"Entirely Unforgettable". Auschwitz 2007: The Lasting Impact

To finish off this series of blogs which have focused on Holocaust Memorial Day and the Liberation of Auschwitz, I want to return to some of the questions I raised in the first blog, when comparing two articles which attempted to address the question of who should visit the camps and if it should be made a compulsory trip in schools. I very clearly asserted my belief that it was a hugely valuable experience for me, both in terms of understanding the history of that period but also in terms of personal growth and development. However it got me thinking and there was one question I kept coming back too- was this a view shared by others who made that same trip to Poland?

Not knowing, I set out to investigate.

Unfortunately the passage of time has severed many of the links I had with those who also visited Poland in 2007. However, through social media I managed to contact some 25 of those 40 class mates who originally attended, explaining why I’d got in touch and asking them if they could spare a few minutes to consider the following four questions:

1.       Should “everyone” go?

2.       Did it aid your understanding of the Holocaust?

3.       Has it shaped your world perspective today?

4.       Do you think the camps that still exist should be destroyed? Or are they important as memorials?

I wasn’t sure what reception this message would get but I am pleased to say that 5 of those contacted did reply, with insightful and well considered responses. I appreciate it is not an easy thing to be asked to remember and  I’m sure there are some haven’t given it a second thought, while for others it will have replayed numerous times. Then of course, being asked to share those thoughts is perhaps a bit exposing, while others might not have wanted too. However, in a sense the ‘why’s’ do not really matter, what does, is the commonalities that appeared in those 5 responses I did receive.

1.       Should “everyone” go?

This first question divided the responders. Generally there was a feeling that if circumstances allowed, people should visit and be exposed to those educational messages. For example:

CL - ‘I definitely agree that everyone should go. When you read about such historical horrors, it can be easy to be overwhelmed by the facts and figures that seem entirely unfathomable and thus forget…. But the feelings you experience when you visit…. Entirely unforgettable’.

However an air of caution was also expressed:

 ZC - ‘I think the trip is very stressful so perhaps not everyone - I still get upset thinking about it now, especially the block they used to torture… ‘.

This response draws parallels with the view of fellow public historian Emma, who was inspired by my first blog to recall her experiences to Auschwitz in 2003 (1). I was struck by her comment about the lack preparation she was exposed too in advance of her school trip, for the arrangements around ours were very different.

Firstly, to be eligible for the trip you had to be studying either history or religious education which would provide you with the necessary background and context for the trip you were about to make. Furthermore, lunchtime sessions were also held in the weeks before where all were gathered to watch Schindler’s List. I think there was also discussion beforehand of what you might expect and how you might react. The staff had really considered what was necessary to prepare a 14/15 year olds for this trip so that it was a beneficial experience and one not purely wrought with emotion. It was a trip they’d run for years before taking us, so they had it pretty honed down by the time our turn came around – but perhaps that was a lesson learnt by experience? Either way the trip to Auschwitz-Birkenau and to the site of Plaszow was grounded in prior knowledge.

A mixed response then to this first question, but one that largely resonates with my own.

2.       Did it aid your understanding of the Holocaust?

This question sparked a more general consensus and that was yes, all responders walked away possessing greater understanding of what they’d been taught – the realisation of the magnitude of it being a particular point all recalled vividly:

SD – ‘it gave me a more realistic understanding, history lessons are on paper and this was startlingly real’.

MC – ‘[It] not only gave me a greater understanding of what happened, it made me aware how many people suffered and lost their lives. From walking around the camp and seeing the suitcases labelled with their return addresses and hair still tied in hairbands, it makes you realise how evil mankind can really be’.

ZC – ‘It definitely aided my understanding and added context to what I had already learnt. It made what I had read and watched “real”, rather than just another lesson in the classroom. It also brings to life the scale of what happened, which despite being told the number, I had never fully realised before visiting’.

Pictures cannot compare to seeing the real thing with your own eyes. It’s this whole argument about the response a ‘sense of place’ evokes – you’re not removed from it, you’re immersed in it and that feeling is not one easily forgotten. It leaves a lasting impression, as MC clearly shows in her recollection of the suitcases and human hair. You could all too easily skim over that when reading a text book, but when you’re confronted with a glass case full of false legs and spectacles and stats that say 1 in 4 men wore glasses – the magnitude of it hits you.

