ASYMMETRY OF MEMORY
1.
To tell or not to tell, to honour or not to honour, to apologise or to remain silent one more time and to hide behind a wall of euphemisms or to finally bring oneself to frankness? These and similar questions prevailed in the discussion which preceded the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the World War II. The commemoration turned out to be yet another battlefield between the two competing memory projects: not only differing but to a certain extent also contradictory. The presence is laden with the past and struggles to deal with it. The past becomes part of the presence which is being processed over and over again and which is being adapted to the changing circumstances. The history interwoven with politics from which it is to a large extent dependent. Although the issue has become popular in academic circles and over a long period of time lengthy analyses have been dedicated to it, it still remains a risky issue; it arouses more emotions than any other academic considerations. It escapes any theory and any serious scientific discourse which would hide the fact that all matters pertaining to memory are happening here and now on the eyes of the viewers. And the matter will remain controversial as long as it somehow coincides with our everyday life.
Knowing "Przegląd Polityczny" ("Political Review", issue 95/2005) which usually eagerly participates in current debates, one would rather expect something in the form of an analytic comment to the polemics above mentioned. And such was indeed the case, with the exception that the editors have moved these polemics on a meta-level abandoning any direct allusions to the anniversary which is sketched only symbolically. The question asked most often is the reverse to the one we usually ask ourselves. The World War II emerges as an inconsistent problem, a phenomenon which we still find difficult to overcome and deal with. Memory of particular groups, communities and nations is being laboriously committed to paper but what is it that we are trying to forget, what is the cornerstone of the common (at least in theory) memory of the post-war Europe – these are the questions that we carefully avoid.
2.
The highlight of the issue (with which the reader should begin) is the block of articles entitled Powojnie. O kondycji naszych czasów (Post-war. On the condition of our times). It is first and foremost a thorough presentation of works of Tony Judt, a reflection on his views – partly expressed in Post-war (Polish translation was published at the end of last year), and partly in his later books. Judt – 20th century historian and an active commentator of the current affairs in one person – writes at length on his own critical vision of the place and role of memory in our reality. The strongest point he makes could probably be factorized as follows: the inflation of memory which expresses itself in a massive drive to commemorate (erecting monuments, setting memorial plaques in the walls of the buildings, founding more and more museums) constitutes only a cover for the desire to forget, and even for the process of forgetting taking place here and now. Both hysterical deadlock in evoking the past as well as national amnesia – as Judt claims – may be equally harmful. Judt shows how the common memory about the war has been and is still being instrumentalized in the Western and Eastern Europe respectively, the bidding of “who has suffered more” is referred to with consternation. However, the author’s reflections on the memory are not up in the air. They serve as a basis to ask several questions which are afterwards developed by his interlocutors. How the concept of Europe has evolved in the course of the 20th century? (the concept will be challenged by Paweł Śpiewak). Is it Shoah which should become a new founding myth of the collective memory of the war, perhaps the only thing we are able to bend over commonly and unanimously? (Jan Tokarski calls to develop this problem). Who are the present-day intellectuals, what is their place and their role?
For Judt though, the greatest problem pertaining to memory is, as it may seem, very trivial: unable to cope with 20th century homework, we simply refuse to do it pretending that all belongs to the past. By doing so, however, we forget that past makes part of our own selves (even if we have not learnt anything from it), we would not exist without it and by forgetting it, we lose the key to our own selves.
3.
Monika Milewska and Bronisław Baczko (his article is a reprint of Wyobrażenia społeczne / Social Images already known to Polish reader) raise the issue which only seemingly remains on the margin of the reflections concerning memory. The main topic is the parallel lives of Hitler and Stalin, a complex issue of building a charisma. Thereby, they are interested in the moment of forming a new common memory which would origin in the portrait of a charismatic leader. Beginning from scratch, therefore, they repeat a question how an inconspicuous single may turn into a man who cumulates so much dangerous power in his hands. They investigate the issues of collective seductions, massive hypnosis. It may be that the conclusions concerning the German and the soviet societies are much more interesting than the remarks on their leaders. The point of view assumed by the authors itself deserves separate attention.
Writing about Hitler, Milewska refers to the context of messianism and shows how he made use of the Christian and the jewish tradition manipulating them to meet his own ends. Above all, I would like to point to reference materials with which the text is illustrated: we often emphasize para-religious character of the communism, thereby neglecting the fact that the motif is also clearly present in Nazism.
Baczko, in turn, looks at Stalin who has become charismatic contrary to the circumstances and contrary to the inborn character features. The author is thus interested in the phenomenon of an artificial creation of charisma, paraphrasing his expression- it is the engineering of a charismatic soul.
4.
