Northumbria Research Link

Citation: Kirk, David, Durrant, Abigail, Kosem, Jim and Reeves, Stuart (2018) Spomenik: Resurrecting Voices in the Woods. Design Issues, 34 (1). pp. 67-83. ISSN 0747-9360

Published by: UNSPECIFIED

URL:

This version was downloaded from Northumbria Research Link: http://northumbria-test.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/50860/

Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University’s research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/pol i cies.html

This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher’s website (a subscription may be required.)

Spomenik: Resurrecting Voices in the Woods DavidS.Kirk,AbigailC.Durrant,JimKosem,StuartReeves

ABSTRACT

Spomenik(‘monument)isadigitalmemorialarchitecturethattransposesintimeotherwise

hiddenculturalmemoriesofatrocity.Spomenikwasdesignedasasimpledigitalaudioguide,

embeddedinaremoterurallocation(KočevskiRog,Slovenia),andworkingwithoutthe

infrastructurenormallypresentatnationalmemorialsites.Byresurrectingvoicesandcultural

narrativesofthedeceased,positingthembackintothelandscapethroughdigitalmeans,

Spomenikopensadialogueabouttheeventsofthepast,inrelationtonetworksoftheliving,

exploringtheroleofvoiceandagency,asservicedthroughdesignintheactofmemorialization.

Wecontributeadetailedcasestudyofadesign-ledinquiryaboutdigitalmemorializationand

digitalpreservationofculturalheritage,andareflectiveaccountaboutthenatureoflegacyand

theextenttowhichitis(andperhapsshouldbe)necessarilyboundtonetworksofcollective

memory,mediatedthroughdesignedculturaltools.

1. INTRODUCTION

Formany,afundamentalexistentialcrisisarisesfromcontemplationofmortality.1Thedesireto

leavealegacyandtacitpresenceintheworldafterdeathcanoccupypeople’sthoughts,asthey

realizepost-mortemexistenceresidesinthememoriesofothers.Thisorientationtowards

longevitythroughmemoryencouragesmemorialization,andinmanyrespectswecan

understandhumanorientationstomortalitythroughlegacy-making.

Post-mortemremainsandmemorialartifactsareoftenarchitecturalinscope.2Memorial

architecturessuchasgravestones,tombsandevenplaquesareoftenconceptualizedas

spatializedmarkersofmemory,asiftheycontainmemories,keepingthemalive.3Digital

augmentationstogravesiteshaveincludedjustthiskindofmotivation,whereindigitalcontentis

‘attached’togravemarkers.4Thisresonatesstronglywithpersistenttropesinthestudyof

personalinformatics,whichseedigitaltoolsasmeanstosupportbetterveridicalrecallofthe

past.5Wewishhowever,totakeanalternativeperspectiveonmemory.Weseerememberingas

anenactiveprocess,mademanifestthroughtherelationshipsandinteractionswehavewith

otherpeopleandtechnologies.

WedrawinspirationfromtheworkofWertsch6onprocessesofcollectiveremembering,andin

particularfromtheexplorationofthisinrelationtocontentiousmemorialsitesbyMiddletonand

Murakami.7Memorialization,accordingtoWertsch,isinherentlyasocializedpractice,and

rememberingisinessence‘distributedbetweenpersons’.Wertschlocatestheliteralactof

rememberingwithintheindividual,butthesignificanceandmeaningoftheactivityisgivenby

howindividualactsofrememberingareinterdependentwithoneanother.8Wertschisconcerned

withthedialecticalrelationshipbetweenactiveagentsandculturaltools.Wehavetherefore

founditofinteresttoconsiderhowmemorialarchitectures,andassociateddigitalinterventions,

cometomediatememoryandprocessesofcollectiverememberingasculturaltools.

WithinthefieldofHuman-ComputerInteraction(HCI)therehasbeengrowinginterestinend-of-

lifeissues9,thanatosensitivedesign,10legacymaking,11andbereavementandgrieving.12We

drawupontheseliteraturesbecauseoftheirevidentimportanceinunpackingthedesignof

specificallydigitalmemorialinterventions.

Frameworkshavebeendevelopedtoconceptualizeemergingpracticesofdigital,physicaland

hybridizedformsofmemorialization,13buildingdigitallayersontoHallamandHockey’s

understandingsofspacesofdeath.14Relevantworkhasalsoexploredthenuancesoflegalityand

ethicsaroundmattersofdigitallegacy,15therequirementsforcareofresearchersworkingin

thesespaces16andevenvisionsofmulti-lifespandevelopment.17Muchofthisworkhowever,

drawsfocusonverypersonalrelationshipstothedeceasedorthegrieving,withmoreofan

emphasisondomesticandpersonalinteractionswithtechnology,andsitsbeyondananalysisof

thenetworkedrelationshipsthatpotentiallyinformprocessesofmemorialization.

Physicalmemorialsitesthemselveshavealsobeenextensivelystudied.Inparticularmuch

researchhasexploredcontestedsitesofculturalheritage,18includingparticularlyemotive

settingssuchasholocaustmemorials,19warmemorials,20androadsidememorials.21However,

thisisoftenintheabsenceofanydigitalinterventionatthesesites.Thestudyofthesekindsof

settingsisnecessarily‘in-the-wild’withconcomitantchallengesformethodology22andthe

politicsoflegitimateparticipation.23

Buildingonthisandotherworkarounddesigningsupporttoculturalvisiting,24wecontributein

thispaperadesign-ledstudythatexploresnovelconfigurationsofdigitaltechnologytosupport

memorializationpractices.

