Abstracts Day Three: Wednesday 21th march
10:30 – 12:30 Panel: Testimony in situ and Context
Dr. Kinga Frojimovics, Yad Vashem, Israel, “Luckily I made it to the building
of the Embassy at Vadász Street” Testimonies given during the Holocaust in
Budapest
There are 34 testimonies in the Yad Vashem Archives (O.15H/181) which had been
collected before liberation—between the end of November 1944 and January 16, 1945—in
the so-called Glass House in Budapest (29 Vadász Street). The official name of the Glass
House after 24 July 1944 was the Swiss Embassy’s Office for the protection of Foreign
Interests, Emigration Division. In reality, various Zionist organizations worked in the building,
and thousands of Jews found refuge there from the summer of 1944 until the liberation of
Budapest in February 1945. The Glass House also had a crucial role in the Halutz rescue
operations as well as it served as one of the centers of the Halutz movements.
The Zionists who managed the Glass House found it imperative even then (during
the siege of Budapest by the Red Army) to collect testimonies from the Jews who made their
way there from the ghetto of Pest, forced labor, or from groups taken by Arrow Cross men
to the Danube side to be executed. Several of the testimonies were given by Jews, who
swam ashore from the freezing water of the Danube and arrived in the Glass House despite
their bullet wounds.
The 34 testimonies are the results of the first Jewish testimony collection project
concerning the Holocaust in Hungary! This collection raises a number of very interesting
questions. We cannot define these testimonies as survivor testimonies, since it is not sure
that either the testifiers or the interviewers lived to see the liberation, yet in many ways the
testimonies are similar to the ones taken later by the DEGOB (the National Relief Committee
for Deportees in Hungary). To what extent this earliest testimony collection project is the
forerunner of the first post-Holocaust large-scale Jewish testimony collection project, the
DEGOB (1945-1946) and in what way the structure and topics of the earliest testimonies
determine the ones taken by the DEGOB? What kind of voice emerges from the earliest
testimonies taken still amidst constant and immediate danger? In my paper by analyzing the
34 testimonies together with the immediate context of their rendering, I will explore the
answers to these questions
Dr. Eliyana R. Adler, University of Maryland, USA, On the Banks of the Bug:
Exploring the Borders of Holocaust Testimony
In the fall of 1939 as many as half a million Polish Jews crossed the newly
established border at the Bug River; opting to leave the area of Nazi occupation for the parts
of Poland recently conquered by the Soviets. In crossing that arbitrary physical border, these
1
soon-to-be refugees not only changed their fate, but also their status. Unlike their relatives
who stayed behind, most of these Jews would survive the war. However, in doing so they
would forfeit their standing as survivors. This paper will explore the borders of Holocaust
testimony by examining the sense of identity and rhetorical self-definition of these border
crossers.
Whereas reparations organizations, as well as many survivor groups, have chosen to
apply strict criteria in defining the status of the Holocaust survivor, most of the institutions
involved in taking testimonies have accepted a broader definition, or sought to avoid the
question entirely. The result is that major testimony collections, including those at the
United States Holocaust Museum, Yad Vashem, and the USC Shoah Foundation, include
numerous recollections from people who, despite having undergone terrible trials, are
ambivalent about their own inclusion in the canon of survivor testimony.
As part of my ongoing research about the experiences of Polish Jewish refugees in
the Soviet Union during the Second World War, I have listened to dozens of oral testimonies.
Many, although not all, directly address issues of identity and their relationship to the
Holocaust. This is particularly true for those conducted by the Shoah Foundation, where the
final questions often offer an opportunity for self-reflection. For that reason I will focus on
those testimonies for this paper.
After opening with a brief introduction to the deportation, internment and forced
labor, unexpected amnesty, and subsequent battles with starvation, disease and Soviet
bureaucracy of the subjects, I will turn to the question of how these people view themselves
vis-à-vis the Holocaust. While some proudly claim the status of Holocaust survivor, others
are unsure or avoid self-definition. This exploration of individual stories will lead to a
broader discussion of the borders of Holocaust testimony. Indeed, these literal border
crossers provide an ideal opportunity for probing the politics of memorial culture both in
and outside the academy
Dr. Lisa Costello, Georgia Southern University, USA, Local Testimonies:
How Regional Holocaust Museums in the United States Impact the Future of
Holocaust Memory
In Preempting the Holocaust, Lawrence Langer argues that,“Only by multiplying
voices can we begin to present the moral complexity of the Holocaust experience to
individuals accustomed to basing their conduct on stable value systems” (190). For Langer
this means that audiences must encounter as many testimonies about the Holocaust as
possible, both visual and textual. Holocaust museums provide narratives and testimonies
that are a combination of the visual, textual, and spatial; thus, their role in education about
the Holocaust is of particular import. Audiences react physically and emotionally in museum
spaces, and this interaction can be a powerful way to bear witness. There is much scholarly
discussion about national Holocaust museums such as Yad Vashem and The United States
Holocaust Memorial Museum and the impact of their transmission of Holocaust history and
memory (Bartov 1997, Feldman 2007, Ofer 2010, Patraka 2001, Stier 2005, Stauber 2000,
Young 1993, 1995). The mission of such museums is to bear witness and to educate in order
to transform ignorance and the suffering it causes.