In her blog Emma is sceptical of the potential to learn from such a place and criticises the idea of ‘understanding’ - believing it can only be definitive – complete, job done. I disagree, there are something’s beyond full comprehension, this being one of them, but you can achieve a level of understanding and that is what all responders and myself walked away possessing a greater level of after our visit.

3.       Has it shaped your world perspective today?

This is perhaps the question I was most interested in hearing the responses too, for I was interested to see how the lessons learned by studying the Holocaust and visiting some of the places in which it happened had shaped the world view of the others, if of course at all, and how they may have carried that forward into their current lives.

The first responder’s recollections tie in with one of the lasting impressions I have of the trip in terms of the impact it had on us as a group. Like many school year groups, as a cohort we were divided by ‘factions’ and clashes of personalities did lead to bullying and people reaching judgements about others based on very little more than assumption. But as NM recalls:

‘when at Auschwitz, I don’t know about you, but I felt it bought everyone together. We all had the same feelings that what had happened was just awful…. For me it has taught me not to judge people, everyone is different… we all have our own beliefs and that doesn’t make one person more superior than another…’

And I couldn’t agree more for that is something I also took away, but was somewhat surprised it wasn’t remembered by more people than just us two. I remember us leaving for Poland divided into those factions yet coming back a more united unit which carried on for the rest of the year. I spoke to people on that trip that I’d never spoken too before and even cried with them; our vulnerability forced us to depend on each other in that moment and when we came back we continued to have conservations and exchange civilities. There is a lot to be learnt at Auschwitz alongside the history – lessons in citizenship and humanity are also taught, important steps in preventing such an atrocity occurring again.

A further point was raised by the responders in relation to this questions and that was the impact it has had on their world perspective and heightened engagement with politics and world issues:

ZC – ‘Yes, since the first day there it changed my perspective. I am far less naïve, I certainly think more carefully before I open my mouth, judge a race/religion, it drove me to become more politically aware so I can make informed decisions when voting, considering the Nazis were VOTED into power’.

SD – ‘I think my world perspective growing up was shaped by many things and is continuing to be shaped, but I do often think about this trip and how easy it is to be a bystander on world issues and how important it is to stand against inhumanity’.

4.       Do you think the camps that still exist should be destroyed? Or are they important as memorials?

The final question sparked consensus again:

NM – ‘There is so much history at places like Auschwitz and these need to be kept for generations in the future to see and to gain understanding of what happened’

SD – ‘how they have been left abandoned is important to see the realism of something so unimaginable’

MC – ‘So many innocent people lost their lives; it is there graveyard and should never be forgotten.’

ZC – ‘I think by running trips like the one that I went on, it might change the perspective of those children and who knows what a difference that handful of enlightened minds could do?’

The importance of places like Auschwitz came through in all those responses, both in terms of the educational value but also in the role they play as places of remembrance, memorialisation and of warning.  

Five responses out of forty is a small percentage and on some level I wish I’d had more data on which to base some of these conclusions. I am sure there is more that could have been said and different points that could have been raised, but what I am reassured by is that at least those 5 people took something away from that trip, just as I did and that it did have a lasting impact on those few.

Would I therefore stick by my original conclusion that school children should be encouraged to make a similar trip to ours? Yes I would, even though I wavered when watching Night will Fall. I think there is great need for exposure to such things, the lasting impact far outweighing the initial shock that comes with realising the magnitude of the Holocaust.

(1)    https://yorehistory.wordpress.com/2015/01/19/return-or-single-ticket-the-future-of-auswitz/

(2)    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30996555

Holocaust: Night Will Fall

I’ve been trying for the past three days to write something about this documentary which aired on Channel 4 on Saturday night and have really struggled – in many ways I think the documentary speaks for itself and you should just go and watch it. No words can really do it, or the footage it shows justice.  Just watch it.

It’s tough and not pleasant viewing, but it is a wonderful piece of craftsmanship. I’m glad the Imperial War Museum decided to finish the piece Bernstein and his team began all those years ago and that Singer and his team documented that process. Simply put - just watch it.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/holocaust-night-will-fall

.............................................................................................

Since watching the documentary I watched the brief clip on the Channel 4 website which sees director, Andre Singer and producer Sally Angel talk about the process of making the documentary and it was an enlightening five minutes. Both spoke openly about the process and made some very thought provoking statements which have added to the impact Night Will Fall has had on me as a viewer.

