Memorials

-Trying to upload again, maybe this time the wi-fi will be mature about this...-

I first visited the Auschwitz website, and was unfortunately unable to get the virtual tours to work properly, but did get a good look at the still images. Auschwitz is primarily a walking, in person memorial. As opposed to ones such as the Holocaust museum in Washington D.C, it is the real thing. What better, more appropriate place to remember the history, than where it actually happened? For tourists and viewers who want a more emotional effect, Auschwitz would be the place to go. The original barracks and base have been kept renovated, as well as the Arbeit Macht Frei gate. Memorials have been placed within the area, to give names to the dead. Visiting the actual site has to give some sort of very surreal feeling to the visitor; the Holocaust is already so difficult to fathom, that standing in a death camp decades later has to feel odd.
In comparison, rather than seeing the buildings that cremated bodies, there is the Topf und Söhne building that looks into the history and creation of these ovens, and how they came to exist in camps.
Topf und Söhne's website features an at-a-glance look into their current exhibitions. They feature remnants of old building foundations, as well as models and pictures of the ovens. This is a sterile environment, away from the actual historical site. So if one were take into consideration Young's perspective on memorials, they might choose to go to the Topf und Söhne building, rather than the actual camp. He mentioned his opposition to tourists specifically visiting concentration camp sites, as it deteriorates from the memory and horror. I personally disagree, though I do see a point. But I can't think of a stronger way for someone to feel emotionally attached to the event other than to visit in perso.