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