Herein,wepresentacasestudyofSpomenik(‘monument’inSlovenian),aprototypedigital

memorialarchitecturethattransposesintimehiddenculturalmemoriesofatrocity.Spomenik

wasamobile-phonebasedaudioguideserviceembeddedinaremoterurallocation(Kočevski

RoginSlovenia),whichworkedwithouttheinfrastructurenormallypresentatnational

memorials.Spomenikwasdevelopedfromaconceptualdesignproposedbyoneoftheresearch

team,JimKosem,andisentangledwithhisexperiencesofbeingraisedwithintheSlovenian

diasporacommunityintheUnitedStates.OurresearchteamcollaboratedheavilywiththeStudy

CentreforNationalReconciliation(SCNR)inSlovenia,25torecountknownrecordsofatrocityat

onehistoricsite.Digitally,anaudio-recordofvictimandsurvivortestimonywastransplantedto

whereitwashistoricallyredacted.Thedesignwasdevelopedduringanine-monthpartner-

collaboration.Itservedtoaugmentvisitors’experiencesofthephysicalsitebyprovidingthem

withacloud-basedserviceandmobileaccesstoafirst-personaccountofthosememorialized.26

Themobileapplicationwasaccompaniedbyawebinterfacedeliveringbothpost-visit

informationandinteractionbutalsopresentingto‘virtualvisitors’aholisticvisualizationof

serviceuse.

TheprocessofdevelopinganddeployingSpomenikallowedustoexplore,bothconceptuallyand

empirically,hownewdigitallyspatialized‘landscapesofloss’maybearticulatedandgivenform,

affectingasenseofmortalityforthoseinvolved.Further,thedesignworkallowedustocritically

examinehownetworksofconnectedstakeholders(suchasthevictims,theirrelatives,the

diasporacommunities,theauthorities,andinstitutionsofculturalmemory)areconfigured(and

conceptualized)withinthisdesignprocess.InparticulartheSpomenikexperiencehighlighted

thedistributionof‘actors’inbothspaceandtime,includingremotediasporamemberswhowere

engagedwiththegravesiteonlineandatageographicaldistance.Theworkalsoallowedusto

explorehowlegacyisconstructedwithinamemorialdesign.

Intheremainderofthispaperwedescribethecontextofthiswork,thesystemthatwas

developed,andtheprocessofourdesign-ledinquirytodevelopthememorial.Inreflectingupon

thisprocesswediscussthedesignedconfigurationoflegacy.

2. CONTEXT FOR THE WORK

Thecontextforourworkisthememorializationofpeoplemassacredinthesummerof1945by

communistpartisans,whosebodieswereinterredinmassgraves,acrossSlovenia.27Duringthe

ensuingc.45yearsofYugoslavcommunistrule,speakingabout‘whathappenedinthewoods’

wasillegal,resultinginreducedawarenessoftheseevents(especiallyamongstyounger

generations).Despitethehostilepoliticalclimate,someSloveniansdiscretelyfoughtto

memorializethosekilledbymarkingknownsitesofatrocity,forexamplethroughactsof

resistancesuchasmarkingtrees(seeFigure1a).

Figure1.IllicitmarkingofSlovenianmassgravesite(1aleft);Gigodesignedmonumentalbell(1b

right).

WitheffortsfromtheCatholicchurchwithinSlovenia,andthediasporacommunitiesoutside

(largelybasedintheUS,CanadaandArgentina),recordsofvictimsinthesemasskillingswere

kept;these‘WhiteBooks’wereconstructedbydiasporacommunitiesandlistednames,dates,

locationsofexecution,andbiographies,whereknown.

FollowingthecollapseoftheSocialistFederalRepublicofYugoslaviain1991,recognitionofthe

victims(viathegovernment-ledCommissiononConcealedMassGravesinSlovenia)hasbecome

moreopenandcommonplace,withsomesitesofficiallydesignatednationalmemorials.Akey

partnerinthisofficiallysanctionedmemorializationhasbeenSloveniancompanyGigoDesign.

GigowascommissionedtoinstallmonumentsatsevensitesacrossSlovenia.Theseincorporatea

workingbell,castinbronze,resemblingatreetrunk(seeFigure1b).Thebellisrungbypushing

the‘trunk’.EachbellhasanengravedGPScodeofitspositionandpresentssomebasic

information(location,nationalitiesofthevictims,dateandnumbersofpeoplekilled)foreach

givensite.

3. THE SPOMENIK AUDIO GUIDE SYSTEM

OneofthesesevenmemorialsitesbecamethesiteofengagementforourSpomenikdesign

project:KočevskiRog,locatedinsouthernSlovenia.Inthissectionwedescribetheaudioguide

systemthatwasdevelopedforthissite,andthenturntounpacktheSpomenikdesignprocess

andhowitrespondedtotheprojectpartners’voicesandtheculturesofmemorializationthatwe

engagedin.Bydoingsoweprovideacaseexampleofdesign-ledinquirythatexploresmediated

mortality.

