Re-Inventing German Collective Memory: The Debate over the Memorial for the Murdered Jews of Europe Author: Karen C Kauffman Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/557 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2008 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. Re-Inventing German Collective Memory: The Debate over the Memorial for the Murdered Jews of Europe An Advanced Independent Research Project By Karen Kauffman Boston College History Department Class of 2008 Table of Contents Introduction . 1 Chapter 1 – Learning from the Holocaust: The Debate over Meaning and Responsibility . 21 Chapter 2 – Defining the Holocaust: The Debate to Determine its Victims . 54 Chapter 3 – Representing the Holocaust: The First Design Competition . 90 Chapter 4 – Representing the Holocaust: The Second Design Competition . 118 Conclusion . 146 Appendix A – Glossary of Key Terms . .. 161 Appendix B – Glossary of Key Names . 166 Appendix C – Chronology . 173 Appendix D – Publications and Political Parties . 183 Bibliography of Works Cited . 184 Acknowledgements Since I began work on what would become my thesis more than two years ago, studying German memory of the Holocaust has become much more than an academic pursuit. Engaging with this topic has developed into a personal passion, the apex of which is in the pages that follow. Whether this document is only an intermediate point in a longer career of historical study or the capstone achievement of my academic years, working on this project has been an incredibly meaningful experience for me academically and personally. Without the help of many incredible people, however, you would probably be about to read a disaster. First and foremost, I have to thank Professor Peter Weiler. I am so grateful that a year ago he was willing to take on my orphaned Advanced Independent Research project on a subject outside his primary area of research. Since then, he has provided me with support, guidance and advice throughout the entire process – above and beyond that for which I could have ever hoped. From patiently correcting my use of passive voice to helping me grasp the historical context of my argument, Professor Weiler is why I can be proud to call this project mine. Next, I have to thank the professor who has been my mentor and teacher from my second day at Boston College on, Professor Timothy Duket. Whether he knows it or not (and if he does he will probably not admit to it anyway), Professor Duket was instrumental to my project. He cultivated my abilities as a writer and analytical thinker and supported all of my endeavors including my trips abroad and the research I conducted throughout my summer and Junior year. Finally, he helped me reason through my thesis and dealt with every panicked moment I had along the way. There are so many other professors who have helped me through the process, all of whom I want to thank: Professor Bernd Widdig who took the time to read this project critically as my second reader; Professors Chadwick and Martin, who provided thoughtful advice whenever I wandered into their offices; Professor Rodgers, whose advice throughout my Thesis Seminar was essential to getting the project going; Professor Resler, who gave me the confidence to do my research in German and who has always taken the time to speak with me about the memorial, Berlin or really anything; Professor Bernauer, who first introduced me to the topic of conflict over Holocaust memory; Professor Pendas, who helped me to develop the initial version of my thesis proposal. Ich muss meiner deutschen Familie für ihre Hilfe mit meiner These danken. Sie haben alle meine Fragen geantwortet und haben mir viele Informationen über Deutschland und das Denkmal gegeben. Vielen, vielen Dank Susanne Lang, Michael Buersch und Sebastian Wehrsig. I have to thank my friends and roommates for the sometimes minute-to-minute support with which they provided me. Elizabeth Ruddy motivated and challenged me throughout the entire process. Paul Astuto kept me awake as we wrote through all-nighters. Michael Harper read numerous chapter drafts and provided valuable feedback and support. Emily Weiner always understood when I missed work and was always there for me. Gabrielle Frawley supplemented my insufficient knowledge of German with help on the wording of some translations. Julie McLeod, my direct roommate, did not complain when I arrived with two shelves of books on the Holocaust and Nazi Germany and always made me smile. All my suitemates deserve thanks for dealing with the thousands of paper scraps that littered our suite as I organized my chapters, which was only slightly better than dealing with my moods as I wrote them. Finally, I have to thank my family, which has been a constant reminder for me of what is really important in life and that I am so much more than just this project. They can tell stories about Christmas Day 2007, which could be titled “The Kauffman Family and a German Documentation” and Easter 2008 during which the living room was covered in thesis drafts. I cannot thank them enough for all they have done for me. i Acknowledgements Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please . The traditions of all dead generations burden the minds of the living like a nightmare. Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte ii Introduction Coming to Terms with the Nazi Past Arriving in Berlin in the middle of the 2006 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup, I noticed nothing out of the ordinary for a population hosting an international tournament in which their nation participated. German flags flew from cars, buildings, flagpoles and even people; the tri-colors -- Rot , Schwarz , Gold (red, black, gold) – adorned bracelets, t-shirts, and every trinket imaginable. Amidst all the revelry and celebration, German flags flew amongst those of every other soccer-loving country in the world. To me as an American nothing seemed out of the ordinary; what could be more natural than to show pride for one’s national team in a world championship? Yet, it took only a short conversation with any German to realize that the patriotism so openly expressed by the German population was something out of the ordinary. Just a short time prior to this, for reasons I will discuss later, most Germans considered flag-waving and national pride to be indicative of the radical right. The flag- waving and patriotism I experienced in World Cup Germany diverged radically from the attitudes of the nation in the decades prior because before that time, Germany had not yet finished struggling with or reached a resolution of its Nazi past. People could not begin to feel pride in the history or identity of their Volk , of Germany, until their nation had come to terms with the National Socialist past in some significant way. Since World War II, Germans have often seemed to be trapped by their collective memory. Deeply involved with their traumatic Nazi past, they have sometimes dwelled on it to the point of obsession, one example of which has been an intense debate over how to memorialize the Holocaust. Since the end of World War II, Vergangenheitsbewältigung , coming to terms with their National Socialist history, has stimulated numerous debates over memory that have greatly affected German national identity. This thesis explores the subject of German national identity through the framework of conflicts in the 1990s about the memory of the Holocaust, focusing on the debate over building a national Holocaust memorial in Berlin. I propose to explore two questions. First, what were the fundamental issues under debate and the arguments pertaining to each issue? Second, how have these memory issues affected German self- perception and thus national identity? In order to begin to answer these questions, it is necessary to clarify what the national Holocaust memorial actually is. Then, the debate over its construction must be set in the historical context of German debate and discussion of the Holocaust and the memory of the Third Reich. Central to this debate was the question of whether the Nazi period was part of the larger trend of German history or if it was an aberration from it, a question that a number of prominent historians discussed during what came to be called the Historikerstreit (Historian’s Debate) of the 1980s. An examination of the Historikerstreit will reveal the particular relevance and importance of the issues it raised, as they would later give life to the debate over the national Holocaust memorial. Das Denkmal für die Ermordeten Juden Europas The Denkmal für die Ermordeten Juden Europas (DEJE) , literally, the Memorial for the Murdered Jews of Europe, was unveiled in May, 2005, and it is by far the most unique memorial Berlin has to offer. This memorial consists of three thousand Stele (concrete columns), identical in width and depth, but ranging in height from almost flat on the ground to nine feet high. The ground, which rises and falls as the viewer walks, further exaggerates this height differential. As the columns are completely blank, the 2 Denkmal (memorial) itself is an aesthetic and symbolic experience, severed from a rational, fact-based exploration of the Holocaust. To walk through the memorial is to enter a world of contemplation, shadows, and isolation. Yet at any moment, life can interrupt reflection. Children run and play amongst the great columns; municipal employees and business people alike walk through the columns to reach the other side, talking on their cell phones; adolescents stand atop the columns shouting to each other; some sit on the smaller columns eating an ice cream cone or drinking coffee on their lunch break.