This thesis examines the debate regarding the establishment of a memorial to the victims of a national trauma; the terrorist attacks in Norway July 22, 2011. This thesis reflects on how different interest groups are treated regarding the memorial’s design according to the groups’ own opinions and arguments.The method chosen is a qualitative text analysis where a selection of material is used to formulate answers and opinions from the interest groups regarding the memorials purpose. Constructed argumentation are identified based on the perspectives regarding the issues.  The national memorial at Utøyakaia stands to remember the deceased and wounded, but also to give reflection upon terrorism and consequences of political extremism. This purpose is debated regarding on how this retelling of history should be presented at its authentic location.The interest groups are identified through the work since everyone’s involvement is not clear to all. Different forms of power and knowledge play a key role in these negotiations, where arguments and opinions are mixed through a private and professional character.  Appearance and location are the two biggest issues. Since these are most lacking in the agreements between the interest groups. The memorial should be beautiful and have associations to the island. This definition opens up to multiple ideas regarding its design which leaves no suggestion to feel justified.Utøya today is a name that brings association to the date and the place of the massacre. Utøya is an identity that has forever changed the island, AUF and the locals living in the area. It is both an authentic historical location and a memorial grove, a tourist attraction and a place where everyday life goes on through the trauma.  This is a two years’ master’s thesis in Museum and Cultural Heritage Studies.