To begin with, Singer recalls how they’d begun with the intention of making a historian/expert led piece, but quickly realised the need to tell it from the perspective of those who were there and so ditched all the material they had already recorded and began again. He goes on to say that this documentary:

“has a particular resonance, number one, because it is the 70^th anniversary of the liberation of the camps at the end of the war and the generation that participated either as victims, or saw it or were there, sadly of course are dying and this is probably the last chance to look back from living memory”.

 I mean how true – yet it’s probably not something many of us think about, or don’t wish to think about. It is in living memory – most of what we know is told by those who lived through it and who survived, yet at the same time, it’s seems like so long ago because we struggle to comprehend a society in which that could be allowed happen (I know there are recent and on going events that spark comparison but I’m concentrating on this one event for the moment).

 The importance of the documentary is further compounded by a comment by Angel:

“I think it’s a kind of undocumented side of things that people who do bear witness to atrocity, cameramen, journalists and film makers often have to carry quite a lot of stuff with them that they can’t then share with other people, so for me there is an important element that actually we have to look at ways in which we honour people who bear witness to atrocity…”

In the documentary, those cameramen who recorded the footage are overcome with emotion as much as those survivors who recalled their experiences. They’ve been traumatised too, and again that’s not something I’ve often thought about.

Therefore, in finishing the film, the IWM have completed an act of remembrance; a way in which to honour the people who made it and have had to live with those experiences, because they were ordered to go into the camps and film what they saw; just as much as it honours the memory of those who lost their lives there as victims, by recording what happened. It provides context for the material, you’re not just watching archive footage, but are told the story of who was involved and why. As Angel comments, ‘it’s a really important piece of documentary evidence about what happened when the Allies went in and liberated the camps” and having finished that, as the original film makers intended, has meant that that record is now preserved for many years to come.

I’m sure there will be critics of this documentary, those who say it is too macabre and graphic in its imagery, but it appears all these decisions were ones Singer didn’t make lightly:

“We had to make quite severe choices about how much archive to put in and for me the biggest dilemma in the whole making of the film was how far do you got to show really horrific atrocity footage, to a public?…”

The intention originally was to make a film that would show the Germans what the Nazi’s had done in their name, to spread guilt. But the delay in finishing meant it lost its relevance and became politically sensitive so was shelved by the British Government. Times have moved on and it holds different meaning now, but that footage is still as horrific for anyone to view and I am sure, as Singer describes, “you don’t become anaesthetized to seeing the material”. We may be a modern audience with different sensibilities but that degree of human suffering is undoubtedly just as difficult to see today as it once was.

I’m forced to think about the first blog in this series where I discussed the idea that every child should go to Auschwitz, or another camp and I question my decision. The footage I saw when I watched this was very unsettling for me as a 23 year old – I can’t imagine how I’d have responded as a 15 year old. It’s tricky, because I stand by my original argument – I wouldn’t be the person I was today if I hadn’t been, yet to reveal the unedited truth, as the documentary and film footage depict, to a ‘child’… I don’t know. That takes the education to a whole different level and I think, one that is age sensitive.

Singer’s closing remark goes as follows:

“I’ve been quite shocked at how little generations under my generation and certainly under the generation who were there during the war, know really, about what happened, it’s kind of already distant history and it shouldn’t be because it’s our living memory, it’s our living history.”

I really don’t like to think of this as being true. I mean can it be distant history after only 70 years? It still feels very recent to me, I suppose because it is an event in living memory and I have been fortunate to hear people recall their extra ordinary experiences first hand. It’s dominated the school curriculum for so long and there is so much ‘history’ written about that period, can people really know so little about what happened?

Singer goes on to talk about the modern relevance of the documentary and the issues its raises – again issues I’ve thought about and engaged with over recent weeks -:

 “The subject matter I think has become more relevant now because of what we’re seeing across Europe, across the world perhaps, sort of an increase from the right… fundamentalism if you want to call it that, or anti-Semitism and so on, are on the increase rather than decrease and I think it’s a timely reminder of what happened last time, in the 1930s, when that swept across Europe.”

We live in scary times and I hope to god it doesn’t take another dramatic turn of events like this for society to reconfigure our sense of tolerance and accept that we now live in multi-cultural and multi-faith societies. An idealistic view perhaps but I’m sure I’m not alone.

