In the session with Elizabeth Cole, we looked at photos of monuments that were memorials for victims and heroes of historical conflicts and genocides. The images that we saw were so powerful and reminded me of the power art can have in making a political and symbolic point by compelling the audience to look beyond what they simply see, something that people tend not to do with simple historic accounts.

In particular, the stepping stones monument, that had the names of the jewish family who were driven from their home was so powerful to me because of how their names were now permanently engraved in the stones. Apart from the most obvious fact that this was in memory of their suffering and lives, the symbolism of their names permanently etched in the stone is so powerful as it reflects the resilience of the people generations after. In addition, the unsteadiness of the stones that stumbles those that walk in ignorance of its message is also so powerful in its mission of remembrance and respect to the lives that these people lived.

This however also made me think about those stories and names that are not etched in stone. Those grandchildren and children and siblings and mothers and fathers who lost their loved ones to genocide and other atrocities, but who don’t even receive any act of acknowledgement, regret or apology.  Those that don’t even know what eventually happened to them, who don’t have any closure.  Particularly, the video that we watched about the Omarska camp and the fact that after being freed, people were compelled to live life normally amongst those that tortured them, in ignorance of the suffering that was inflicted makes me so angry to think about how we as the public are so discriminatory about who we hold accountable.

This is seen not only in remembrance and memory but also in conflict and development and peace building. If we are to move towards a society that is peaceful and equal, we have to personally do better to strive beyond the rhetoric that is tailor fed to us and seek those narratives that the system suppresses.

I have never been much of an environmental person or an activist, perhaps because I find the whole field extremely overwhelming, even more than human rights and conflict, go figure. With climate change and the other ways humans are destroying our planet, I have a very bleak perspective and hope in the field and of our future.

However, the session with Professor Jeff Langolz made me very optimistic about the field, and renewed my faith on technology and human capabilities to innovate. The fact that one can now make water out of thin air – or more like thick air – is astounding and inspiring. Harnessing energy and resources that are abundantly available and reusable will be revolutionary for the environment and human kind and I am at least positive my children will not be thirsty.

However, things such as solar panels and grey and black water filters are not cheap, especially for developing nations and governments that are already struggling with corruption and inefficient governance. Moreover, with the lack of awareness about sanitation and how such things work, it will be difficult to get the community to buy into the idea of recycling and reusing. Although cheap alternatives have started to be created the process will be long and will need to be accompanied by large scale educational campaigns.

The session with Professor Moorti was very interesting and reopened many questions in my mind that I have had throughout my college career about gender and conflict. I was particularly intrigued by her question about if a space without gender actually exists. Having thought about this a lot, I have come to the conclusion that a place without gender simply does not exist. Gender is perhaps the strongest part of our identity and we as human beings take our identities every place we physically and figuratively inhabit. Therefore, like we can’t separate ourselves from our gender (although there are many valid agreements otherwise, especially in the modern world), we cannot separate gender from situations, particularly in conflict situations that usually affect people as a group and community.

Gender is often an ignored subject when it comes to peace building and conflict; the thoughts that are given to gender at all is the traditional roles and needs of women and men, such as the militarization of men and the physical discrimination of women. Seldom do we address how such conflicts and gender identities and inequity intersect. Perhaps understanding this is what peacemakers have failed to do, as conflict in all its destructive nature is also an effective way to transform power structures and address gender inequities in a long-term manner.