“Przegląd” is a place where one of the most interesting debates concerning literature have been taking place from times immemorial; the debates on significant books which are usually neglected by literary magazines. Books irritating and troubling the reader which allow (or which clearly call for) a reading embedded in a wide context- above all in the history of thought. The issue of memory is not a novelty for this magazine which has already written about Littel’s The Kindly Ones (Les Bienveillantes). Nonetheless, most of these deliberations are based on literary materials.
5.
Sebald was originally neglected in Poland. First translations of his books have not evoked any response and the situation had not changed until the publication of Austerlitz, a very widely commented novel. Today, however, it is more present due to the volume Luftkrieg und Literatur – recently elaborated upon in “Kronos” (3/2008) by Piotr Nowak and by Jacek Leociak in “Przegląd”. It is significant that the problem of memory of war is dealt with in the issue which aspires to solve this problem. The editors have abandoned referring to texts, even those provoking to discussion, on the responsibility of Germans and have instead emphasized the issue which has aroused intense emotions until the present day: the right of the German victims to be commemorated (or the right to commemorate German victims).
We should add, mostly civil victims; those who have been killed during the allied firebombing of the German cities. For this is the main topic of Sebald who, in all his works, has examined the issue of various dimensions of Holocaust. The identity of those who had to face with its consequences and the manner of remembering. Luftkrieg is to a large extent an accusation of the German literature for the trespass of negligence of an issue which should have been dealt with and which has been excluded from the collective memory and has been for many years doomed to be neglected. Jacek Leociak refers in the summary to Sebald’s book that “it was the beginning of the whole process of liberating the experience of the past from psychological barriers and political correctness which leads to the reconstruction of national memory”. It is worth to read carefully the interview with Sebald which supplements the text and shows that there were more such gaps. Not only is it a record of the Sebald’s vision of the German history but also of the remembering mechanism in general. It is my personal impression that in order to refer Polish literature to the experience of war we should familiarize ourselves with its content.
6.
“In February 1961 the novel (Life and Fate, M. Sz.) was arrested. Grossman phoned me and asked in a weird and somewhat uneasy voice: “Come as soon as possible”. First I thought that something bad had happened and it did not occurred to me that the book had been arrested. Nothing of this sort had hitherto happened as far as I could remember. To arrest writers was quite common indeed, however the manuscripts would not be confiscated until the author was placed under arrest!” – as Grossman’s friend, Siemion Lipkin related.
Życie i los whose Polish translation has been published relatively recently, resounded far and wide. The book created a sensation due to its monumental dimension and a complicated story of publication. One could still wonder, however, why a discussion takes place in the pages of “Przegląd” – all the more so because it does not concern the book itself.
From among an extensive selection of texts revolving more around Grossman himself than around his most important work, one of them, an essay by Jerzy Czech, translator of Życie i los, deserves particular attention in my opinion. The article, to a large extent biographical in nature, is a useful introduction allowing a better insight into the remaining, mostly commemorative, statements published in the current issue of “Przegląd”. The whole selection might be treated as a story about the condition of a writer in a totalitarian regime/system. A somewhat different order, the one in which life becomes more inextricably bound up with artistic work. The essay by Czech is worth recommending also due to numerous perturbations being discussed which pertain to the publication of the first part of dilogy “Za słuszną sprawę”. It is a story about compromises to which the author has had to accept in order to be able to publish his book. However, in opposition to the problem highlighted by the editors, one could focus on yet another one approached from the point of view of the main topic of the issue, namely: not on the arresting the novel (which in such context would only be a consequence) but on the transformations in approaching the history taking place in the author himself. In this context, philosophy of history, as expressed in Życie i los, is entirely different to the views expressed in the first part. This requires much more effort, a close reading, picking out interesting information in particular sketches or interviews but in the end it seems more satisfactory than to merely follow the plot of the authors, at times too apologetic, who do not fail to paint a portrait full of emotions and tenderness (which should not come as a surprise, especially if we take into account the fact that these are the voices of his family and friends).
Such a contrary approach might help to find out the manner in which the attitude towards Stalinism, Stalin himself and his responsibility evolved in the USSR. In order to be provided with a context, it will be helpful to use the text of Baczko from the same issue as well as the thought-provoking sketch of the chairman of the Russian memorial, Arsenij Roginski, entitled (Pamięć o stalinizmie) Memory of Stalinism.
7.
„Przegląd” is interesting, as usual. However, I was most intrigued by Tony Judt. His reflection on the hidden danger of memory is particularly close to me; the danger of abuses and manipulations. If a careful reading of the issue will result in a more aware perception of such phenomena as historical politics and will allow us to gain distance, then the reading will pay off.
Małgorzata Szumna
Translated by Katarzyna Strębska