Modern Australia has developed a unique set of codes that categorize them as being ‘Australian’. These codes are represented in the media tools and in the civic rituals. From these texts, it has become possible to identify and locate the groups that are within the realms of the four-fold structure of the national symbolic boundaries (Short, 2003). These external dimensions enable the people to connect with the narrative that are associated with the spaces.
Hence the externalities of these monuments are combined with the intangible emotions. These are not merely statues as they represent the history of the past. They are indicators of the future. They serve as examples as to what would occur in the future. In this schema, there are differential opinions that the people have developed over time with regard to the national monuments. They are detailed in the following.
Viewpoints Regarding National Monuments and Statutes
In the places such as Fremantle, Western Australia, owing to the events, there were old statutes that had bronze plagues. They explain two versions of the historical events. In some places, the reasons for the competing monument are also explored. Some of the controversial historical figures that are under protest have engendered controversy in the communities.
The people who support the statues state that the history is a part of the good and bad that are not eradicated (Phillips, 1996). It is shown as facts. These would also serve as symbol of the existence of the times. It also serves as a reminder as to what would happen if certain aspects are not checked. The socio-demographic factors indicate that the older Australians would be more sympathetic to the rigid symbolic boundaries when they are compared to the young. This hypothesized generational effect is an allusion towards the collective memory that exists in the society.