Germany's Holocaust Memorial Problem-and Mine

Author(s): James E. Young

Source: The Public Historian, Vol. 24, No. 4 (Autumn, 2002), pp. 65-80
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3378922
Accessed: 12/04/2010 05:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Public Historian.

http://www.jstor.org

Germany's
Memorial

Holocaust

Problem-and Mine
JAMES
E. YOUNG

ONCE7
NOTSOLONGAGO,Germany
hadwhatit calleda "Jewish
Problem."
Thenit hada paralyzing
Holocaustmemorialproblem,a double-edged
conundrum:
Hclwwoulda nationof formerperpetrators
mournitsvictims?
Howwoulda dividednationreuniteitselfon the bedrockmemoryof its
crimes?In June1999,afterten yearsof tortureddebate,the German
Bundestag
votedto builda national"Memorial
forthe Murdered
Jewsof
Europe"on a prime, five-acre piece of real estate between the
Brandenburger
Tor andPotsdamerPlatz,a stone'sthrowfromHitler's
bunker.In theirvote,the Bundestag
alsoacceptedthe design a waving
fieldof pillars by American
architect,PeterEisenman,
whichhadbeen
recommended
bya five-member
Findungskommission,
forwhichI served
as spokesman.
Proposedoriginally
by a citizens'groupheadedbytelevisiontalk-show
personality
andjournalist
LeahRoshandWorldWarII historian
Eberhard
Jackel,thememorial
soontookona fraughtandhighlypoliticized
lifeof its
own.Although
I hadinitiallyopposeda single,centralHolocaust
memorial
forthewaysit mightbeusedto compensate
suchirredeemable
loss,oreven
putthepastbehinda newlyreunifiedGermany,
overtimeI beganto grow

JAMES
E. YOUNG is professorandchairin the Department
of JudaicandNearEastern
StudiesattheUniversity
of Massachusetts,
Amherst.
He is theauthorofAt Memory's Edge
(NewHavenandLondon:
YaleUniversity
Press,2000),fromwhichthisessayhasbeen
adapted;
The Texture ofMemory (NewHavenandLondon:
YaleUniversity
Press,1993);
Writing and Rewreting the Holocaust (Indianapolis:
Indiana
University
Press,1988);andis
theeditorof The Art ofMemory (Munich:
PrestelVerlagandTheJewishMuseum,
1994).
65
Vol.24, No.4, pp.65-80 (Fall2002).ISSN:0272-3433
C)2002bythe Regentsof the University
of California
andthe
NationalCouncilon PublicHistory.Allrightsreserved.
Sendrequestsforpermission
to reprintto RightsandPermissions,
University
of
California
Press,2000CenterSt.,Ste.303,Berkeley,CA94704-1223.
The Public Historzan

