Framing Wartime Sexual Violence in Hungary
CEU eTD Collection
F In partial fulfillment for the degree of Master of Arts in Gender Studies. Gender in Arts of Master of degree the for fulfillment partial In RAMING WARTIME SEXUA WARTIME RAMING Supervisor: Professor Elissa He Elissa Professor Supervisor: Department of Gender Studies Gender of Department Central European University European Central Budapest, Hungary Budapest, H DalmaSziller Submitted to Submitted UNGARY 2013 By
L VIOLENCE IN IN VIOLENCE L lms
CEU eTD Collection aboutgenderagainstthinking violence violence basedor discourse public the in voices Germany. Nazi with involvement Hungary‟s suppr the and WWII of politics memory false isthe thislimitedframing of consequence which nation, the of t In soldiers. Soviet which thesis This current the with combines author the that nationalism gendered and feminist violence sexual wartime of uses theories it framed, and understood is violence sexual wartime which in ways dominant in reception its and analyzes It II). War World in committed was contemporary the investigates thesis This Abstract wartime sexual violence is exclusively commemorated as a brutal crime c crime brutal a as commemorated exclusively is violence sexual wartime
stateofmemoryin of politicsWWII Hungary.
rus ht atm rp i gnrly rmd n ainls ad edrd way, gendered and nationalist a in framed generally is rape wartime that argues
his discourse women are only conceptualized as the symbols or reproducers or symbols the as conceptualized only are women discourse his
h Hunga the gendered in Hungary in
and nationalist and inmdatruhdsore analysis discourse through media rian about wartime rape, and the overall absence of critical of absence overall the and rape, wartime about Hungarian
framing is used to claim national victimhood. national claim to used is framing This research also points to the lack of feminist feminist of lack the to points also research This a novel novel a i
Denied rmn o wrie eul violence sexual wartime of framing women. women.
by Judit Kováts published in 2012 2012 in published Kováts Judit by
. In order to find out the out find to order In ommitted by the by ommitted ession of ession
(that (that The in CEU eTD Collection year. academic I comments supervisor my thank to like would I Acknowledgements m lo hnfl o m lv ad y aiy o su for family my and love my for thankful also am on inspiringformychapters and meto
,
Elissa for help for Elissa ii
always ing me ing think thingsfurther. think prig e hog ti challenging this through me pporting
wri te
this thesis, for for thesis, this
her her insightful CEU eTD Collection OnlineSources References Conclusion Discourse IV. analysis of Female III. ofWWIIaccounts and sexual violence wartime Theoretical II. frameworks I. Introduction Tableofcontents Acknowledgements Abstract Tableof contents Thecase ofHungary IV.1. General IV.1. framingof III.2. III.1. Critiques II.4. history oforal II.3. TheGerman case Previous II.2 inwartimeresearch violenceabout Hungary sexual Feminist II.1. theoriesofviolencewartime sexual I inGender I.2. Hungary Hungary inI.1. WorldII.War .3. Hungarymemory.3. andof WWII politics IV.1. 4. The current atmosphere4.The current IV.1. memoryofnationalism politics, and Political inIV.1.3. reviewsbook commitment the Silences IV.1.2. Framing IV.1.1. violencewartime sexual Denied theWomanOnein War
......
......
......
......
......
......
...... –
...... and the omissionthe and ofterms‗comingth to with
...... Denied – ......
Denied beforeandsocialism after ......
......
......
...... ‘s ......
perception - ......
or the state state or journalismofthe Hungarian ......
iii ...... – ......
degendering violencedegendering ......
......
......
...... e past‘ e
......
...... Denied ......
......
......
83 76 73 69 66 65 57 52 51 39 35 35 31 27 24 19 19 14 iii
ii 9 6 6 1 i
CEU eTD Collection and fas from liberated was Europe WWII, of version Soviet the In the silenced that interests Soviet by constructed was period this of history the and country socialist a became Hungary WWII, after that fact the to due also is interest public This Hungary. contemporary in debate and of discourse part is that issue an still is period historical this because WWII, of case the chosen in framed been has II War World during happened that violence these ways the in forarewhoresponsible andnation, the purity honor (Das nation‟s 1995). of focus the in is capacity are women discourses Yuval and these (Anthias nation the In of symbols as conceptualized forthcoming). Helms 2008, Mookherjee 1995, (Massad victimizatio group‟s ethnic or nation‟s a claim to order in goals, nationalist for is rape of experiences women‟s expropriating of form most itThepoliticalfor common purposes. isbut equallyused collectivememory, articulated and sexual historiography, in silenced a and marginalized often is is rape Wartime 1994). but act, Seifert motivated 2009, Merry 2001, sexually Goldstein 1994, (Brownmiller a control and not violence of manifestation is rape wartime that argued and women, aga violence naturalizes that 1975) Brownmiller (first war of nature gendered the to attention drawn have scholars feminist this, after and formerYugoslavia. Before the in war the to response intens history, the women throughout against violence sexual of kinds different by accompanied been have wars Although Introduction
the Red Army and the Soviet Union were portrayed as heroic liberators heroic as portrayed were Union Soviet the and Army Red the As a Hungarian feminist feminist Hungarian a As
topics are treated in Hungary in treated are topics
nationalist interest, as they are constructed as the reproducers of the of reproducers the as constructed are they as interest, nationalist fe pbi atnin o hs oi ws lyd n h 19s in 1990s the in played was topic this to attention public ified and gender studies student studies gender and atrocities n and violation through symbolic gendering of the nation the of gendering symbolic through violation and n
that Red A Red that 1 , I have chosen to analyze how wartime sexual sexual wartime how analyze to chosen have I ,
rmy soldierscommitted rmy who is interested in gender in interested is who - cism with Nazi Germany‟s defeat, Germany‟s Nazi with cism ai 18) woe reproductive whose 1989), Davis contemporary
public discourses and and discourses public in this struggle. T struggle.this in
Hungary. I have I Hungary. against civiliansagainst issues and and issues public inst inst his his . CEU eTD Collection fra been has topic this that argue I Hungary. contemporary in violence, scholars. by up taken been not has Hungary on literature existing the to contributes research my sense, this In nationalism. and WWII of politics memory dominant the how in interested am I as argument, Mark‟s use also I time same the At violence. sexual wartime of framing public rap wartime examined past” Hungarian the over conflicts “political with saturated and commitment politicalinterviewee‟s the framing personal the that found Mark 2000. 1998 and between made commemorated middleby rapes were these how on focused he but 2010), (2005, rape wartime of topic the investigated also Mark, James historian, non A looting. and rapes including civilians, Hungarian againstatrocities Soviet about accounts personal and interviews files, archival at looked he where (1998) siege Budapest‟s of Ungvá Krisztián Vienna. in cases same the with findings her contrasted and 1945 in rapes Army Red the of framing public the 2000 1999,(1998,Pető Andrea topic: this undertook also Historicalworks raped. testif also and perspective female a from topic this narrated post the in violence wartime sexual of account famous most the Hungary, In 2010). (Mark voices suppressed articulate East in trend general the into fitted soldiers Army Red the by atrocities revealing 1989, in socialism state histofficial the became
(Mark 2005:136). (Mark The overall guiding question of this thesis is how wartime sexual violence has been framed been has violence sexual wartime how isthesis this of question overallguiding The who scholar only the is she as research, Pető‟s thematically following is research My - European post European gendered nationalism
in terms of gender of terms in e in Hungary from a gendered perspective, and I am also interested in the in interested also am I and perspective, gendered a from Hungary in e
- Hungary in WWII of ory oils onre odsusarcte fte “communis the of atrocities discuss to countries socialist - socialist period was Alaine Polcz‟s memoir (1991), in which she she which in (1991), memoir Polcz‟s Alaine was period socialist
andmemory politics
framing of this of framing ry examined wartime rape in the context of the military history military the of context the in rape wartime examined ry
Theoreticall , violence ,
y it builds on feminist theories feminist on builds it y 2 politicald current with overlaps issue
and in other socialist countries socialist other in and
and history and - . class people during oral history interviewshistory duringoral he classpeople
ied to her own experiences of being of experiences own her to ied , as in the past ten years this theme this years ten past the in as, med in a nationalist and gendered and nationalist a in med of this issue is informed by informed is issue this of
of wartime sexual wartime of . After the fall of of fall the After . , 2003 , t” regime and and regime t” iscourses of of iscourses - Hungarian ) analyzed analyzed )
CEU eTD Collection novel, the in presented as politics memory the that conclusion the to me lead finding This sides. reviews the how in differences significant no were there that sense the in argument 2010) (2005, Mark‟s challenge reviews book analysisSovietsocialism.duringthestyle in dominantlater framing my argue the the that and I of the to due face to had Hungarians the that crimes of forms other the beside population, Hungarian the of victimization the prove to usedis framing nationalist its and warti that the and whichwaysin book dominant this novelthe reviews overall framed isThefinding of myresearch topic. the in violence sexual wartime of framing the examined both I analysis my in genera violence based gender of issues as me, for suspiciouswas reviews book in it to assignedwas that feedback positivevery the because andduringHungaryWWII i happened that “truth” the as to referred is but novel this memoir, media a Hungarian asthe in constructed interestingly is that story fictional a is it survivors, WWII with interviews p been attention scholarly recently, published was it that considering and Hungary, in discourse chose I addition In civilians. that analysis.discourse Hungarianthrough media published I research, this For nationalized. been has trauma this Soviets and the soldiers, by committed abuse an as framed and commemorated exclusively is Hungary in by a as women pr been not war‟shas “nature” of of product rape wartime the that means This granted. for taken been has it precise more be to or neglected, been has rape wartime and war of aspect gendered the although way, describes the widespread rapes rapes widespread the describes Besides wartime sexual violence as a central theme of this novel, I I novel, of this theme central asa violence sexual Besideswartime ayed to it. Although the author of the novel claims novel of the author Althoughthe it. to ayed me sexual violence is exclusively talked about as a crime that was committed by Soviets, by was committed that crime asa about talked isexclusively sexual violence me Hungar a nvl entitled novel ian r e ceivedasauthentic. it
talked about the book and wartime rape on different political political different on rape wartime and book the about talked eas i bogt h tpc f atm rp it te public the into rape wartime of topic the brought it because n ohr atrocities other and Denied lly do not cause public attention and interest. Thereforeinterest. and attention public cause not do lly oblematized, but normalized. In addition, wartime rape rape wartime addition, normalized.In oblematized,but This novel is a female account of WWII in Hungary in WWII of account isfemale a novel This Kvt 21) ad h nvls r novel‟s the and 2012), (Kováts 3
that she based this story on history oral on thisstory based she that that that S oviet troops troops oviet
chose Soviet soldiers‟ occupation occupation soldiers‟ Soviet chose
to analyze a analyze to
committed it for my research, my for it e eto i the in ception
recently has not has ag ainst ainst n - CEU eTD Collection how examine I end the in and silences the of discussion w how then book, the of framing general the of reviews book the of analysisdiscourse the of findings my provide I 4 chapter In past.‟ the with terms to „come to namely aim, stated author‟s its in fails novel the that argue analyzing When them. between differences and similarities the at look and rape wartime of framing different books‟ two the examining am I fiction. is Kováts‟ while memoir, memoi with thisunderstanding. problems the out point to method, asa history oral of critiques at look interviews,I history oral on reliance novel aschapter,the the w issue this how and WWII in Germany se aboutwartimethemcomplement with sexualtheories and violence, and nation, post the in WWII of politics memory the how at look I chapter the of end the At period. socialist issue women‟s about hostility general discou at look background viol sexual wartime of framing contemporary the analysisof my iswidelyandaasWWII, sharedit accepted notion, any criticizedthein reviews.was book not of in disaster biggest the as soldiers Army Red by country the of occupation the portraying namely ul ilne n Hungary. in violence xual - 99 r i itrikd ih rsn dy ainls ad liig h mrydm f the of martyrdom the claiming and nationalism day present with interlinked is era 1989 In terms of structure, the thesis has four chapters. In chapter 1, in order to contextualize contextualize to order in 1, chapter In chapters. four has thesis the structure, of terms In Chapter 3 and 4 are analytical chapters. In chapter 3 I contrast contrast I 3 chapter In chapters. analytical are 4 and 3 Chapter gender and feminist at look I thesis. this for theoretical background the 2provides Chapter r as both are first person accounts of WWII and wartime rape, although Polcz‟s is a a is Polcz‟s although rape, wartime and WWII of accounts person first are both as r
how of Hungary during Hungary of rses on women on rses gender andgender Denied wartime sexualwartime violenceinto fit this work. memory Then I examine the similarities of wartime rape in Hungary and and Hungary in rape wartime of similarities the examine I Then
during and after socialism in order to show the reasons for the for reasons the show to order in socialism after and during is perceived asin Hungarianauthenticme the is perceived World War II and its involvement with Nazi Germany. Then I Then Germany. Nazi with involvement its and II War World
s and the absence of feminist political agendas in the post the in agendas political feminist of absence the and s as
treated treated artime sexual violence is talked about, followed by a by followed about, talkedis violence artimesexual 4
and commemorated and Denied ence, first, I give a brief historical historical brief a give I first, ence, ‟s memory politics fits into the into fits politics memory ‟s previous Denied publicly. publicly.
research dia mostly due to itsdiadue mostly to with Alaine Polcz‟s Polcz‟s Alaine with
Denied In the end of of end the In Denied on . I look at at look I .
wartime , I also also I , -
CEU eTD Collection politicsmemoryrape, and nationalism to chose review book I the analyze why reason the is this topic, this of understanding the for representative as itself novel the 2013.As in framed topic thisis how on focus a with Hungary issuessilenced or to according was book the which along themes main the are What reviews? book the and novel the in understood and framed violence sexual to according conceptualized of sense general a get to rather but texts, selected within contradictions or book this about talked reviews book particular how only not was in interested was I What reviews. these of omissions and topics silenced the to attentions paid also I themes, recurr the besides (1998), Tonkiss Following 4. chapter in discussed Kováts, Judit author, its novel with made interviews examined also I 2013. 4 April to 2012 August from reviews book covered the intern the searched also used ( I reviews, Denied about reviews book the all at looked have I analysis, this For rape, nationalism. and wartimeviolence gender, WWII, about sense broader the in and it, about produced are knowledge and general uncriticgenerally these that argue I conclusion, a As WWII. of politics memory mainstream https://www.facebook.com/megtagadva?ref=br_tf ad odce m aayi floig oks‟ 19) guidel (1998) Tonkiss‟ following analysis my conducted and , I Overall my research iscontinuationaprevious of r research Overall my
chose r e ception of the book the of ception Denied
discourse analysis as a main method for my topic, because I was interested in the in interested was I because topic, my for method main a as analysis discourse al of the topics werevisiblythat omitted?
in the Hungarian media? Did the the Did media? Hungarian the in s about it, about s t o h oe ta wr nt nldd ee h dt htI analyzed I that data The here. included not were that ones the for et novel Denied Denied
and its framingits and ofWWIIwartimeboth and sexual of violence . My guiding questions for the analysis were: how is wartime is how were: analysis the for questions guiding My . in order order in
akd bu? ht r te an sus ht ee raised were that issues main the are What about? talked in the Hungarian media, and what kind of social mean social of kind what and media, Hungarian the in in contemporaryin Hungary. to show the general perception of issues of wartime wartime of issues of perception general the show to s aeok ae s base a as page Facebook ‟s 5
) as most of the reviews are linked here, and here, linked are reviewsthe of most as ) reviews find this book valuable book this find reviews esearch aboutwartime sexual in esearch violence
how selected themes are perceived and and perceived are themes selected how
ns Fr findi For ines. Denied book cannot be seen inseen be cannot g h book the ng reviews are are reviews ? Are there there Are ings .
ing CEU eTD Collection Treaty the to due ―motherland‖ the from detached were who thosefavors and fits conditions which Hungarian, has whoHungarians thoseethnic to citizenshipgranted rights it Hungary‖as 1 id and wing politicalparties right and nationalist for ideology irredentist and victimhood national for base a form that issues still are WWI withdrawn after were “historicalitsborders”Hungary” that and “Greater of notion 2006). 1998, al. et (Benkes infrastructures and materials raw of sources main its of loss the to according damage, economic an meant addition in Hungarians, ethnic and territories both two one nation independent Austria of monarchy dual the of end the which I, marked War World of outcome the with do to much had WWII in involvement Hungary‟s II. War World in Hungary I.1. workmemorythrough this n post the in WWII of politics memory willthe I chapter at thelook of end the At feminist politicalHungary. and in movements agendas post the post and socialist the in relations gender changing the investigate will I Then, Germany. Nazi with involvement its to point and Wa World Second the in background historical Hungary‟s describe briefly I first chapter, this In TheI. case of Hungary
T he he contemporary Fideszgovernment, also shows attempts to keep up continuitythe of idea the of ―Greaterthe - - thirds of the Hungarian speaking population was left out of the newofnationtheHungarian wasspeaking out the population left thirds of thirds of its pervious territory was detached. This decision has been perceived as a loss o loss a as perceived been has decision This detached. was territory pervious its of thirds
The Treaty of Trianon has been a trauma since 1920 for 1920 since trauma a been has Trianon of Treaty The - oils cnet o te eea nget f wom of neglect general the for context socialist - state after lo after state
eas. ationalistdiscourses. 1
ng rule of the Habsburgs, due to the Treaty of Trianon in 1920, in Trianon of Treaty the to due Habsburgs, the of rule ng - socialist period, in order to delineate what factors played role in role played factors whatdelineate to in order period, socialist
- socialist period and ho and period socialist 6
- Hungary. Although Hungary became an an became Hungary Although Hungary. en‟s issues and the lack of feminist feminist of lack the and issues en‟s w wartime sexual violence fits violence sexual wartime w
the Hungarian nation, and the and nation, Hungarian the
Hungarian predecessor and speakspredecessor and Hungarian - statebordersand Száray Száray -
Kaposi
into into r - f CEU eTD Collection in t (present Trianon of Anglo the with treaty unsuccessful peace an to Due 1944.August until unchanged 1920,remained in appointed was who Horthy, Miklós regent, anti for made was pressure German the before long therefore education, higher the in 6% to Jews Act Clausus Numerus the law, from and spheres, educational and economical political, cultural, in presence Jewish the restricted that pro and wing right Hungary‟s by committed was that Kassa of 1941, city before Even 138). 2012: (Romsics Soviet be to the considered were but aircrafts unidentifiable of bombing the after 1941 in side their on war TrianonTreaty al.(Benkes 1998,the by of et away taken been which had Hungary, to territoriesimportant offered Germany which in Awards, relationship the politics, second and (1938) first the to according tighter became countries two the between irredentist Hungary‟s supported Germany As Germany. towards Ge (Anschluss), 1938 in Austria of occupation German the After 1931. in pact trade made Hungary Arbitration), and Conciliation Friendship, on (Treaty Hungary‟sshif atmosphere. and anti strong for base the set and role a played „Tanácsköztársaság‟ called 1919, Hungary‟s In and WWI of result a was that isolation political the from out break to was goal the policy foreign of terms In population. whole the by supported was that pursuit he upcoming he political election. rmany became the neighbor of Hungary, and also Hungarian politics became more oriented more became politics Hungarian also and Hungary, of neighbor the became rmany - Jewish lawsJewish1998, (Braham alsoSágvári 1998).see Pók 2002, 1941 forbid the marriage between Jews and Hungarians. In addition the first discriminatoryfirst the addition Hungarians.In and Jews between marriagethe 1941forbid fe Tinn trioil eiins ws h mai the was revisionism territorial Trianon, After Although the prime ministers frequen ministers prime the Although joine and Act, Tripartite the with 1941 in Powers Axis the of part became Hungary orientation orientation - day from Romania, Slovakia, Vojvodina, Ukraine), and also provides them the right to vote vote to right the providesthem also Slovakia, and Vojvodina, Ukraine),Romania, from day to
wards
- Nazi politics is traceable due to the to due traceable is politics Nazi t to the rightthe to t was introduced already in 1920 that restricted the admission of admission the restricted that 1920 in already introduced was
the political right, the short lived communist dictatorship in dictatorship communist lived short the right, political the tly changed after the end of WWI, the power of the of power the WWI, of end the after changed tly was Száray - American forces that Hitler learnt about, German about, learnt Hitler that forces American 7
also marked by the agreement with Italy in 1927 Italy1927 agreementwith in theby marked also -
Kaposi2006). and and gieie o Hnain politics Hungarian for guideline n with Austria in 1931. With Germany, Germany, With 1931. in Austria with
three introduced Jewish laws, Jewish introduced three
make new political alliances. alliances. political new make - Bolshevik feelings feelings Bolshevik
(1940)Vienna (1940)Vienna d the d , a a ,
CEU eTD Collection 1998:219). al. et (Benkes did they as Jews Hungarian many as deport to managed never have could they testim Solution‟) „Final the accomplish to Eichmann Adolf helped who Germany, of representative (the Veesenmayer‟s to according although forced, or voluntary was Jews Hungarian eliminate recognit (or consensus public no is there However, 27). 1998: (Braham meant Auschwitz to deportation what Horthy to also and powers Allied the to known already was it 1944 in that (1998), Braham by argued Budapes of Jews of deportation the stopped Horthy However, history. Holocaust the in deportation of process fastest was the which months, Auschwizt to mostly deported were Jews Hungarian million a half opposed have could he that laws Jewish discriminatory the (beside - all received pro the Szálasi, Ferenc and Union, Soviet the with negotiation peace unsuccessful this to due 15 October on position c and arrested that forces German to establishthat andunsuccessfulattemptto theendbecametreaty peace aan war,tried Horthy due change Romania‟s After 1944. October until unchanged remained regent German the Regarding Budapest. of liberation) perception Soviet‟s the in (or occupation the for fought was siegelong days hundred a and enemy as treated were they forces, Soviet the of case the Whilein enemy. as troops German perceive not did they pl as take not did Army, resistance military case Red this in therefore Germany, the of ally by an was Hungary occupation later country‟s the from much very differs it occupation, H occupied forces
Kaposi2006). It was under Horthy‟s rule as a regent that the deportation of the Hungarian Jews began began Jews Hungarian the of deportation the that regent a as rule Horthy‟s under was It n a te unegTiua, ihu te ugra sae n isrpeettvs help representatives‟ its and state Hungarian the without Tribunal, Nurnberg the at ony
the political power and became the “leader of the nation” (Benkes et al. 1998,al. et (Benkes nation” the of “leader the became and power political the
ungary in 1944 March. Although this historical event is conceptualized as an an as conceptualized is event historical this Although March. 1944 in ungary - ion) about the question whether the collaboration with the Germans to Germans the with collaboration the whether question the about ion) Nazi leader of the extreme right Arrow Cross Party was appointed, who appointed, was Party Cross Arrow right extreme the of leader Nazi aptured Horthy‟s relatives. Horthy was removed from his from removed was Horthy relatives. Horthy‟s aptured t after the mentioned three months on July 7, it is is it 7, July on months three mentioned the after t 8
cuain Hrh‟ pwr s a as power Horthy‟s occupation, as a regent) and overall about about overall and regent) a as - Birkenau in under three three under in Birkenau - vr o h Allies, the to over Száray Száray ace as ace CEU eTD Collection 3 2 existin real the in that argue 2010) Zimmermann 1994, Haney 2000, 2002, Kligman feminist and Galscholars (Fodor many but communism, of ideology Thisthe wasfact women. in emancipated that regime asato referred socialismoften isvery State Hungary in Gender I.2. afterstatesocialism.during and changed relations gender and women on discourses how at look and WWII followed that era, bac a provide to wanted analyzedI consideringthat innot detailsministers primewere different of periodsThe Germany. poin to aimed that background wartime the overalland of collapsecommunism. was occupation liberators as portrayed by established was WWII of history official Sovi and country the ruling been had dictatorship socialist/communist 1949 From 2012). (Romsics democracy and system multi the of end the marks also year which 1949, in Republic People‟s a became Hungary in established was socialism style Soviet and SovietBlock, the of part a became Hungary years, fewa Within Trianon. of Treaty the in defined was it as same the became borders territorial Hungary‟s Paris, of Treaty Peace the to According
For a more detailed The lastSoviet troop leftcountry the 1991. in k as parts or rather omissions of Hungary‟s memory politics of this era. this of politics memory Hungary‟s of omissions rather or parts as k Hungary its of discussion brief very a is history Hungary‟s about above delineated have I What
was occupied by the Red Army in 1945, and Nazi Germany wa Germany Nazi and 1945, in Army Red the by occupied was
upesd Hnain ae oils edd eadn te eouin i 1989 in revolutions the regarding ended socialism sate Hungarian suppressed. discussionof this topic see: Deák2000.