The final words of the short video are given by Angel who recites the last lines of the script - ‘unless the world learns the lesson these pictures teach, night will fall. But by God’s grace we who live will learn.’ She then concludes ‘well the question is, have we really learnt?” and I ask you now the same question.

Link to press release -

http://www.iwm.org.uk/sites/default/files/press-release/German%20Concentration%20Camps%20Factual%20Survey%20-%20IWM%20press%20release%20(Final).pdf

Auschwitz-Birkenau: To go or not to go?

2014 and 2015 mark the anniversaries of some of the ‘big’ events in history and acts of commemoration and memorialisation seem to be dominating the news. Last year the centenary commemorations of the First World War began with stupendous force – world gatherings attended by thousands of people, local memorial services and of course the hugely talked about art installation at the Tower of London, being just a few. There was also the 25^th anniversary of the falling of the Berlin Wall and this year we have the 800^th anniversary of Magna Carta and the 70^th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. It also means that it marks the anniversary of the liberation of the notorious concentration camps and January 27^th, the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, is of course Holocaust Memorial Day; a day for remembrance and education and one I expect will be even more poignant on what is the 70^th anniversary.

As such there have been a number of articles appear on twitter in recent weeks; some reflective, some thought provoking, but all inspiring discussion. This week however, two have particularly caught my eye for the questions they raise and the differing attitudes of their authors.

The first was titled ‘70th anniversary of Auschwitz liberation: 'Why I had to visit this monstrous memorial' and was written by Simmy Richman who had long been critical of what the article describes as the ‘macabre tourism’  that now surrounds the sites that were once the locations of such horrific acts (1).

He writes:
‘…. the idea of ever returning to any of the scenes of the Nazis' crimes never particularly appealed. The very thought of visiting the concentration camps themselves felt positively macabre. I have known many Jewish people who have done this as a rite of passage. But, I reasoned, there are also those who jump at the chance to visit any site of historic evil – Ground Zero, the killing fields of war, the trails of serial killers and so on. Why didn't they just tear Auschwitz down after the war, I would ask whenever the subject came up. Who needs to see such monstrousness in person, and why?’

'Arbeit Macht Frei'
Authors own Photo

These are all perfectly reasoned and justified views which I am sure are held by many and not just Richman, himself of Jewish ancestry. But what I found interesting was that following a discussion with a relative who is a “survivor”, actively involved with the Holocaust Education Trust and believes that “everybody should” visit; Richman made the journey to Auschwitz-Birkenau . His article is therefore very much a reflection of the personal journey he went on and of his responses throughout that experience. His expectation’s that there would be things you’d instinctively detest were met and there were clear political undercurrents at play, but Richman concludes, somewhat surprisingly,  by saying that his ‘eyes have been opened and that ‘[he], too… now believe[s] that everybody should visit these miserable memorials…’.

I then came across a second article that’s title drew me in immediately- ‘Why every child must visit Auschwitz’, which was published on Holocaust Memorial Day 2014 (2). Having just read an article where an adult had struggled to reconcile with whether visiting a concentration camp was the right and appropriate thing to do, with some very convincing and poignant remarks, I was somewhat conflicted by the ideas this second author was putting across. Yet, incidentally they are views I happen to share.

Writer of the second article, Tom Walters, made the visit to Auschwitz and offers a personal yet insightful reflection on his trip, putting forward the opinion that schools and colleges should run trips to Auschwitz-Birkenau and that ‘with history’s lesson firmly in mind, it should be a compulsory trip. Young people need these lessons from history to help shape perspective [and] to learn lessons that cannot be taught in the classroom’.  And, I agree strongly with what Walters writes here, having myself been one of a group of students to go on such a trip organised by my school. Having opted to take GCSE history, we were offered the chance to visit Krakow and to go to Auschwitz-Birkenau back in 2007, and it was a hugely eye-opening trip for me and an experience I still remember vividly to this day.

At the time we were asked to write a short piece about why it was we’d like to be considered to go as there were a limited number of places, and looking back at what I wrote, it’s very much in keeping with the ideas Walters encourages, if perhaps a little naïve and idealistic.

‘…by going I hope that I will not only learn, but to be able to come back and tells others about the experience and do everything in my power to ensure that it never happens again. I think the way of being able to do this, is to witness and visit the place where it happened.’