66

THEPUBLICHISTORIAN

skeptical
of myownskepticism.
Eventually,
I wasinvitedtojointhefivemember
Findungskommission
charged
withchoosing
anappropriate
design
for Germany's
nationalmemorial
to Europe'smurdered
Jews,the only
foreignerandJewon the panel.HereI wouldlike to tell the stotyof
Germany's
national
Holocaust
memorial
andmyownroleinit,myevolution
froma highlyskeptical
criticon the outsideof the processto one of the
arbiters
on theinside.I findthatasthelinebetweenmyroleascriticand
arbiterbeganto collapse,the issuesat the heartof Germany's
memorial
conundrum
cameintoeversharper,
morepainfulrelief.
Alongwitha privatecitizens'initiative
theyhadorganized,
LeahRosh
andEberhard
Jackelatfirsthopedtoplacetheirmemorial
ontheGestapoGelande,
a scarred
wasteland
andformersiteof theGestapoheadquarters
in a no-man's
landnearthewallin thecenterof Berlin.Butthe"Gestapoterrain"
hadlongbeenenmeshedin a complicated
debateoverits own
futureandhowto commemorate
allthevictimsof theGestapoin a single
place.1Withthe fallof thewallin 1989,however,theprojectgainedthe
backingof boththe FederalGovernment
andthe BerlinSenate,who
recognized
thatsucha memorial
mightserveasa strategic
counter-weight
totheNeueWache.Shortly
after,thegovernment
designated
analternative
siteforthememorial,
alsoattheheartof theNaziregime'sformerseatof
power.Bordered
ononesidebythe'<Todesstreifen,"
or"death-strip"
atthe
footoftheBerlinwall,andontheotherbytheTiergarten,
theformersiteof
the"Ministerial
Gardens"
wasstilla no-man's
landinitsownright,slightly
profaned
byitsproximity
to Hitler'sbunkerandthe Reich'sChancellery.
Butinits20,000squaremeters(almost
fiveacres)attheheartofareunified
capital,
itwouldalsobecomeoneofBerlin's
mostsought-after
piecesofreal
estate andwasthusregarded
asa magnanimous,
if monumental,
gesture
to thememoiyof Europe's
murdered
Jews.
In 1994,abouta yearafterthededication
of theNeueWache,a prestigiousinternational
competition
wascalledfordesignsforGermany's
national"Memorial
to theMurdered
Jewsof Europe,"
andsome528designs
weresubmitted
fromaroundtheworld.Submissions
ranthegamutoftaste
andaestheticsensibilities,
fromthebeautiful
to the grotesque,
fromhigh
modernto lowkitsch,fromthearchitectural
to theconceptual.
Therewas,
forexample,
HorstHoheisel's
proposal
toblowuptheBrandenburger
Tor,
aswellasDaniCaravan's
proposed
fieldofyellowflowersin theshapeof a
JewishStar.BerlinartistsStihandSchnock
proposed
a seriesof bus-stops
whencecoacheswouldtakevisitorsto the sites of actualdestruction
throughout
Berlin,Germany,
andEurope.Otherdesignsincludednumerousvariations
ongardensof stone,brokenhearts,andrentStarsof David.
Round,square,andtriangular
obelisks
wereproposed,
aswellasa gigantic
1. Formoreonthedebatesurrounding
thediscoveryof ruinsontheGestapo-Gelandeand
subsequentarchitectural
competitionsto memorializethis site, see JamesE. Young,The
Textureof Memory (NewHavenandLondon:YaleUniversity
Press,1993),81-90.

MEMORIAL * 67
HOLOCAUST
GERMANY'S

One
forthebloodofthemurdered.
emptyvat(130feettall),anemptyvessel
insteadof carriages,
artistproposeda ferriswheelcomposedof cattle-cars
andthegenocidal."2
rotating
between"thecarnivalesque
The jurywas composedof some fifteenmembers,expertsand layagenciesnowinvolved the
people,appointedby the threesponsoring
Bundestag,
theBerlinSenate,andtheoriginalcitizens'group.Thoughthe
deliberations
had been shieldedfrompublicview, manyof the jurors
bitingdebate,withlittlemeetingof the
subsequently
toldof rancorous,
andexpertsonthejury,
minds.Thecitizens'groupresentedtheintellectuals
andminimalist
astheirelitisttasteforconceptual
withwhattheyregarded
fantaforartistsandtheirself-absorbed
design."Thisis nota playground
sies,"LeahRoshis reportedto haveremindedhercolleagueson thejury.
eyefor
sniffedatthelayjurors'middle-brow
Meanwhile,
theintellectuals
andthe
theirphilistineemotionalism;
figuration,
kitschandmonumental
Bundestag's
appointeesglancedanxiouslyat theirwatchesas the right
politicalmomentseemedto be tickingaway.
announcedthe juF's decision:firstprize
In March1995,organizers
inspireddewouldbe sharedby twoteamswhohadsubmittedsimilarly
andthe otherby a
signs-one led by BerlinartistChristineJacob-Marks
NewYorkartistlivingin Cologne,SimonUngers.Ofthesetwo,onlythat
wouldbe built,however,possiblywithelements
proposedbyJacob-Marks
eightprojectswouldbe
incorporated
fromthe other,andan additional
winningdesign
Jacob-Marks's
recognizedas finalistsin the competition.
intheshapeof
23-footthickconcretegravestone,
consistedofagargantuan,
fromsixfeethighatoneendto
a 300-footsquare,tiltedatananglerunning
names
withtherecoverable
25 feethighattheother.Itwasto be engraved
of leavingsmall
Jews,andin the Jewishtradition
of 4.5 millionmurdered
visit,it wasto havesome18
stonesat a gravesiteto markthe mourner's
in Israelscatteredoverits surface.
bouldersfromMasada
a
symbolism
seemedto haveparalyzed
andmisguided
Itsliteral-minded
juryasunableto resistit asto loveit. Sinceeighteenis theHebrewnumber
representing
chai,orlife,thenumberofstonesseemedright.Butaccording
againsttheRomansattheend
wasthelaststronghold
to Josephus,
Masada
of theJewishrevoltof 66-73C.E.andalsothesiteof a collectivesuicideof
Jewsthatpreventedthe Romansfromtakingthemas slaves.A German
aspartof itstheme?
memorial
withJewishself-sacrifice
nationalHolocaust
mixedmethe monument's
Withinhoursof the winner'sannouncement,
generatedan
andself-sacrifice
morialmessageof Jewishnamingtradition
decrying
this"tilted
criticism
intellectual,
andeditorial
avalanche
ofartistic,
too divisive,andfinallyjusttoo
gravestone"
as toobig,too heavy-handed,
IgnatzBubis,
Jewishcommunity,
German.Eventhe leaderof Germany's
hatedit and told ChancellorKohlthatthe winningdesignwas simply
Wettbeterb:
JudenEuropas:Kunstlierischer
fur die ermordeten
2. See Denkmal
(Berlin: Senatsverwaltungfur Bau und Wohnungswesen, 1995).
Kurzdokamentation