Spomenikformedalocativemedia‘audio-guide’,accessedbysite-visitorsthroughpersonal

mobilephones,invitingbothsituatedandremoteformsofengagement.Thenarrativecontentfor

theserviceconstitutedanaudiorecordingofaspokenwordtestimony,writtenbyoneofthefew

survivorsfromthisparticularsiteofkilling.28Theentireaudiocontentis15minutesinduration.

Thesiteitselffeaturesanexistinginformationboardattheentrancetothesectionofforest

wherethemaingravesiteresides(thesiteitselfisacavelocatedwithinthatwoodland),along

withanadditionalsignthatdisplaysthephonenumberforouraudioguide(Figure2).This

locationis‘StationOne’andisindicatedwithanumber‘1’,thefirstofthree,markedwith

correspondingsignage.Theaudioguideuserisinvitedtoprogressfromonestationtothenext,

andtousetheirmobilephonetocalltheserviceateachstationtohearthenextpartofthe

unfoldingstory.Oncenarrationhasfinished,thecallisendedbyoursystem.29

Figure2.InsitusignagefortheSpomenikdeploymentreading“Calltofindoutwhatatonetime

happenedhere”

The service was configured so that the user might navigate backwards as well as forwards through the

narrative episodes at the three stations. On first dialing, the user receives an introduction and is asked

to confirm which station they are at, using number buttons on their phone. At this point, the system

creates a profile for them and stores this in a database so that their interactions with the system may

resume in the instance of a lost connection. Then the narrative episode is played. When the caller

connects again, s/he is asked to confirm which station s/he is at, and can choose to hear the first

episode once again before proceeding with the second. These options are given again at Station 3. The

user also has the option at Station 3, after following the whole narrative account, to leave a voicemail

response about their experience. S/he also receives a text-message thanking him/her for their visit.30

4. DESIGN-LED INQUIRY We now explore the Spomenik design process, and the configuration of the team in dialogue with our

partners and stakeholders. Positioning Spomenik as a design-led inquiry, we further describe how our

design concepts became resources for exploring and understanding the stakeholder relationships within

the setting. The features and affordances of the developing audio guide prototype engaged those

relationships in terms of practices of collective remembering, mediated by cultural tools.

Project origins, relations and partnerships

Spomenik formed part of a broader Pervasive Monuments project, designed to explore concepts of

memorialization in the digital age. It originated as a personal project by Jim Kosem of Halfman

Design. Having grown up in Cleveland, Ohio within a diaspora community of Slovenian émigrés and

their children, he had heard family-stories of the events of 1945 since he was a small child, and was

directly related to victims. The idea to develop digital support to realize his design solidified in

conversations with the first author around shared research interests. Subsequently, an interdisciplinary

project team (including Jim) was brought together to develop Spomenik. This account of the design

process (the first full paper written about Spomenik) is principally developed from the reflections of

the first two authors – but based on notes and recordings of design meetings produced during the

project by all authors.

The collaborators on Spomenik were varied in terms of their degree of involvement (ranging from

advice to content providers, from research critique to system building). Jim Kosem of Halfman Design,

self-identified in an ‘interaction design’ role, with personal and professional interest and links to the

design setting. Jim provided high-level project direction, and led the engagement with Slovenian

partner organizations. He engaged in the co-design, implementation, and field testing of the prototype.

Spomenik also involved a core group of investigators from the University of Nottingham, with

expertise in genocide education, computer science, psychology, economics, geospatial science, and

design. This group was engaged in a range of material activities that were research-oriented: project

management, design critique and documentation; prototype co-design and implementation, testing and

fieldwork. The Study Centre for National Reconciliation (SCNR) were our local ‘hosts’, organizing an

engagement with the technology prototype and connecting to Slovenian partners. The National and

University Library of Slovenia (NUK) provided content for the prototype and local information about

the Spomenik site. Gigo Design were also involved, as discussants on their bell design, and on the

interaction design research in the field.

Motivating design development

Figure3.MapofSloveniaMassGraveSites

The collaborative design process was structured by group meetings and critiques over a 10-month

period (across 2009/10). At the first stage of the project, Jim generated a number of conceptual designs

for further marking and memorializing mass graves across Slovenia (see for example, Figure 3). These

concepts took the form of graphical representations of site maps, and proposals for visual data

representations to be delivered to audiences via a mobile interface (see Figure 4). Scenarios and

storyboards of user interaction supported these proposals. Jim’s concepts were presented to the project

team not just as possible design directions but also to communicate his values about designing for this

setting and his emotional connection to it, that motivated him to explore its memorialization. In

discussing his design rationale, Jim conveyed to the rest of the research team the historical political

complexity for both Slovenian nationals and diaspora, which needed to be addressed in the design

engagement. He emphasized that discussing these events remained sensitive within the Balkan states.

31 Jim’s presentations constituted a significant learning experience for the team; and he recognized an

opportunity within the project to represent and give legitimate and authorial voice to the Slovenian

diaspora in the US.

Figure4.Storyboardfromtheinitialdesign,presentedbyHalfmanDesignatanearlymeeting.From

lefttoright:Spomenikaslocation-based;asking/requestingpersonalinformation;comparinguser’s

similaritytovictimsbyasimplesimilaritymatchbetweenaprofileandknownvictiminformation

listingvictims;locatingvictims;.