I certainly learnt a lot on that trip and at the time, I did come back and speak about my experiences, something that I still do today. It made what is written in books and spoken about become real - it seems so intangible that the crimes committed actually happened, that I think to see the place where it happened, is oddly, the only way to believe it. And so if those sites had been torn down as Richman once believed they should have been, you lose part of what makes it a reality for those who did not experience those events at the time. Being told about it is one thing, but to see it is another.

It is Walters’ second paragraph that really captured exactly how I remember the experience, he writes:

‘Predictably, a visit to Auschwitz was harder than you could have ever imagined, something which just cannot be forgotten. The experience wraps itself around you, changing forever your perspective of the world and the people that reside in it. Emotions are robbed from you leaving you numb, unable to comprehend the magnitude of the systematic terror brought upon so many people. Ten minutes, fifteen minutes, an hour passes but still nothing. You're almost thankful for the numbness it brings for if emotion was to get the better of you, the suffocating pressure of history would leave you unable to breath’.

I’ve never felt as cold or as numb as when we stood as a group, lit candles of remembrance and said a prayer on the site. Even now thinking about it I get shivers down my spine and can still see the exact scene before my eyes. It’s a memory I will never forget and an experience that has changed my perspective of the world.

"I still live and will live on/ and will never more keep silent about/ I have seen Auschwitz."
I Have Seen Auschwitz by Fritz Deppert

I was 15 at the time and perhaps not what you’d strictly call a child, but I do think it’s an appropriate age to make such a trip and to have that experience. By the time you’re an adult, as Richman discovered, you’ve had chance to really formulate opinions and almost become cynical about it – I don’t mean that disrespectfully, but you do get stuck on the fact that a tourism has formed around these sites, gift shops and cafes can be found there and visitor experience is taken into consideration. While political motives are also strongly at play, each invested party trying to impart  its own historical narrative. In many ways you have to try and detach all that from the history and from peoples experiences; I suppose treat it like any other historical source. You have to analyse and critique what you see – but there is something about the sense of place that is evoked by standing there that pushes that all to be a latter consideration. It’s so inconsequential in that moment.

Authors own Photo

Just to stand there and to experience it is something else. It’s not enjoyable by any stretch of the imagination. It’s tough, it’s emotional, it’s infuriating, it’s overwhelming but I am so glad I was given the opportunity to go as young person. Both articles conclude the same way by saying that “everybody should go” and I agree. Furthermore, with a more mature head on my shoulders now, it is something that sometime in the future I’d hope to do again, for there is more to learn than any 15 year old can comprehend, but it is a very good place to start.

(1)    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/70th-anniversary-of-auschwitz-liberation-why-i-had-to-visit-this-monstrous-memorial-9963741.html

(2)    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/tom-walters/auschwitz-holocaust-memorial_b_4668992.html

The Monuments Men: A New Angle on a Familiar Topic

It’s been a while hasn’t it? What with the festive season and the fact I’ve been busy working on my PhD application, blogging has fallen a little by the wayside…. But enough of those excuses, let’s try and get back into the swing of things shall we…

I saw a link to an article this week entitled “20 things only history students understand” (1) and read it with some amusement - a number prompting a smile or even a ‘lol’ moment and the only obvious omission being: ‘when pub quizzing everyone always expects you to get the history questions correct… do you not know the breadth of what the subject “history” covers”!!!! That said and all jokes aside, the second statement really stuck with me, because its true isn’t it? To quote the article, “you’ve had enough of learning about the Nazis – yes you understand their significance and accept why they can be fascinating, but you’ve had it drilled into your throughout your whole education – give it a rest!” I mean no disrespect at all in repeating that article; I personally find it one of the most fascinating periods of history and have chosen to continue studying it in higher education for that reason. In fact, I chose my University based on the expertise of staff who specialised in the Second World War and Holocaust Studies (I know, how I got onto the Victorians and animal history is a blog for another time)… but it did become quite oppressive.

It is all I remember about secondary school history and the majority of A Level history too. There may be a little bit about Motte and Bailey castles, the abolition movement and history of medicine mixed in there, but predominately I have good recall on events in Europe during the Second World War. It’s a shame in a way, because it becomes so drilled into students that I do think it loses that originality which makes it an interesting topic to learn about and engage with. If you’re told the same things over and over again there comes a point where you’re not open to the new and more interesting narratives that might be being offered to you.