general historical overview historical general an ay eaie otaa o their of portrayal negative any d
et military troops were present in until 1989. until in present were troops military et –
before and afte and before
t out its intensifying political orientation towards Nazi towards orientation political intensifying its out t the Soviets, in which the Red Army soldiers were soldiers Army Red the which in Soviets, the h cuty wt Soviet with country, the 9 , and highlight points to which later I can refer can I later which to points highlight and ,
r socialism r
g socialism the proposed gender equality gender proposed the socialism g oe n attd drn Hungary during attitude and role
- upre government. supported 2
Under socialism, the socialism, Under 3
Now I turn to the to turn I Now s also defeated. defeated. also s - party ‟s -
CEU eTD Collection 4 how examined They men. and women by differently experienced was countries European East in transformation this that claim (2000) Kligman and Gal it? followed that change economical socialnor reality,theequality, socialism‟s with contrast in official ideology. equalitygender in existed neither the Therefore qualification,ethnicity. location, and to according ex different a in available was support state and work paid of opportunities different that (ibid) argues Zimmermann burden. double of notion the causing woman, the of responsibility the remained housework unpaid the work, paid of requirement B ibid,). Zimmermann, 2002, (Fodor unchanged remained sphere domestic the in position gendered their although emancipation, proposed their to contributed that factors main Wo 2010). (Zimmerman decision and need economic an also but men, with them equalize to policy a only not was workforce the to entrance women‟s of incentive the therefore workers, more required development‟ and cafeterias, public leave, maternity care, child kindergartens. example for burden, double their in institut and policies social introduced state socialist the although roles, family traditional maintained socialism sense, this In housekeepers. mothers, unpaid and as caretakers role basic women‟s of assumption the was unchanged remained what although, mandator became workforce the in involvement women‟s that was change important Another 1996). (Verdery itself Party the was which of figure father and head the family, a as nation whole divor of process the making to some due to extent, relations gender change did regimes socialist fact, In realization. into come not did
Ceausescu‘sRomaniawas exception an from thispattern, for thissee Kligman 1995. o wr gne rltos omd by formed relations gender were How WWII after country agricultural an was which Hungary, of case the In men‟s entrance to the workforce and their inclusion in the education system were the were system education the in inclusion their and workforce the to entrance men‟s , namely the fast indust fast the namely ,
their
aenlsi ntr te rdcd e‟ pwr oiin n h fml, by family, the in position power men‟s reduced they nature paternalistic
ce easier and legalizing abortion. legalizing and easier ce
rialization of agriculture in order to catch up with the „West‟ the with up catch to order in agriculture of rialization
10 the fall of state socialism, and the political and and political the and socialism, state of fall the
tent for different groups of women, of groups different for tent 4
Socialist paternalism imagined the imagined paternalism Socialist ions that aimed to help women help to aimed that ions
, the „catching up „catching the , eside the new the eside y, CEU eTD Collection a seen now was socialism that something home at remain to women to opportunity the back give to aim political the and family” the of“sanctity the emphasison identifiesthe addition in nation, the of reproducers as role women‟s andgendered communism (Anthias nationalism and Yuval socialism. in nation the of th which regime, socialist the of liberallegislation of remnant a as death the of concern politicalparties wing right nationalist the by portrayed also was Abortion discourses. conservative/Christian of issue questi an the how became showed reproduction and abortion, around debates political Hungarian analyzed Gal issue. legislative and political a as framed was it rights, women‟s of issue an as reproduction post in The dominated reg old the Like domain. masculine visible dictatorshipdemocracy tofrom genderedpolitics alsohad effects. caused that changes economic Beside jobs. part with supplement to had often they and that sphere, public sectors, the in jobs private paying low in women jobs paying high occupied predominantly men when force, labor of genderi the in shifts state caused also change After economic the economy.socialism, second the to contribute to had also they where motherhood, of duty the fulfill to sphere private the to back drawn were later workforce, the to sphere public the to d first were women socialism, during Whileworkplace. and force labor the of gendering the to due connotations gendered their gained mainly concepts these that concluded and socialism, concept ideological the question of human rep human of question ae (94 dtcs h sm pten i Hnain politi Hungarian in patterns same the detects (1994) Haney post (1994)that also argues Haney Kligman (2000), and LikeGal - socialis
In this sense on the political right, the framing of women‟s issue was informed by anti by informed was issue women‟s of framing the political right, the on sense this In discourses about female duties, which were highly informed by anti by informed highly were which duties,female about discourses CE countries CEE t
of public and private and its gendered coding changed during and after and during changed coding gendered its and private and public of roduction and abortion became one of these these of one became abortion and roduction
Gl 1994) (Gal s having taken away from them from away taken having s shifts in the gendering of the workplace, the shift in shift the workplace, the of gendering the in shifts . m, hs nw eorce as established also democracies new these ime, ua Gal Susan 11
(1994) - Davis 1989).Davis ng of work sectors and division and sectors work of ng
ey opposed on the base of anti of base the on opposed ey rus ht nta o treating of instead that argues - socialista became politics cal discourses regarding regarding discourses cal
issue
(ibid:114) s -
socialist ideology. socialist of public interest interest public of . However However . n of on - rawn male time – - -
CEU eTD Collection sa ( sphere” private the leave to permitted are they when dangerous male the to due also is era socialist conclud Goven it. quit to decide to opportunity the alsogot women family, but the over power and right the had men only not when family, the within relation gender changed the was onwards 1980s the from women claims th Goven 234).ibid, law(Goven, socialist family the the to usingdue men as by right same the betrayed with obtain could women they that divorced, that getting of opportunity resistance, of locus the state, the sphere”) from “private independence (the home the and family the mothers accounts, as antipolitics‟ duties feminine their fulfilling not for and state, the po were discourse this in Women socialism. state of fall the before appeared even that 80s early the in publications antipolitics in traced be also can hostility this of roots the that argues (1993) Goven post aboutcommon thebelief was two‟s nestedness brought the ofover to post period be relationship imagined the shows again that interviewees, her by synonyms as used even were „communist‟ and „feminist‟ words the that detected Hayne is feminists and Antifeminism workers. as role fundamental women‟s on emphasis with coupled wasit period that at 1960s,although the from socialismduring detectable assume. would one as much, politi as state differ Pronatalist not do relationships two the that claims socialism after and during state the to relationship gendered women‟s of examination the through Haney, me conclusion about the hostility against working women that was coupled with the intensified the with coupledwas that women working againsthostility the about conclusion me - oils pro, aty utfe te g the justifies partly period, socialist The fact that women‟s emancipation has been conceived as a socialist achievement in the in achievement socialist a as conceived been has emancipation women‟s that fact The rtrayed as responsible for social disorder, for being “powerful agents” of or alliances with allianceswith or “powerfulof agents”social being for for disorder, asresponsible rtrayed another similarity between the two era two the between similarity another s ta hs en caatrsi fr h post the for characteristic a been has that cs, es that the reason why Hungary lacks feminist movements in the post the in movements feminist lacksHungary why reason the that es - oiae preto o wmn h “eoe socially “become who women of perception dominated nrl otlt aant edr n wmns issues. women‟s and gender against hostility eneral 12
at the main trigger for the hostility against the for trigger main the at s . Through her research during socialism, during research her Through . or the hostile attitude towards attitude hostile the or tween the two ideologies, which which ideologies, two the tween ibid:
236). Haney (1994) has the the has (1994) Haney 236). ii: 225) (ibid: - socialist period, is also also is period, socialist
a te pee of sphere the was Acrig to According . - socialism. feminism feminism
- CEU eTD Collection occur not would violence domestic then children, enough to birth give would Varga István MP, Fidesz violence domestic of question day) the ( night late for discussion their by exemplified be can offense. topic this toward criminal attitude negative independent governments‟ an as violence domestic include not did Code Criminal Hungarian the because agenda, their on topic this up take to Parliament the make to gathered domest of question be can the issues when 2012, gender September in toward case a attitude by exemplified negative Their questions. these in interest no show male the violence, domestic mostly violence, based gender issuesof to attention draw toattempts clear showed LMP party the years, otherUnion tocompared low European countries very isalso parliament the in participation women‟s addition, In alsoabsent. are women and men on effects different legislations‟ to attention propose to example for sensitivity, gender of issues neg general MP‟s female and politics, Hungarian in absent also are agenda political a parties political period, socialist the to political compared women‟sdecreased has participation investigatedtheir 1989, since that that concluded Hungary in 2010 participation from study A issues. gender of terms in changed sphere original,domestic t to return women‟s by solved be could that birthrates national declining the about concern oe hn wny er hs asd since passed has years twenty than More Furthermore, Furthermore, g mentioned, As and also prevention theirby of
(polhist.hu) ic violence ic h wy n hc ml MP male which in way the ender issues lack political support and agendas, and although in past few past in although and agendas, and support political lack issues ender and the question of gender equality has not been a special agenda of any of agenda special a been not has equality gender of question the and .
argued that if women would fulfill their their fulfill would women if that argued because this issue was not found important en important found not was issue this because . Feminism as a political movement, and gender or women‟s issues as as issueswomen‟s or gender and movement, political a as Feminism . due to a civil initiative civil a to due lo eeld ht hy ra ti qeto a a non a as question this treat they that revealed also dominated parliament and the ruling Party Fidesz generally Fidesz Party ruling the and parliament dominated
the televisioncoveragethe 13
h fl o sae oils, n nt uh has much not and socialism, state of fall the , in factlowest in the , - , oty rm h rln party ruling the from mostly s, . More than one hundred signatures were were signatures hundred one than More . Hungarian Parliament had to discuss the the discuss to had Parliament Hungarian
ofthe primary duties as mothers and mothers as duties primary
(polhist.hu) event ough to discuss during during discuss to ough .
scheduling .
- rmd the framed issue. lect to the to lect ( belol.hu, belol.hu, of the of One One Th heir e CEU eTD Collection regime “communist” m and statues communist of removal reburials, pre the to back turning included patterns common These pasts. their with dealing in characteristics after that argues (2010) Mark James WWII of politics memory and Hungary I.3. marginalized. and suppressed are voices their which in nation, the of reproducers biological as constructed hierarchies power and gender nation the to relation in capacity sexual and reproductive their through conceptualized only are women cases both in as treated, is violence wartime following) the in discussed be will it (as and violence domestic how between link a is There Hungary. contemporary the in violence based gender of issues of treatment general mention these of analysis representative‟sviolencediscussedtheir commit,domestic government.is not the by police. the by prosecuted not still is Balogh independent an as Parliament the in remained Balogh however party, the from him dismissed fact this to respond a as Fidesz party, His wife. previous weeks some ( nationalism p ruling the conceptualized generally (and his follow not magyarinfo.hu) - a ea s sac fr rdto ad o “re to and tradition for search a as era war Although Fidesz showed no interest in the question of domestic violence in S in violence domestic of question the in interest no showed Fidesz Although
ago it turned out that one their one that out turned it ago AnthiasYuval and
.
oe as women Varga
(xiv) also draw attention to the threat of the „death of the nation‟ if women do women if nation‟ the of „death the of threat the to attention draw also ed cases is out of the scope of this thesis, but I wanted to point to the to point to wanted I but thesis, this of scope the of out is cases ed .
biological -
Davis1989) Ds 1995) (Das 1989 reproducers , East ,
. - I tee natio these In .
MP
state
Even if domestic violence is a crime that some of some that crime a is violence domestic if Even 14 - - rys guidelines. arty‟s) s, József Balogh beat his current partner and his and partner current his beat Balogh József s, European post European - ,
establish continuity of the nation”, events of of events nation”, the of continuity establish of the nation nation the of mras ad eeig h arcte o the of atrocities the reveling and emorials, and both are forms of violence are based on based are violence of forms are both and
P ad w wes fe te incident the after weeks two and MP, ait icuss oe ae only are women discourses nalist - socialist co socialist hog te oi o gendered of logic the through n i monologue, his In untries had common common had untries Thedetailed eptember,
sexual Varga
CEU eTD Collection “Double narration roomtextualof Occupation” the claimsit: politics German to contribution country‟s the admit fails to Terror of can they past, country‟s their with familiar become to order in class, history their of part as students schools high graduating also but visit, tourists only not that “museum” a is whichTerror past, the of representation authentic isrepresentation and memory collective form to established 64).Markby 63 [Mark Communism of Victims the for Day Memorial and execution Nagy‟s Imre of eve (the meanings communist o the at state the of aspect demonizing every on and victimhood national on concentrates Terror of House the regimes, both of atrocities the a see 2009, Otto 2010, (Mark one latter the demonizing only for criticized highly been has it regimes, communist and fascist both of HousecrimesrepresentandAlthough to theAuthority aimedatrocitiesof (ÁVH). Terror and pro 60 Street Andrássy at located is memorial This party. anti and nationalist a became later 1989, in democrats as ideology original its with ruling contemporary 2002wasthe in established by that Terror of - Nazi In Hungary, the most famous institutionalized form of dealing with the past is the House the is past the with dealing of form institutionalized famous most the Hungary, In increasingly more aggressive Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, which by the end the by which Union, Soviet the and Germany Naziaggressive more increasingly mid the From is memorial this that is argues (2009) Otto Lene as Terror, of House with problem The pening ceremony of the House of Terror, the date of which incorporated symbolical anti incorporated which of date the Terror, of House the ceremony of pening
get get Arrow Cross Party Cross Arrow here is here
(Otto ibid., Mark 2010). Instead, it portrays Hungary as a a as Hungary portrays it Instead, 2010). Mark ibid., (Otto in fact fact in
- a false sense of the five decades before 1989. The problem is that the House the that is problem 1989.The before decades five the of sense falsea thirties onward, Hungary found herself in the buffer zone betweenthezone buffer herself found Hungarythirtiesthe onward, in - 64]: “The only honest part of facing up to our past is this H is this our past ofto facingparthonest up 64]:“The only very much much
and after the Soviet occupation, the occupation, Soviet the after and one - socialism. Viktor Orbán, the leader the party Fidesz party claimed the leader the Orbán, socialism.Viktor - sidedandtheref lso Frazon and K. Horváth 2002). Instead of portraying of Instead 2002). Horváth K. and Frazon lso 15
its ,
ore partly falseore partly “double occupation” and Hungary‟spro and occupation” “double previously the headquarters of both the both of headquarters the previously
- party Fidesz, which in contra in Fidesz, party which
State Security Office (ÁVO) Office Security State . In Hungary,In . passiv e however what however ouse”(quoted victim, as the the as victim, the - communist communist Houseof st - - - CEU eTD Collection 5 but text, autobiographical an aswork not does it Terror, of House the in exhibited is it form the country‟s the in and monologue, this of out cut were during parts out, points Lóránd as However, own. her including Army Red the by rape wartime of account and narration personalauthor‟s theis 4), chapter in later back willcome I which (to memoir thisof importance e an claims, Lóránd As music. and speeches political both contain they content, diverse 1940swith the from documents are excerptsthat to telephone a through listen can visitors Here, occasion only thisthe discourse, from Gulagare du episodes other while in distributed and for made narrations written in in mostly Terror, of attention House little gets Jewry Hungarian of elimination the However, 2002). (Ságvári orders” Szálas appointed German the to and forces occupational German the memoryto Jews Hungarian killing this for blame the of shift to characteristicpolitics also is it addition, In foreseeable. was Germany of defeat the ou get to plan political its of leaks the to due occupied was it that and plans, to due Germany with collaboration conscious Hungary‟s of erasure its and politics, excer This
Officialmaterial from t crt rm lie oc‟ mmi cn lo e er ta te uhr ed u. The out. read author the that heard be also can memoir Polcz‟s Alaine from xcerpt the war, on war,19, theMarch1994. of year fifth the in only eventuated this that achievement great a was It occupation. her the After War Hungary. World of independent outbreak an for place no had that order new a for strove life a in locked subsequently and decade the of Where did gender figure at the House of Terror? As Lóránd (2012) argues, gender is absent Terror?HouseAs(2012)is absent Lóránd argues,of gender figure didgenderthe at Where emphasized as tragic episodes of theemphasized asepisodes tragicnationof t eel ad hw a oiat hed unn truh h misra memory mainstream the through running thread dominant a shows and reveals pt –
let limited albeit
once again became a power to reckon with. Allied with one another, one with Allied with. reckon to power a became again once he House he ofTerror, distributed in the„Double Occupation‖ room. ring socialism, for example persecution of the church or forced labor in labor forced or church the of persecution example for socialism, ring
–
- elbow minim to and regime, II, Hungary made desperate attempts in order to maintain to order in attempts desperate made Hungary II, 5
- room and to avert the worst scenario: German German scenario: worst the avert to and room
where it gets relevance is the room of „double occupation‟. occupation‟. „double of room isthe relevance gets it where - and - death battle, the two totalitarian dictatorships totalitarian two the battle, death 16
alize Hungary‟s responsibility as “acting on on “acting as responsibility Hungary‟s alize .
the the
t of the war, when war, the of t different rooms, different its among them among occupation,
revisionist revisionist CEU eTD Collection salsmn o te omns rl, fe wih te oit atm arcte became atrocities wartime Soviet the which, after rule, communist the the after years of forty namely establishment publicity, gained atrocities these which in era the by informed 2003:133). (Pető, past Nazi Hungary‟s from away attention the draw to and victimhood national claiming for basis a as served which on focus the rape, and looting troops‟ Soviet the and country the of th about was war the politics of memory dominant the 1989 after claimsthat Red( Army in the by Hungary rape wartime severalarticleson but rape, of experiences subjective or personal on not isemphasis the excerpt Terror of House the regarding 194 victims/survivors nat of part a was silences and taboos Breaking sphere. and victimization of topics silenced and socialism during aimed that discourseemphasize collectivenationalto victimhood. targeti its and violence sexual wartime of nature gendered Soviets the by women Hungarian of rape widespread the is represent to aimed is of House the what that argues Lóránd end the In front. eastern the on women raped also soldiers Hungarian the that explains, out cut was that part The cut. was which excerpt the to point doesshe occasion one at only but Polcz‟sbook, of parts many quotes She argument. t and 1990s in memoire de much too into goes she that is article Lóránd‟s with problem the However, ibid.). (Lóránd, motherland” the of rape the of “metaphors nati a as functions and interpretation new a gains oa iett ta incorporates that identity ional - 197). According to Mark, wartime rape was one issue of this trend, but as Lóránd argues Lóránd as but trend, this of issue one was rape wartime Mark, to According 197). According to Mark (201 Mark to According The emphasis on wartime rape and a and rape wartime on emphasis The
on the collective suffering of the nation. Similarly, Andrea Pető (2003), who wrote who (2003), Pető Andrea Similarly, nation. the of suffering collective the on gained public attention public gained he memoire itself, but but itself, memoire he 0), after the fall of socialism of fall the after 0),
h nto o ntoa vciho. xeine of Experiences victimhood. national of notion the tail about the House of Terror, of House the about tail , and were and , trocities of looting of Red Army soldiers was also also was soldiers Army Red of looting of trocities she she 17
does not present sufficient evidence about her about evidence sufficient present not does
portrayed as a form of social healing (Mark (Mark healing social of form a as portrayed nl artv o vciho ad implies and victimhood of narrative onal the the ng of women gets lost in a nationalistic a in lost gets women of ng common trends of establishing a new new a establishing of trends common
ufrn wr rvvd n h public the in revived were suffering the articulation of suppressed voices voices suppressed of articulation the 1998,2012)2000,2003,1999,
the perception of Polcz‟s of perception the e double occupation occupation double e , therefore the therefore ,
probably Terror , also also , CEU eTD Collection claiming nationalvictimhood. for pr which army, Soviet the by committed crime a as but women, against violence of form a as or issue gendered a as framed not is violence sexual wartime chapters, following the in H about victimhood anti of atmosphere current responsibilityof persecutio the shifts and WWII, through victimhood nation‟s Hungarian the of notion the maintains (which Nazi occupation of the time the at 1944in March, selfitsdetermination lost country the that text revolution) anti and C female), and male between only marriage recognize they (as heteronorativity conservativism, January m substantially been has it latteras “communist”,theeven designatedduring socialism1949, they becausewasin introduced that one previous the with break to order in Law”) “Fundamental it call they as (or constitution t by example for legislation, and programs political their of anti Their agenda. government‟s their of factor important succ direct the as portrayed they whom (MSZP, left previous the and regime socialist the from separate strictly is that regime new a creating on emphasis the KDNP, party Christian the with together 2010 in Party ruling for sign a as interpreted hristianity (as hristianity My aim with this chapter was to give a background about Hungary‟s memory politics, its its politics, memory Hungary‟s about background a give to was chapter this with aim My
- ae visible makes omns (s t elrs ht h ros f h Hnain reo i i te 1956 the in is freedom Hungarian the of roots the that declares it (as communism
(kormany.hu) the importance the ungary‟s role in WWII. As I implied through this chapter, and as I will argue I as and chapter, this through implied I As WWII. in role ungary‟s
the nationalist politics and political guidelines that Fidesz embodies: embodies: Fidesz that guidelines political and politics nationalist the
. In terms of memory politics, they arg they politics, memory terms In of . the later horrors of the Soviets, state socialism. As Fidesz became the became Fidesz As socialism. state Soviets, the of horrors later the odified since 1989. The new constitution that was introduced in 2012 in introduced was that constitution new The 1989. since odified ns against Jews ns gainedtheit toin Germans)and back May 1990. - communism and the general pattern towards claiming national national claiming towards pattern general the and communism
of Christianity in the nations‟ history nations‟ the in Christianity of
18
essors of the communists the of essors - socialist attempts are traceable in many in traceable are socialistattempts he establishment of a new national national new a of establishment he ue through the newconstitution‟sthe through ue
is highlighted in its preface its in highlighted is ) ,
- wing gover wing again became an became again ovides a base a ovides nment nment
), CEU eTD Collection rus sx oe ad epniiiis r acpe, vn daie, s otatd and contrasted as idealized, even accepted, are responsibilities and roles “sex argues passivi and peace and masculinity, of part inherent and natural a as violence portray and sexes, the of essentialistassumptions on build that home‟, at stay women fight, „men or boys‟ be will „boys as explanations, historical and biological grante for taken is but questioned, not often very is war of nature gendered the Turpi 2009, 1994, Merry MacKinnon 2001, 1994,Goldstein p make is incidents these for ground common the conflicts, and wars in varies natural enslav sexual rape, wartime history; throughout women against violence sexual of kinds different by accompanied been have Wars violence sexual wartime of theories Feminist II.1. authentic. at look will I authentic, as media Hungarian the in perceived generally been has method which interviews, history oral on based is that novel a about be to going isanalysis my as end, the At cases. two these compare Germ and Hungary in framing public its and WWII during Hungary. in violence sexual wartime of framings theories a look first will I Therefore Hungary. in violence sexual wartime of framing contemporary the about research my for background theoretical the provide I chapter this In Theoretical II. frameworks ossible and even legitimizes wartime rape (Brownmiller 1975, Cockburn 2004, Enloe Enloe 2004, Cockburn 1975, (Brownmiller rape wartime legitimizes even and ossible “
about wartime sexual violence. Then I focus on scholarly works that examined previous examined that works scholarly on focus I Then violence. sexual wartime about by
- products ”
f wars of the specificity of this method and whether it can be evaluated as as evaluated be can it whether and method this of specificity the
Bonilr 1975 (Brownmiller ement, abduction, forced prostitution have been regarded as regarded been have prostitution forced abduction, ement,
y s eiie hrceitc A Cnha Cockburn Cynthia As characteristic. feminine as ty 19
As 32 :
the occurrence of wartime sexual violence sexual wartime of occurrence the . lhuh h frs f eul violence sexual of forms the Although ). n 1998, Stig 1998, n any has many similarities, I will I similarities, many has any
lmayer 1994). In contrast, In 1994). lmayer war’s gendered nature gendered war’s t feminis t d according to according d t critics and and critics t
also also that CEU eTD Collection right a as conceptualized is intercourse sexual when reasons, recreational for militarized: is rape wa in militarized commonly expressionof asconceivedan masculinity. is rape of performance the when Third, community. enemy‟s the of masculinity the challenge humiliat to source a as alsoserves women enemy‟s the raping case, this In community. their of women the protect cannot enemy male the that show to order in groups, male opposing the Th conquerors. 58). to explanation, enemy‟sDue game” this (Seifert: thewomen legalizedbecome of the trophies the of “rules the of form a as naturalized and conceptualized is that practice a winners, the by women when first, rape, wartime for explanations three distinguishes (1994) Seifert Ruth characteristics. common are there still war, or conflict the in and perpetrators by conceptualized are rapes these how contextual 1994). Seifert 2009, Merry 2001, Goldstein 1994, Brownmiller also see 157, 2009: (Merry maintained” and formed are power of hierarchies “way a and control, violence, of form and continuation a but phenomenon, of„everyday‟ exaggeration life violence. isolated an not is women against violence wartime that highlights it because and hand, one the on violence based gender of nature structural the to be important is violence‟ of „continuum the of idea Cockburn‟s forms. different in pre in but conflict, a of period the during only not present is violence finds and continuum, this a is violence that argues (2004) Cockburn addition In women. over domination frommale reinforces: absent and creates it that hierarchies are and structures power the of normalization the is nature however, gendered gender, proble The of 27). 2004: relations discourse”(Cockburn power The complementary. n diin o efr‟ epaain, yhi Ele 20) ihihs ht ae s very is rape that highlights (2000) Enloe Cythnia explanations, Seifert‟s to addition In schol Feminist e second, when raping the enemy‟s women serves as a communication between communication a as serves women enemy‟s the raping when second, e ars have argued that wartime rape is not about sexuality, but is a sexualized a is but sexuality, about not is rape wartime that argued have ars