Tohelpdevelopthedesignwork,Jimconductedtelephoneinterviews(snowballedsampleof

five)withSloveniandiasporamembers,connectedtohisfamilyfriendsintheUS.Hisquestions

probedunderstandingofthemassacresashistoricalevents,thereasonswhytheinterviewees

leftSlovenia,andissuesarounddiscussingandcommemorating‘whathappened’.Datagathered

fromtheinterviewswaspresentedalongsideaninitialdesignvisionatateammeeting.

Spomenikwasenvisionedatthispointas“adigitalmonument,whichreplaysandrelaysthe

eventsofCommunistpoliticalmassacresinSloveniafortheeducationandremembranceofthe

averageSloveniancitizen”(excerptfromJim’spresentation).Astoryboarddepictedalocation-

basedmobilephoneapplication(app),(Figure4).Thisappwouldprovideaninterfaceforits

userto“Findsomeoneyoumightknow”,searchingdatafromtheWhiteBooksanddisplayingthe

locationsofmatchingvictims.Inthisdesign,theuserisinvitedtoexplorenarrativeand

biographicalinformationdrawnfromtheWhiteBooks.Moreprovocatively,theinterfacealso

asked“Couldithavebeenme?”;theappaskeditsusertoprovidetheirsurnamealongwithplace

ofbirth,andtheninformedthemiftheycouldhavebeenavictimiftheyweretransposedtothe

historicalcontextofthemassacres.Assuch,thedesignsuggestedarelationalengagementwitha

memorialandempatheticconnectionwiththosememorialized.

Discussionofthisideaandinitialinterviewfindingsraisedanumberofsensitizingconcernsin

theteamthatshapedourinquiry.TheWhiteBookswererecognizedasdesigninspiration–both

intermsoftheircontentandsocialfunction.Also,thedesignspaceforconsiderationwas

refocusedfordevelopingamonumentinSlovenia,physicallysituatedor‘placed’atadistinctsite

(seeFigure5).Theteamdepartedfromtheideaofincorporatingmappingintothedesignor

markingmultiplesites(e.g.Figure3).Thisisbecauseitwasnotpossibletoaccuratelymap

recordsfromtheWhiteBookstoactualgraves,andtheinterviewsrevealedtheimportanceof

‘facticity’,andpresentinginformationaboutthemassacreswithcertainty;thediasporamembers

feltthatambiguityaboutinaccurateinformationwouldpotentiallyunderminethelegacyofthose

memorialized.Focusingononesiteassociatedwithfirst-handtestimonyofgenocide,alleviated

thisissue.Athirdconcernwastomaximizeaccessibilityformobiletechnologyuserstosupport

multi-generationalengagement.Afourthconcernwastorepresent‘bothsidesofhistory’,

includingperspectivesfromthediasporaalongsidemoreestablishedperspectivesinthecountry.

Andfinally,therewasacreativedriveacrosstheteamtoinnovateonnotionsof‘Monument’;32

andtoreconceptualizewhatamonumentcouldbeasa‘culturalvisitingexperience’supported

bypervasivedigitaltechnology.Thesesensitizingconcernsreflectedtheteam’sdeveloping

understandingofthecomplexityofrelationshipstothesetting,acknowledgingthepolitical

positioningofJim’svoicedvaluesinthedesignprocess,whichresonatedwiththevoicedvalues

ofthediasporamembershehadinterviewed.Discussionalsoraisedconsiderationofthe

ownershipofknowledgerelatedtothissetting(aboutthegenocideanditsvictims)and

considerationsofhowvaluecouldbelocated,ineconomicterms,inaproposedservicethatcould

besustainedbythosewithvestedinterests.

(5a)

(5b)

(5c)

Figure5.Storyboardfromthefirstdesign,presentedbyHalfmanDesigninFebruary.Additional

signageforexistingentrypointtoamassgrave(5a).Narrativedrivenbylocationwithmultipleway

stops(5b).Finalexperiencecoordinatedtodriveinteractionwithexistingmemorial(5c).

Keytotheproject’sdevelopmentwasafieldtriptoSloveniabyJimandtheteam’sgenocide-

educationexpert.Theyvisitedanumberofmarkedgraves(e.g.Figure5c)toidentifyand

experiencethesitefordeployingSpomenik.Furthersemi-structuredinterviewswereconducted

onthistrip,withSloveniannationalsincludinggenocidesurvivorsandpartisans(sampleof5).

Thetripalsoenabledface-to-facecoordinationwithSlovenianprojectpartnersSCNRandNUK,

andincludedavisittomeetGigo.Thosewhowerebroughtintodialoguewiththeresearchers

werepresentedwiththeconceptualdesignforSpomenik(describedabove).

People’sresponsestothisconceptprovidedtheteamwithadeeperunderstandingofthe

stakeholdercontextweweredesigningforalongwithfurtherinspirationandconstraints.We

learnedthatgenocidesurvivorsandpartnerorganizationsinSloveniawishedtotelltheirstories

tobothnationalandinternationalaudiences.TherewaskeeninterestthatSpomenikshould

servetoraisepublicawarenessofthegenocidewiththeseaudiences.Theconceptofthe

location-based,mobilephoneapplicationwasfoundtocapturetheimaginationsofinterviewees,

intermsofhowthevictims,interredintheirhiddengraves,couldberememberedthrough

recordedtestimoniesofothers,accessedatthesite.Again,thoseinterviewedexpressedconcern

