[ Previous ]   [ Next ]

History

Memory

A couple of days ago my friend Mark alerted me to this article by Timothy Snyder in the NYRB. It took me a while to finally read the article, which is highly recommended. Mr. Snyder poses important and interesting questions about the difference between memory and history and the disturbing role literature can play in distorting history.
Mr. Snyder writes: “Auschwitz as symbol of the Holocaust excludes those who were at the center of the historical event. The largest group of Holocaust victims—religiously Orthodox and Yiddish-speaking Jews of Poland, or, in the slightly contemptuous German term, Ostjuden—were culturally alien from West Europeans, including West European Jews. To some degree, they continue to be marginalized from the memory of the Holocaust. The death facility Auschwitz-Birkenau was constructed on territories that are today in Poland, although at the time they were part of the German Reich. Auschwitz is thus associated with today's Poland by anyone who visits, yet relatively few Polish Jews and almost no Soviet Jews died there. The two largest groups of victims are nearly missing from the memorial symbol.”

And also: 'Yet as Auschwitz draws attention away from the still greater horrors of Treblinka, the Gulag distracts us from the Soviet policies that killed people directly and purposefully, by starvation and bullets. Of the Stalinist killing policies, two were the most significant: the collectivization famines of 1930–1933 and the Great Terror of 1937–1938. It remains unclear whether the Kazakh famine of 1930–1932 was intentional, although it is clear that over a million Kazakhs died of starvation. It is established beyond reasonable doubt that Stalin intentionally starved to death Soviet Ukrainians in the winter of 1932–1933. Soviet documents reveal a series of orders of October–December 1932 with evident malice and intention to kill. By the end, more than three million inhabitants of Soviet Ukraine had died.
What we read of the Great Terror also distracts us from its true nature. The great novel and the great memoir are Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon and Alexander Weissberg's The Accused. Both focus our attention on a small group of Stalin's victims, urban Communist leaders, educated people, sometimes known in the West. This image dominates our understanding of the Great Terror, but it is incorrect. Taken together, purges of Communist Party elites, the security police, and military officers claimed not more than 47,737 lives.
The largest action of the Great Terror, Operation 00447, was aimed chiefly at "kulaks," which is to say peasants who had already been oppressed during collectivization. It claimed 386,798 lives.'

And not to forget:

“Poland's capital was the site of not one but two of the major uprisings against German power during World War II: the ghetto uprising of Warsaw Jews in 1943, after which the ghetto was leveled; and the Warsaw Uprising of the Polish Home Army in 1944, after which the rest of the city was destroyed. These two central examples of resistance and mass killing were confused in the German mass media in August 1994, 1999, and 2004, on all the recent five-year anniversaries of the Warsaw Uprising of 1944, and will be again in August 2009.”

So far for the fact checkers.


16 comments Last_comment
But that part of Poland was not yet in the Reich, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Government

Indeed, a lot of people do not know about those two uprisings in Warsaw, as they do not know the difference between the battles of Leningrad and Stalingrad or the subtle difference between ‘concentration’ and extermination camps,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_camp
or the ‘Judenrein’ declaration of the Baltic States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judenfrei
etcetera…
Arnon
A foreign friend of mine is going to spend a few weeks in Amsterdam this summer to work on a book, a bit related to the topic of this post. I have a feeling you would enjoy meeting him, and that he would enjoy meeting you.
Shall I arrange something?
(I won't be there, if that were to be your concern)
The movie "The Pianist" shows a clear image of what happened in Warsaw during WWII.
Bernard
Wasn't Auschwitz part of Upper Silesia?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberschlesien
I may be wrong, this is not a rhetorical question.
Batta
I'll be teaching at the university of Wagingen in September and October. I would love to meet this "foreign friend" of yours.
Did you read 'Everything is Illuminated', by Jonathan Safran Foer? It's partly about the nazi's killing Jews in Ukraine. If you read it, I'm very curieus what you thought of it, literary-wise, also in the light of your comment in a post a few weeks ago that you couldn't think of any writer of your generation you liked.
The article raises the question as to if we can rely on literature to reflect the suffering of WW2. Perhaps it is part of the tragedy that this cannot be (re)captured. Suffering can only become less if it is shared and is unbearable without reason or witness. For these victims, the suffering is unbearably light.
M
Do you think literature has to get it's facts right to reflect on suffering? Isn't it a sign of good literature that it touches on universal emotions, without being bound to a specific time or place? I don't think it's the task of literature to get the facts, that's the task of science and history. It's the task of literature to make stories, that can possibly have a healing effect, but I think literature is free to create these stories anyhow they want, whether totally historically correct or totally historically wrong. Nobody should rely on literature for facts.
Hordijk
Let me put it this way: "Everthing is illuminated" is not my favorite book. FYI a while ago the Dutch weekly 'Vrij Nederland published an interview with me and Safran Foer.
Hordijk
There is fiction and there is non-fiction. Non-fiction needs to get its facts right, yes.
But the article mentioned in this entry isn't so much about facts versus fiction, it's about the power of literature that can cause the exception to turn into the rule, i.e. based on one or a few books a wider audience comes to the wrong belief that the exception is the rule.
In the case of history this can have consequences.
@Arnon
If you look at the map closely, then you can see that Auschwitz remained part of the ‘Generalgouvernement’, but was intended to become part of the Reich in the future.
Only the western part of Oberschlesien was annexed immediately.
@Arnon
Although it seems Auschwitz was indeed a few kilometer inside the annexed territory. I was wrong, it was situated just outside the Generalgouvernement.
Arnon
Great! Let me email you his details once his visa is arranged and I know exactly when he will be here.
Foer
Thanks for the info. I couldn't find the complete interview, but I did find a quote from you that said 'I looked into his (Foers) eyes and I felt like... Jesus.' Now the context in which you said this isn't completely clear, so I wonder what you meant by that.. Did you feel like Jesus because you felt superior to him as a writer? Did you feel like Jesus because you felt you were suffering during this interview, because of the interviewer, or his company?
Hordijk
You are referring to a blog post I wrote for Words Without Borders.
http://www.wordswithoutborders.org/
If I’m not mistaken you still can find this particular post on their site.
Anyhow, the post ends like this:
'Mr. Foer was polite, rather intelligent, and he acted convincingly modest. That he took refuge in commonplaces is something that he cannot be blamed for.
Why say something about your work and life, when you know that there aren’t thirty-nine flavors of ice cream waiting for you?
I have to admit that I didn’t believe a word he was saying, but even that is something we are all used to.
Mr. Foer declared that he had good experiences with love, and suddenly I was reminded of Katie Holmes declaring in Vanity Fair: “All I can say is the moment I looked into her eyes I felt like... Mom.”
Rule One of the interview: don’t say anything, and don’t offend anybody.
All I can say is I looked into the eyes of Mr. Foer and I felt like... Jesus.'

I don’t believe that much explanation is needed. As the painter Karel Appel once said to me: “Use your fantasy.”
Thank you, that makes a lot more sense than the isolated sentence.