the sharp distinction between peace and wartime useless, because gendered becauseuseless, wartimeand betweendistinctionpeace sharp the rs and conflicts, and also determines three conditions under which which under conditions three determines also and conflicts, and rs
20 wt te ae fr rne nto o war‟s of notion granted for taken the with m
of the losing half are conceptualized as booty booty as conceptualized are half losing the of the the - and post and public during and after after and during public - war phases, only phases, war cause it points points it cause It It is mostly is e and and e CEU eTD Collection nation opposing the by wars in targeted much very is honor nation‟s the of violation this fact In conflicts. armed and wars in violated be can which logic), patriarchal and nurturing is who women, the repro of duty and focus gendered the of Because narratives. nationalist in importance gained sexuality and capacity reproductive their therefore nation, the the of symbols as constructed 2008 Mookherjee 1995, forthcoming Massad eg. (see nation the of gendering symbolic through a claim to order in goals, nationalist for is rape wartime of discourse the of expropriation common most The 2006). (Mokherjee forgetting andremembrancepublicits of process justthe as in timeof occurrence, the at power and politics 2008).(Mookherjee cases many in goals political serves also but masculinity, of understanding boys‟ willbe „boys of expression an as and sexualalwaysare wartimeseparable. not orviolence clear explanation. boys‟ be will „boys the hence biol acknowledged and used commonly very the with complemented be to have rape wartime of by asa status gainedthe and expla and mechanisms the goal political like of case the is form third The torture. instrume asan functions rape when rape”, mass“systematic of form a as serves and Philippines, the and Chile of case the asin security, national of name the in occurs it iswhen form second The and prostitution. brothels military with satisfied is need this and fighting, for deserve soldiers that ogical explanation, when rape is constructed as a legitimate biological need of the soldiers, soldiers, the of need biological legitimate a as constructed is rape when explanation, ogical in uig h nto, hi hnr n prt i a eta qeto fr h nto (n its (and nation the for question central a is purity and honor their nation, the ducing I t the case the also . s nha ad Yuval and Anthias As ). s to to
(ibid: 111) (ibid:
of Bosnia and Rwanda, where rapes were used consciously in order to perform to order in consciously used were rapes where Rwanda, and Bosnia of be emphasized that wartime rape is not always naturalized as casualties of wars wars of casualties as naturalized always not is rape wartime that emphasized be . I find Seifert‟s and Enloe‟s argument important, because they point to point they because important, argument Enloe‟s and Seifert‟s find I . nations through which wartime rape have been naturalized, legitimized legitimized naturalized, been have rape wartime which through nations - product of wars. These explanations and reasons for the occurrence the for reasons and explanations wars.These of product
nation, in which discourses they are represented as reproducers of reproducers as represented are they discourses which in nation, - ai age 18) wmn ae en predominantly been have women (1989), argue Davis T he framing of wartime rape is rape wartime of framinghe
nation‟s or ethnic group‟s victimization and violation and victimization group‟s ethnic or nation‟s oee, ifrn fntos and functions different However, 21
nt of war („rape as a weapon of war‟), of weapon asa („rape war of nt
(or community) in which in community) (or very o very ften
oiain of motivations
saturated withsaturated , Helms Helms ,
forced CEU eTD Collection genits attentiondraw to to tried have scholars feminist although 1994), (Seifert wars of casualty natural a as acknowledged this been hitherto had practice mentioned, have I As Yugoslavia. Former the in war the to response in 1990s, Herman2007). 1992, (eg. raped Theidon events narrate instead but person, first in it testify not do they do they if tal to like not do women that researchers feminist by noted commonly is It it. about talk to reluctance survivor‟s also but 1994), (Seifert events these historical of and marginalization them of discourse publiclack of the to refer only not claimdoes t but 459), (2007: silences” about talk to is rape about talk “to it framed Theidon As face. researchers feminist that phenomenon common a is rape wartime around Silence forthcoming). use is rape wartime and nation, whole the of violation the is articulated gets often very what suffering, and violation women‟s individual on focusing of instead fact, In 2008). Mokherjee 1995, (Das purity violations these on discourses proper and silenced, become even or silent, remain victims rape of voices the discourses, state or nationalist these In 1995).(Massadmotherland‟ the of „rape the as conceptualizeit and territory national the thro violation this express or „other‟; the enemy, the of characteristic only is that act an as rape wartime portray and ethnical) or (national community enemy the of brutality the (sym their admitting of instead discourses, male predominantly also are which women discourses, Nationalist their 1994). protect (Seifert to duty masculine their fulfill to failed they as community enemy‟s the source a as serves also women enemy‟s the raping and continuity, 1995), (Massad purity ethnic nation‟s the disrupt to way a as realized is violence mal which through tool a became body women‟s Wartime rape as a problem and an issue gained international visibility international gained issue an and problem a as rape Wartime t dmn ntoa vciho ad h mrl tts f noec (Helms innocence of status moral the and victimhood national demand to d bolic) defeat and the failure to protect their women, they either emphasize either they women, their protect to failure the and defeat bolic)
are expropriated in the name of national honor and and honor national of name the in expropriated are dered nature, first Susan Brownmiller, who wrote a Susanwho Brownmiller,deredfirst nature, 22
to humiliate and challenge the masculinity of of masculinity the challenge and humiliate to gop cmuiae Ds 95. S 1995). (Das communicate groups e k about their experience of being raped and and raped being of experience their about k as witnesses as
and attention in the in attention and ugh gendering gendering ugh of others of exual exual his his ‟
CEU eTD Collection sexual (wartime) that perpetrators, as sourcethe claim ofviolence the are genderinequality unequal abovepowerand relations. mentioned and quoted I a is violence that scholars feminist the contrast, the In of source problem. the as patriarchydesignates and clear, are (women) victims and (men) perpetrators of group the the women, against violence ofform a as rapeconceptualizes she acknowledgedthat 6 peac UN example (for neglected still is nature gendered its hand one the on that highlights which problem, gender a than rather v undemocra and wars” “new of characteristic a as and problem security a as violence sexual wartime framed and democracy, of defender the as appear to USA the for opportunity political a as served and war, cold the of end the at context political the to issue supported politically a became mainstreaming gender and women against violence that claims She Union. Soviet the of fall the with interlinked was but advocates, feminist of activism peac and security UN a as rape wartime that coincidence a not was it that out points (2011) Harrington Carol unreported. remained and attention international any draw not co other many in occurred have rapes mass that argues she addition, In cleansing. ethnic of form a and rape genocidal as rapes these of framings thi the to due but war, of that nature gendered the of understanding an arguesto due not was law international Copelon dignity, Geneva and the honor in against acknowledged crime was as practice Conventions this hitherto that consider we if success huge a is humanity against crime and breach grave as rape wartime of recognition the Although 1994). (Copelo humanity against ascrime isrecognized and lawinternational in graveabreach become has rape wartime war, Bosnian the Regarding activists. feminist to due largely law, international Bosnia attention in international conflict the during occurred that violence sexual 1975. in rape on book foundational
iolence against women in wartime and in armed conflicts became an international security issue security international an became conflicts armed in and wartime in women against iolence lhuh rwmle i oe f h ms feunl qoe fmns shlr hoeiig ae i a t be to has it rape, theoretizing scholar feminist quoted frequently most the of one is Brownmiller Although
form of gender based violence, in which there are no clear and identifiable groups of victims and victims of groups identifiable and clear no are there which in violence,based gender of form keig agenda ekeeping
not only in the media and among feminist scholars, but also in in also but scholars, feminist among and media the in only not
ekeepers also commit sexual violence against refugees), while on on while refugees), against violence sexual commit also ekeepers 6
Due to the widespread and ethnically motivated nature of nature motivated ethnically and widespread the to Due
n h 19s ad a nt ny u t te successful the to due only not was and 1990s, the in 23 untries and conflicts besides Bosnia, Bosnia, besides conflicts and untries
human rights issue became part of part became issue rights human - i countries. tic ezgvn, hs a gained war this Herzegovina, refore as a crime in which in crime a as refore
n hs discourse this In cag i the in change s which which
due due did the n
CEU eTD Collection women of number high the to due Budapest medica (Pető institutionalized soldiers Soviet the that prove violence sexual and the reconstruct and to order in records sexual official these of widespreadness health and sanitary at looked Petősilence. examining shows difficultyof research isthe her collectivelevel, individual what and 2003 (Pető Vienna and Budapest in 1945 the contrasted she Then 1999). 1998, (Pető me research gendere through topic this analyzed who one only the and scholar, gender starting fromlater, 1998.years socialism. state of end the Polcz‟s Alaine been has violence sexual wartime most The b 2010). had (Mark that articulated experiences were socialism and during voices suppressed chapter, previous the in mentioned was it as 1989, After silenced. were rape wartime on discourses public Hungary, in WWII the after established ba the Against Hungary in violence sexual wartime about research Previous II.2 zones. conflict the in only not level, international an on also politics as used is issue this hand other the thodically reconstruct the wides the reconstruct thodically Andrea Pető, whose name was already mentioned in chapter one, is a historian and a a and historian a is one, chapter in mentioned already was name whose Pető, Andrea
l treatment of venereal diseases of gonorrhea and syphilis and gonorrhea of diseases venereal of treatment l
on
atm sxa voec b te e Am, is, n nlss n whic in analysis an first, Army, Red the by violence sexual wartime ckground of the Soviet occupation and later state socialism that was forcibly forcibly was that socialism state later and occupation Soviet the of ckground 03 135 2003: coal wrs dmnnl fo histor from dominantly works, Scholarly
atrocities, because regarding the Soviet occupation of the country the of occupation Soviet the regardingbecause atrocities, . eie h nwy nrdcd esrmn o aoto, the abortion, of measurement introduced newly the Beside ). preadness of sexual violence during Budapest‟s siege in 1945 1945 in siege Budapest‟s during violence sexual of preadness : 130 way in which which in way
24 ). As these As ). aig eeel infection venereal having committed memoir that memoir
rape cases were silenced both on the on both silenced were cases rape lgl n fe aoto ws first was abortion free and legal , wartime rape rape wartime
was published only two years two only published was also as wr pbihd some published were ians, became state became Pt age ta rape that argues Pető . famous was publicly framed framed publicly was d lens. She published She lens. d
riuain of articulation se re to tried she h - supported in supported after een in
CEU eTD Collection emphasized he intervi werewhonot and raped were who interviewees of opinion between distinctions clear and violence, sexual wartime Lóránd as However, importance ar narratives rape way the that oral on hi argument his based who 2010), (2005, Mark James by argued and shared is violence narrating person perso third in rapeleftistnarrated respondents rape,her of experienceand the recallednarrated and waythey politic the that argues she that is works Pető‟s remain to order in silent remain to have women the therefore winners, the of victory the strengthens only cases these of violating through their enemy male humiliatethe to instrument an as serves rape that out, pointed sexualwartimeviolence of theoriesfeminist delineated above the militarism and wars of masculine nature the but alliedpolitical regime, Soviet new the by silencedonly not were rapes these war, the after that argues She 213). 1998: (Pető, care health sexual or abortion either of admini these in recorded were women those only because designated, be cannot abused and raped were who women of number approximate the or actual 137 asa with dealt acknowledged and perceived, only caseswere story interviews with Hungarian men and men Hungarian with interviews story . lhuh eős i ws o rv te curneo ms rp, h hglgt ta the that highlights she rape, mass of occurrence the prove to was aim Pető‟s Although ). eie tee eiinis Mr‟ agmn aothw h pltcl omteto the of commitment political the how about argument Mark‟s deficiencies, these Besides sexual narrating and recalling in views political of importance the about remark Pető‟s ewees informs their portrayal of the Red Army atrocities is atrocities Army Red the of portrayal their informs ewees , (1998 n
n ae sae b pltcl conflicts political by “shaped are and
that that alofexperiencebeing 2007). (Theidonraped
(2012 footnote 7)(2012 footnote : in many cases many in also contributed to the “conspiracy of silence” (1998: 204). Pető claims, as as claims, Pető 204). (1998: silence” of “conspiracy the to contributed also 1) hwvr eiit eerhr age ht hs s omn taey of strategy common is this that argue researchers feminist however 217),
one ot Mr‟ mtoooy lacks methodology Mark‟s out, pointed “ loyal e constructed is linked to the to linked is constructed e ”
to to the interviewee‟s framing of wartime rape goes hand in hand in hand goes rape wartime of framing interviewee‟s the . their
men (Pető men
women with middle with women 25 al commitment of the rape victims informed the informed victims rape the of commitment al
2003
over the Hungarian past” (2005: (2005: past” Hungarian the over : strative systems who used the services services the used who systems strative 141 “
public health public addressing of of addressing ). Another important argument of of argument important Another ). important feminist theories of of theories feminist important - “ class background. M background. class important for my research my for important property ”
” problem (Pető (Pető problem these cases‟ these , an , d the the d “ ark states states ark retelling political 2003: 135). 135). , as , ”
CEU eTD Collection interviews, diaries, on sub a dedicated Ungváry relies documents. archival and memoirs he investigation this In civilians. Hungarian against atrocities this on entit militaryevent book a published Ungváry Krisztián historian, Hungarian another siege, Budapest‟s withsaturated were (139).nationalism of understanding “truth of the form a as violence complicates sexual wartime addressing Mark Furthermore neglected. are opinions other while conservative the are case Hungary‟s in which 158), ibid.: (Mark agendas” politic contemporary “support which publicity get rapes of framings those only that highlights black on based not were which t pattern third the In 152). soldiersdo that r male the to contribute female the contrast, In (151). “honorable” as women offered willingly women that described narratives their and liberators, as Army Red the saw respondents Jewish Naturally true). stories these (realized 1989 after and propaganda) Nazi them considered (mostly 1945 in cases these of thought they what between rupture a admitted often They 145). 2005: wer cases wi respondents for characteristic was framing other widespread s Army Red of brutality the highlighted war the of disaster greatest the as occupation Soviet the emphasized but occupation German the of importance the minimalized who responders, nationalist framing, of politics.nationalidentifiedthreeformsmemory the He with In the same year as Pető‟s research was published on the gendered consequences of of consequences gendered the on published was research Pető‟s as year same the In e also Jewish: here the denial or the marginalization of rape cases was typical (Mark (Mark typical was cases rape of marginalization the or denial the here Jewish: also e ness of these rapes these of ness ,
and did not acknowledge it as traumatic or asa or acknowledge didnot astraumatic it and led The Siege of - dominated narrative of narrative dominated hat Mark designated, people performed “more balanced” narrations, narrations, balanced” “more performed people designated, Mark hat . Racialized language was also characteristic of this perception. The perception. this of characteristic also wasRacialized language . - and
Budapest - white portrayals of the Soviet soldiers. As a conclusion Mark conclusiona As soldiers. Soviet the of whiteportrayals
oldiers that targeted every woman and emphasized and woman every targeted that oldiers (1998), in which he dedicates a subchapter to the Sovietthesubchapter atodedicates he (1998),which in hi bde t tee soldiers these to bodies their
consensual sex, instead framed instead sex, consensual 26
th leftist political commitment political leftist th - telling”, because telling”, - espondents of this group did not not did group this of espondents subchapter to the iss the to subchapter
form of victimization (Mark ibvictimization (Mark of form
the first by conservativebyfirst the and also defined these these defined also and
. the narratives about it about narratives the
This group of people of group This -
ainls framing, nationalist
rape as something something as rape ue of rape and rape of ue
who in many many in who ee actually were in
their lives, their often the id: al al -
CEU eTD Collection c be can which army, country‟s foreign a by occupied and invaded ethnicity was Hungary where Rwanda, or Bosnia like cases from differs Al The II.3. non the doeshesexualnotmention although violation, violated also Germans the that namely behavior, their between soldiers German with troops emphasizethat a to than army Soviet the to specific more m that claims he soldiers, Army Red by performed rapes 294) (ibid: male describes he meaning, symbolic its of instead biological their to according rapeable as women sees only that rape, of understanding “however as narrates he which betwee it counted Pető while women, 50,000 about raped, was population female Budapest‟s of 10% about that determinated Ungváry Pető, with contrast In vehemence. fighting the of part inherent w through 1994), (Enloe “lootpillageandrape” of concept Enloe‟s issuesechoes these of understanding his together, occur always not did they if even subchapter, same the in looting and rape of events the investigates descriptive his to due discourse this to much contribute by a as violence sexual wartime portrays he Overall Soviets. the of portrayal diverse with events these of accounts personal quotes mostly he where looting, huh atm sxa voec i Hnay a be fae wt ehiie oetn, it overtone, ethnicized with framed been has Hungary in violence sexual wartime though
n 50,000 and 200,000 (Pető 1998 (Pető 200,000 and 50,000 n . Although he Although . German case German Ungváry‟s mentions that sexual motivation sexual that mentions
workscholarlyonlyisencounteredthe I Soviet compareswork the that hich Enloe captures the way in which rape gets naturalized as an an as naturalized gets rape which in way the captures Enloe hich
n fr n sal aarp cnies h psil similarity possible the considers paragraph small one for and neivbe t sounds”, it unbelievable ) Ungváry also mentions cases when men were raped, were men when cases mentions also Ungváry ) ny other European one (Ungváry: one European other ny
only looting andmurder looting only ( 27
- male rape as a form of psychological violation psychological of form a as rape male
nature of writing. Considering that he that Considering writing. of nature ass raping of the enemy‟s woman was was woman enemy‟s the of raping ass was hc rvas i heteronormative his reveals which
not the only driving force in the in force driving only the not really - product of war and does not not does and war of product lyd sgiiat role. significant a played 282). - 294). Still, I have to have I Still, 294).
eih population, Jewish onceptualized as as onceptualized
sex and and sex
CEU eTD Collection country,same although inthis internalconflict Serbia 7 German only is rape rap wartime Hungary, and Vienna Sovietreason wasthesoldiers.Theby abusethat committed as an commemorated in civilians against atrocities committed Army, Red Soviet ofatrocitiesalso here number are not were cities the as but number, highest the in Austria and Hungary in occurred rapes Berlin, Beside Germany. Nazi over complete triumph their make to women, German of bodies the through by affected mostly was empire Hitler‟s of 19 (Enloe “lootpillageandrape” capital the Berlin, that surprising not is it war, 1998) Turpin 1994, Seifert 2001, Goldstein othe many affected that Berlin to way the all through in commemorated mostly is what is Germanwomen of rape widespread the duringWWII, wasthat committed sexual Soviet violence Germa in sphere public the in recognized and commemorated more also but academia, in examined more only not is which period, time same the in Germany of case the groupo ethnic theeliminategoalto the served Rwandaalso in gain territories, and usedto were cleansing,which was rape wartime Bosnia, wome the rapes that army conquering a as acted country. one of territory the in place took conflicts the cases latter the in while nations; between fight a
I n the case of the Bosnian war, it took place in the formerthe in tookplace war,it Bosnian the ofcase the n e b te Soviets the by s
capi The atrocities that were committed in Hungary against women in WWII mostly resemble mostly WWII in women against Hungary in committed were that atrocities The Another similarity between Vienna and Hungary is that they were not only occupied by the by occupied only not were they that is Hungary and Vienna similarity between Another 7
tals of of tals armies committed in the Soviet front against Soviet civilians (Brownmiller 1975, 1975, (Brownmiller civilians Soviet against front Soviet the in committed armies The motivation of rapes were also different, because in Hungary, Red Army soldiers soldiers Army Red Hungary, in because different, also were rapes of motivation The fTutsis. Axis Power countries and countries Power Axis
but previously also by the German forces, and although both foreign forces foreign both although and forces, German the by also previously but is mostly explained as a revenge for the atrocities that that atrocities the for revenge a as explained mostly is
dominantly
94). In this sense, Red Army soldiers performed their victory also victory their performed soldiers Army Red sense, this In 94). surprising(Mark2010) feminist feminist
ocpulzd s gncdl ad s to fr ethnic for tool a as and “genocidal” as conceptualized (the main) collaborators of Hitler‟s Germany the high the Germany Hitler‟s of collaborators main) (the . Following the above delineated masculine logic of of logic masculine delineated above the Following .
andCroatia were alsoinvolved. 28 coal wor scholarly n in the defeated territories. Regarding the rapes rapes the Regarding territories. defeated the in n
Yugoslavia, between ethnic groups who lived in the in livedwhogroupsbetweenYugoslavia,ethnic cutis s well as countries r . ks,
vn f h S the if even
y I trs f the of terms In ny. (Brownmiller 1975, 1975, (Brownmiller ve ros raped troops oviet Hungarian and and Hungarian for thesefor mass CEU eTD Collection public The 1961. from wall Berlin the by divided physically later was territory its and powers, 2003). (Pető afterwards only not happened, they before were politicized even rapes these narratives of military.Therefore en local the by and their civilpopulation the by both enemy as received were they addition in before population, established was them of fear and soldiers Army Red towards attitude negativethe Therefore 2010). 2005, Mark 1997, 1996,Naimark Heineman 1995, (Grossmann beast‟ „red the against moral fighting the raise to order in Party Cross Arrow the by Hungary in used also was that propaganda German the through arrival their before long started Army Red the of culturalcharacteristic and racialas a rape wartime of depiction the Furthermore bot who Army, Hungarian and German the of case in true not fact in is which abroad, civilians rape not did army nations‟ their of soldiers the that implies framing This women. against individuals male by or women, isconceptualizedit therefore abusebetweentwonat asan army, Soviet the by committed only as framed been has violence sexual wartime cases, both In topic‟s my in territories. conqueredwomen “ the followed rapes S the by rapes for factor motivating main the as revenge of explanation simplified the problematize examples These legation 1997:70). Swedish(Naimark the attacked Army Red the when nationality” of regardless women “raped an during and 1997:70)Yugoslavia (Naimark in women Serbian ( ghettos and camps concentration/death of liberation through women Jewish 1997:75), (Naimark Silesia in Poles also but women, Hungarian or German rape soldie Soviet that is explanation this with problem the However, 1997). Naimark fe Nazi After significan most together case German the and Hungarian the links further What
angle is the commemoration of wartime of commemoration the is angle Germany ue o te ae (efr 1994 (Seifert game” the of rules
s defeat ‟s h committed sexual violence on the Eastern front (Krausz 2013). 2013). (Krausz front Eastern the on violence sexual committed h
te oto oe Bri ws iie bten h Allied the between divided was Berlin over control the , oviet army, therefore I would rather suggest that these these that suggest rather would I therefore army, oviet 29
rape, and how it was dealt with in the public. the in with dealt was it how and rape, :
58), as Red Army soldiers only raped raped only soldiers Army Red as 58), ions, and not by soldiersions,and not by against civilian d after the siege of Budapest they Budapest of siege the after d Hedgepeth one wt te civil the with counter
and and rs did not only not did rs Saidel tly from from tly
2010), 2010), CEU eTD Collection 8 its and film This rapes. wartime about silenced enforced the break to aimed that Liberties) take Sander‟s Helke era, this from film documentary a is work cited hostileagainstbehavior theunwanted Soviets. were accounts these because forgotten, be to recommended were and art were publi 1997) (Naimark state the by supported was infections venereal of treatment the only legalized, become Budapest and Vienna with contrast In 1997:104). (Naimark uniforms Army Red been wore who had bandits German pillage by committed and rape of atrocities these that stated Germany East in press the women, o the acknowledging of Instead postwar years. the in silenced be to continued and Germany, Nazi of defeat military the after even in framed Hence 376). 1997:365, (Heineman nation whole the for applicable them make to order in “degendered” wo of expropriation the case German West the In nation. German the of victimhood the express to used were experiences their and identity national German the into incorporated publicly were women civilian German of victimhood a when incidents, rape of framing postwar German West the to the 5, chapter in argue will I As control. French a for and British American, under was (FRG) Germany West and troops, Soviet by oc was (GDR) Germany East as territories, these in different was rape mass with dealing
However,later abortion was legalized inGermanyEast contrast in toWest Germany. cly discussed, but instead of dealing with rapes, only acts of looting bicycles and watches and bicycles looting of acts only rapes, with dealing of instead but discussed, cly 8 Niak ny on oe ae n hc voain aant h cvla pplto was population civilian the against violations which in case one found only Naimark . rape as gendered act gendered as rape In Germany, feminists started to deal with wartime rape from the 1990s, the most widely most the 1990s, the from rape wartime with deal to started feminists Germany, In continued incidentsof rape Soviettheoccupied Zone, in West contrastwith Germany, In iculated (ibid: iculated politica land
134 national national -
136).
i te atr zn o Gray aoto dd o immediately not did abortion Germany, of zone Eastern the in , or as a violence that targets women was neglected, and and neglected, was women targets that violence a as or
terms Naimark
(Heineman:370). gig eul bss y h Rd ry gis civilian against Army Red the by abuses sexual ngoing
claims that at this discussion rape cases were silenced were cases rape discussion this at that claims
men‟s experiences of rape were generalized and and generalized were rape of experiences men‟s 30
contemporary
Hungarian framing is very similar similar very is framing Hungarian ccording to Heineman (1996) the the (1996) Heineman to ccording BeFreier und Befreite und BeFreier considered to give rise to rise give to considered
instead shorter time shorter
(Liberat cupied it was it ors CEU eTD Collection problematizeseencanwhether itand asbe an objective abouthistorical source events. the in authentic as novel the As II analyticalwillthe chapters discussin fra degendered German as onwards 1945 from rapes these of suppression public the is Germany East with similarity The Germany. bo case Hungarian the short, In West Germany. in homes their to returned men German fighting the when began silencing that argues also Grossman silences, these behind logic masculine the silence” of “conspiracy of concept A then? silenced became stories these did why and How 50). that novels and diaries personal through women German were events these that argues Grossman Furthermore, guilt. or shame the produce not did hence and scale wide a on experienced was their it of because honor, loss a as raped being of experience the perceive not did women part) which specify o performance and logicmasculine the of victim” “universalahistorical an as only labeled be cannot they Hence contribu and from benefitted also they because victims, innocent argues Grossmann war. the of outbreak the provoking in role Germany‟s Nazi and war problematic, the of is context political proper victims the lacks its innocent because as women German of portrayal Sander‟s that out t pointed about critique her In focus. the in women‟s placed if are even testimonies rape, wartime rearticulate neutrally to is it hard how reveal critics feminist .4. Critiques of oral history oral of Critiques .4.