2
In the United States, however, there is also a proliferation of regional Holocaust
museums, which have similar missions. Like national museums, regional Holocaust museums
are repositories for oral histories, artifacts, and archives, but they also can be spaces that
reflect a special relationship between history and memory for particular communities.
Because regional Holocaust museums often represent the narratives and experiences of the
local community, this paper suggests that regional Holocaust museums in the United States
represent a unique form of future testimony that requires further examination. Regional
Holocaust museums reflect local, collective testimony that multiplies Holocaust voices as it
also reveals how that region engages with Holocaust memory in the present. Looking more
closely at this interaction may give important clues about how each region might shape
Holocaust memory in the future.
As this is a new avenue of inquiry, this paper will begin by examining only one
museum in depth: The St. Louis Holocaust Museum and Learning Center (a department of
the Jewish federation). I will show how the museum’s mission, design, and content not only
bear witness to the Holocaust and its victims in order to educate, but also how these
elements represent testimony about the impact of Holocaust memory on one specific region
in the United States. I will also examine the websites of two other museums, The Holocaust
Museum Houston and the Illinois Holocaust Museum and Education Center, to begin to build
what will become a larger, comparative study. The study of regional museums in America
will contribute knowledge about the distinct impact these communities have on Holocaust
memory and memorialization for the future.
14:00 – 16:00 Panel: Testimony and the Next Generations
Dr. Nancy Isserman & Ms. Juliet I. Spitzer, Council for Relationships
Philadelphia, USA Stories That Reveal “Characteristics of Survival”
The stories of Holocaust survivors discussed the experiences of real life and death
circumstances that had devastating consequences to them and their families. These stories
reflect both positive and negative views of the world. Many survivor interviews contained
stories that revealed that the survivors as a result of their past experiences viewed the world
as threatening. They saw Holocaust like conditions in the world today. The stories showed
how they were constantly vigilant and prepared for the next Holocaust; how they expressed
concern about the Holocaust deniers and those who have forgotten what happened; and
how they saw a prevalence of antisemitism and the pervasiveness of enemies of Jews in the
world. In addition, their stories were also about acts of revenge toward the perpetrators of
the genocide against them. For these survivors, the Holocaust experience negatively
affected their beliefs and values. For other survivors, their stories revealed a positive view
of the world. There was no mention of vigilance, concern about Holocaust deniers, the
numerous enemies of the Jews, or the worry about a reoccurrence of the Holocaust. Their
stories not only were not about revenge but were about helping non-Jews as well as Jews to
live a better life.
For those survivors whose view of the world was as a threatening place they also
told stories about their prewar family relationships that disclosed the existence of troubled
relationships between the survivors and their parents. The effect of these relationships
along with their negative view of the world continued to influence the survivors postwar.
3
Their postwar stories revealed that their values were characterized by a rejection of and
prejudice against people from other ethnic, national, racial and religious groups.
In
contrast, the survivors who view the world in non-threatening terms told stories that
revealed the existence of positive relationships in their prewar families. These survivor
interviews contained stories about values of acceptance and openness towards others, even
towards the perpetrators of the crimes against them and their families.
What happens in the second and third generations postwar? Children of survivors in
their interviews told stories about the impact of growing up with survivor parents. Did they
follow the same pattern as their parents? If the narratives about relationships in the
children’s interviews reflected a view of the world as threatening and full of antisemitism
and contained descriptions of poor relationships between them and their parents do their
values also show a rejection of and prejudice against people from other ethnic, national,
racial and religious groups? If the narratives about relationships in the children’s interviews
reflected a non-threatening view of the world and contained descriptions of healthy
relationships between them and their parents what is their attitude towards other ethnic,
national, racial and religious groups? What happens with the grandchildren of the survivors
who are two generations removed from the experience of the Holocaust? Do they follow a
similar pattern as their parents and/or grandparents? Looking at the stories that the
children and grandchildren tell about their childhood experiences and relationships with the
survivors helps to explain the impact of the Holocaust on world views and family
relationships and thus on the transmission of values in three generations of survivor
families.
Mr. David Szél, University of Pécs, Hungary Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity:
Survivors and 3rd Generation
The aim of my presentation is to show the connection between the first generation
Holocaust survivals’ narratives and oral testimonies and the identity of third generation
Jewish youngsters’ and young adults’ and their Jewish identity strategies.
While the Hungarian literature supports the connection between narratives about
Holocaust and Jewry, my hypothesis which I want to prove is that there are surely stories of
the grandparents about Holocaust which have a huge affect on the grandchild’s attitude
toward his or hers Jewish identity. But I propose that not only the stories themselves
determine these attitudes, but – as the narrated world is doted with gaps – the narrative
holes, the untold, the historical interruptions. To go further I suggest that the pronounced
testimonies have less, while the hidden, unvoiced words and feelings or implicit emotions
have more impact on the attitudes. Moreover the stories told by the first generation to the
descendants or through the second to the third generation survivors don’t even have to
have any connection with the Jewry, Jewish identity or the traumas of the Holocaust.