andethicalquestionsabouttheuseof‘historicallyaccurate’informationinSpomenik.One

interestwastousemobiletechnologiesforengagingyoungeraudiences,andforthecontent

developedforSpomeniktobemadetransferrabletoothermemorializationsettings.Anditwas

stronglycommunicatedthattherewereversionsofhistoryinthepublicdomainpertainingtothis

settingthatneededtobenegotiatedwhendevelopingSpomenik,bothinSloveniaandinthe

diasporacommunitymorewidely.33

Followingthistrip,thedesignspacewasnarrowedtoconsidertwoconceptsthatwere

storyboardedandpresentedforteamcritique.Theteamoptedforwhatbecamethefinaldesign

(section3andFigure5above),butactuallyincorporatedideasfromtheseconddesignconcept:

toconfiguretheaudioguideforlearning,deliveringeducationalcontentwiththeaudioguide

narrative.SCNRprovidedcuratedaudiocontentforthethreenarrativeepisodesoftheguide.

AninitialworkingprototypeofSpomenikwastestedinthegardensattheNationalHolocaust

MemorialCentreinLaxton,UK.Allmembersofthecoreteamexperiencedusingtheprototype,

whichgaveusinsighttowardstheproperpacingandbodilyengagementoftheexperience.Italso

madeevidenttheroleofindividualandgroupexperiencewithinserviceuse.Reflectingonuse,a

keyfeaturewasdevelopedforthefinaldesign:ratherthan‘stayingontheline’duringtheirwalk

betweenstations(Figure5b),thevisitorcall-backfeaturewasintroduced(seenintheproposed

signageofFigure5a).Thisenabledmoreflexibilityforsocialinteractionwithothersinbetween

stations.

Figure6.DeploymentoffinalSpomenikdesignwithclassoflocalschoolchildren.

DeploymentofthefinalSpomenikprototypetookplaceatKočevskiRog(seeFigure6).The

contentprovidedbyNUKwascuratedspecificallytofitwiththetopologyofthissiteand

distancesbetweenstations.TheinterventionitselfinvolvedafurtherfieldtriptoSlovenia,bya

subsetoftheteam.Forthisdeployment,wecoordinatedwithourlocalpartnerstorecruitaclass

oflocalschoolpupils(aged15to17years)toevaluateSpomenik.Participationwasofferedasan

educationalexperienceand,again,theSpomenikdeploymentcomprisedpartofourdesign-led

inquiryaimingtogeneratenotjustuserinsightspersebutalsonewaccountsofsensemaking

aroundthehistoricalgenocideevent,mediatedbypervasivetechnologyatthegivensite.

Toreportonthequalitativedatacollectedandanalyzedfromtheevaluationeventisbeyondthe

scopeofthispaper.Wenowturntoreflectonwhatwegainedthroughourdesign-ledapproach

toinquiry,describinghowcomplexhumanrelationshipstositesofmemorializationcanbe

meaningfullyaugmentedandtransformedbycreatinganddeployingpervasive,mobile

connections.

5. UNDERSTANDING LEGACY THROUGH DESIGN INQUIRY

Belowwefocusonthreephenomenathatsurfacedwithrelativefrequencythroughourinquiry,

situatingthemwithinthecontextofourdesign-ledapproach,namely:howlegacyisdelivered

throughnetworksofactors;howlegacymodifiesplace;andinfrastructureforsustaininglegacy.

Legacy through networks of actors

Comingbacktooneofouroriginatingargumentsistheideathatmortality(andthereinlegacy)is

maintainedthroughactiveremembranceofnetworksofothers.Accordingly,indevelopingthe

Spomenikconceptweexploredhowthehumandimensionofmemorializationwasconfiguredin

ourdesignsetting.Whilstitwasevidentfrominceptionwhowastobememorializedby

Spomenik,teamdiscussionsfrequentlycenteredontryingtounderstand‘who’thememorial

wouldserve.Questionswereraisedaroundhowvariousstakeholderswereconceptualizing

system‘users’andhowitsdesignwasdeliveringsomethingofvaluetothem.Thisledtothe

designspacebeingdynamicallyre-imaginedastheprojectprogressed.Initiallyweassumedthe

memorialwouldbeforoldergenerationSlovenianswhohadkeptthesitealiveandthoselocal

Slovenianswhowantedtorevealthisotherwisehiddenhistory.Butbasedonourearlyinsights,

webegantothinkmoreabouthowtodesigntheexperiencefordiasporacommunities,leveraging

theaffordancesofawebinterfacetoconnectthemtothesitefromadistance.Buildingina

remoteconnectiontothephysicalsiteservedtoameliorateanxietiesheldbydiasporamembers

abouttheirhistorybeingredactedfromthelandtheyusedtocallHome.

However,initsfinalconfiguration,Spomenikrespondedtodiasporaconcernstotargetschool-

agedchildren,whoitwasfeltwerevariouslyrestrictedfromdevelopinghistorical

understanding.Curiously,evenastheformfactorofthedesignchangedduringitsstagesof

development,thebiggestshiftsinscopewerebothgeographic(intermsofthecommunities

served)andtemporal(shiftingfromservinglegacyamongstthosecontemporaneoustothe

massacrestothoseseparatedbyseveralgenerations,whohavenodirectexperience).