in Denied f war (ibid: 47 (ibid:war f oh onre Sve sye oils ws salse, hl te ota West postwar the while established, was socialism style Soviet countries both
book reviews, in the following I discuss the scholarly critique of oral history, oral of critique scholarly the discuss I following the in reviews, book was based on oral history interviews, which method was mainly understood understood mainly was method which interviews, history oral on based was ming resembles the contemporary framing of rapes in Hungary in rapes of framing contemporary the resembles ming - 49). In addition, she claims that in Germany (although she does not not does (althoughshe Germany in claimsthat she addition, 49).In
.
hrsmls h pbi faig i Es ad West and East in framings public the resembles th that German women cannot be portrayed as only only as portrayed be cannot women German that 31
are
traceable in postwar literature (ibid: literature postwar in traceable s Pető (1998) pointed out with her with out pointed (1998) Pető s e im Aia rsmn (1995) Grossman Atina film, he ted to Hitler‟s regime (ibid: 49 (ibid: regime Hitler‟s to ted often often commemorated by commemorated
feeling of of feeling , which I which , ). ). CEU eTD Collection Sa 1998). (Sangster historiographies traditional by marginalized been have experiences whose groups to voice give to used be can or used is it because history oral in interest have historians Feminist 1991). (Borland to alluded or claimed never respondent the during also but narrative, the that arguments life creating in result easy can a which data, the analyzing of of process interpretative recording the during present only not is position a Sprague 1998, (Sangster position power this on emphasis more even put has criticism feminist and testimony, produced authorshipshared itsbecauseof of nature. que the raises which project, collaborative a is historian it Hence interests. and the questions his through by guided process a recalling, its and memory subjective the on based are they argues He changing. always is past the of memory although past, the of „truth‟ the performing are they believethat interviewees personal by distorted w saturated are they although value, factual have not th argues He original). the in emphasis 50; (1991: about less us “tells narrative history oral an that emphasized alrea have that materials analyzing of practices other in than data, the forming involvedin more gets and past, the of construction the of part a becomes ibi (Abrahams, authorship objectiv credibility, subjectivity, narrative, orality, specific: history oral make that factors six in the through produced is itself data histor the persons, other living two from requires it that different is methods historical history oral makes what that argued (1991) Portelli 2010). it (Abrahams from recall they what and events past to meaning give respondents way the also but itself, Oral history as a research method is used to gain information of not only about the pa the about only not of information gain to used is method research a as history Oral otli mhszd ht h hsoins edn psto hs get nlec o the on influence great a has position leading historian‟s the that emphasized Portelli
n cmua mmr (Portelli: memory communal and nd Zimmermann 1989). It has also been highlighted that this power power this that highlighted been also has It 1989). Zimmermann nd d 1, otli 91. hog oa hsoy neves te historian the interviews, history oral Through 1991). Portelli :19, that oral history sources are inherently not objective (ibid: 53) as as 53) (ibid: objective not inherently are sources history oral that teraction of these two people. people. two these of teraction
32
at this does not mean that these narratives do do narratives these that mean not does this at t sbetvt, mgnto, eie and desire, imagination, subjectivity, ith dy been produced (Portelli ibid (Portelli produced been dy 49 ngster argues that even women‟s even that argues ngster events - 1. e ihihs ht the that highlights He 51). ian and the narrator, and the and narrator, the and ian He determined and analysed and determined He
hn bu their about than ). meaning
Portelli stion ity, ity, st st ” CEU eTD Collection ex those lived truly have would he if valid be only would memoire as genre its labeling that argues Suleiman novel. a of instead memoir a be to it claims he that is hoax, as disclosure he as child a Suleima as Holocaust claimed. the experienced never had author the as false, be to out turned Wilkomirski‟s is memories (Smit witnesses false untrue, be to out turned has narratives witness some as suspicion, with perceived commonly are identity 591 2012: Watson o behalf on speak and stand they as true, be to expected are experiences traumatic witnessing narratives of person First ibid). Watson and (Smith survivor the and experience the both of terms in authenticity, of questions the raises foremost and first narrat life personal of usage This 2006). (Assmann Holocaust the since importance historical past.representations of the a produced… is knowledge of kind what remembering, the through produced is position identity of kind what forgotten, is what memory, collective becomes memory whose articulated, and what speak, to authorized is who politics, considered be to has has it also because Memory 2010). Watson and (Smith remembering the of context historical the and purpose its by informed is which present, the from past the of reconstruction the but language. through mediated but pure, never is which memory, of nature constructed the highlights also choice researcher‟s feminist a as well as memory of construction their inform also view political religion, position, culture, race, class, of factors background because objective, as granted for taken be cannot experiences nd so on (Smith and Watson ibid Watson and (Smith on so nd
Personal accounts of traumatic events and human rights violations have started to gain to started have violations rights human and events traumatic of accounts Personal Testimonies, oral or or oral Testimonies,
n (2010) argues that the main problem with Wilkomirski‟s book after its its after book Wilkomirski‟s with problem main the that argues (2010) n hrfr te aiiy ftee ido wtesnraie adte author‟s the and narratives witness of kind these of validity the Therefore )
Fragments of data collection (1998: 92). Similarly to many other scholars she scholars other many to Similarly 92). (1998: collection data of written (personalmemoir writtendiary, ad asn 02. h ms cmeoae cs o fake of case commemorated most The 2012). Watson and h ). Therefore life Therefore ). : Memories of a Wartime Childhood, Childhood, Wartime a of Memories 33
narratives should not be treated as objective as treated be not should narratives f others who cannot sp cannot who others f ) are not representations of representationsof th not are ) and how can be remembered be can how and a Holocaust memoir that memoir Holocaust a eak (Smith and (Smith eak periences, e past, ives CEU eTD Collection WWII.in Hungary re true a as media Hungarian the in perceived mainly been has it and it, for authenticity of illusion the creates testimonies history oral on based was it that fact reverse a somehow is chapters next the in see will we what However, meet. to has it that requirements determinesthe what is accounts person first writtenlabeling of question the that insistsSuleiman what is nature lived their previously, discussed havethat duememory changing I thememoirs nature of to also includeelements fictional person although
of the Wilkomirsky case, as Kováts‟s novel novel Kováts‟s as case, Wilkomirsky the of he could call it call could he
a
novel novel
and imply and
with this genre genre this with
34 authorizes their validity as a form of truth telling. telling. truth of form a as validity their authorizes
Denied
is a novel, therefore fictional, but the but fictional, therefore novel, a is that it contains fiction. Although first Although fiction. contains it that presentation of what happened in happened what of presentation CEU eTD Collection it as authorship verified lacked diary be German the to as and have authentic, testimonies personal sources historical become to order in chapter, Berlin rai was authenticity of question the that presumable is it chapter previous the of light in texts, autobiographical are books both As identity. her about anonymous remain the in Weeks in times several raped being of including experiences, own her about wrote also who woman, German a of diary the resembles memoir her sense, this In account. t and perspective female this narrated who person, last) the now until up (and first the was she because important is It emigration. or exile in this about wrote mostly who 1998) Ungváry also see 1972, (Boldizsá well as authors male by acknowledged been have atrocities these that considering Hungary, in WWII in rapes mass and assaults and sexual narrates wartime it portrays that namely topic, its regarding important only not is memoir Polcz‟s Alaine III.1. storythe regardingitself tone and of narration.the find I addition In women. against violence of understanding important an Polcz‟s that argue to going am I chapter, this Through thesis. this of focus the novelthe of predecessor a is and socialism, fall state the of after years two Polcz Alaine first books: two Hungarian introduce and narrators, female by WWII of accounts person first on focus to going am I chapter, this In FemaleIII. accounts of WWII and wartimesexual violence
eas is uhr a aoyos Rdan 08. s rfre t i te previous the in to referred I As 2008). (Redmann anonymous was author its because One Woman in the the in Woman One
Conquered City City Conquered
counterpoint to to counterpoint also testified t alsotestified (2005), but the difference is that the author of the latter wanted to wanted latter the of author the that is difference the but (2005), Denied War , in terms of the portrayal of the Red Army soldiers and the and soldiers Army Red the of portrayal the of terms in ,
o her own experience of being raped in war in a first personfirst a in war in raped being of ownexperience her o 35
‟s memoir (1991) which was published only only published was which (1991) memoir ‟s
a dbtd n em o authenticity of terms in debated was Denied r 1982, Konrád 1989, Márai Márai 1989, Konrád 1982, r
a oy fte former the of copy bad a A Woman in Berlin, Eight Eight Berlin, in Woman A sed about sed Denied memoir memoir (2012) that is in is that (2012) pc rm a from opic A Woman in Woman A
serves as serves CEU eTD Collection “saintlyasisaportrayed calvarie” which (Vasvári 2011:78). this from exception clear a is marriage her but women‟), through go „Soviets that means it what understand didnot she when example (for tone ironic an in naivety previous her evaluate traumat the with contrast In him. loved but him, leave not did she that despite her; in interested not generallywas and her, on cheated wife, young his suppressed alcoholic, was who husband a with abusive, as described ea not is “War claimed is it prefacethe theas in asparallel book,portrayed and warare marriage of hardness throughout The novel. the of (divorce) end the and (marriage) beginning the frames relationship which husband, W of experience the Beside 11). 2002: (Tezla socialism of fall the before it publish not did she why reason a as situation political cou to wanted she which of stereotype the troops, Army Red the of image negative a gave that essay an was 1990s the Polc t as and psychiatrist clinical a as known previously (sexual)agency. without victims passive only as women) sense broader a in themselves(and represent not do and bea brutal as soldiers Army Red portray only not do occurred, incidents these which in war the of picturesimplistic agive donot they thatis texts autobiographicaltwo the connects further by revealed author the of identity 2003 in only and German, 1 in then US, the in English in 1954 in published first was diary This 2008). (Redmann z wrote her memoir in the 1970s the in memoir her wrote z The genre of of genre The
One Woman in the War the inWoman One ic nature of her marriage, as Vasvári points it out, Polcz tends to re to tends Polcz out, it points Vasvári as marriage, her of nature ic nterbalance with her own experiences, but she did not reflect on the on reflect not did she but experiences, own her with nterbalance
at the time of the republication of the diary in Germany was the the was Germany in diary the of republication the of time the at y Nihr s arae (P marriage” is Neither sy. I, h mmie lo eit P depicts also memoire the WII, a journalist, and its authenticity verified (Redmann ibid). What ibid). (Redmann verified authenticity its and journalist, a - 80s, and according to her, the main main the her, to according and 80s,
is a memoir, and was written by Alaine Polcz, who was was whoPolcz, Alaine by written wasand memoir, a is 36
he wife of a famous writer, Miklós Mészöly. Miklós writer, famous a of wife he
lz fot matter front olcz: o l zs arae ih her with marriage cz‟s trigger ). Her marriage is is marriage Her ). to publish it in it publish to
pattern, 959 in 959
first sts - CEU eTD Collection historyof Transylvania see Tezla. 2002: 4 9 “oh that claims Polcz but elderly, to ageyoung from women every raped they that Army Red the intention without brea sheit eveneasyhowexplains is point to one civilians. At other to also and her to bad and good being as sides both of examples gives but Hungarians, the even or propaganda German the before (Wolff Enlightenment 1994). history longer a has barbarian or backward Russia/Russians construction although Wolffargues Larryof this that (Redmann), as propaganda Berlin in traceable also is barbaric and backward as Russians the of portrayal orientalist East the Here barbaric. this not were they the in honorably more any behaved have not could soldiers “Hungarian East the maintains she point one at However, unpredictable. more were Russians that adding similar, as behavior their portray but soldiers, Soviet and German the between civilized/barbariandichotomy mainstream even be could we defenseless; be the only not unpredictable, is everything where way, complex very a in war of situation the portrays she soldiers, Army Red by committed were illness, infection, venereal violence, sexual lice, starvation, hiding, war: the to due faced she burdens the Hungary and (Transylvania) Cluj d in II War World of years last the in place
escribes the last year last the escribes Northern TransylvaniaNorthern
the Hungarian soldiers” (Polcz 2002: (Polcz soldiers” Hungarian the The story of of story The Polcz n i bt css hs dpcin cou depictions these cases both in and loneliness, hopelessness. hopelessness. loneliness,
does not generalize the Germans and the Soviets as good or bad in relation to the to relation in bad or good as Soviets the and Germans the generalize not does
(ibid:77) One Wo One
was a pa a was
of of - West dichotomy between Hungary and the Soviet Union and claims that that claims and Union Soviet the and Hungary between dichotomy West wiped out at any moment by partisans, the Germans, the gendarmes, or gendarmes, the Germans, the partisans, momentby any at out wiped the war in a chronological logic chronological a in war the War the inman . Furthermo .
rt of Hungary at that time according to the Second Vienna Award. For a brief a For Award. Vienna Second the to according time that at Hungaryof rt
Althoughshealsoonl - 7.
re, it is often highlighted as highlighted often is it re,
as it is included in its subtitle ( subtitle its in included is it as
70 a ivdd h Ws” Plz ibid (Polcz West” the invaded had ). In addition, in general she does not uphold the uphold not does she general in addition, In ). 37 d ae en nomd y h anti the by informed been have ld
airo h e Am soldiers Army Red the of havior y talks about rapes (including her own) that rapes (includingown) talks her y about
through a through k a women‟s spine women‟s ka evidence for the brutality of brutality the for evidence young girls‟ young Hungary 1944 Hungary
Russian villages. Only, Only, villages. Russian
duringrape lens and and lens 9 Te memoir The . 85 : A Woman in in Woman A - : “We were were “We : 1945 - - Bolshevik Bolshevik 6. This 86). depicts depicts ) takes takes ) even s CEU eTD Collection azt, hogybántalmaztak‖.testileg (Polcz, 2005:109). does it think I 10 wasalsoasraped everyonewas.she else dinner, After said:her mother is she table dinner the at and family, her with reunite to Budapest to arrives finally Polcz when is 2011), 2010,Vasvári whyc reasonPolcz the was (gonorrhea) disease venereal this if even soldiers, Soviet the to specific only was that disease extremityasasexual and sexual andreduces of infections wartime everyday the patterns, between gotit from husband.ownshe warThis her asserves f another the before even but her, to transmitted soldiers only that disease a not is Army, Red the by rape by common a was which disease, venereal addition, In 220). 2010: (Lukic narr the in of inscribed” “structurally but memoir,the in explicit made critiquenot is power patriarchal this although violence), of forms other (and rape of understanding based gender sexuality,i of but expression bodily. violated but raped, was she that feel not did she that states she as violence, of form a but act, motivated sexually a not is rape that claims F men. with but soldiers, and war with connection in violence sexual portrayonly doesnot she Therefore her. harassed sexually priest a and seriousillness for hospital of forms two the connects that structure patriarchal violence, the reveals based implicitly she women), gender against violence violence, violence/marital (domestic issue this regarding feminism face, women that violence soldiers,thereforenotthe evidence brutality of their their nonchalancebut dark is cow every dark the in Lord, dear well
Violatedbodily mytranslation, is Beside wartime sexual violence, Polcz also talks about domestic violence as a form of of form a as violence domestic about talks also Polcz violence, sexual wartime Beside Another important part of the novel, which is very often quoted (as in Lóránd 2012,Lukic Lóránd in (as quoted often very is which novel, the of part important Another violence. In addition she also mentions an occasion after the war, when she was in the in was she when war, the after occasion an mentions also she addition In violence.
not give back what Polcz meantPolcz what backgive not ould not bear ould not later inchildrenbear life. on her asked whether she had been faced with widespread rapes, she admits that admits she rapes, widespread with faced been had she whether asked
nstead violence, control and dominance points in the direction of thein direction controldominance nstead points theviolence,of and n atog se os o ue h vcblr o scn wave second of vocabulary the use not does she although and
in t in he he E nglish versionis nglish as translated it in the original:the in
, implying that this was not an intentional choice of of choice intentional an not was this that implying , 38 10
This kind of understanding of rape as not an not as rape of understanding of kind This ‖Nem
azt éreztem azt orm of evidence theorm forof connection
‖ attackedphysicallyme urthermore, Polcz explicitly Polcz urthermore, , hogy megerőszakoltak,, hanem
( 2002: - product of wartime of product 97) .
‖
(p.89), but (p.89), ation CEU eTD Collection history. and Denied III.2. other many for representative is that Hungarianwomen. rape) public, (wartime but event personal, an only depicts not it is that memoir considering her that aware is she that suggests deficiencies possib of confession this me for because important, gesture this find I 2010). (Lukic wrong something remembers she that possibility a is there that or details the all recall cannot she that erosi and forgetting change, to subject are memories personal earlier, mentioned have I as that noted, be In should it rapists. addition as remembered and about talked only be should they whether question implicitly women, because soldiersraped t Soviet whether question and violence sexual wassilence interiorizedmasculinealso nature of female theby popul completesPető‟ssilence” enforcedastheit out thehow excerpt concept of “conspiracy points of contr and period postwar the in women raped surrounded that hypocrisy” “social the grabs excerpt This „All right‟ Isaid, is„All not right‟ „it true. They meawaytookjustsick‟. tothe nurse (120 thre she Then said. mother my one‟, not are You whores. were who those only but „Yes, too‟. here, women away took they said You woman! every raped they away, everyone took they said I „Mother, tr the is it „Mother, her. at looked I them!‟ believe might people stories, nasty such tell don‟t girl, dear My I find Polcz‟s memoir important according to its complex understanding and depiction of of depiction and understanding complex its to according important memoir Polcz‟s find I was published in 2012 and was wri was 2012 and in published was Denied btd otervciiainadsimtzto nte society the in stigmatization and victimization their to ibuted Denied
is her first book, although previously she had published some short literary short some published had she previously although book, first her is for uth‟. She began crying and put her arms around me. Then I said, I Then me. around arms her put and crying began She uth‟. irpig h smlsi dpcin f h Rd ry Plz os not does Polcz Army. Red the of depiction simplistic the disrupting on, and Polcz does reflect on this process and admits on occasion on admits and process this on reflect does Polcz and on, w herself on me and begged, „My dear, tell me it is not true!‟ true!‟ not is it me tell dear, „My begged, and me on herself w tten by Judit Kováts, who has a background in archives in background a has who Kováts, Judit by tten 39
hey did; what she does in this memoir is is this memoir in does she what did; hey ation
Lkc bd 219) ibid: (Lukic, (1998,2003) - 121)
.
This . le CEU eTD Collection historyin oral theas pointedout connected, and much more becometwo havethese war, lightof 20 the in but separate, quiet as seen be to used two the as memory, and debatesaroundtoalsoreferringbe historians‟ probably could she addition In period. time same the in groups different of lives private the from much reveal not do and economics, and politics like sphere public the of events describe and facts rel they as contain generally books history that gaps the to alluding is she statement past the of events” objective the “reconstruct can interviews the with terms past to come to “suitable” not is objective” be never can “which (…) teach” and books” kn be never can “it as Anna protagonist the of life ruined the portrays created she that novel the that and novel, her for source a as interviews ( of” lot “a used she that claims Kováts „Soviets‟. the by committed horror diverse the of continuity the by connected arelatter the and former the which in politics, the by new regimes established later the but soldiers, not that harms also but itself, war the only not was interviewees her with about talked she what that reveal interest of questions her WWII, is novel collect the of topic the and Although persecution kulak the than occupation, soviet the front, the war, “the the about them asked and WWII, through lived who sex), their specify sno of help blog). the (könyves with interviewees other found and aunt, her with interviews make to started she time, that at interrogated be to sick too was mother her as and childhood, her Accordingstated her writetostories. toshe claimedthisthatmotivation to ofbednovel, next the
knvs blog (könyves yn mte, h raie ta se os o ko mc aot h ea f e mother‟s her of era the about much know not does she that realized she mother, dying (a vörös (a postakocsi) socialist In interviews that were made with Kováts, she argued that “official history that we study we that history “official that argued she Kováts, with made were that interviews In
regime is a very common characteristic of the mainstream Hungarian memory Hungarian mainstream the of characteristic common very a is regime She made oral history interviews with 23 or 25 elderly persons (she did not not did (she persons elderly 25 or 23 with interviews history oral made She ) .
oás lis ht n otat ih h „fiil itr‟ oa history oral history‟, „official the with contrast in that claims Kováts .
committed, and this mixing of crimes by the Red ArmyRed soldiers and andtheby committed,this mixing crimes of 40
the changingthebetween relationshiphistory ivization”
a öö postakocsi) vörös (a w fo acie ad history and archives from own sok ) information from these from information )
th
a öö postakocsi) vörös (a century and mostly in mostly and century
WWII through WWII bl method wball . With this this With . y on hard hard on y s .
CEU eTD Collection “Russians” the and village their it reached occupied front and the deported, until an family, her gathered and were her star, for yellow personally the wear to forced were Jews the until lives Although narra asthe war, the WWII, of middle 1942.the in already isHungary in starting river, Tisza the near village, Hungarian a in place takes story The memo a as presented is story fictional her but Somlyói, Anna named girl old year 18 an protagonist, 1991). of kind different from of devoid terms in which interests, are and not are histories personal that implies she political, is history‟ „official that claims she as addition In historians. by for used is it what and method previo the in described I what account into take she does nor source, historical a as history oral of criticism the interview any in acknowledge or to refer background” s different from people of number adequate “an with made interviews the from themes recurring the emphasizing by eliminated be can nature subjective its and history, of discipline wit connection in military)” economical, (political, interest power kindof some from devoid is “never that selections of isresult aofficial because history objective, t asserted Kováts interviews the of one in Furthermore, knowledge. historical into incorporated not were lives whose women) (like groups marginalized for and violations, rights human of cases for mostly true be could this that anywhere out point oral ismorethatas ahistory authentic sourcehistoricalthan sh history although books, Vinitzky Olick, al has memory section,
ire, as the narrator is the protagonist in her elderly years, who recalls the events of her past.her of recallsevents who the years, elderly her protagonistin isnarratorthe asthe ire, rm h oa hsoy neves ht oás odce se rae a fictional a created she conducted Kováts that interviews history oral the From
(In the novel the narrator narrator the novel the (In
(a vörös postakocsi) vörös (a - Seroussi and Levy 2011). According to the above quote, Kováts obviously claims obviouslyclaims Kováts quote, above the to According 2011). Levy and Seroussi h the previous explanation, that oral history as a method can supplement the supplement can method a as history oral that explanation, previous the h so gained the status of historical source in some cases (Assmann 2006, (Assmann cases some in source historical of status the gained so
oral history was also questioned by scholars (Sangster 1998, Portelli Portelli 1998, (Sangster scholars by questioned also was history oral . From these statements it is presumable that Kováts does not does Kováts that presumable is it statements these From . las al te oit “Russians) Soviets the calls always
41 (könyves blog) (könyves
a hsoy s dsiln cno be cannot discipline a as history hat us chapter about the nature of this this of nature the about chapter us . In another interview she claimed she interview another In . tor claims, was not affecting theiraffecting not claims, was tor An, h narrator, the Anna, . e does e not ocial CEU eTD Collection about talk even not could Anna afterwards. or event that at word a say not did mother her but a was taken she shewasWhen raped, me, firstnot withme, recurringme”. “not statement herand not I, narrated the and narrator the between split the with illustrated is raped being as identity her of denial the causedru a rape of experience The as„that‟. it to referring raped been had she that deni she raped, was Anna After to. refers book the of title the that things the of one is denial this and socialism, during on later and era that in perception public its to similarly denial, and state,and later suicide.against committed the force on and jail in was husband her as ruined, also was life personal their and relationship, harmonic a had never they disaster,a be to out turned Her marriage committed. or in her, micro Anna‟s war, the After labor. forced for away taken and robbed, murdered, were civilians men and women Both times. rapes, diseases, starvation, soldiers, Somlyói” Anna another was That me. not was followed that things the all through lived who person the and end, an to came “Everything the with began trauma Soviet and American sh to which in bunker a create to had they as nuisances, only harm, personal mean not pres German the them For star. yellow the wear to forced were Jews the and abruptly occupation German The love. romantic the by ruined was life idyllic Her 33). 2012: (Kováts woman” old an became I and ended years student the army, (Hungarian) the from school) high (her Geduly back got we after months “two that states The framing of wartime sexual violence in the novel can also be characterized by silence silence by characterized be also can novel the in violence sexual wartime of framing The e t gi bc hr uiy ht h hd ot u t te ae ta te “Russians” the that rapes the to due lost had she that purity her back gain to der way from a bunker, where her mother and her younger siblings were also present, alsopresent, were siblingsyounger her and mother her where bunker, a wayfrom occupations, which was previously filled with friendship, tests in school and and school in tests friendship, with filled previously was which occupations, bombings and because her father was taken to the front to fight. The real The fight. to front the to taken was father her because and bombings
and and “ Russian - community made her marry a man who was twenty years older than older years twenty was who man a marry her made community never explicitly referred back afterward what happened to her, only only her, to happened what afterward back referred explicitly never ” lice, forced labor, and all these things happened to her many her to happened things these all and labor, forced lice,
cuain a te narrat the as occupation,
disrupted their life first because the school year ended year school the because first life their disrupted
( 90). What followed for her was constant hiding from hiding constant was her for followed What 90).
