- Tapa dura: 352 páginas
- Editor: Ohio University Press (31 de agosto de 2003)
- Colección: Polish and Polish American Studies
- Idioma: Inglés
- ISBN-10: 0821415069
- ISBN-13: 978-0821415061
- Valoración media de los clientes: Sé el primero en opinar sobre este producto
Compara Precios en Amazon
Auschwitz, Poland, and the Politics of Commemoration, 1945-1979 (Polish and Polish American Studies) (Inglés) Tapa dura – 31 ago 2003
Descripción del producto
"Auschwitz, Poland, and the Politics of Commemoration is ... a fascinating and engaging study that makes an important contribution to our understanding of the controversy over memory at Auschwitz and is a highly welcome addition to the growing body of literature on twentieth-century Polish-Jewish relations." - Slavic Review "Jonathan Huener has written a magnificent book that will become mandatory reading for everyone interested in the Holocaust, Polish History, Jewish History, or the study of collective memory and commemoration.... This book is full of provocative insights and fascinating analysis, and is certain to generate a great deal of debate and discussion." - Brian Porter, author of When Nationalism Began to Hate
Reseña del editor
Few places in the world carry as heavy a burden of history as Auschwitz. Recognized and remembered as the most prominent site of Nazi crimes, Auschwitz has had tremendous symbolic weight in the postwar world. Auschwitz, Poland, and the Politics of Commemoration is a history of the Auschwitz memorial site in the years of the Polish People's Republic. Since 1945, Auschwitz has functioned as a memorial and museum. Its monuments, exhibitions, and public spaces have attracted politicians, pilgrims, and countless participants in public demonstrations and commemorative events. Jonathan Huener's study begins with the liberation of the camp and traces the history of the State Museum at Auschwitz from its origins immediately after the war until the 1980s, analyzing the landscape, exhibitions, and public events at the site. Based on extensive research and illustrated with archival photographs, Auschwitz, Poland, and the Politics of Commemoration accounts for the development and durability of a Polish commemorative idiom at Auschwitz. Emphasis on Polish national "martyrdom" at Auschwitz, neglect of the Shoah as the most prominent element of the camp's history, political instrumentalization of the grounds and exhibitions-these were some of the more controversial aspects of the camp's postwar landscape. Professor Huener locates these and other public manifestations of memory at Auschwitz in the broad scope of Polish history, in the specific context of postwar Polish politics and culture, and against the background of Polish-Jewish relations. Auschwitz, Poland, and the Politics of Commemoration will be of interest to scholars, students, and general readers of the history of modern Poland and the Holocaust.Ver Descripción del producto
No es necesario ningún dispositivo Kindle. Descárgate una de las apps de Kindle gratuitas para comenzar a leer libros Kindle en tu smartphone, tablet u ordenador.
Obtén la app gratuita:
Detalles del producto
Si eres el vendedor de este producto, ¿te gustaría sugerir ciertos cambios a través del servicio de atención al vendedor?
Opiniones de clientes
|5 estrellas (0%)|
|4 estrellas (0%)|
|3 estrellas (0%)|
|2 estrellas (0%)|
|1 estrella (0%)|
Opiniones de clientes más útiles en Amazon.com
There is also the meme that there was no Polish Quisling because the Germans did not want one. They most certainly did. [See comments.]
“HIDING JEWISH DEATHS” AND THE “4-MILLION AUSCHWITZ DEAD” FIGURE
The long-quoted almost-threefold-inflated 4 million-victim figure was said to be a deliberate postwar invention, designed for the “polonization”, “dejudaization”, or “internationalization” of Auschwitz. In contrast, Jonathan Huener points out that accusations of manipulated figures, for Auschwitz deaths, have no basis in fact. (p. 44). In fact, Huener shows that the 4 million figure was developed by Soviet investigators shortly after the “liberation” of Poland. Moreover, it was held not only by Poles but also by Jews.
Much more can be said about this. There is an extensive body of evidence, not mentioned by Huener, which soundly refutes any insinuation that the Polish authorities had EVER tried to conceal Jewish deaths or just disguise them as Polish deaths. [See comments].