Ourinquiryresultedinadesignthatservesanetworkofrelationshipsmediatedthrough

differentfeaturesofdigitaltechnology.Thewebelementsservedthediasporacommunityata

distanceshowingthemactiveengagementwiththememorialsetting.Theactivityinsitu

supportedtheolderlocalswhostruggledtomaintainthememorialduringtheCommunist

regime.Furtherphysicalsignagefortheservicecreatedasenseofpermanencetothememorial

and,arguably,existencetothosegenocidevictimspreviouslymadeinvisibleincertainversions

ofhistory.Fortheschoolchildren,mobiletechnologyprovidedthemwithmeanstoengagemore

deeplyandpersonallywithacontextthatmightotherwisebealienating.

ThroughrepatriateddatatoSlovenia(recordsfromthosewhohadsurvivedwithinSloveniaand

thosefromthediaspora),wehavefoundhowrememberingthegenocidevictimsultimately

becomesaprocessofactiveengagementwithinthehuman-network.Jim’sdesignvisionfor

Spomenik,andhisself-identificationwithinthediaspora,motivatedthedevelopmentofconcepts

throughemotionallychargedsense-makingaroundthehistoryofthegravesite,avolitionaldrive

towardscertainformsofrepresentationatthesite,andalegitimatevoiceasadiasporamember.

InthiscasewehaveobservedhowJimwasusingthelanguageofdesign(fromgraphicdesignto

physicalprototyping)tofosterdialogue,leadingtotheunderstandingofmultiplestakeholder

voices.

Spomenikcreatedadialogicalspaceforthestakeholderstofosteragencyintheir

memorializationpracticesenactinglegacyinvariousways.ForJimitservedhissenseofdutyto

hiscommunityandfamily.ForNUKitshowedcontemporaryrelevancetotheirwork,andfor

SNCRitraisedprofilefortheirmissiontofosteracknowledgementandreconciliationover

events.ForGigoitpotentiallyinvitedpeopletothesettingsothattheymightencountertheir

originalBelldesign.

Legacy and the modification of place

Earlydesignideashadconsideredbringingthemassgravemappingdowntoan‘encounterable’

scalesothatitcouldbetransposed(andthereforeexperienced)invarioussettings.However,in

thefinaldesignwechosetoworkexclusivelywithonesite–onethatalreadyhadapartiallegacy

ofmemorialarchitecture.ThedigitallydrivenaspectsoftheSpomenikexperiencethereforehad

tositalongsideorsubtlyoverlaythelegacyinfrastructure;thedesignhadbecomesite-specific

plustherewereinherentsensitivitiesatplay.Assuchwerecognizedwewerepotentially‘re-

making’thespace34–by,forexample,manipulatingthemovementandbehaviorsofpeople

withinit.Whathadbecomerestingplaceswerebeinggiventhepotentialtobemade‘restless’

againthroughdigitalintervention,somethingwewereatpainstoavoid.35Therewasalsoan

extenttowhichwewereconsciouslyconstructingan‘uncomfortableinteraction’,36wantingto

expresssomethingofharrowingexperienceslivedthroughinasettingthathadbecomea

peacefulandrespectfulplace,whilstseriouslyconsideringtheethicalimplicationsofthe

interventionandtheaffective,educationalcontextofengagement.

ThroughtheSpomeniksystem,thesiteofKočevskiRogbecameimbuedwithanewsenseof

mortality(itbeingagravesite–arestingplace–andincidentallysomewherethatwasformerly

hiddenandhopedtobeforgotten).Butatthesametimethetemporalboundsofhumanmortality

andconcomitantlythelegacyofmemoriesinvestedinthesitewerereimaginedbythenewly

persistentdigitaltraceofthephysicalactivityatthesite.Equally,thedisembodiedvoicesinthe

wirebecameembeddedandthis,tosomeextent,providedthesevoiceswithanewlegacy,a

corporeality,throughatransformedhybriddigital-physicalsetting.Assuch,Spomenikconnected

culturesandcommunitiesofpeopledistributedacrossbothspaceandtime,beyondthehuman

lifespan.

Infrastructure for sustaining legacy

InourdesignworkforSpomenik,weencounteredsomespecificchallengesaroundmaintaining

legacy,notleastbecauseofthepotentiallycontestednatureofthishistoricsetting,37butalsoby

virtueofthenetworkofstakeholdersandtheircompetingvoiceswithinthememorialization

process.38Therewerelegitimateargumentsoverwhosehistorywasbeingaccountedfor.The

natureoftransplanting‘memories’thathadbeenrehearsedbyadiasporacommunityintothe

landscapeofanothercountry–onethathadpursuedanalternativeaccountofhistoryfor60

years–inevitablyraisedtensions.Thestakeholdershadtonegotiatethesetensions(itbeingof

farlessconsequenceforadiasporacommunitytomakeprovocativestatementsthanforalocal

government-fundedinstitution).Theseissuesbroughttotheforethelegitimacyofwhocanenact

memorialization.WithJimbeingamemberofthediasporacommunity,aSlovenianspeaker,and

sometimeresident,itfeltappropriateforhimtoleadourendeavours.Ironicallyhowever,itisan

evidentfeatureofmortalitythatourlegaciesarenotourown,theyareinthemakingofthose

whodealwiththemafterourdeaths;theinterpretationofeventsisthereforemediatedbythe

voicesofothers.39

Designinginfrastructuretoscaffolddiscussionanddialogue40wasfoundtoofferclearbenefits

(thathavebeennoted),butalsoarangeof‘designdangers’.Forinstance,asourteam’seducation

expertpointedout,exposingsystemusers(suchasschoolstudents)toethicalquestionsmightfit

wellwithwhatwasknownabouteffectivegenocide-educationpractices.However,asystem

supportingdiscussion,dialogueandthereconcilingofdifferentperspectivesisopento

subversion(forinstance,fearsregardingdenialofthemassacres,hatespeech,modern-day

partisanattitudes,etc.).

