“Ghosts in the Background” and “The Price of the War” Representations of the Lapland War in Finnish Museums
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Nordisk Museologi 2016 • 2, s. 60–77 “Ghosts in the background” and “The price of the war” Representations of the Lapland War in Finnish museums Suzie Thomas & Eerika Koskinen-Koivisto Abstract: Museums decide which events and perspectives to privilege over others in their exhibitions. In the context of “difficult” or “dark” histories – in which the subject matter might be painful, controversial or in some other way challenging for one or more community or interest groups to reconcile with – some events may be marginalized or ignored. This may also happen due to official narratives diverting attention to other events that have come to be seen as more “important” or worthy of discussion. We explore the ways that information about the Lapland War (1944–1945) is incorporated into permanent exhibitions at five Finnish museums: the Provincial Museum of Lapland; Siida – the National Museum of the Finnish Sámi; the Gold Prospector Museum; the Military Museum of Finland; and the Finnish Airforce Museum. Despite the significant social and environmental upheavals brought about by the brief but destructive conflict, it seems surprisingly rarely addressed.1 Keywords: Dark heritage, dark tourism, difficult histories, exhibition analysis, Second World War, Lapland War, Sámi heritage, military history. Over the past few decades, interest has immaterial legacies of the Second World War, noticeably increased in “dark” or “difficult” how visitors experience them, and the strategies history, heritage and tourism. This has impacted employed to commemorate, preserve or curate academic research, in which we have seen sites connected to this conflict heritage (e.g. areas of study emerge such as “dark tourism” Moshenska 2015). (e.g. Foley & Lennon 1996, Stone 2006) and Museums are also tackling “difficult “dark heritage” (e.g. McAtackney 2014, Carr histories” (Bonnell & Simon 2007). This trend & Corbishley 2015, Koskinen-Koivisto & has seen emotionally challenging and even Thomas 2016). Many studies of “dark heritage” taboo topics exhibited, as museums have have inevitably focused on the material and tried to carve out a relevant and active role “Ghosts in the background” and “The price of the war” in society and contemporary debates. At the of Italy’s Fascism and alliance with Nazi 61 same time, museums continue to be a forum Germany), for example, became central to Italy’s for what society chooses as official history and “post-war identity [...] celebrated through all knowledge (and hence also what goes ignored kinds of ‘official’ media, histories, memorials or underrepresented); they “select, legitimize, and formal education” (De Nardi 2014:449). marginalize, and are open to contestation and Kevin Walsh has suggested that national and resistance” (Borg & Mayo 2010:35). Thereby state-run museums have been reluctant to museums take part in the construction and interpret the history of the French Resistance, deconstruction of collective memory and as this would necessitate also acknowledging national narratives (e.g. Bogumił et al. 2015, collaboration by civil servants and other with Walsh 2001). the Nazis (Walsh 2001). Nordic countries such A museum’s collection and subject matter as Norway, Denmark and Sweden have been affect decisions about what to interpret, and dealing with the trauma of not providing a how. For museums that deal with particular forceful defence or indeed not contributing communities and aspects of social history, to the defeat of Nazism (notwithstanding the there are certain major events such as the resistance movements) (Stenius et al. 2011:12). Second World War which are likely to feature in Finland’s case was different, as a co-belligerent many exhibitions. Susan Crane has noted that rather than an occupied territory, but it was this “single largest event-complex/complex nevertheless traumatic. event in the living memory of our eldest generations, of world-shaping significance, Finland and the Second World War continues to figure most prominently in public memory work” (1997:58). At the same time, Finland has arguably adopted a “narrative for Germany in particular, but other countries of ‘the morally immaculate nation in a non- too (the USA in relation to the Enola Gay, for ideological war of self defence’”, as “an essential example), the continuing process of coming element of the national imagery”: to terms with this history, and reconciling state culpability for atrocities, has meant that Particularly, the years 1939–1944, with two “museum exhibits about this period carry an consecutive wars against the Soviet Union and one extraordinary burden of responsibility” (Crane against Nazi-Germany were a formative collective 1997:58). This is