“HIDING JEWISH DEATHS”: THE BOGUS ISSUE AND THE REAL ISSUE
Author Jonathan Huener lays out the situation at hand, “Neither the State Museum nor the Polish government ever explicitly denied that the vast majority of victims at Auschwitz were Jews. But this fact was not emphasized; nor did it designate Auschwitz in any distinctive way. Simply put, Jews were usually included among the so-called ‘martyrs’ of Auschwitz and regarded as citizens of Poland, the Netherlands, France, Hungary, Greece, or any of the many other countries under Nazi occupation. One has to grant that the destruction of Europe’s Jews was not yet, in the first postwar years, the DISTINCT CATEGORY OF HISTORICAL ANALYSIS or broad, public commemoration that it is today. But the fact remains that for decades Polish postwar culture did not treat the Shoah as the salient characteristic of Auschwitz, but relegated it instead to the status of yet another example of German barbarism. Jews were to be remembered for their suffering and death, but they were neither represented as the overwhelming majority of victims at the site nor given PROPER EMPHASIS in the larger memorialization undertaken there.” (p. 29; Emphasis added to loaded phrases).
So the “Poles tried to hide Jewish deaths” and the “Poles ignored Jewish deaths” accusations are clearly bogus. The real issue, all along, had been quite something else: Poland not obediently falling in line behind the Jews-are-special mentality that manifests itself as Holocaust supremacy. In addition, Poles—how terrible of them—had failed to do their duty of just tamely accepting Jewish ways of thinking that reject Auschwitz as a place of martyrdom.
“HIDING JEWISH DEATHS”: FOCUSING ON THE REAL ISSUE BEHIND AUSCHWITZ-RELATED ACCUSATIONS AGAINST POLAND
It all comes down to this unvarnished truth, “Although the mass extermination of Jews was not denied in the public presentation of Auschwitz in the early postwar years, Jewish genocide was seldom upheld as a UNIQUE PHENOMENON.” (p. 53. Emphasis added.)
And why should it be? Contrary to the party line, the Holocaust was not unique. [See comments.]
Just because Jews, as a group, suffered more than Poles, as a group, is no valid reason for demanding special attention, at Auschwitz and elsewhere. Quadriplegics suffer more from paralysis than paraplegics, but no one suggests that quadriplegics are thereby entitled to special privileges, least of all from paraplegics.
Finally, if there is to be a meritocracy of genocides at all, who decides what the criterion for the meritocracy will be? For example, consider the fact, brought out by Huener (p. 19), that Soviet POWs are unique, as Auschwitz inmates, in having not a single known survivor. So, if any Auschwitz victim-group is entitled to special recognition and special rights, it would be the Ukrainians and Byelorussians, and not the Jews, who did have survivors.
The point is clear: Any so-designated special genocide is arbitrary.
WHAT ABOUT ALL THE POLES MURDERED BY THE NAZIS?
Author Huener exhibits ambivalence about Polish deaths at the hands of the Germans. On one hand, he recognizes the fact that the Poles were likely to share the fate of the Jews, had Nazi Germany won the war (pp. 53-55). At the same time, he tries to minimize the fact of 3 million Polish dead. (p. 44). He is clearly incorrect. [See comments].
POLES AND JEWS DIVIDED OVER AUSCHWITZ: THE ONLY LASTING REMEDY
There have been dozens of genocides in recent history, consuming the lives of over 100 million people in the 20th century alone. [See, and read my review, of DEATH BY GOVERNMENT, by Rummel]. Surely it is as racist to think that a Poles' genocide is unworthy of the same solicitousness as a Jews' genocide, as it is to think that a black man is unworthy of the same civil rights as a white man. Could Holocaust Supremacism be formally condemned for what it is--a form of racism--under international law?
This would be broad-based. It would encompass anyone saying or implying that his or her peoples' genocide is: 1) A unique wrong (e. g, “the greatest crime in history”); 2) Qualitatively different from all other genocides; 3) At the pinnacle of some imagined hierarchy of genocides; 4) Of greater historical significance or moral gravity than any other genocide; or 5) In any way worthy of more attention than any other genocide.
Genocide-Recognition Equality now!