Onefinalconsiderationisthelegacyoftheserviceitselfanditseconomicsustainabilitypost-

project.Theresearchteamdiscussedhandoveroftheprototypewithkeystakeholders

(NUK/SNCR),andinvestigationsweremadeaboutbalancingthecostsoftheserviceand

responsibilitiesofownership,financialinvestment,andmaintenance.Spomenikhaspotentialto

beconfiguredasasocialenterprise.Alargelystandalonemobileapplicationwouldrequire

maintenance,supportanddataconnectivity,whereasanautomatedtelephonyserviceworks

anywherewithaphonesignalandcouldgenerateenoughincometosustainitself,atleastforas

longastheserviceremainstobeusedbyvisitorsandvaluedbystakeholders.Bytakingtheform

ofapervasiveserviceratherthanaphysicalmonumentliketheGigobelldesign(Figute1b),

Spomenikraisesnewdesignconsiderationspertainingtotheinherentmortalityofsystem

elementsandtheirlegacy,andtherequirementformotivatedhumanstosustaininterestin

maintainingthemonumenttokeepitalive.

Concluding Discussion: On Collective Memory

InclosingwereflectuponthenotionsofcollectivememoryraisedintheIntroduction.Asour

threethemeshaveshown,withinthisdesign-ledinquiryweexploredmortalitythroughthelens

oflegacyandtheagencyofvariousactorstomanipulateit.Wehavealsoseenthewaysinwhich

perspectivesonmortalityandlegacyaremediatedbyculturaltoolsthatweengagewith(e.g.

relatedtolanguage,history,politics)andalsothatwegenerate(e.g.websites,audio-guides,

visitingexperiences).ThisresonatesstronglywithWertsch’snotionof‘culturaltoolmediation’in

theproductionofcollectivememoryandreinforcesthenotionthatmortalityisdeeplyconnected

toremembering,anditisthisaspectthatpeoplemostreadilyseektomanipulatewhenenacting

legacythroughperformingactsofremembranceandmemorialization.ThedesignofSpomenik

hasledustothinkmoredeeplyabouttheimplicationsofdesigningmemorialsforothersthat

utilizedigitaltechnologies.Digitallayeringoffersupopportunitiestoexpandthenetworkof

connectedstakeholders,configuringthemincertainwaysandmediatingtheiraccesstothe

memorial.TheSpomenikprojectledustointerveneinandmanipulatephysicalspacesin

emotionallyengagingways,offeringnewopportunitiesforlegacymakingandreflection.Allof

thesepossibilitieshowever,haveuniqueandinterrelateddependencies,whichoffersubstantial

challengestothedesignerandwhichcannotbeaddressedlightly.Theyrequiresubstantial

sensitivitytotheexpandingnetworkofhumanrelationshipsinthememorializationcontextand

acommitmenttoexplorethemultiplicityofvoicesthatconstitutecollectivememory.

Acknowledgements ThisworkwasfundedbyRCUK,(HorizonDigitalEconomyResearch)EP/G065802/1.The

secondauthorisfundedbytheLeverhulmeTrust(ECF-2012-642).

1BernardSchumacher,DeathandMortalityinContemporaryPhilosophy(CambridgeUniversityPress,2010)2NigelLlewellyn,TheArtofDeath.(London:ReaktionBooksLtd,1991)3AvrilMaddrellandJamesD.Sidaway,Deathscapes:SpacesforDeath,Dying,MourningandRemembrance.(Routledge,2010)4FordiscussionseeBjornNansen,MichaelArnold,MartinGibbs,andTamaraKohn,“TheRestlessDeadintheDigitalCemetery,”inDigitalDeath:MortalityandBeyondintheOnlineAge,ed.ChristopherM.MoremanandA.DavidLewis(SantaBarbara:Praeger,2014),111-1245Foracritiqueofthispositionsee:ChrisElsden,DavidKirk,andAbigailDurrant,“AQuantifiedPast:TowardDesignforRememberingWithPersonalInformatics,”Human–ComputerInteraction31,no.6(2016):518-5576JamesWertsch,VoicesofCollectiveRemembering,(CambridgeUniversityPress,2002)7DavidMiddleton,andKyokoMurakami,“CollectivityandAgencyinRememberingandReconciliation,”Outlines.CriticalPracticeStudies5,no.1(2003):16-308 Ibid.