also an issue for countries that experience that would be summoned up and recalled allied with or were occupied by Germany in the in numerous films and novels and, to some extent, Second World War, challenged with framing in family tradition also decades afterwards (Löfström their national identities and narratives in the 2011:98). aftermath (Stenius et al. 2011:9). Tarja Värynen has commented on how many Framed in this context, it is reasonable to nations require “post-war closure”, noting that expect to find coverage of Second World War the “post-war national anxiety creates sealed conflicts generally, and also the Lapland War national memoryscape where all residual (the “one against Nazi-Germany”) as part of historical context is shunned away” (Väyrynen the formation of Finland’s national story and 2014:220). The Italian resistance movement identity. However, there has been criticism in (rather than the more problematic history both Norway and Finnish Lapland “of national Suzie Thomas & Eerika Koskinen-Koivisto 62 histories that erase the consequences of the Nazi Germany (Herva 2014:300, Väyrynen Lapland War and the reconstruction period” 2014:224), while there are also positive (Lehtola 2015:126). In spite of this there is recollections of interactions with German continued Finnish public interest in the Second soldiers before the Lapland War (although World War generally, and arguably increased see Väyrynen 2014 concerning the role of popular awareness of the Lapland War recently women – especially those who fraternized with (for example through the best-selling novel German soldiers, the perceived moral threat Kätilö, 2011, and the subsequent film, 2015, by this behaviour posed, and reactions from the Katja Kettu). Finnish state). This seemingly “harmonious The most significant of the three wars for phase” in Lapland was presented in the the “official” national narrative has been the temporary exhibition Wir waren Freunde / 1939–1940 Winter War2 (Paasi 1997:47). In the Olimme ystäviä (in English We Were Friends) Second World War, Finland was a small nation at the Provincial Museum of Lapland (April situated both geographically and politically 2015 to January 2016). between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. After the Winter War, Finns believed that it Analysing museum exhibitions would not be long before conflict started again. Since the early 20th century, Finland had had We discuss the representation and interpretation a close relationship with Germany, and as of the Lapland War in five museums in Finland part of Operation Barbarossa – the German (fig. 1). We selected our museums partly for attack on the Soviet Union – German troops their geographical locations, and partly for began arriving in Finland (Seitsonen & Herva their subject matter. Three of our case study 2011:177). From late 1940, some 200,000 museums are located in Lapland itself: the German troops came to be based in Finland, Provincial Museum of Lapland; Siida – The mostly in the north. The German presence in National Museum of the Finnish Sámi; and the Lapland, under Generaloberst (colonel general) Gold Prospector Museum. We also analysed the Eduard Dietl, was relatively harmonious Military Museum of Finland and the Finnish with locals until late 1944. In October 1944, Airforce Museum. Each of these museums has Finland’s treaty with the Soviet Union a different type of governance, and different required Finland to declare war on Germany key themes, although all are broadly speaking (Korppi-Tommola 2008:445). What was first historical museums (Table 1). a “pretend” war escalated into actual war (the The three Lapland-based museums were Lapland War, 1944–1945) with considerable selected partly due to their locations mirroring devastation in northern Finland (Tuominen the primary case study areas for the larger 2005). Retreating German troops adopted Academy of Finland–funded project Lapland’s “scorched earth” tactics. While casualties Dark Heritage3 (from which this article stems), were relatively low, material losses were high and partly due to the different perspectives they (Seitsonen & Herva 2011:177). represent. The destructive “scorched earth” Finland’s position during the Second World tactics that the retreating German military War resulted in conflicting perspectives and employed affected both cities and isolated experiences. Some Finns have had difficulties structures, and all communities in the region in acknowledging the close alliance with were deeply affected, in many cases also by the “Ghosts in the background” and “The price of the war” trauma of evacuation to Southern Finland or David Carr has noted that museums may 63 Northern Sweden (Tuominen 2005), or forced be considered as an “open system” in which migration from Soviet-ceded territory. visitors are invited to participate in the process We