42
pture in her life and in her identity her in life and her in pture or retrospectively claims that that claims retrospectively or lbr o acting for labor d elter from elter ence did ence ,
and ed CEU eTD Collection This needs. sexual men‟s and rape between second and violence, sexual and war between relationship historical day‟ next the for tomorrow”( essential is that them, drew necessity unsatisfied old years thousand a if As there. me leave and relieved, be to possible, as soon as done it have experie us stayed of (alive)”( fe a just and cared, nobody that ago, long so happenedEverything to. tellto one no was “there socialism? of fall the after it about talk not d heroes “the and liberators, heroic as Army Red the represented they because incidents these silenced that regime new the on addition in man, microherwith blame on the iscomplemented the per was ( same the all was it one first the “after and herself by disgusted the after that described also She raped. being for responsibility their pondered victims rape the how recalls and purity, of loss the as consequence its and rape perpetrators. the of (men) group biological the to belongs he because suffering her understand cannot he therefore male a also is father asher that imply could it or man, frontof in sexualitygirl‟s a about talk to inappropriate is couldit paragraph), thataallude but of to ( too” man a was he th from return h After her. towards emotions show not did generally who mother, own her with this 154). The recurring theme theme recurring The 154).
village, the world know it”( know world village, the Anna Anna nces stated that “even if it was one of them, or many of them, they were all in a hurry to hurry a in all were they them, of many or them, of one was it if “even that stated nces ceived as a silencing effect silencing a as ceived 154). This quite vague statement refers to two things in my interpretation:theto first,twomy things refers to in 154). quite This vaguestatement only e front, Anna describes that “”about that”” “”about that describes Anna front, e described her first experience of being raped and as a conclusion of the rape rape the of conclusion a as and raped being of experience first her described explanation 248). 216). There is no further elaboration about this claim (it is the last sentence sentence last the is (it claim this about elaboration further no is There 216).
about 196). This explanation of hers (for why no one talked about rape) talkedabout one no why (for hers of explanation This 196). fits to the to fits : “w :
Anna sexual violence is that everyone knew who was raped, which which raped, was who knew everyone that is violence sexual hy talk about it about talk hy incorporates the traditional patriarchal discourse about about discourse patriarchal traditional the incorporates
she patriarchal logic of rape that I have referred to in the in to referred have I that rape of logic patriarchal –
the reader could reader the - did not talk community, that forced her to marry aforced thatto much old her marry community, 43
o not murder, loot and rape” ( rape” and loot murder, not o –
I was telling myself tellingwas I
about the rapes to her father herit rapes becauseto the about I did not say anything to hi to anything say not did I ask. The narrator claims that then that claims narrator The ask.
first time she was raped, she was she raped, was she time first how many times it happened” it times many how f s – gt fr h war‟s the for ight,
if the whole family, whole the if 248). Then why Then 248). m, because m, er father‟s er er w CEU eTD Collection 11 onl the are they because Holocaust, the for responsible are Hungarians the that argued subservient” generically are “Hungarians that stated Népszava Ke was2011another in indignation literaryprominent figure, by Kertésza(not ÁkosImre relativeof Hungarianin wrote and Hungary in lived not claimed is this all socialism: and Hungary elaborated” fascism, and Hungary WWII, in role anti “Hungary‟s wing right extreme mainly that remarked he HungaryAbout Berlin. to belongs person metropolitan completely Balkanized.A has city The Budapest. to belong not does person metropolitan A been. always have I person, metropolitan 2009. in birthday 80th his of occasion the on Welt Die newspaper the by made interview an in survivor Holocaust and writer famous Kertész, Imre was criticism with terms to „come to its of reluctance Hungary‟s when years, past problemthe from incidents two to refers the Kováts commemoration. and population, Jewish the against crimes German) (and Hungarian the this to according novel a story a created tha shenot shouldhave concept, write to wanted have would Kováts if Hence 2004). (Mushaben regime Hitler‟s with collaboration or past Nazi their to up face to reluctance society‟s German an Adorno, Theodor by created was past‟ the with terms to „coming the of inconcept the all, of past‟, First novel. the in the happening is what not with is this that terms claim will I following into come „to readers the motivate would and event this back needs. by natural a as legitimized is rape which in chapter, review literature
Kertész receivedNobel the inPrize literature in2003. ts) writ rtész),
Although Kováts‟ aim was to create a personal story of WWII that would realistically give wouldrealistically give that WWII of story personala create wasaimKováts‟ to Although
to be a Berliner, although he lived in Berlin in lived he although Berliner, a be to (nol.hu) r n dramaturgist. and er .
In the Hungarian media this interview caused indignation, because Kertész because indignation, caused interview this media Hungarian the In its past‟ was emphasized was past‟ its
ks ets i hs ril i te esae Amerikai newspaper the in article his in Kertész Ákos
in his wholelifehis in 44 t is about crimes of the Soviets, but insteadcrimesSoviets,of ttheabout is but about
(a vörös postakocsi) vörös (a
- eii oiin get opinions Semitic
only in the past ten years, and was born and and born was and years, ten past the in only . The other event that also caused huge causedalso that event other The .
(Kertész 2011) (Kertész 11 -
product of wars and men‟s and wars of product . The one to first raise this this raise first to one The . Kertész said that: “I that: said Kertész d referred to the postwar the to referred d
articulated . In addition, he addition, In . and , y ones (in ones y
am a am that CEU eTD Collection the deportationJews,talkedofabout the she answered that historicalasapresented reflects piece ofthat the past. would novel the if problem, a of less be would omission This revolution). 1956 the (after Israel to immigrated they that only survivors, Jewish of case the in mentioned not is Holocaust is there recollection; a as things. better acquire to managed others when booty other‟s each envied people how on is emphasis the because collaboration, debated a is collaboration more society‟s Hungarian much of theme a the be as topic, would interesting property Jewish of looting The reader. the in work memory cause book, the of end the until forgotten is later but novel the of beginning the in portrayed is deportation Jews‟ the of narration the as but past‟, the with terms into „come of storyline deportation.resistThisJewish alsothe didnot left and they troops that behind, German escaping food the that properties,Jews‟the for other each civilianshowwith depicted fought therefore id the with break to aimed Kováts sense, this In did state the of representativesand state the as just property Jews‟ deported viol Soviet the of victims both civilians andemigratedheCanada. withdrawn to was Prize Kossuth his wing, right the in indignation huge caused Hungarians the about remarks argum an made he that isproblematic it that admitted absolution seek not did and people Jewish against crimes regret and admit not did who Germans) with contrast utemr, hn oás a akd n n neve, hte hr nevees easily interviewees her whether interview, an in asked was Kováts when Furthermore, Kováts‟s stated purpose was to write a story that is not black and white, and to and white, and black not is that story a write to was purpose stated Kováts‟s issue the novel could be interpreted as the part which is aimed to motivate the reader to reader the motivate to aimed is which part the as interpreted be could novel the
Sgái 02 Vg 2010), Vago 2002, (Ságvári . Kertész later no reconstruction of the past in a historical sense. For example, the example, For sense. historical a in past the of reconstruction no apologized for calling the Hungarians “genetically subservient” and and subservient”“genetically Hungarians callingthe for apologized However ence
the novel is written as a memoir and the story is told told is story the and memoir a as written isnovel the
but and also perpetrators, as they were also looting the looting also were they as perpetrators, also and 45
in ea of the innocent Hungarian civilians, and and civilians, Hungarian innocent the of ea h nvl t s o fae a a om of form a as framed not is it novel the
ent based on biology. As his condemnatory condemnatory his As biology. on based ent
I think it is too weak to to weak too is it think I suppressed or at least least at or suppressed
(a vörös postakocsi) vörös (a portray not be not . CEU eTD Collection many tooare there now becauseit, to up face to possibilitythe have to order in known be to has past Hungary‟s that argues Kováts history. of version official the as population the on enforced trul socialismthat the alludingto times, many denied” and “silenced changed, been has which past, our with familiar become to have (Hungarians) we socialism” of fall the or 1956 revolution, the nor Holocaust, areSovietsthe with peopleeventswhenstolesoldiers‟ dead clothes. the out points versions, two these between In this. from son own his save to order in labor forced for selects man a when is case other The wife. his rape and away take would soldiers gi young the reveals man a when first portrayed, is betrayal this of forms Two members. family own their save to order in community their up giving and “Russians” the with cooperating village the from men some 2011)”. (Kováts blurb: its happened in that events true are claimedtells she everything person, fictional a even is Somlyói Anna “Although is authenticity books‟ The problem. the creates what is this and which book, authentic an is this that claims Kováts that is problematic is what Instead, accountability. (nove book the of genre the to according of representation a is it much how and T his excerpt shows the vagueness of how much this book is based on based is book this much how of vagueness the shows excerpt his opinion anti of kind TheCalvinist….. Catholic, GreekJewish, was neighbor theirwhether difference oássae i nitriwta e(ugras r o aigorps, “neit past, our facing not are (Hungarians) we that interview an in stated Kováts t refer can that novel the of part other The – words the put I
as it will be argued in the next chapter chapter next the in argued be will it as - – Semitism which is still traceable in the media and the public sphere public the and media the in traceable still is which Semitism
benefits did not exist inexist those small didnot communities.
into my protagonists‟ mouth, mouth, protagonists‟ my into of the German occupation (looting Jewish property) and the collaborationandthe Jewish property) occupation (looting the German of rls‟ hiding place because he is too afraid that otherwise the “Russian” the otherwise that afraid too is he because place hiding rls‟ what Kováts thinks of the past, although although past, the of thinks Kováts what l) it is a fiction and its authenticity cannot be called for called be cannot authenticity its and fiction a is it l) 46 –
is a taken for granted truth in the book revi book the in truth granted for taken a is
o the process of facing up to the past depicts past the to up facing of process the o y had its own version of WWII, which was was which WWII, of version own its had y ht o te i dd o mk a make not did it them for that
(my
emphasis;blog) könyves (a vörös postakocsi) vörös (a
oral history testimonies history oral . She claims thatclaims She . I am aware that aware am I other –
in my my in
villagers her the her
which which ews, CEU eTD Collection 248). (Kováts: them.” resist and them from hide better to able being not for responsible, somewhat also were we so war, every in this like behave soldiers that inside thought vi rape stigmatizing and (248).regime”Horthy ( terror such communism “with that years Soviets. the this population, the with from bore protagonist brutal the that violations the as examples many as by up backed more not is statement even sometimes were Russians and Germans with colla to volunteered who those that remarks protagonist the though Even front. eastern the on raped also probably soldiers Hungarian that speculated who did, Polcz as it rationalize S the contrast, asabove, way, rational a in portrayed are Hungarians the by committed sins the Although guideline. same inciden judgeto these want shedidnot that meaning permissive, even or neutral, as crimes Hungarian the to relationship Kováts‟ depicts excerpt This anclaimexamplewith the this book of mentioned): (already did predecessors our what judge to right the have not do we but past‟, the with we„cometerms totointerestingly, haveclaims and that fillingshe Although gap.of historical this not are that things The Hungarians‟ blameworthy behavior is rather emphasized in connection with silencing with connection in emphasized rather is behavior blameworthy Hungarians‟ The 10 person will be, as he is going from house to house with the Russians. He literally Russians. literally He the house with to house from going is willashe be, 10 person has he but him, rescue to headquarters the to goes Gyurka caught. gets son Koncz‟s Gyurka labor, forced for people collect Russians the when occupation, the during novel, the In savedheson? becausehis pe ten those because him condemnwe do So, back. came nobody died, them of alland people ten those sold implying that there is some kind of an an kindof issome there that implying Furthermore at the end of the novel, the protagonist sta protagonist the novel, the of end the at Furthermore oviet soldiers‟ behavior is not “excused” in the same manner, she does not not does she manner, same the in “excused” not is behavior soldiers‟ oviet acknowledged, and I would say that she does understand her novel as a form form a as novel her understand does she that say would I and acknowledged,
to provide ten other people in exchange. And he decides who that who decides he And exchange. in people other ten provide to ctims: “the most insincere were our people. Those who got away and and away got who Those people. our were insincere most “the ctims:
(a vörös (a postakocsi) snsdahi i epniiiy rd e bov him absolve we do or responsibility, his is death rson‟s rémuralom 47 acceptable way (saving his son) for these sins. In sins.In these for son) his way(saving acceptable
) began, that had never been even during the during even been never had that began, ) ts and created her character according to theaccording to character her created and ts
tes as a sum of her previous her of sum a as tes
This attitude This . She illustrates She . can be be can borate borate CEU eTD Collection sex enjoyednever furthermore she in, be wanted shenever to that marriagea into wasforced she dest and disrupted irreversibly was life her and rapes these of because children bear not could who woman raped a is nation the of symbol the therefore “Russians”, the by ruined was life whose forever. ruined andwas the that raped nation of andbody gendered afictional a Kováts story and created person with terms to„coming past‟in sensethe that the this of act an as valued be cannot it book, the of out left is Jews towards atmosphere discriminative the and war the of outbreak the toled that politics the of background important the because and deport Jewry‟s the from benefitted civilians that implied only but collaboration, of act an as framed never were acts these as However past. the of memory realistic more a towards step a portra negative a incorporated that arguewould I WWII. of memory historical mainstream the challenge really not did blog) right the of behavior the of disapproved she example (for feelings nationalistic extremist any without story authentic an create to wished o authentic an interviewscreatehistory can oralthat history claimabout underlinedher with be can idea This nation. the for symbolic and country whole the for representative novel this finds she pl take could it Kováts to according but novel, the in named not is place takes story the where place The suffering. national of symbol a appear be towartime representative,consequences its sexualthan which and in violence symbolic suppressionregimes‟ incidentsthe of arethese equally theby highlighted protagonist. as understood f the past. Readingimpression theinterviewsthrough Kováts thef thethatpast. with I had truly her, made royed. The Soviet occupation is portrayed as the biggest disaster in the protagonist‟s life, as as life, protagonist‟s the in disaster biggest the as portrayed is occupation Soviet The royed. ), but the kind of memory politics of the past that she represented (nationalist,conservative) represented she that past the of politics memory kindof the but ), In contrast with Kováts‟ aim, I will argue in the following, that this that following, the in argue will I aim, Kováts‟ with contrast In Instead, her novel has a clear symbolicisreadingthesincefictionalaclear novela nation, the hasof her Instead, narrator Kováts‟
ic te symbol the Since
critique of how raped women were treated by their community their by treated were women raped how of critique yal of the Hungariancivilians the of yal c iue o te ugra cvlas s yug noet girl, innocent young a is civilians Hungarian the for figure ic ace in any village or city in Hungary, which implies that implies which Hungary, in city or village any in ace - ig iiait move militarist wing 48
concept was used in concept Germany. in the novel, the in et Mga gárda” “Magyar ment this can be evaluated as as evaluated be can this
novel is rather more more rather is novel
, however , since (könyves ation,
she CEU eTD Collection addition In abroad. population civilagainst committed soldiers Hungarian the that crimes violent bombs and airplanes events, military all while teachers, about gossips love, and emotions to dedicated v a in portrayed is who girl, young a of focus me Germany with alliance what understanding the war, of context political the neglect to subterfuge territories. poss the or a raped or also as (Germans Hungarians) others violence that sexual mentioning no frames is there novel as practice, The or characteristic nation. national/racial the of representatives bad versus good German of contrasted this portrayal With 84). (Kováts: bad” anything said never finger, single one with us not touch did “they house their to accommodated were soldiers Hungarian when that highlight to rape who looters, violent unpredictabl drunk, always as soldiers Army Red of description stereotypical the follows The men. Nazi civilized as with soldiers German allied the warof portrayal the the and Germany into Hungary drew that decisions political the WWII, of context duties bi their fulfill cannot they as useless as themselves perceive and become this they lose capacity, they if and capacity, reproductive and sexuality their through nation the to relation from also sense broader a in and occupation Soviet the of because nation the of disruption the expresses which nation, the for narrative gendered a as read be can sexualityenjoy to or conceive to inability Anna‟s soldiers. husband, her with ant, and the possibility to not mention the Jewish laws that were introduced from 1938. This This 1938. from introduced were that laws Jewish the mention not to possibility the and ant, In addition to the above omissions, choosing a young girl for a narrator serves a good good a serves narrator a for girl young a choosing omissions, above the to addition In historical broader the of omission the is book this about problematic very find I What in the
traditional gendered waygendered traditional and and became - ugra ad ae “Russia later and Hungarian
every woman whom they could. In contrast, th contrast, could.whom they In woman every
state
interfile because of the gonorrhea the interfile of because - socialism. In this patriarchal logic, women are only imagined in imagined only are women logic, patriarchal this In socialism. ) (Das 1995, (Das forthcoming). Helms ibility that they could have behaved similarly in enemy enemy in similarly behaved have could they that ibility as gvs h opruiy ont eto fr example for mention not to opportunity the gives also , ery traditional gendered sense( gendered traditional ery 49
” odes se anand dcooy of dichotomy a maintained she soldiers, n”
that she got form“Russian” the shegot that
the boys were familiar with with familiar were boys the
e author felt it important important it felt author e who spends her time her spends who depiction
of Soviets of ological e and and e CEU eTD Collection 12 of reproductionduty and raped being of trauma her on move could she therefore war, the during her to happened what over got unsuccessful and her marriage end couldPolcz contrast In t (from free” break cannot “I is sentence last her and marriage), bad a to lead that t happened what of because ruined as life her perceives Anna mentioned, protagonist two the how in lies difference important The similar. very also is scene rape the of language and description the and infertile, them made that gonorrhea of infection venereal a got both rape, the of silenced experience and protagonist‟s her about care really not did that family a marriage, bad a had who girl old st fictional a is it although Denied rape. framing of terms in and literature rape wartime of experience the furthermore I committed, suffering. national o story gendered a created she victim, the by with dealt be can rape wartime how of complexity past‟ the and authentic how and love, platonic this incorporate wasthis ininterviews.representative event thehistory oral to chose Kováts why wonder right a was and country the of regent the was 1 chapter in described as Horthy Miklós because problematic, is themselves.carriedThis with they whosephoto István, son, regent Miklós Horthy‟s the with love is novel,it the of beginning the at
I awaream Polcz‘sthat novelis a memoir,but The conclusion can be can conclusion The a bad copy of Polcz‟s memoire, as its story traceably follows the patterns of the previous, the of patterns the follows traceably story its as memoire, Polcz‟s of copy bad a n h oiia sne f h cnet ad nta o atcltn te iest and diversity the articulating of instead and concept, the of sense original the in ol say would - ig emn al, hrfr raig hns ie hs n h nvl ae me made novel the in this like things reading therefore ally, Germany wing performed agency. agency. performed Although Kováts‟ aim was to reveal the atrocities that the Red Army troops Army Red the that atrocities the reveal to was aim Kováts‟ Although .
that that eighteen young a is texts both in protagonist The ory.
drawn that the novel novel the that drawn h dd o cnrbt mc t te xsig et o ti topic, this on texts existing the to much contribute not did she
described that the protagonist Anna and her friends were all in in all were friends her and Anna protagonist the that described She 12
As I have implied in the beginning of the chapter, I find I chapter, the of beginning the in implied have I As i challenged the the challenged t t hasbeen was s
50 ocue wa hpee t te. s have I As them. to happened what concluded
by Polcz Alain Polcz by
Denied also on that she could not could she that alsoon mainly
did not not did
mentioned referred Hungaryreferred toin as literature.
e in e succeed to „come to succeed a much better way better much a patriarchal logic of rape, as as rape, of logic patriarchal o her in the past (rape past the in her o
fulfill - he past) ( past) he nineteen years nineteen
to terms with terms to the the – gendered gendered
both as both 255). f
CEU eTD Collection Hungary in and among Hungarians. intere was I becausereviewsHungarian for looking was I Overallauthor. its Hungarianby reviewof a versiontranslated a is onethat onlyfound I butEnglish, in bookforreviewssearched casesmany in newspaper‘spopular however homepage,withoutresult on offline reviewswereuploaded and scanned on printedtheir publishverreviews did in somewords.that thechance, Therefore newspapers search a and novel‘sauthor‘s theas isname using there title 13 person, fictional a is Somlyói Anna “Although that stated which blurb, mentioned the from was it of parts a without several (included plagiarized they which blurb, book‟s the on built were basically origina any present not blogs. personal two and portals news journals, offline), and (online newspapers portals, cultural online portals, literary from sources: media different from articles 29 analyzed have I else. anything about than journalism Hungarian framed novel the Is left ideas? differently by confronting generated topics Which silences? there Are book? violen sexual wartime to refer they Did reviews? book the in framed violence sexual is How why? did, they if and valuable, book this find reviews the raised?Did were issuesthat main the are What was book framed? the which conceptualized and perceived are according themes selected how of sense general a get to rather but texts, selected within contradictions at look to and book this reviews talkedabout particularbook not was in interested was I What introduction. my in outlined methods the through r analysdiscourse chosen have I Discourse IV. analysis of e
ception of the of ception Conside vrl I on ta tee eiw poal rva mr aot h p the about more reveal probably reviews these that found I Overall ring the limited amount of time that I had, I searched for Hungarian book reviews only on internet, by internet, searchedbookHungarianon I for only I reviews had, amountlimited that the of time ring ny reference or quotation mark). The most common sentence that I read in these texts these in read I that sentence common most The mark). quotation or reference ny to the to
novel novel - and and right media?
. My guidingthe My analysisquestions . for wer in the Hungarian media. I have analyzed all the book reviews about reviewsabout book the allanalyzed have I Hungarianmedia. the in l perception or framing of the novel the of framing or perception l
is as a method for my topic, because I was interested ingeneralwasthe interested I because mytopic, for ismethod asa
sion that were not published on their internet page.internetHowever,weretheir thaton published the sion somenot of ce as a broader pattern of war, or only in connection with the with connection in only or war, of pattern broader a as ce
Denied 13
My Denied
first observation was that these reviews commonly didreviews these commonly observation firstwas that ‘s facebook‘s addition, I alsoIn searched page. for novel the 51 ’s
perception (or of wartime sexual violence), but violence), sexual wartime of (or that I will point to in chapter 4. I alsoI 4. chapter in to willpoint I that e: what are the key themeskeyalong the are what e:
s ted in how this novel is novel this how in ted roblematic level of of level roblematic only only
perceived Denied how
CEU eTD Collection criticalreflections. any without author the of claims and blurb book‟s the on overallreliance their and reviews these of nature schematic the observationwas general first my mentioned, have I As of framing General IV.1. stateofHungary. memorycurrent in politics of framing the and fourth commitment found, political have between connection I that omissions and silences about third, violence, sexual wartime of framing the second, controversies), the and evaluation its (including book this of framing general the first, refer): questions mentioned above my which to (and in interested mostly was novel about critique a wrote person O Radnóti intellectualsand Sándor (e.g., Hungarian famous by reviewed also was which memoir, Polcz‟s of reception the with contrast in was that observation fourth My much. very other each reviewsresembled these as was framed, siaplay didnot wherepublished reviews the were outlet media the of commitment political the that was observation third My topics. silenced as to referred they what topic its valuablefor and sense historical a in authentic book this found reviewsaverage the novel, a is Although war. any of experiences general are humiliation) destruction, poverty, starvation, expe war the of most that mention or WWII, of context the in situation Hungary‟s position not do war, of context broader a in experiences r critics these although wasthat se My 2011). (Kováts happened” that events true are tells she that everything ,
and also and progressivediscussions namely For the transparency the For for the narration of WWII from an everyday person‟s viewpoint and for revealing for and viewpoint person‟s everyday an from WWII of narration the for of my analysis, I have divided this chapter among the topics that I I that topics the among chapter this divided have I analysis, my of Denied. Denie e ceive
In addition, there was no feminist review or debate of the of debate or review feminist no was there addition, In Denied of wartimesexual of violence d tto Orbán)such tto literaryprominentjournalists,besides no
-
or the state of Hungarian journalism Hungarian of state the or
as a historical novel, they do not situate the wartime situatethe not do they novel, historical a as 52 riences (death, sexual violence, looting, pillage, pillage, looting, violence, sexual (death, riences
Denied, wereabsent. gnificant role in how in how role gnificant n i te n aot the about end the in and
cond observation observation cond
Denied Denied Denied
CEU eTD Collection 15 14 are characters the “although or author” the to people old by told were which Hungary, in place took that events real are aretendencyasfollows: “These this events‟.Typical of „true framing and a but objective, something represents that method a as perceived only not was history oral reviews, the of most In explained.) not but stated only were his oral used she because it. on genre, novel her based and interviews literary new a established Kováts that claimed even asauthenticsomethingisitself.representativemethodological that and Somein approach authors oral conducted Kováts that mentioned critiques the All of WWII. of portrayal the alsoto itself, but narration the judge.” not does na the and nature, documentarist its voice, objective and neutral its highlighted: were things same valuethe literary its About representation. historical a as but product, literary a as not was book this on emphasis general the newspapers, or portals cultu or literary on published were reviews the of most Although WWII. of representation or source historical authentic an as also but novel, literary a as only not valuable it found them used. and media, Hungarian the unproblematically in and widely is that practice a is issue reference any without idea(s) other‟s portraying ethical an not is plagiarism that prove and journalism these of all Beside als critiques them). these of nature among schematic found the possibilities, be also can other each of plagiarism (as other and reviews blurb its on relied therefore and it read (critically) not did but book this of review had they that third and claims, those on relied therefore and novel the personal of no opinion had they that second, novel, the in is what about claims author‟s the with agree schematism This
Sándor Thisstatement was made by manyauthors, for example
Overwhelmingly the a Overwhelminglythe
2012
andkönyvkolonia.hu. 14 history interviews with WWII survivors, and they generally perceived this this perceived generally they and survivors, WWII with interviews history could point to three things about the authors of these reviews: first, that they that first, reviews: these of authors the about things three to point could
This purported objectivity not only referred to the voice of the narration and narration the of voice the to referred only not objectivity purported This
uthors of the book reviews claim that this book is valuable. Most of of isvaluable.book reviews Most this book claim of that the uthors
15
(As in all of the critiques, claims like this were vague and and vague were this like claims critiques, the of all in (As 53
see : rration which only “portrays the events but events the “portrays only which rration Feliciter.net;Sándor 2012;Sándor 2013. lso as something that reveals the „truth‟ the reveals that something as lso o reveal the general state of Hungarian of state general the reveal o
o rt a write to
tory tory ral ral CEU eTD Collection 20 19 18 children. however wasit published on ablog that is dedicated tofashion, consumption, food, culture, lifestyle, and 17 16 that fact the despite was This perception. reviewers‟ the in authenticity and objectivity novel‟s her of because posi authentic as perceived were conducted she that interviews the and research the Hence authenticity. of kind additional an created files war archival up looked she that claim absentOverall almost from reviews.critical the voiceswere changeable is which memory, their of reconstruction a are they because sense a in uncertain explicitlyclaiwas only authentic”. undoubtedly are wrote she stories “the interviews, history oral the novel” “factual a be cannot it that acknowledged constructed is that story life one portrays only it because and interviews those of mixture a of kind some is that fiction a fact in is it when reality” book this on this about argued herself Kováts chapter, previous the in investigated I as and reviews, these of all in method authentic asan granted for is taken Oralhistory authenticity. or objectivity itsquestioned historians by for used generally is history oral what explained one no addition In novel. her in interviews those from used actually she sources these of much how problematized it is nor critiques, the of any in explained not is method a as werejournalistdifferencesaboutimpact there thefor attributedthe and much how events. eve the fictional, Deményi,2013. Markovics2013. Bátai2012 andolvaslak.hu. Divány.hu. Olvaslak.hu, tion as a historian. Therefore it is the historian profession that assigned guarantee for her for guarantee assigned that profession historian the is it Therefore historian. a as tion 16 lhuhKvt lie ta hs itriw ee nipratsuc fte book, the of source important an were interviews these that claimed Kováts Although ora of usage the Beside behalf of her novel. There was only one critique that highlighted that it is strange to “call to strange is it that highlighted critiquethat one only was There novel. her of behalf
Thiswas alsothe criti Sándor2012,
nts are real”, and “behind every line (of the novel) stand real people and real and people real stand novel) the (of line every “behind and real”, are nts med in one review that evenreviewin that one stories that med thesurvivorsKováts these are told Orosz2012.
