14 happening in the Ukraine . Such importance applied to the protesters who were taking part in
“ Lenin-Fall ” but also to domestic and international spectators . It was through the corporeality of the cause that the understanding of conflict could go beyond the normal traction of something like the aural or written word . There were human emotions on display whose physical actions were captured through the ‘ toolkit the actor-network theory ’ ( Law , 2007 , p . 142 ) provided in the image . This can primarily be seen as depicted within figure1 which illustrates the sheer volume of people who have turned up to watch and partake in forcibly removing the statue of Lenin . Likewise , the fire at the foot of the statue is important to the symbolic power of the image . It is important , because it enhances the likelihood of empathy on part of the audience of the image , as the fire has connotations of being in a hostile environment . The overall aesthetic of the picture is one that looks dangerous and as a spectator you can empathise with the position in which the demonstrators are putting themselves in .
The debate on whether ‘ Lenin ’ was figuratively still with the people or not was met with despondence . Arguably , Ukraine was still not ‘ freed from the monuments ’ both in the landscape and in the national discourse . Although , it was in this assertion of national identity which questioned if the development of national identity and national culture was but another ‘ decommunization ’ task . This produced an ambiguity around the symbols used within the country with regards to what they actually meant , which was then reflected within the still images of those symbols - the photographs of the fallen Lenin statues . The protestors came