9MichaelMassimi,WilliamOdom,RichardBanks,andDavidKirk,"MattersofLifeandDeath:LocatingtheEndofLifeinLifespan-OrientedHCIResearch,"inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI'11).(ACM,2011),987-996.10MichaelMassimiandAndreaCharise,Dying,"Death,andMortality:TowardsThanatosensitivityinHCI,"inExtendedAbstractsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHIEA'09).(ACM,2009),2459-246811WilliamOdom,RichardHarper,AbigailSellen,DavidKirk,RichardBanks,“PassingOn&PuttingtoRest:UnderstandingBereavementintheContextofInteractiveTechnologies,”inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI'10).(ACM,2010),1831-184012 William Odom, Richard Banks, David Kirk, Richard Harper, Sian Lindley and Abigail Sellen, “Technology Heirlooms? Considerations for Passing Down and Inheriting Digital Materials,” in Proceedings of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12). (ACM, 2012), 337- 346 13 Wendy Moncur and David Kirk, “An Emergent Framework for Digital Memorials,” in Proceedings of the ACM Designing Interactive Interfaces (DIS’14), (ACM, 2014), 965–974 14ElizabethHallamandJennyHockey,Death,MemoryandMaterialCulture.(Oxford:Berg,2001)15JedBrubaker,LynnDombrowski,AnitaGilbert,NafiriKusumakaulikaandGillianHayes,(2014)“StewardingaLegacy:ResponsibilitiesandRelationshipsintheManagementofPost-MortemData,”inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI’14),(ACM,2014),4157-416616WendyMoncur,“TheEmotionalWellbeingofResearchers:ConsiderationsforPractice,”inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI’13),(ACM,2013),1883–189017BatyaFriedmanandLisaNathan,“Multi-lifespanInformationSystemDesign:AResearchInitiativefortheHCICommunity,”inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI’10),(ACM,2010),2243-224618LizSevcenko,“SitesofConscience:NewApproachestoConflictedMemory,”MuseumInternational62,no.1-2(2010):20-2519ShaulKrakover,“TheHolocaustRemembranceSiteofYadVashemWelcomesVisitors,”InternationalResearchinGeographicalandEnvironmentalEducation11,no.4,(2010):359-36220ZacharyBeckstead,GabrielTwose,EmilyLevesque-GottliebandJuliaRizzo,“CollectiveRememberingthroughtheMaterialityandOrganizationofWarMemorials.”JournalofMaterialCulture16,no.2(2011):193-21321AnnaPetersson,“TheProductionofaMemorialPlace:MaterialisingExpressionsofGrief.”In(Ed)AvrilMaddrellandJamesD.Sidaway,Deathscapes:SpacesforDeath,Dying,MourningandRemembrance.(Routledge,2010),141-15922BarryBrown,StuartReevesandScottSherwood,(2011)“IntotheWild:ChallengesandOpportunitiesforFieldTrialMethods,”inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI’11),(ACM,2011),1657-166623LillyIrani,JanetVertesi,PaulDourish,KavitaPhilipandRebeccaE.Grinter,“PostcolonialComputing:ALensonDesignandDevelopment,”inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI’10),(ACM,2010),1311-132024Seeforexample,PaulAoki,RebeccaGrinter,AmyHurst,MargaretSzymanski,JamesThorntonandAllisonWoodruff,“SottoVoce:ExploringtheInterplayofConversationandMobileAudioSpaces,”inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI’02),(ACM,2002),431-43825 Through SCNR we also collaborated with the National University Library of Slovenian and the national poet. 26 The account represents a narrative of a survivor of the massacre that took place there. The site holds some c.2200 dead, the account itself was generated by one of the five to seven survivors. 27TheseeventsaredescribedindetailinJohnCorsellisandMarcusFerrar,Slovenia1945:MemoriesofdeathandSurvivalAfter1945.(I.B.Tauris,2015).ThesitewechosetoworkwithwaspickedbySCNRasitwasassumedtocontainremainsofprimarilyethnicallyGerman,Sloveniannationalists,howevermostoftheSlovenianmassgravesitescontainremainsofvariousmixesofCroatians,Serbians,Montenegrans,Albanians,Bosnians,Ukrainians/Russians(Cossacksgenerally),Germans,ItaliansandHungarians.28 The content was sourced by the National Library in Slovenia and had likely been previously archived by the Slovenian diaspora community in Argentina. 29Thesystememploysacloud-basedtelephonyservice,Tropo,inordertosupportthesevariousfunctionalities.ThescriptsemploythefollowingfunctionalitysupportedbyTropo:theprogrammatichandlingofvoicecallsandgeneralcallcontrol(e.g.,endingacall),numberbuttoninput,outboundSMS,andvoicecallrecording.Inthisway,Tropoprovidesasimpleinterfacetothepotentiallycomplexaspectsoftelephony-basedapplications. 30 In addition to audio-guide handling, the system also provides a website front-end that presents online information about the grave site, and displays the number of visitors to the physical site (as logged via calls to the system), along with any recorded responses by callers. 31 That is, events designated as crimes against humanity 32 This moved away from discussions of statuary and the visual arts in memorialization, as presented in Llewellyn (1991). 33 And, of course, through other regions in the former Yugoslavia affected by these events memorialized. 34PaulDourish,“Re-space-ingPlace:"Place"and"Space"TenYearsIn,”inProceedingsofthe2006ConferenceonComputersupportedCooperativeWork(CSCW'06).(ACM,2006):299-308

35 To use the language of Nansen et al. 2014 36SteveBenford,ChrisGreenhalgh,GabrielaGiannachi,BrendanWalker,JoeMarshallandTomRodden,“UncomfortableInteractions,”inProceedingsofACMConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI’12),(ACM,2012):2005-201437 Sevcenko (2010) 38 Middleton and Murukami (2003) 39 Ibid. 40 Wertsch (2002)