quewhich had mostthe negativeabouttone andportrayal of novel,the hsoy Kvt‟ akrud s n archivist an as background Kováts‟ history, l
54 o mnind h ciius f hs ehd or method this of critiques the mentioned or , 18
as the narrator is fictional, but still because of of because still but fictional, is narrator the as
. 17
There were some reviews that reviews some were There - historian and her her and historian 19
Interestingly, it Interestingly, m, historym, oral 20 . CEU eTD Collection 21 drew even who journalist one was There occasions. two at novel women‟s a as addition in novel, war memoir, fictional as or docunovel a as reviews the in perceived mostly is novel) (a book the the framing, this with connection In emphasis). 2011,my (Kováts principles.” of instead facts speak to so events, the portrays only she distance: her keeps author “The acknowledged: and reference) without (again, cited widely was which blurb book‟s the from quote other the echoes clearly which book, the i often very is happened) they as things the represents only but judge not does she that means (which objective as voice narrator‟s the reviews, these In realistic. more novel the made have could that thread a as even not all, at mentioned even probl not are Germany Nazi with alliances Hungary‟s WWII, of background political broader the of omission general the short, in but silences, about subchapter later the in framing an realistic a is novel the isin that everything believethat they that impression gives threads the these uncouple not do journalists the fact the and one, as treated are soldiers) the of behavior events, military based, is th interviewsof history oral personal narrator, the of (experiences true or authentic as perceive are truth as perceive journalists the what vague very is it reviews the in although untrue, wasoverall wrote Kováts what that implying not am I 2011). tha everything person, fictional a is Somlyói asanmainlyarchivist, worked thenpublisherasain owncompany,and her publisher. Feliciter Era „Reform Hungarian the was focus research main her previously
Fo
ny e o te ta epiil rmr ta te iiayhsoia eet ae hc they which are events military/historical the that remark explicitly that them of few only r example, Károlyir andKiss2012 2012. are stubborn things: the events follow each other without commentary, and actions speak actions and commentary, without other each follow events the things: stubborn are Almost without exception the reviews argued what I previously cited: “Although Anna Anna “Although cited: previously I what argued reviews the exception without Almost d truthful representation of WWII. I will elaborate on the problem with this with problem the on willelaborate I WWII. of representation truthful d shows the reality, but the edifications have to be deducedby us. However However us. deducedby be to have edifications the but reality, the shows
21
. a ol hglgtn ta tee ifrn sds f h novel the of sides different these that highlighting only am I ).
t she tells: are true events that happened” (Kováts happened” that events true are tells: she t 5 5 –
the story itself, or the military events (as there there (as events military the or itself, story the ntermixed with the historical objectivity of of objectivity historical the with ntermixed e survivors on which the novel novel the which on survivors e ‟ (nineteenth century) and sheand century)(nineteenth ‟ ematized or ematized genre ofgenre
CEU eTD Collection 25 guilt,even ifwe aboutforget it‖ (emphasis inoriginal).the of question the answerto aims which literature a in placerightful a Denied―Nevertheless,has version:Hungarian the In sentence.quoted the include 24 socialistperiod, when Red Army soldierswere indeed portrayed onlyas heroicliberators. 23 22 many in years for labor forced to age) and gender of (regardless people many away took they subchapte next the in depth in will explore I “Russians”(which the by women Hungarian of rape widespread the namely facing, invo folk‟s the deportation. of issues traumas process to order in that emphasizes also that review another in up comes guilt” “own our issuesas these of Framing generallyHungarians thatnot “wealsocommitted, are”innocent. things therefore were bad there non non means people, Roma targeted also Holocaust “us” therefore WWII, survived who Hungarians, to refers of one in up summed was which of allsoldiers‟clothing, dead of thievery their children, own their save to Russians the with collaborated who behavior parents‟ those behind, left soldiers the that food village and neighbors their by properties inaction community‟s the whencommunity, the Jews‟ deported the of expropriation collective novela(re)presents this that history coul that stated authors some and two, the between dichotomy strict very a is there that argument) Kováts‟ (following claimed also journalists Many recurs. history‟ „personal and history‟ „official Kováts reviews book the of lot in and history, “official” the with contrast grantedforis journalist.authenticitytaken theby documentary. of genre the with analogy an
Szerbhorváth2013. Ayhan Anta olvaslak.hu and 2012 Tóth 2012, Markovics 21. t s neetn, htti uhr ulse ti atce n nls ( English in article this published author this that interesting, is It 2012. l I have pointed out in the previous chapter, that Kováts values personal stories more in more stories personal values Kováts that chapter, previous the in out pointed have I The themes that were made taboo, and are “revealed” in this novel are denoted as the the as denoted are novel this in “revealed” are and taboo, made were that themes The the reviews as “ as reviews the 2013. 25
However at the same time this guilt is paired with another taboo that the novel is novel the that taboo another with paired is guilt this time same the at However
our
guilt” (emphasis in the original). the in (emphasis guilt” that and behavior, violent and inhuman lootings, their also and r),
who we are, actually. In a literature, that shows with mercilesspower with showsthat literature, a actually.In are, we who d never be known frombenever history d books.known Atog hs d nt ihih ta i poal tu fr the for true probably is that highlight not do these Although . - 22 Roma people. This means, that the book rev book the that means, This people. Roma
All these fr these All 56
Jews were previouslythefor fight were their Jewsdeported,
amings show that the novel‟s historical novel‟s the that show amings vmn i loig fe te Jews‟ the after looting in lvement 24
The possessive determiner “our” determiner possessive The Ant l 2013 al ‟ dichotomy between dichotomy ‟ -
Jewish 23
wih os not does which ) ,
n a the as and eals that eals our CEU eTD Collection its of part least at or topic its therefore raped, was she how describes narrator the when excerpt novel the As Hungary. contemporary in framed v sexual wartime is how out find to was thesis this writing for question driving main My sexualviolence wartime Framing IV.1.1. (könyves blog) treate and highlighted but acknowledged, only not are “Russians” the by committed violence the but war),in do one can else what that added them of some (and things bad and questionable morally on going is what isclearly this and them, face and acknowledge to but acts, predecessor‟s our judge to not is task “our” that claim re or reproduce only They journalists. the by judged not are sins Hungarians‟ the cont in victimhood) (and superiority and innocence nations‟ the about was assumption clear that a is there labor that is revealed forced reviews book these and What novel. the in looting represented killing, violence, equally but violence, sexual highlight only not do they but “Russians”, the by committed violence the on emphasis more much put th claimed mentioned, the are what and past, journalists.the do 2012)neither (Kováts events” the portrays judge only not “does novel the of narrator the and perpetrato and (innocence) being scalessymbolically: victimhood the in are things Two work. memory this in them with did “Russians” the that acknowledged be to have also things those but guilt, own its face to have community imagined an as Hungarians the that means only not understanding journalists‟ the in past‟ the with terms to „Coming occasions. i a ey ifrn mne, hc i wa m nx sbhpe i gig o investigate to going is subchapter next my what is which manner, different very a in d The reviews differ at the point when it comes to the topic of coming to terms with the with terms to coming of topic the to comes it when point the at differ reviews The .
at “our guilt “our at things that should be remembered and faced. Some of them as I have I as them of Some faced. and remembered be should that things ” is that the folk also participated in the looting, while others while looting, the in participated also folk the that is ” in this reviews: they acknowledge that the Hungarians also did Hungariansalso did the acknowledgethat they reviews: this in 57 – Denied
degendering violence degendering
was publicized prior to its release with an an with release its to prior publicized was rs (guiltiness), and as Kováts (guiltiness),asKováts rs and rast with the Soviets‟, as Soviets‟, the with rast
- evoke Kováts‟ evoke iolence iolence
CEU eTD Collection formof agency. women of number significant a (1998), 26 sure not representati how am I and agency, without and victimaspassive rape construct portrayal this that life, disrupt only pa soldiers all and any by raped being of instead sex, “consensual” have to going was she whom with man one chose to decided of protagonist the over get later could who and eat, to something get to order in body own her commodify to had also she that admitting experience, own her as described (1991) Polcz what with contrast in is framing This traumas. their over get can or agency have rape that illusionof the even awaytakes reproduction uncritical of kind this and aim, perpetrators‟ the follows clearly violence sexual wartime of framing This life. disrupts irreversibly isolated an claimed as Kováts and it portray instead and war, of hand other the On phenomenon. logic masculine general the in or WWII, failin by hand one the above,on portray by general a or motherland/nationaltheterritory, of violation asthe or Soviets, the of act brutal and is asan or violence, based gender of form a realized as been it has whether reviews and the in gained topic this emphasis much how novel, the to according violence sexual wartime framed and by agendas rejected political been has that issue an is rape or violence domestic like women, against violence offorms factother the with contrast in answered)fully be can question this that claiming not am p such gained it why curious was I obvious. was topic
lhuh hr i o icsin n h oe o vcis h gt rgat u t terps as rapes, the to due pregnant got who victims of novel the in discussion no is there Although - product ofwar. product What I generally found in these reviews was the kind of narrowness that I have tried to to tried have I that narrowness of kind the was reviews these in found generally I What
A Woman in Berlin, in Woman ulc neet Wa I a itrse i, a hw hs bo reviews book these how was in, interested was I What interest. public n neves bu te fet f ae a cmo, aey ht it that namely common, was rape of effect the about interviews in ve this is of Hungarianthisvecases. is of
ssing by. I am not questioning that (wartime) rape can and does and can rape (wartime) that questioning not am I by. ssing I found found I received after g to contextualize wartime rape in the broader context of broader the in rape contextualize to gwartime
the uncritical usage of what the narrator in the novel novel the in narrator the what of usage uncritical the abortion after the siege of Budapest, which for example is a is example for which Budapest, of siege the after abortion acknowledging that she is going to be raped anyhow, raped be to going is she that acknowledging 58
26 ositive feedback in the media (although I I (although media the in feedback ositive
to what happened to her. Similarly, her. to happened what to victims can victims eő argued Pető olated olated CEU eTD Collection bethat add thehe is only onewho familis makes only to literatureofrepresentation wartime with rape, he but Yugoslavia, former the in journalist a as war the of reported also and Vojvodina 28 27 any to reference no is there since addition In unique. be to implied are Hungary in committed Yugoslavia. former articlesdailya in newspaper were publishedthe ( discuss for Yugoslavia former(except the in war the likerape, wartime of case other Hungary. in did they like assaults committed also Army Berlin in women of rape widespread the mentioned author unablespeak were to KovátsKováts themselvestoon give and to had rely voice.them a a claim This public. the for traumas their revealed also who person, emphathetic an to experiences their about talk could those that w survivors implying them,” find not did Kováts like history a oral or to died, committed “either as they researcher because traumas, their about talk chance the have not did survivors overemph was also but authentic, describedaswas Kováts not only theseof In position reviews, whichescape. the thereis no from comm were rape wartime of experiences reviews the In topic. mentio already I whom authors the considering hand other the on hand, one the on novel the of popularity the by proved is it as false, is claim latter The it”.for reason and tono ittell to anyone,thereone told havewascould no time they the by and “s stories: their in interested was one no socialism, of fall the after and regime the by silenced were victims these socialism
Sándor2013. sameThe argument can be tracedinR.Kiss. ádr 2013 Sándor
The other statement of Kováts‟ abo Kováts‟ of statement other The When I state that there was no broader context of wartime rape, I mean that not a single a not that mean I rape, wartime of context broader no was there that state I When below), which g which below), ho were interviewed by Kováts are in a better psychological condition because they they because condition psychological better a in are Kováts by interviewed were ho
and and Markovics 28
This general erasure of other cases of wartime rape also means tha means also rape wartime of cases other of erasure general This lso implies that rape victims are victims rape that implies lso ained international attention regarding the mass rapes, although two of of two although rapes, mass the regarding attention international ained
ilence settled on a long, dark age, that did not want to listen to them to listen to want not did that age, long,dark a on settled ilence 2013.
n diin oe f h junlss Sebovt Gög ws on in born was György Szerbhorváth journalists, the of one addition, In szd a oe f h junlss lie ta a o o rape of lot a that claimed journalists the of one as asized, i arwith A Woman in Berlin inWoman A AWoman in Berlin ut rapes that the journalists follow is that during state state during that is followjournalists the that rapes ut 59 MagyarSzó
passive, and that that and passive, Generally they also did not did also they Generally
, or in other countries where the Red the where countries other in or , and to Polcz‘s memoir. (However, it has to Polcz‘s(However,has itmemoir. to and ) ) inwhich wasVojvodina,of ) the part
ned who previously undertook this this undertook previously who ned only described as “unspeakable” as described only the ones interviewed by interviewed ones the two
cases that I will I that cases
mention any mention
a t rapes t pa ralell 27 , ,
CEU eTD Collection andliterary writer waswho historianthe József awarded with prestigiousAttilaliterary award, and poet, a is who Borbély, Szilárd is statement misleading this of author the that mention, to have by or characteristic common a is rape that denies he framing, this With do. nations certain only that aut This following:journal,arguedthethe offormereditorsof the also one commentators, Oneof the article). editors‟under the comments co his of three by Postakocsi sufferi forthcoming). subjective and nature gendered the silencing and level, national a on incidents these with dealing for characteristic common a is innocence of group, ethic an of characteristic brutal and backward a as war, perceived in rather committed but logic, crime war‟s following a as acknowledged not is sense this in rape Wartime Hungarians. are rapes crimes mass as these as portrayed victimhood, national of kind some implies portrayal this case, any In Soviets. the of brutality extreme the intensifies unique as rape wartime portraying because it, thinkfamiliar thisI (which not pattern with either are war was armedconflictwherewar‟,orused as other shows rape of it that reviewers„weapon a the - product of war. I do not want to personally attack the male a male the attack personally to want not do I war. of product fighting nation‟s certain was anintimidation expression symbolicIt habit. of and victory of characteristic a is men) even (and women raping that Africa, and Yugoslavia former the in wars the from known be can It army. Soviet o part essential an were soldiers occupying Soviet the by committed rapes The
the “Russians”. the n bo rve ta ws ulse o te nie oeae f h journal the of homepage online the on published was that review book One hor explicitly ethnicizes sexual violence in war, and implies it as a non a as it implies and war, in violence sexual ethnicizes explicitly hor
(the red post coach) by the editor the by coach) post red (the
- okr.(hstcncly mea technically (This workers. that were committed by a nation (“The Russians”) against another, another, against Russians”) (“The nation a by committed were that Using wartime rape for gaining national victimhood and the moral status moral the and victimhood national gaining for rape wartime Using
- in - 60 chief, was supplemented by “official” comments comments “official” by supplemented was chief,
sta hi hre eiw r pbihd as published are reviews shorter their that ns
is mostly the case), or they did not didnot mention case), they or the ismostly g f oe o th on women of ng uthor of the above quote, but I but quote, above the of uthor
(Onder 2012) (Onder - ohr (Helms other e civilized practice practice civilized .
f the f A Vörös Vörös A
CEU eTD Collection 32 31 30 29 that burden the reveals book the that stated only violence, sexual or rape like words used not did about talk not did but rape, re only and statements novel‟s the followed they Hence silenced. and banned was Army Red the of heroes liberating discou public any where country, socialist a became which Hungary, in “Russians” stayed because the taboo thiswas violence made were that women (Das1995, women Helms rape, wartime of or book the of analysis gendered a gave that review no found have I that direction the to points colleinto violence sexualwartime “incorporate to attempt makesan that argues overall and protagonist the by perceived was rape how do neither violence, based gender as it frame not does he novel, the of thread rape the on focuses ( “wasted” her called even one which “dis a as protagonist the about talks approach”. “historical a author this journalits, using other by sexualviolence wartime of framing the similarlyto topic Unfortunately, this about wrote also Pető Andrea that mentions he refer not does he (but occurrence its for patriarchy blames theory feminist alsoclaims that and humanity, is against legally acknowledged asthiscrimes practice that aut the representativeHungarianunfortunatelyof the common issues.aboutgendermentality edu highly a that fact the
For example:For Csuka,ibid. Csuka2013. Gerincrevágva blog es he approach this topic from the perspective of feminist theory, as he mostly talks about about talks mostly he as theory, feminist of perspective the from topic this approach he es I found only one review that focuses on the thread of wartime sexual violence in the novel, the in sexualwartime violence of thread the focuses on review that one only found I The things that were highlighted in the reviews in connection with the rape of Hungarian of rape the with connection in reviews the in highlighted were that things The hor of which appears to be familiar with some literature about this topic, as he remarks he as topic, this about literature some with familiar be to appears which of hor
Győrffy2013 instead
- articulated it. Interestingly many reviews included a reference to wartime to reference a included reviews many Interestingly it. articulated cated man thinks about gender based violence as a cultural attribute is is attribute cultural a as violence based gender about thinks man cated
forthcoming) forthcoming) that Or NeubergerOr 2012.
hy ny erdcd seetpcl nesadn o di of understanding stereotypical a reproduced only they this form of violence openly, only implied it. implied only openly, violence of form this
honored girl” ( girl” honored megpocsékolt
we knowwelong. too for 61
). 30 meggyalázott
lhuh sae ta hs uhr Csuka, author, this that stated I Although s ta wud eaiey ota the portray negatively would that rse ), similarly to other reviews, from from reviews, other to similarly ),
Denied
to any author). Furthermore, author). any to ctive memory”. ctive
32 is important because it because important is
This means that they that means This 31
This review review This
shonored shonored 29
CEU eTD Collection 35 34 33 ca in that many means which them, between established were hierarchies no These level, same violence. the on random valued were and incidents looting bombings, labor, forced face: to had civilians the that o occurrence widespread the to restricted only relatives other or grandparents by generation next the to waspassed knowledge this and society, the in known are and were incidents these claimed memoir, b or mentioning of instead who others, are There balanced. are sides both for „votes‟ the but literature, as valuable more found they one which about contradiction oftwentytheproducts also years, past and dofailuretoa search their even web aboutthis topi literary the and topic this about knowledge general journalists‟ the about telling is books two m one only (and memoir Polcz‟s Alaine mentioned reviews the of third one only that fact The them. revealed already have texts other that or known (widely) are incidents these that argued others while important, and valuable wh topic new a is this that claimed some Namely, rape. wartime “Wow, Russkisthe or women!” raped K “Judit that stated that one the like title, their in case this included that some were there rape, about talk openly not do that reviews the with contrast In interpreted. be not could reviews these of some book, Kováts‟ Ková implicitly (and authors some as unknown so be would generalin thisorphenomenon Hungarianwomen, of rape ifwartime that highlightedbe to has it Here, feared. they wasit that what of explanation no soldiers,with the from hide to had and dust face their cover to had they that and occupation “Russian” the during face to had women Divány.hu R.Kiss2012. R.Kissibid., Among those who drew a parallel between between parallel a drew who those Among about silence the breaking of subject the on authors the between difference a was There
Sándor 2012,Győrffy Divány.hu, 2013, olvaslak.hu. ses wartime rape was interpreted as one of the many formsviolence that the of wasmany of interpreted wartime assesone rape ováts wrote on behalf of the women who were raped by the Russians” the by raped were who women the of behalf on wrote ováts
entioned entioned .
34
A Woman in Berlin in Woman f wartime rape, but also to other forms of burdens of forms other to also but rape, wartime f 62 Denied
and
) and/or drew a parallel between the between parallel a drew and/or ) One Woman in the War the inWoman One s cam t ta wtot reading without than it, claim ts) ich is why they found this novel novel this found they why is ich 35 . But this knowledge was not was knowledge this But . esides mentioning Polcz‟s mentioning esides , there is also a a also is there , with c. c. 33
CEU eTD Collection 39 38 37 36 infertile become cases many in who ruptured, is life whose passive, is who women, victimized gen but depiction This common. also was these offraming the mentioned as unspeakable, something h what about talk to possible it is whether questionable is “it and escape no is there which from things the words, no are there a of thepartstory. only novel‟s wartime understood but purposes, propaganda for used be should that issue an not is rape spoiled” be scene‟, „rape the from victimhood (Heinemannational 1997). west postwar the to similarly reviews, these by deg but gendered, not is sense this in victimhood national that arguing am I why is That referred. implicitly or explicitlyjournalists many which to Hungariannation, the of symbol a as killi or labor forced to similar is that violence of kind a as rather but Army), Red the by violated sexually also were men when cases of read haven‟t (I women against violence as realized not is violence sexual that means fictional who the anyone by substituted that be could narrator claims the of character which reviews, these in down traced be can that argument of kind another by confirmed is argument This victimhood. of understanding degendered a of direction were genderedviolenceforms differentthey po not) of equation (whethertheor of this addition, In occupation. “Russian” the of because precisely more but war, the during occurred
Győrffyibid. Divány.hu,olvaslak.hu KárolyiSándor ibid, 2012, Ayhan ibid, On two occasions, journalists problematized that the novel was popularized with excerpts excerpts with popularized was novel the that problematized journalists occasions, two On As mentioned earlier, mentioned As rlzd o l te Hnain rp victims/survivors, rape (Hungarian) the all to eralized 38 . Hence they didfind they Hencethisbehalfnot victimsofproblematiconand . the because wartime Bátai
i bid.
Ayh as te on tpolmtc htte“nytito h soy was story the of twist “only the that problematic it found they cause
an an wartime rape was rape wartime ngs. Therefore this novel and the female perpetrator is interpreted is perpetrator female the and novel this Therefore ngs.
ibid. protagonist)” (the her to appened
not only referred only not , Bátai ,
i bid, Onderibid, Neuberger ibid, R.Kiss ibid. - 63 mainly German expropriation of rapes in order to claim to order in rapes of expropriation German
to what happened to the novel‟s protagonist, protagonist, novel‟s the to happened what to framed as framed women
lived at the time of WWII. of time the at lived an creating
39
as dishonored, wasted people wasted dishonored, as unspeakable thing, for which which for unspeakablething, Bsd prryn rp as rape portraying Beside .
h nraie f the of narrative the
intsin the endered endered 36
This rape 37
CEU eTD Collection 41 40 personal a only not as portrayed is rape wartime of taboo the revealing large and by Although authors these of any by drawn been parallelhas no which to for rape, or violence domestic example Hungary, in violence based gender of forms other of perception the with contrast sharp women‟s disrupts that violence arrived”. also violence and labor forced Russians the by) (and “with civilians: against violent were soldiers Hungarian or German that possibility “Hungarians”, the and Jews of experiences the separate totally they first, that means which arrived, “Russians” the when skin their on felt only civilians certain gain groups certain infac thiswhyexperiences, case women why revealed be should logic very the granted, for experiences taking of instead argues, (1991) Scott as addition, In women. were they because experienced fac the on not is reviews these in emphasis the as any progress, means acknowledgement public overall its the and “horrible” that as convinced events not these of am framing I emotional casualties. national of box stereotypical a in put and life” adult whole their in war the during suffered they violence the about silent were victimsrapewho those to name and face “gaveit because important very is r these by but book the by only not narrative, one story, one into converted are experiences Their victims. passive 2. chapter on but community, the of continuity the physically to functions only not it and symbolicallydisrupt, to also but bodies, women‟s through community the and when humiliatemen itself, rape wartime of logic patriarchal the into fits framing t over get never could she because ruined, totally was life her therefore and
R.Kissibid. ―Gerincrevágva blog. rmn rp a usekbe lo is h ptirhl oi o rpeetn wmn as women representing of logic patriarchal the fits also unspeakable as rape Framing oh n h nvl n i tee eiw, ilne s otae a a eprec which experience an as portrayed is violence reviews, these in and novel the in Both
eviews as well, and in contrast with one journalist‟s claim that Kováts‟s book Kováts‟s that claimjournalist‟s one with contrast in and well, as eviews
lives and the solidarity that these authors discursively offer, is in is offer, discursively authors these that solidarity the and lives einrapewar. 64
41
Furthermore, the dramatization of wartime of dramatization the Furthermore,
lre sae h nto, s icse in discussed as nation, the scale larger a n scn, ht hy ey h very the deny they that second, and ta hy xeine wa they what experienced they that t 40
, these women women these , ertam. This trauma. heir are re are - silenced . CEU eTD Collection 42 novel that themes Soviets selected the by occupation the on concentrated only also that reviews so state of burden the with blended is occupation Soviet the and Germany Nazi with alliance worst deportat the the that and means dominant also most This the WWII. was of army memory/event Soviet the by occupation the that also but othe and rape looping, that claim only not country whole the of representative were events these that claimed events”. “authentic on based is but character, fictional a by narrated is that sense of claiming and victimhood national on built aninadequate and attemptinnocence, comingwith at terms the to past. still is that politics, memory distorted a to (1941 Union Soviet the in and Jews), and Serbs massacring 1941 (in Vojvodina in example for countries, other in civilians against committed conqueror. and Germany Nazi with alliance the reviews: the in prev have I SilencesIV.1.2. finds whole she lifeher wasted. as salvation, or relief of kind any in result or her help not did experience own her telling Anna, a fictional the for novel, the of logic very the to stick we if nation, the of interest the in also but silenced, and raped were who those of behalf on interest
Magvető.