It’s become clearer to me recently that there is actually a lot more to the events of this period than we are ever told at school or indeed that are so far missing from the mainstream that very few people actually know about them. Of course topics and events like the Weimar Republic, Rise of Hitler, the Anschluss, and Holocaust take precedence when examining European events, while at home the Blitz, rationing and evacuation dominate the narrative. But the Second World War was all encompassing and as such resonated within so many different areas of society; a fact I think is all too easily often forgotten and one that certainly isn’t shown to students. I know they are taught what is on the curriculum in order for them to complete coursework and pass exams, but I just wonder what the effect would be if an alternative approach was taken (I think I shall do some investigation into the curriculum changes for a future blog and follow up on this point).

One of my favourite projects conducted as part of the MA was the research paper I wrote on a fascinating set of sources I found by chance at Surrey History Centre. These were the diaries of Philip Bradley, a fairground enthusiast, which were filled with notes and newspaper clippings that gave invaluable insight into the affect the war had on fairgrounds and their professionals. I was fascinated to read how rationing impacted what prizes were offered and how steam engines were commandeered for the war effort, in particular demolition work. At a high level we are taught the basic concepts; the policies, reasoning and impact, but very rarely are we shown the impact at a grass roots level and this project on fairgrounds showed me that. It took one group of professionals and highlighted their plight and huge contribution to this life changing conflict - it really brought it home for me.

And this brings me nicely on to what prompted this blog in the first place – the 2014 film The Monuments Men, directed by George Clooney. I’d heard about the film and was intrigued by the plot but until I received it for Christmas I hadn’t got around to watching it. So last night I got cosy with a cup of tea and some chocolate (so much for the January diet I hear you cry) to see what it was about. I’ll be honest, it was a slow burner but it did raise some very thought provoking statements, well obviously if it prompted this blog.

The Monuments Men, 2014.

The film is based on the true story of The Monuments Men, a group of men and women from thirteen nations, who volunteered for service in the MFAA – Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives Section – in order to save as much of European Culture as they could from being destroyed, both accidently and deliberately, during the war. Amongst them there were museum directors, curators, art scholars, artists and architects all of whom entered professions which would see them dedicated their life to culture, whether creating it, restoring it or critiquing it. So when war broke out it almost seems natural that they would step forward to protect it from ultimate destruction. I therefore ask, why has it remained one of those aspects of war very few people know about?

In this opening speech Clooney as lead character Frank Stokes, presents his argument for the taskforce to the President, stating that “we are at a point in this war that is the most dangerous to the greatest historical achievements known to man” and that “while we must and will win this war, we should also remember the high price that will be paid if the very foundation of modern society is destroyed…”. Stokes and team then go on to salvage stolen works of art from houses and mines, and if it can be taken as a true reflection of what was identified and found, then it was an astounding amount. As the film develops you realised that in Stokes' mind, art, culture and history are the basis of identity and if that is lost, then it is as if those people, societies and generations never existed. This was a fight for identity.

The narrative is actually very poignant and emotionally charged, especially when you consider that many people posed the question, “is art worth a life?” when they heard of this work. But when you understand the motives of those involved and why they were willing to risk their lives, than the answer to that question becomes clear.

I was left asking myself a great many questions. Would we, in modern society, react in the same way? Would there be people who put their lives on the line to protect and secure art from destruction and return it to the many? Is our cultural identity as tied to these traditional and priceless works of art as it once was, or has time moved on? And, would we still look to preserve the classics, or would we just be looking to preserve modern art, the likes of Warhol and Hirst?

Authors own Photo

It is hard to envisage the reckless destruction that occurred during that time, but it highlights another side to the war – the assault on cultural identity and questions of ownership. I can’t imagine not having seen first-hand the Mona Lisa or Venus De Milo in Paris - just imagine what it would be like to only know of these artworks and not be able to experience them first hand. It was a great thing those of the MFAA did and I am glad that this film has highlighted their work. I just think it is so important we try and find ways of communicating these aspects of the war to students and not just the more conventional narrative, it could be hugely successful way of reinvigorating interesting and putting a stop to those “give it a rest!” comments. I for one will be looking into this in a little more depth!

For another perspective on the film I found a great blog piece here - http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/monuments-men-wonders-art-worth-life

(1)    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/18/20-things-only-history-students-understand_n_4986523.html