public square. It would be out of place (and even disrespectful) at an amusement park.

Fun is for amusement parks, while memorial brings back memories that are sad but recognizable.

Many people visit the amusement park. It is, therefore, a good place to erect a memorial. Although I think it would be much better to pick a busier location because of what that particular memorial represented to the Irish.

I agree that while a memorial is definitely a good idea, I don't think that the theme park would be a good place for it. Not so much from Dermot's point of view that it would bring down the atmosphere etc but more from the point that the fun and frivolities of a theme park might cheapen what the memorial is all about and it would be overlooked and not fully appreciated. I think a town centre would be a better idea or maybe in the shopping centre so that people could appreciate it more for what it is and fully take it in.

I totally agree with you; setting up a memorial at the amusement park doesn't fit in. People go there to have fun and merry, seeing it will numb their excitement. Placing it in a place more versatile would serve a good purpose.

In my opinion, It can stay in the amusement park, but not out in the open like that for both people who want to see it and those who don't necessarily want to.

If a small building can be made to house it, right inside the amusement park, then It will be great. The park gets its audience but only the ones who want to go in there actually will.
The aim of its erection will be better achieved this way.

I agree that an amusement park would have been an inappropriate place to put the memorial. Would it not have been passed by in favor of all the exciting rides? I agree that it should have been placed in the center of the towns activity.

To put a memorial in an amusement park would be to put a tinge of sadness in a pile of fun. In my opinion, it doesn’t ruin the fun. Because it makes you appreciate it more. To have that chance to invest yourself in the culture of another country, well, isn’t that the whole point of traveling?

What I had a problem with, was wanting to put the memorial in the amusement park a real reason to kill someone? Is that really such a bad thing to have to hire assassins and kill multiple people? I honestly don’t think so. Therefore, the whole plot of the book felt so stupid.

Placing a memorial in an amusement park is not only a poor idea, but it was probably the weakest element of the book. Nevertheless, it did serve as a relevant plot device to move the story along. Now this is a bit out of leftfield, but remember when Disney's Epcot originally opened? It was designed specifically to be a scientific park that focused on the origins and maintenance of the planet. I loved each of the exhibits but those original exhibits are long gone, the powers that be sacrificing the ecological aspects of the original design for more rides and excitement. In retrospect, it didn't work for those who wanted amusement in their amusement parks. Similarly, I think that an amusement park featuring a memorial would generate the same type of disinterest.

The thing is, though, who is the memorial for? Tourists, or Bridgett? I personally found it quite beautiful that it was placed in an amusement park. Metaphorically speaking, I think that it was an excellent symbol for life and death: the way that the somber shadow of death always lurks around life's brightest corners. Maybe the author was trying to convey a deeper meaning as such?

I think the memorial will not get as much attention as it should get at the amusement park because people's minds will be focused on things that are fascinating to them.