As I have delineated above, above, delineated have I As ion of Jews are beside the point, and also implies that this retrospective emphasis on the on emphasis retrospective this that implies also and point, the beside are Jews of ion
iously referred to the main topics that are silenced and ignored innovelthe ignored are and thatsilenced topicsthe to main iouslyreferred Furthermore r forms of violence were present everywhere in the country and on the same level, same the on and country the in everywhere present were violence of forms r – broader broader
and the omissionthe of and , the violent crimes that the Hungarian soldiers and the Hungarian army Hungarian the and soldiers Hungarian the that crimes violent the ,
was portrayed was political context of WWII and the preludes that lead to it, Hunga it, to lead that preludes the and WWII of context political
the fact that the Soviet Union was an an was Union Soviet the that fact the Denied
as the as is framed framed is ‘ coming to terms with the past the with terms to coming 65 -
4 emblem of the horrible events of WWII. The WWII. of events horrible the of emblem
4). The suppression of these topics contribute topics these of suppression The 4). as an authentic, realistic novel in a historical historical a in novel realistic authentic, an as cialism. According to the novel the to According cialism. nd at the same time symbolic figure of of figure symbolic time same the at nd
enemy and its army a a army its and enemy
ocnrts on, concentrates ’
42
Authors who Authors Denied
and the and
and and ry‟s CEU eTD Collection left his in 2010) (2005, Ma soldiersthat Army Red the of behavior the downplaying theof but Narancs) Magyar alsodidwrite aboutthisHVG not novel. Denied about reviews published only origo.hu) (index.hu, portrals news bigger Similarly it. about reviews book publish not did Hírlap) Magyar Barikád, Válasz, (Heti newspapers wing right the of many media wing right the in Interestingly, commitment. political traceable a have not do which portals, cultural and literary online on published were reviews n the framed they connection way casual the and published were of reviews the which in kind outlet media the this of view political the find between not did I reviews book the in contrast, In occupation. way the influenced significantly very interviewees history oral his of commitment political the that argued 2010) (2005, Mark book thereviews in commitment Political IV.1.3. belongabove the didnot groupsto mentioned targetedNazi politics.the by a of representative only who WWII, lived through who civilpopulation the of experiences and people of particulargroup is authentic, be to claimed is that metanarrative this Furthermore, Je ofelimination or politics racial novel their to reference the any and Hungarians, in with side by as side soldiers as Germans, appear only Germans the of portrayal positive the questioned journalists the of None fact the Redthe Army by country the of occupation the for reason
on their other related thematic portals (divany.h portals thematic related other their on Some of the reviews were published in left in published were reviews the of Some that Hungary economically served Germany, served economically Hungary that ovel and in a broader sense the Soviet occupation. However, most of the book the of most However, Sovietoccupation. the sense broader a in and ovel - enn neveeswsnta l hrceitc o hs rves For reviews. these for characteristic all at not was interviewees leaning ws, not to mention homosexuals, the disabled, or the Roma is absent.is Roma the or disabled, homosexuals,the mention to not ws, in
which
hy akd bu wrie ae n te Soviet the and rape wartime about talked they 66
- wing newspapers (Élet és Irodalom, 168 óra, óra, 168 Irodalom, és (Élet newspapers wing
u, kotvefuzve.postr.hu). A leading weekly, leading A kotvefuzve.postr.hu). u, which also put a burden on the country. the on burden a put also which
is not taken into consideration, just as consideration,just as into taken isnot Denied
a underrepresen was
rk found found rk e, as ted,
CEU eTD Collection 48 47 Soviets.These together ourare shared history‖Sándor 2012. 46 2012. 45 44 43 arrived”. tragedy”. recove ever never could many how and Hungary in soldiers Russian the by raped were women many how documented not is it because articulate Somlyói Anna character fictional the emphasis Russians”. the by raped were who women the behalf on wrote Kováts “Judit title its by mentioned already was which way. sarcastic a in liberators as Army Red the about talked only others the all while committed, they that violations the besides people many liberated also Soviets the that highlighted end the at that shame”. the of died who some, were there women: old the o “e version online the in published was that review another In repor a of accuracy the with horror the “talk about them of both Levis‟sbecause work Primo writer and survivor Holocaust the and novel Kováts‟s between parallel a made Demény Péter rea a of story a isnot irrespectively this of thatstillvalue document, abook fictional the“this has that of Hungary” and in anywhere “almost happened have could story the that Irodalom, és Élet in wrote Károlyi authe the on remarked also them of many addition In protagonist. the raped soldiers “Russian”which in one as novel the about wrote all they example
R.Kiss ibid. R.Kiss ibid. Deményibid. Károlyiibid. ‖The Soviet occupation meant tragedies for many. But those who escaped the ghettos, were alive due to the to due alive were ghettos, the escaped who those But many. for tragedies meant occupation Soviet ‖The killed women old an when novel, the to refernce a also is latter The verybody knew raped women and children born out of rape. The Russians did not spare even spare not did Russians The rape. of out born children and women raped knew verybody 46
I only found one review that wa that review one found only I
48
on the rape thread: “e thread: rape the on
This author also notes, that “with (and by) the Russians forced labor and violence alsoviolence and Russianslabor (and“withby) forced the that alsonotes, author This
l people or peoples”.or lpeople 47
This review is a shorter one, that explains the plot of the novel,with the of plot the explains one,that shorter a is review This
ven today we do not know exactly how many women‟s fate does fate women‟s many how exactly know not do we today ven s published in a right a in published s 43
On the online version of Népszabadság, the reviewer Népszabadság,the of version online the On 67
tct o h novel the of nticity - 45 wing newspaper, in Magyar Nemzet, Nemzet, Magyar in newspaper, wing
However this this However herseld because she was raped. Sándor raped. was she because herseld f 168 óra, it was argued that that argued was it óra, 168 f f , was the only review only the was or example Csaba Csaba example or r after the after r t”.
an an 44
CEU eTD Collection ofdied it‖. you.‖ 52 51 50 withStalin in1948. Aspointed out chapter in Soviets2 also raped athere endthe of WWII 49 Hungarians,and asense thepopulation in broader betweentheSoviet. and Nazithe regime betw made is parallel a quote the of half second the in bolshevism. Hence of emblem the star, red the imply must of died they that star the Hungarians of from quote a is quote the of part first The guilt“ourtalking for earlier about quoted was (who Antal Nikolett author, another with statement word) to word (almost similar survive”. to family Hungarian pure a for even easy not was it 1942 in public Hungarian the from disappear never novel the to referring noted also “will and awareness”, that trauma a as Trianon about talked it as tone, nationalist its of because wing right suspiciously was newspaper Vojvodinian the from memory”. his from denied and love his lost hope, his of deprived faith, his of ( Man the indictmentof The power. of beneficiaries the forcers, silence th that claimed reviews these i as “communism” and novel the about talk articles these they that presumption the had I t published, checked I Before Szó. Magyar newspaper, Hungarian
Markovicsibid. Sándor2013. Markovics ibid. The simil The ibid. Markovics Yugosla – eie h aoe eiw I on to ht ee oh ulse i a ovdn based Vojvodina a in published both were that two found I review, above the Beside the theJewsstar, of rest villagetheof alsothe of Hungarians”diedbut the and Goldberger Eta only not However introduced. were Laws Jewish the when this with friend Jewish her calms Anna you.” will neither star, a of dies one “…no
says Anna towhensays friend Jewish theher Anna Laws wereintroduced. However, onewayanother, or they both
via was also a socialist country, but it was different from other CEE socialist countries as Tito brokeTito countriesas socialist CEE other from different was it butcountry, socialist a alsowas via
ar statement from Antal‘s (2012) atricle was: atricle (2012) Antal‘s from statement ar
s oe i a “nitet gis hsoy trny ps falsifiers, past tyranny, history, against “indictment an is novel is
”), and stated and ”), that: Denied were 68
, published in right in published
, but it took me a while to realize that in terms in that realize to while a me took it but ,
that Anna and Anna that
f they had also experienced it experienced also had they f e ei suc wee hy were they where source media he
―…no one dies in a star, neither will neither star, a in dies one ―…no e h sfeigo h Jewish the of suffering the een her family did not suspect “that suspect not did family her - wing media. It is striking that that striking is It media. wing 51 ember
This author had a very a had author This ) 52
50 who was disabused disabused was who
The other The . 49
One of One
review
CEU eTD Collection 53 thi of vastmajority The WWII. in Army Hungarian the of memory mainstream the is Army Second Hungarian the of tragedy The right extremeJobbik. the of characteristiconly Hungariansthe isnot violations by possibility victimhoodthe claim accordingnational to Warwhat “tous”tohappened World II. in sharplycontrastingthepillagedwould erasepossibilityof with Soviet it andthearmy, would erase also army Hungarian the that recognizingcourse, Of crimes. war Hungarian of subject its of because also likely, not is popularity mass Hungary, in works scholarly of visibility archival on based is (it genre book‟s the Hungary). Given in crimes Army‟s Red the investigatenot doesand Union regimes”. communist th in argues he what for Krausz reported and right the to connected is which movement‟ Spring „Hungarian The 2013). (Krausz will at alive people innocent and villages houses, burned violen troops Hungarian sexual and killing random looting, from Aside more. even or did, Army Red the what as brutal as civilians against violations Hungarian about documents and testimonies of files archival on based is book This (Krausz). 2013 in recently published was WWII,in tha Union Soviet Hungarianthe in about atrocities isbook a example good very acase latter the for However, againstothers. Hungarian army the by nor Army, Red the than others by to did Army Red the what to committed were that killings) random humiliation, violence, (sexual crimes similar of acknowledgement the and itself WWII to a was there reviews book the in out, pointed have I As and nationalism politics, ofmemory atmosphere IV.1.current The4.
Czene,2013. This hostile and dismissive environment dismissive and hostile This
sources and translations of these) and taking into account the lack of public of lack the account into taking and these) of translations and sources s army died in 1942 at Voronezh, and their portrayal as victims often serves as as serves victimsoften portrayal as their and Voronezh, at 1942in died army s 53
(Although the book is explicitly about the Hungarian troops in the Soviet the in troops Hungarian the about explicitly is book the (Although
“us” (Hungarians) is unthinkable to had been done neither to “us” to neither done been had to unthinkable is (Hungarians) “us” by other soldiers than Soviets than soldiers other by
69 is book and for his “public denial of crimes of of crimes of denial “public his for and book is against historical works that aimed to document to aimed that works historical against
tal absence of the broader context of context broader the of absence tal . Any incidents that could be similar be could that incidents Any . - wing party Jobbik, has accused accused has Jobbik, party wing ce, it is also argued that that argued also is it ce,
raped, murdered, raped, Denied
t
CEU eTD Collection i film the of description short a NMHH, of page web the On (NMHH). authority media national the by part leastin at financed and supported is being film Skrabski‟s Skrabski). to interviewees her introduces she that is presumption my extent, what no is it (although it in part taking also is Kováts Judit that learnt 2013, I September in cinema the in be to going victimsis rape filmabout the that besides and film, this in public made ent Biszku, Béla communist”, a is previously who and Skrabski, journalist Fruzsina is film the of director The WWII. of survivors rape Hungarian politicalnarratiand commitmentthe between causalconnection important the about argument 2010) (2005, Mark‟s challenge findings be can portrays Kováts that politics memory med by framed was novel this how in differences significant no were there as analyzed, have I that reviews book confirm can I ofWWII. memory mainstream as awhole population the by right with people gained Hungariancrimeswar of past the up face to reluctance general s the shows which the documentary, this broadcasted of channels none time that Since Hungary. in commemorated are they testified who Army, this of behavior the about Don at people local the with interviews recorded who Erdős, Péter entitled documentary a However, frontline. direct the on Army Second the send to decision German a was it as cruelty, Germans‟ the for evidence discursive uig h wiig rcs f h tei I l I thesis the of process writing the During Denied
in the Hungarian media is due to this memory politics, which is not only characteristic of characteristic only not is which politics, memory this to due is media Hungarian the in
iey is no hs one this into fits nicely a n ifrn pltcl sides political different on ia - wing commitments, but I would argue that it has been generally incorporated incorporated generally been has it that argue would I but commitments, wing and revealed and
(Ungváry 2013)(Ungváry co - made a film about the unveiling of the “biggest living Hungarian Hungarian living “biggest the of unveiling the about film a made itled Guilt and Impunity. Her strong anti strong Her Impunity. and Guilt itled that the Hungarians were really not as heroic and humane as as humane and heroic as not really were Hungarians the that on ofwartimeon sexual violence. - sided memory politics, and the positive feedback that it it that feedback positive the and politics, memory sided .
,
considered typical of Hungary. of typical considered ht ed e o h cnlso ta te id of kind the that conclusion the to me lead that 70
and ht fl i gig ob md with made be to going is film a that earned s published with the working title “Soviet “Soviet title working the with published s Doni tükör Doni
- communist feelings were were feelings communist ae iacd television financed tate
my argument with theargumentwith my was made i made was In this sense, my sense, this In t known to known t n 2 n 003 by by 003 CEU eTD Collection violence based an in result which lacks Hungary in rape wartime of discussion when era political victim inUnthe Hungarians Soviet committed that ones the with Hungary in Soviets by committed rapes the contrast they don‟t Why soldiers? ex Hungarian interview they don‟t/won‟t Why case? Hungarian the for important occupation motivation Soviet the and war Bosnian the between similarity the is What videotaped? it have and experience rape their about talk to want would victims that presuppose they do Why brutality? measure they do How than conflicts? brutal wars/armed more portrayed Soviets the are why as: such questions a mixed are that things many with loaded is it because length in text the quoted I document dishonor”. exploit: children who were conceived due to this violence. We would also give voice to to voice give also would We violence. those this victims: to additional due has conceived atrocity were who This children (..) it. process to society the for and indignity woman the for big this how reconstructs as is shame the that is presumption Mysociety. whole theand victims the indisposed retroactively that documentary psychological this in brutal most the perhaps but warfare, of form a as counts women of rape the wars In whataskthey them think theand aboutthis what and this, processes can wo We be. can woman soldier the of a motivation how to solution a for searching be rape helped who born were who children - centered commemoration is made about wartime rape, it rape, wartime about made is commemoration centered As it was pointed out by Atina Grossmann (1995) in the German context, even if a a if even context, German the in (1995) Grossmann Atina by out pointed was it As that
sense were the Soviet troops that occupied Hungary. (…) I intend to make a make to intend I (…) Hungary. occupied that troops Soviet the were sense
istogoing made: be s bet rm h aaees f riay nelcul, s oe f hs book these of none as intellectuals, ordinary of awareness the from absent is
unbalance
t apnd Furtherm happened. it From this description I I description this From d
women in solving their trauma in Bosnia after the war. We would would We war. the after Bosnia in trauma their solving in women and the society that it is still hard for the victims to talk about it it about talk to victims the for hard still is it that society the and d
nationalist from violence. violence. from
ion?Willlatterat discuss all?they the
expropriation of this trauma. The recognition of gender recognitionof The trauma. this of expropriation r, a ore,
(NMHH) visible uld also search for Soviet and Serb soldiers Serb and Soviet for search also uld 71 (..) (..) quote some parts that can can that parts some quote
i ws ecie truh h catr the chapter, the through described was it s We would also search for psychologists for search also would We feminist feminist .
n ugr? h i Sr soldiers‟ Serb is Why Hungary? in critiques has to be to has n gender and other soldiers in other other in soldiers other
context
imply nd raise nd
ualized
the approaches, kind of of kind
in many
the the - CEU eTD Collection suffering duringnational WWII. Hungarian of element an as it perceived and rapes these degendered reviews the victimhood, discourses: national gendered violence. sexual reviews analyzed As argued, argued, As Denied
from a gendered perspective or referred to the gendered logic of wartime logicgenderedof the to referred perspective or gendered a from Denied
while the novel has a clear symbolic reading of gendered national gendered of reading symbolic clear a has novel the while
and the book reviews both framed both reviews book the and 72
wartime sexu wartime al violence in in violence al CEU eTD Collection (taking war the after others to ‘us‘ by done advantageofsituation the Germans the similar) hadobligingly if (howeverunintentionally possible).‖made things of recollection different rather the and sentenceis: original bydominated was that WWII ofpolitics 54 WWII in women from dispublic disappeared Hungarian of rape widespread the decade last Soviet the in the However, by socialism. previously suppressed was that topic this to paid wartime examined th AfterHungary. in committed violence sexual that works scholarly the to and Hungary, of study case the with violence nation the imply to used widely (Helmsforthcoming). innocence only been has is that that pattern phenomenon a a but not Hungary, is for characteristic victimhood national claiming for women of rape the „us nationalist to “done dominant the things commemorates and fits emphasizes only framing which WWII, in This role Hungary‟s place. of understanding first the in country the of occupation against soldiers Soviet the by any without committed Hungarians, crime a as framed exclusively is violence sexual wartimeviolence againstargued about that critical women. at thinking I least publicly, of absence, o topic the about also voices feminist of lack the analysisto pointed This understood. (not) is women against violence which in way the in to nationalism, addition with saturated is it how and Hungary in remembered is II War World which bu about, talked is topic this how revealed only not violence sexual wartime novel the the This Conclusion
Judt‘s quote is in a sense takensense a in is quote Judt‘s hs hss oh otiue t te nentoa fmns rsac o wrie sexual wartime on research feminist international the to contributes both thesis This sis examined the contemporary framing of wartime sexual violence in Hungary through Hungary in violence sexual wartime of framing contemporary the examined sis Denied ‟” and silences “things done by „us‟ to „others‟” (Judt 2002: 163). 2002: (Judt „others‟” to „us‟ by done “things silences and ‟”
and its reception in the Hungarian media. The analysis of the discourses about about discourses the of analysis The media. Hungarian the in reception its and ― Two sorts of memories thus emerged: that of that emerged: thus memories of sorts Two
elcin f ugr‟ alac wt Nz Gray ht e t the to led that Germany Nazi with alliance Hungary‟s of reflection
cussion, but now this topic has been revivified. I am not claiming topic been but that revivified.has this not now am cussion, I
out of context, as in this article he talks about the postwar European memoryEuropeanpostwar the about talks he article this in as context, ofout
the articulation ofarticulation the 73 e fall of socialism, intensified public attention was socialism,attention public intensifiedof fall e
Germany‘s guilt and responsibility for the war. The war. the responsibilityfor and Germany‘sguilt f wartime sexual violence and the general the and violence sexual wartime f
things done to ‘us‘ by Germans Germans by ‘us‘ to done things - supported regimes during during regimes supported
54 t also the ways in ways the also t
Moreover, using Moreover, in t in he war, he ‟s CEU eTD Collection Especially, debates. public any create it will whether and discourses public in received be to going is film that how with comparison itself.rape wartime about less and nationalism, and politics memory of state Hungary‟s about more revealed thesis journ if been have could it as interesting as not are findings my that afraid am I possible, as data my of aspects many as out pull to best lacke that journalism of state poor reviews overall book schematicthe the the and nature of alreadypointed out thesis. theI through nation. the assymbols women conceptualize only discoursesthat national the political and the besides about talked be can violence based gender of forms other and rape wartime which feminist which with work the is This for. wished they if articulated, be should accounts personal their however silent, remain trauma this had actually who women those of voices discourses, these tr this nationalizes that topic, the of understanding patriarchal and limited a of consists only rape wartime of discussion public the because criticalvoicesis feminist problematic, lack the of is why innocence. That and victimhood program nationalist the for WWII in raped were who women of trauma pro extent some to and communism, anti of atmosphere contemporary the that suggest would I Instead, 2013. September in Hung cinemas in be to going is victims rape wartime about Skrabski Fruzsina by documentary a to due only is violence sexual wartime towards interest the revivalof the alists but also the academia Overallthatfeel consideringalists . alsothat the I but This research could be continued by the an the by continued be could research This analyzed I that itself material the was limit main the that feel I limitations, of terms In n gne shlr cud nae i odr o ihih ta tee r ohr as in ways other are there that highlight to order in engage, could scholars gender and
Denied
since as I argued, that political commitment did not play a significant role in role significant a play not did commitment political that argued, I as since ‟s portrayal of wartime sexual abuse. Also I am looking forward to see to forward looking am I Also abuse. sexual wartime of portrayal ‟s auma and portrays women as passive victims. Furthermore, in Furthermore, victims. passive as women portrays and auma d both critical and feminist voices. Although I have tried my tried have I Although voices. feminist and critical both d Denied - acs attds ie n potnt t eporae the expropriate to opportunity an give attitudes fascist
ol cue el eae, ht o ol reaches only not that debates, real cause would 74
alysis of Skrabski‟s forthcoming film and the the and film forthcoming Skrabski‟s of alysis Denied
Denied, Denied, of demanding national demanding of
and its receptionits and or reproducers of reproducers or considering that that considering arian ,
this this - CEU eTD Collection complexrevealnatureofthe also thatthis topic, I showtriedinto this thesis. how co previous Skrabski‟s that debate and indignation the Considering genre. its to according did novel the than publicity more and audience wider a have to going probably is film f this Skrabski‟s Furthermore about same the be to going is reception this whether looking am out finding I reviews, to book forward the in framed was Army Soviet the by rape and novel the how - produced film created, I can only hope for a more interes more a for hope only can I created, film produced Denied
was received, in which gender scholars and historians would also engage in order to order in engage also would historians and scholars gender which in received, was
75
ting discussion of wartime rape than rape wartime of discussion ting
ilm. ilm. CEU eTD Collection Peace and War Perspectiveon Gender A Violence: of Continuum 2004.The Cynthia. Cockburn, Susan.1975.Brownmiller, Braham, “ 1991. Katherine. Borland, 1982.Boldizsár,Iván. Zol Ripp, István, Ravasz, Tamás, Krausz, János, Kende, György, Borsányi, Mihály, Benkes, Assmann, 2005. Anonyma. Anthi Lynn.2010.Abrahams, References s Foa n Yuval and Floya as, Anthias, Berkeley andLos Angeles:Berkeley In UniversityPress: (e L. Randolp ofOral Practice History Research Gábor Székely, (eds and László Szarka. Éva, Standeiszky Péter, Sipos, Ágnes, Rozsnyói, 27( Books
Randolph L. 1999. L. Randolph
Aleida. 2006.Aleida. Giles, Wenona Giles, 2 ) ): . 1998.
261 .
Floya (eds), (eds), Floya
. - A Woman in Berli in Woman A In 273. Történelem IV: 1914 Történelem
Gluck, Sherna Berger and Patai, Daphne ( Daphne Patai, and Berger Sherna Gluck, d), d), Don
Ora History, Mem History, 27 h Nzs Ls Vcis te ooas i Hungary in Holocaust the Victims: Last Nazis’ The - and and Against Our WillOur Against Buda - l History Theory History l Woman 43. . New York:Routledge.. New htsNtWa ad: nepeaie Conf Interpretative Said”: I What Not That‟s -
Davis, Nira. 1989. 1989. Nira. Davis, The Holocuast in Hungary: A Retrospective Analysis. Retrospective A Hungary: in Holocuast The Hyndman, Jennifer (eds) Jennifer Hyndman,
- Párizs
UniversityCaliforniaPress: of - : Eigh n: Nation . Budapest: Budapest: Magvető. . - ory, and the Genre of Testimony. Poetics Today, summer, Today, Poetics Testimony. of Genre the and ory, 1998 . Park,Milton Oxon Abingdon, - t Weeks in the Conquered City. City. Conquered the in Weeks t . NewYork:Simon. State . Budapest: CégérKiadó. Budapest: . .NewYork:Martin‟s Press: St. 76
nrdcin I Yuval In Introduction.