Indeed, they can be completely independent from descent, religion, relations or whatever
Jewry means to the interviewed target group.
If my hypothesis can be proved that would mean that the third Jewish generation
after the Holocaust has to build up their identity from mosaics of stereotypes, from mosaics
of memories. This indicates that the testimonies are not one by one interiorizable, but the
target group has to find out the way from the labyrinth of narrative holes for themselves.
They have to find their memories’ individual observation points to the testimonies of the
4
grandparents. At this point, identity and memory are connected, since “life [and identity as
well] is nothing else but narrative accomplishment”. My point is in conclusion that this part
of life – the Jewish identity – is closely connected to oral Holocaust testimonies told by the
grandparents, which are in point of the above elucidated independent from the Holocaust
itself.
Ms. Susan Legere, Boston College, USA, Narratives of Injustice: Measuring
the Impact of Witness Testimony in the Classroom
Can a vivid presentation about a tragic chapter of American history elicit in viewers
an empathetic reaction, as well as evidence of the telescopic perspective Mills1 ([1959]
2000) described as the “sociological imagination”? Does the addition of victims’ voices to
the lesson make a noticeable difference in their response to the featured historical event, as
well contemporary controversies?
Some scholars propose that oral histories, especially “witness testimonies,” have the
potential to reach audiences more deeply than facts alone. “Narratives,” as K. Slobin
observed, “unfold with flesh and blood…encouraging empathy, identification and a
humanization of content.” (in Bochner and Ellis, 1992:171)2 But in spite of the existence of
high-profile, well funded archives of witness accounts, little systematic research has
examined how or to what extent personal testimony may encourage empathetic
understanding and a broader, more nuanced understanding of social problems. In an era
where entertainment content skews ever more toward un-real “reality” programming and
technology dependence supersedes face-to-face interactions, the challenge to pierce
cultural white noise is great. Educators, then, must figure out ways to counteract the
desensitization, apathy and cynicism that follow these trends—but in ways that are proven,
effective and lasting.
My research seeks to find out if victim narratives can help educators connect
intellectually and emotionally with learners about matters of social justice. Thirteen
undergraduate classes were exposed to three variations of a fact-based, multimedia
presentation about the internment of Japanese in America during WWII. Each presentation
includes the same photographs, government newsreel, and facts about internment.
Presentations varied, however, in their use of survivor testimony and in the manner of its
incorporation (video versus written accounts). Of the 214 students who completed surveys,
a subset of 21 participated in extensive interviews. The analysis of quantitative and
qualitative data will examine information recall, sociological perspective, emotional
response, empathetic identification and predictions of future behavior.
The experiment will generate much-needed empirical data on the efficacy of
survivor testimony and its ability to shape attitudes, broaden world view, and possibly
influence behavior. Data that reflects a positive outcome will be supplemented with a
discussion as to how and why the material worked; presentation formats showing lesser
1
Mills, C. Wright and Gitlin, Todd. 2000. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford.
Bochner, Arthur P. and Caroyln Ellis. 1992 “Personal Narrative as a Social Approach to Interpersonal Communication.”
Communication Theory 2(2)165-172.
2
5
impact on outcomes will be accompanied by a similar analysis. Findings will assist educators
in anticipating outcomes associated with various heuristic strategies, especially the use of
witness testimonies.
Ms. Megan Lewis, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, USA Leafing
out the Family Tree: Genealogists’ Use of Holocaust Testimony
Genealogy has moved beyond the mere collection of names and dates. Family
historians now build fuller pictures of their ancestors’ lives - occupations, participation in
their communities, religious lives and - in the case of Holocaust survivors and victims - exact
paths of persecution.
Furthermore, many genealogists view their role as crucial to
preserving family memories for future generations (Yakel 2004)3.
Most genealogy how-to guides list a researcher’s first step as ‘interview your
relatives’. Jewish genealogists with families affected by the Holocaust however, often do
not have many relatives to interview personally, and therefore turn to the testimonies of
others. This paper will look at genealogists’ use of Holocaust survivor testimonies to
reconstruct their ancestors’ lives before and during the Holocaust. This study will examine
the frequency with which genealogists use testimonies, how they choose those they utilize,
what information they extract, barriers and obstacles they face in working with survivors’
testimonies and the way they incorporate information into their research. It will also
illuminate the differences between genealogists’ and historians’ utilization of survivors’
testimonies. In addition, this paper seeks to elucidate ways that family historians add to the
body of knowledge about the Holocaust and the benefits academic researchers gain from
their efforts. Genealogists as a group are underrepresented in the literature. By looking at
works produced by family historians such as published family histories and websites, as well
as interviews with genealogists, I plan to demonstrate the value of testimonies for family
historians as well as to introduce institutions that hold testimonies to an under-recognized
audience.
3
Elizabeth Yakel, "Seeking Information, Seeking Connections, Seeking Meaning: Genealogists and Family Historians,"
Information Research 10, no. 1 (October 2004), available at http://informationr.net/ir/ 10-l/paper205.html, accessed September 2,
2011.
6