Sites of Violence: Gender and Conflict Zones Conflict and Gender Violence: of Sites
andSchuster. e
24 ds), -
44. Women’s Words: The Feminist The Words: Women’s New York: New
:Routledge. Detroit . lict in Oral Narrative Oral in lict
- 6 Davis - 11 . Wye State Wayne :
Metropolitan Metropolitan ,
In Braham, Braham, In Nira and and Nira tán, ,
CEU eTD Collection Gross 1993. Joanna. Goven, 2001. S. Joshua Goldstein, Kligman,Gail. Susan2000.and Gal, Susan.1994. Gal, Frazon, Éva.2002.and Fodor, Fighting Men: TheSmiling CommunistWomen Genderof Subj the Cythia. Enloe, 2000. István. Deák, V Das, 1994. Rhonda. Copelon, mann, Atina. 1995. Atina. mann, eena. 1995. National Honor and Practical Kinshi Practical and Honor National 1995. eena. of California Press: 212CaliforniaPress: of G Herzegovina, War. of Time Soldiers. EuropeandForm the (ed) Magda Mueller, and Nanette CambridgeUniversityPress. Cambridge: Un and SocietiesEuropean Politics és tárgybemutatás, emlékmű politikairítus. Socialist State Hungary. Bosnia A WarandWorldII Europe its : In Hungary.
sfa n K Hráh Zsolt. Horváth, K. and Zsófia insburg, Faye and Rapp, Rayna (e Rapp, and Fayeinsburg, iversityPress. - Herzegovin 1994.
October Gender in the Post the in Gender Lincoln andLondo Lincoln
Deák, István Deák, Afterword Ftl opoie Te eae ov Debate The Compromise? Fatal A
In
a (72) edr oiis n Hun in Politics Gender . Lincol .
Stiglmayer, Alexanda (ed) Alexanda Stiglmayer, ufcn Gne: eocpulzn Cie Ag Crimes Reconceptualizing Gender: Surfacing er Soviet er Union A Ques A : 42 : a ad edr hw G how Gender: and War -
– . Gender & SociGender& 233.
n:UniversityNebraska Press:of 65. In , tion of Silence: the Rape of Germa of Rape the Silence: of tion 8(2):
Gross, Jan T. and Judt, Tony (eds Tony Judt, and T. Jan Gross,
S The Politics of Gender Politics of Socialism.AfterThe - tig ftermath. SocialistTransition: n:UniversityNebraska of Press:
lmayer . 256
New York:Routledge: New
Gender Politics and Post and Politics Gender ds), ds), mgétt Mgaosá. Tro Háza Terror A Magyarország. megsértett A - 286. ety Princeton,N.J. , Alexanda (ed) Alexanda , ConceivingOrder World New the 77 ,16(2):
ay Atnm ad Antifeminism. and Autonomy gary:
Regio
Mass Rape: The War against Women in Bosnia in Women against War The Rape: Mass ne s ender
236 ,
2002(4): p: Unwanted Women and Children. and Women Unwanted p:
The Abortion Debate i Abortion Debate The - 259. ae te a Sys War the hapes : Princeton UniversityPress:Princeton : 39 r olbrto ad eitne in Resistance and Collaboration er
Mass Rape: the War against W against War the Rape: Mass -
224 Eastern from Reflections Communism:
219
303 - 240. - - 230. 347. )
n Women by Occupa by Women n Princeton,Princeton NJ:
183 The politics of retribution in retribution of politics The
- 196. . Berkeley:University. ainst Women in the the in Women ainst e ad ia V Vica and tem
n Hungary, n
In
omen in in omen ect in ect ,
Fun -
mint 73. East tion ersa
In k,
- .
CEU eTD Collection Lo Lorentzen, 2013. Tamás. Krausz, 2012.Judit.Kováts, 1989. György. Konrád, 1995. Gail, Kligman, Tony.is2002.PastAnother Country:Judt, The M 1992.Judith L. Herman, F Elissa. Helms, 1996. Elisabeth. Heineman, 2010. G. Rochelle Saidel, and M. Sonja Hedgepeth, 2011. Carol. Harrington, Lynne Haney, 1947) CambridgeUniversityPress: Cambridge: 157 Müller,Jan New England New Holocaust Journal Feminist of Politics Change London: NewYorkUniversity Press.London: CaliforniaPress: University of (eds), Rapp Rayna and Ginsburg Faye In BosniainWar 359. Nat German West and . Budapest: Budapest: L‟Harmattan. .
. 1994.. ProudWorkerto StatFrom Women, the Good Mother: s n ad upn Jnie (eds) Jennifer Turpin, and Ann is
inHungary. . orthcoming. orthcoming. - Waltham, Mass.: Brandeis University Press; Hanover [N.H.]Hanover Waltham,University Press; Brandeis Mass.: Wener (ed) . University of Wisconsin Press.of University . Megtagadva. . Political Demography: The Banning of A of Banning The Demography: Political
A magyar megszálló csapatok a Szovjetunióban. Levéltári Dokumentumok (1941 Dokumentumok Levéltári Szovjetunióban. a csapatok megszálló magyar A Cinkos Traumaand eouin 35 n Post and 1325 Resolution
Frontiers: A JournalA ofStudiesFrontiers:Women The Hour of the Woman: Memories of Germany‟s “Crisis Years” Years” “Crisis Germany‟s of Memories Woman: the of Hour The Memory and Power inMemoryand Power Post Innocence and Victimhood: Gender, Nation and Women’s Activism after the after Activism Women’s and Nation Gender, Victimhood: and Innocence . Budapest: Budapest: . ional , 13 , Budapest: Magvető. Budapest: ( 4 Identity R ):
ecovery 234 557 Magvető. - - 255. 575. .London .
The American Historical Review Historical American The
78
yth 1998. -
18 : Pandora.: - S
War Europe 3. andinMemoryPost exual Violence against Jewish Women during the the during Women Jewish against Violence exual ociig h Nw ol Order World New the Conceiving - Cold War Feminist Politics. Politics. Feminist War Cold
h Wmn n W and Women The
14(3): bortion in Ceausescu‟s Romania. Ceausescu‟s in bortion –
Studies in Studies Presence Pastthe of the
113 - 150. - 101, no.2, (April) no.2, 101, war Europe.war r Reader ar e, and Regimee, and : University Press ofUniversityPress :
Nw York, New . International International Berkeley: .
I n : 354 . - -
CEU eTD Collection Vinitzky Jeffrey; K. Olick, 1997. Norman. Naimark, 2004. Marie. Joyce Mushaben, Nayanika. Mookherjee, Sally Merry Joseph Massad, 1991.Sándor. Márai,Akadémia Kiadó Budapest: ——— Hungary in Army Red the and Memory Social Divided Rape: Remembering 2005. James. Mark, 1994. C.A. MacKinnon, Polcz‟s Alaine of Review 2010. Jasmina. Lukic, 2012. Zsófia. Lóránd, gis Wmn n Bosnia in Women against 2002). Press, (Budapest: CEU emlekmuvek/ 2000 Reader 1949. Lens.Gendered andthe in Nation Bangladesh.Woman Blackwell. Journal East Heaven: YaleUniversityPress.New 1944 183
2010. - , 196.
- 62 (4): 24 , 1945. Engle . New York:Oxford New Unive. Cambridge, Mass.:Press Belknap ofCambridge, Harvard UniversityPress. The Unfinished Revolution: Making Sense of the Communist Past in Central in Past Communist the of Sense Making Revolution: Unfinished The 1995. .
2009 . and Present Past 49(3)
Emlékek versus emlékművek: Polcz Alaine a budapesti Terror Házában. Házában. Terror budapesti a Alaine Polcz emlékművek: versus Emlékek ociig h Msuie Gend Masculine: the Conceiving 2008. Historyofthe HumanSciences : 467: - “Rape, Genocide and Wo and Genocide “Rape, 6 O 76. . The Russians The - edr ilne a utrl Perspective Cultural a Violence: Gender eosi Vrd n Lv, ail ( Daniel Levy, and Vered Seroussi, - 483 Gendered Embodiments: Mapping the Body the Mapping Embodiments: Gendered - Herzegovina, nline: nline: eoy n te ooas: rcsig t Processing Holocaust: the and Memory
. No.
Aspasia
http://ketezer.hu/2012/04/lorand 188133(Aug): in Germany. A History of the Soviet Zone of Occupation, 1945 Occupation, of Zone Soviet the of History A Germany. in rsity Press. rsity
icl adLno: nvriy f ersa Press, Nebraska of University London: and Lincoln
Vol. 4: Vol. FeministReview 79
.2
men‟s Human Rights” in Rights” Human men‟s 1944 Hungary War: the in Woman One
217 - - 3(17) 161. - 221. er
:147 n Plsiin Nationalism. Palestinian and , No., 88:36
. - e 185. adn MA Malden, s. 2011. ds).
- 53. - zsofia -
h Cletv Memory Collective The Rap the of Politic Mass Rape: The War The Rape: Mass he Past through a a through Past he Ofr : Oxford ; - emlekek - Eastern Europe Eastern -
versus – Wiley Middle Middle 1945 ed - - - , .
CEU eTD Collection 2012. Ignác. Romsics, Berl in Frau Eine 2008. Jeniffer. Redmann, Jewry. Hungarian of Destruction the and Hungarians, Germans, 1998. Attila. Pók, 1991. Alessandro. Portelli, ——— ——— Alaine.Polcz, ——— ——— ——— 1998. Andrea, Pető, 2009. Lene. Otto, ———
1999. 2012. emlékezete. emlékezete. Internationale, 324 ( Esben UniversityPress: R History EuropeEastern and Central in aftermath its and II War World on Perspective Gender A War. at Men and Women Europeduring of 1940sand 1950s. (eds) Dirk Schumann, and Richard Germanica 2000 2005. 2002. 2003. nop . (ed L. andolp - 360 . . Átvonuló hadsereg, maradandó trauma. Az 1945 Az trauma. maradandó hadsereg, Átvonuló
Women as Victims and Perpetrators in Wo in Perpetrators and Victims as Women . Albany, N.Y. :Albany,University State. N.Y. York of New Press. 1991. Asszony a fronton:afejezet egy életemből Asszony War.Hungary,1944 Woman inOne the Budapest Budapest ostro eoy n te artv o R of Narrative the and Memory . ed
41 (3):193 41 )
ot omns Museums Communist Post The Power of the Object: the of Power The TörténelmiSzemle Asszony a frontona Asszony
32, spring. , Marien Röger and RuthMarienRöger and , ayr ő é ooz aoá. lodn va Elmondani katonák. orosz és nők Magyar
Magyar Sorsfordulók: 1920 MagyarSorsfordulók: ), ),
45 h Nzs Ls Vcis te ooas i Hungary in Holocaust the Victims: Last Nazis’ The - The Death of Luigi Trastulli and Other Stories: Form and Meaning in Oral Oral in Meaning and Form Stories: Other and Trastulli Luigi of Death The - 53 210. ma 1944 ma
, 1 , . Budapest:Szépirodalmi. könyvkiadó. - - 1945 2.: Washington, D.C Washington,
85
Life after Death. Approaches to a Cultural and Social History History SocialCultural aand Approachesto Death. after Life uem n ol a II. War World and Museums - in: - ben ben 107.
- Leiserowitz (eds), Osnabrück:fibre.(eds),Leiserowitz Trosae ad ruacps I Traumascapes. and Terrorspaces : 1989 80 Diary as History or Fiction of the Self? the of Fiction or History as Diary .Pécs:Kiad Jelenkor –
p i Bdps ad ina 1945. Vienna and Budapest in ape
- nőiszemmel 1945 . Budapest: Osiris. Budapest: . . Budapest: CEU Press. CEU Budapest: . . :. Historical German Institute: rld War II: The Case of Hungary. In Hungary. of Case The II: War rld - . ös budapesti nemi erőszak esetek esetek erőszak nemi budapesti ös Budape
ó. gy elhallgatni? elhallgatni? gy
sti Negyed sti Museumsetc. Edinburgh. Museumsetc.
Dtot Wye State Wayne Detroit: .
,29
- 30: Magyar Lettre Lettre Magyar Kjeldbaek, n In Braham, Braham, In
In
203 129 Colloquia
Bessel, Bessel, - - 220. 148. :
CEU eTD Collection Tonkiss, Transition: in Gender 2007. Kimberley. Theidon, I Introduction. 2002. Albert. Tezla, Száray Suleiman,2000.SusanRubin. Recon Quantity: and Quality 1989. Zimmerman. K. Mary and Joey Sprague, Stig ——— 2010. Julia. Watson, and Sidonie Smith, a War 1994. Ruth. Seifert, Experience. of Evidence The 1991. W. Joan Scott, 2002. Ságvári,Ágnes. H Oral of Use the and Debates Feminist 1998. Joan. Sangster, lmayer, Alexandra (ed) 1994. (ed) Alexandra lmayer, 797. , Miklós and and Miklós , ae Te War The Rape: Alistai Thomson, London: Sage: London: HumanRights Budapest Tankönyvkiadó.Nemzeti WilkomirskiWiesel./ Methodology. Nebraska Press.Universityof Verific of Ethic MinnesotaPress. Minneapolis:Universityof 54Press: Nebraska
2012. rn 19. “Analyzing 1998. Fran.
Wi : CEU Press:CEU 1 : tness of False Witness? Metrics of Autenticity, Collective I Collective Autenticity, of Metrics Witness? False of tness , 6: ,
Kaposi Studies on the on History of Studies
TheAmericanSociologist
245 ation in Firstation agai 453 r (e r - - 260. analysis preliminary a Rape: nd s Wmn n Bosnia in Women nst 72. - ds) 478. József ,
Poetics Today Poetics Holoca MemoryFactuality Recent and of in Problems -
14.
The Oral historyTheOral Reader
Mass Rape: The War against Women in Bosnia in Women against War The Rape: Mass
icus. I Sa, lv (ed Clive Seal, In Discourse.” - oc, Alaine, Polcz, n PersonTestimony 2006. .
Reading Autobiography: a guide for interpreting life narratives life interpreting for guide a Autobiography: Reading ,3,21,vol.no. HungarianHolocaust ,20(1) ötnlm V Kzpsoá, 12.évfolyam Középiskolák, IV. Történelem - 81 Herzegovina.
: 71 : Common Senese, Women, and War. and Women, Senese, Common
Critical Inquiry Critical
. London One W One - 86. . Biography (
Fall .
icl ad odn Uiest of University London: and Lincoln oman in the War the in oman In ) :Routledge. : 543 : . Budapest: Napvilág Kiadó.
Stiglmayer, Alexandra (eds) (eds) Alexandra Stiglmayer,
, Vol. 17, No. 4 (Summer): (Summer): 4 No. 17, Vol. , 54.4(F )
- istory. istory. eerhn S Researching 560
all
) In In : 590 : - - :
Formations, and the and Formations, Herzegovina Hungary 1944 Hungary ek, oet and Robert Perks, structing Feminist structing - ociety and Culture. Culture. and ociety 627. us
Budapest: . t Memoirs: t . Linc . Journal of of Journal
- 1945. 1945. Mass Mass 773 oln: oln: - . CEU eTD Collection 2010. Susan. Zimmermann, 1996. Katherine. Verderey, Vasvari,2009. O. Louise 2010. Raphael. Vago, Ungváry,Krisztián.1998. 1998. Jennifer. Turpin, Collaboration with the Nazis. Public discourse after the Holocaustafterthe Nazis. discourse Public the Collaborationwith 3 UniversityPress: (eds) Jennifer Turpin, Eastern EuropeEastern Sou and Eastern Central of History Gender and Women’s for Yearbook International Aspasia: UniversityPress. HungarianCulturalStudies and O. Louise Vasvári, In front). the 229 - 244.
4(1): Hungary: continuing trials of war and memory. memory. and war of trials continuing Hungary:
ay ae: oe Cnrnig War. Confronting Women Faces: Many The Fragmented (Cultural) Body in Polcz‟sin (Cultural) Body Fragmented The
Budapest ostroma Budapest - 18.
1 Gender Regime and Gender Struggl Gender and Regime Gender - What 24.
, h Wmn n Wr Reader War and Women The
L afayette:PurdueUniversityPress:72 Was Socialism and What Comes Next? Comes What and Socialism Was . Budapest: . 82 Steven
Corvina. ööy de Tötösy Nw ok Lno: e York New London: York, New .
. London; New York:Routledge: London; New . e in Hungarian State Socialism. State Hungarian in e In
Asszony a frontona Asszony Zepetnek
- oete, Lois Lorentzen,
88. Princeton, NJ: Pr NJ: Princeton,
n tur Rn (ed Roni Stauer, In
(e ds)
(Woman on (Woman Comparative
n and Ann inceton th th )
CEU eTD Collection http://ujnautilus.info/a 2013. Csuka,hallgatás A Botond. megtöré access Last http://nol.hu/belfold/20130411 2013. Gábor. nyomulás:Czene, Jobbikos ezúttalKrausz jelentikfel. Tamást 460729 http://www.beol.hu/bekes/kozelet/varga István Varga‟sof statements) “VargakijelentéseivelBelol.hu. közösségiIstván a tele vancommunity media media” (The is full 16,2013 http://www.kortarsonline.hu/20 fronton”front)Bátai,Blanka.a 2012. the(Girl “Lány on http://cultur GökhanAyhan, http://www.hlo.hu/news/judit_kovats_denied Nikolett.2013. Antal, relentlesstragedymarch A towards 24.10.2012 http://kotvefuzve.postr.hu/regeny Nikolett.lassan2012. Antal, a közepébeSzépen borzalmak (Arelentless march towards tragedy) Kováts. Judit elhallgatva/ silenced) with (Denied, elhallgatva. Eltagadva, Interview Kováts. Judit with Interview postakocsi. vörös A OnlineSources
.
Lastaccess ed .
a.hu/szub Last access Last Last access Last : May 16,: 2013May . 2013.Elbeszélhető. történelem(Narratablerémes gruesomehistory) ed -
: May 16,: 2013May kultura/elbeszelheto - ed hallgatas ed : May 5, 20135, May : : May16,: 2013 .
- 13/03/irodalom jobbikos_nyomulas__ezuttal_krausz_tamast_jelentik_fel - megtorese/ - bunrol .
.
http://w . -
- se(The breakingsilence) of istvan es - remes -
bunossegrol Last access Last
83 Last Last access ww.avorospostakocsi.hu/2012/04/25/eltagadva - - kijelenteseivel kovats
- tortenelem/ - ed judit18.03.1013 - ed kovats : May16,: 2013. : May 16,2013May :
- Last access Last van - judit - tele
- megtagadva - a
.Lastaccess - ed . kozossegi
: May 16,: 2013May - ed media : May:
.
- - CEU eTD Collection http://www.kormany.hu/download/0/d9/30000/Alapt%C3%B6rv%C3%A9ny.pdf text Kormány.hu. The new of constitutionthe access Last http://www.barkaonline.hu/helyszini ígyitKiss,hozta(That László. 2012.thismade élet Az way) nepszavahoz.html http://nepszava.com/2011/08/velemeny/kertesz Ákos. letter2011.Kertész, in Amerikai the Open Népszava. access Last http://www.es.hu/karolyi_csaba;8222;nem_en_nem_en_nem_en8221;;2012 41.12 no.October. én,2012.Csaba. én, Károlyi, nem nem Nem http://www.litera.hu/hirek/haboru 2013.Ákos.és Győrffy, háborúand Háború war) (War http://gerincrevagva.blog.hu/2012/10/24/megtagadva_282 vágva Genrincre reviewBook of blog. access Last silence) Book net. Feliciter.review of http://divany.hu/stilfuresz/2012/09/29/megtagadva/ ruszkikaNahát,erőszakoltak! Divány.hu. Russkis(Wow,nőket the women!) raped access Last facebook page: Denied‟s aki_nem_szabadulhat?ref=sso Péter Deményi, http://www.feliciter.net/cikk/ajanlo/a_tagadas_ ed ed e ed d : May 16,: 2013May 16,: 2013May 16,: 2013.May 16,: 2013.May .
Aki nem szabadulhatAkicannotnem free). (Who break
Last access Last https://www.facebook.com/megtagadva?r . .
Denied ed
Lastaccess : May 22,2013.May : - es . Atagadás. a és of hallgatás denialregénye” (The and novel - - tudositasok/3038 haboru 08.03.2013haboru Denied ed én notme,(Notnotme,me)
: May 16,2013 84
- akos
- Last access Last nyilt
- es_hallgatas_regenye/3198/ qaz . Lastaccess -
. levele -
Last access Last elet http://nol.hu/lap/kult/20130323 - ed hozta - az ef=br_tf : May16,2013 - ed amerik - ed igyq : May 16,: 2013.May Élet Irodalomés : May16,: 201
ai -
10 - 10.html .
3.
LVI,
- CEU eTD Collection access Last ht ofDescriptionSkrabski‟sNMHH. film hogymeseljen#.UVRu2vKjLVa#ixzz2Oqud5UfH http://www.campusonline.hu/kultura/irodalom/3421 Eszter.2012.let Neuberger, (And themmeséljen…”speak)hogy ”…És hagyni, elt%C3%B6r%C3%B6tt.htm http://www.magyarszo.com/hu/1863/kultura/91195/Minden Mark access Last http://kiadok.lira.hu/media/kiadok/magveto/Kovats_Judit_Highlights.pdf EnglishAn Magvető. publishing companyreviewthe by of _campaign=blhshare nak_akkor_elfogy_a_magyar?utm_ http://magyarinfo.blog.hu/2012/09/10/a_fideszes_kepviselok_szerint_ha_a_nok_emancipalod willpopulation decline). According (Translation: Fideszto doemancipaterepresentativesHungarianif thewomen „Fideszes Magyarinfo.hu. aelfogy képviselők ha magyar”nőkemancipálódnak, a szerint 2013 http://www.ko Book Könyvkolonia.hu. reviewof access Last http://konyves.blog.hu/2012/10/06/van_egy_meroben_mas_tortenelem történetecaught, megrázó (Gets gets raped Interview Kováts.Könyves blog. Judit with Elkapják, megerőszakolják acces Last tp://mecenatura.mediatanacs.hu/adatlap/238/Szovjet_hostett_Meggyalazas . ovics, Annamária.2013. Minden egészeltörött.ovics,Annamária.2013. Minden
s ed ed ed ed : May 16,: 2013May : May 20,: 2013.May 05,: 2012.May 05,: 2013.May nyvkolonia.hu/kritika/Oral
Last access Last .
Lastaccess ed Denied. : May 16,: 2013May source=bloghu_megosztas&utm_medium=facebook&utm
- ed history –
: May : thetragicthe history Soviet of occupation) 85
- .
1221 31.01.2013 1221 16,2013 Last access Last - es - hagyni Denied .
- Eg%C3%A9sz ed : : May 16,: 2013.May . Last access Last –
a szovjetmegszállása
-
ed : May16,: CEU eTD Collection 103619.html silence). Zsuzsanna.2012.Sándor, terápia. A hallgatás Történelmi wallfalaiThetherapy. (Historical of access Last http://www.magyarszo.com/hu/1930/Velemeny_Olvasolampa/94737/V%C3%A1dir .Zoltán 2013.Sándor, (Indictment) Vádirat Russians) írt(The denied wrotenevében self.Kováts womenJudit ofon werewhothe r behalf R.Kiss,2012. Judit Kovátsén.Kornélia. megtagadott az általA oroszoknők megerőszakolt access Last http://www.polhist.hu/index. in participation the“Women‟s sphere”) public Polhi http://magyarnarancs.hu/konyv/a 2012.,Ildikó. történelem margójáraOrosz A the(On margin of history) http://www.avorospostakocsi.hu/2012/09/28/maganhaboruk/ 2012.Csaba. Onder, Magánháborúk http://www Olvaslak.hu. reviewBook of access http://nol.hu/belfold/ebbol_lett_a_botrany__a_teljes_kertesz The HungarianinterviewNol.hu. oftranslation the Kertész. Imre with st.hu. Nők a közelétbenNőka kutatási st.hu. összefoglalása project the research of (Summary project ed : May 22,2013May : ht MagyarNemzet tp://www.168ora.hu/arte/tortenelem ed ed .olvaslak.hu/2012/12/21/kovats
: May 16,: 2013May 16,: 2013.May Last access Last .
,December14. ed . : May 16,:2013.May
Denied. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40&Itemid=45 - tortenelem
- judit - margojan 86 - haboru -
megtagadva/ - - oral 82601 - history -
interju_magyarul_?ref=sso
Last access Last Last access Last Last access Last - kovats
ed ed ed - judit : : May 16,:2013May : May 16,:2013May 16,2013.May - regeny aped theby at.htm - riport
Last
. .
- CEU eTD Collection Don a Mítoszok 2013. access Last kanyarrol/?utm_source=mandiner&utm_medium=l Krisztián. http://index.hu/tudomany/tortenelem/2013/01/17/mitoszok_a_don Ungváry, cimu http://www.kultography.hu/2012/12/17/nezzunk Mariann.2012.aTóth, Nézzünkmúlttal(Let‟sszembe up past) face the 16,2013 http://www.librarius.hu/kritika/460 György.Szerbhorváth, 2013. cold (Icereport) “Jéghideg beszámoló” - konyvet .
ed : May 16,: 2013.May - olvasva/
Last access Last
- ed szerkeszt/2764 : May16,: 2013 87 -
szembe - ink&utm_campaign=mandiner_201304# a .
- jeghideg - a - multtal - beszamolo - - kovats
- judit Last access Last - megtagadva - kanyarról. ed : May
-