68 * THEPUBLICHISTORIAN

unacceptable.
Kohlthrewup his handsin exasperation,
pronounced
the
design as "too big and undignified,"and obliginglyrescindedthe
government's
supportforthewinnerof theHolocaust
memorial
competition.Germany's
"Memorial
forthe Murdered
Jewsof Europe"
seemedto
havebeensunkbyitsownmonumental
weight andonceagain,Germany
wasleftpondering
itsmemorial
options.
Betweentheannouncement
ofthewinneranditssubsequent
rejection,
the organizers
showedall528 designsin a grandmemorial
exhibition
at
Berlin's
Stadtratshaus.
Good,Iwroteatthetime.Betterathousand
yearsof
Holocaustmemorial
competitions
andexhibitions
in Germany
thanany
single"finalsolution"
to Germany's
memorial
problem.Thisway,I reasoned,insteadofafixediconforHolocaust
memory
inGermany,
thedebate
itself perpetually
unresolved
amidever-changing
conditionsmightnow
be enshrined.
Of course,thiswasalsoa positionthatonlyan academic
bystander
couldaffordto take,someonewhoseprimaryinterestlay in
perpetuating
theprocessitself.
My Holocaust MemorialProblem

Afteryetanother
yearofstormydebateoverwhethera newcompetition
shouldbe called,whethera new site shouldbe found,or whetherthe
winnersshouldbe invitedto refinetheirproposalsfurtherstill, the
memorial's
organizers
onceagaintookthehighroad.Theycalledforaseries
ofpubliccolloquia
onthememorial
tobeheldinJanuary,
March,
andApril
1997,whichtheyhopedwouldbreakthe memorial
deadlockandensure
thatthe memorial
be builtbeforethe Holocaust
recededfurtherintothe
historyof a formercentury.Towardthisend,theyinviteda numberof
distinguished
artists,historians,
critics,andcurators
to addressthe most
difficultissuesand to suggesthow the presentdesignsmightbest be
modified.
Amongthoseinvitedtospeakatthelastcolloquium
inApril1997,
I wasaskedto explorethe memorial
iconography
of othernationsS
Holocaustmemorials
inordertoputtheGermans'
ownprocessintointernational
perspective.
Thefirsttwocolloquia,
inJanuary
andMarch1997,rousedconsiderable
publicinterestontheonehand,butastheexchanges
betweenorganizers
of
thememorial
andinvitedspeakers
grewmoreacrimonious,
a gloomysense
of despairgradually
settledoverthe proceedings.
Theorganizers,
led by
LeahRosh,insistedthatthe"fiveaims"
oftheprojectremaininviolable:
(1)
thiswouldbeamemorial
onlytoEurope's
murdered
Jews;(2)groundwould
be brokenforit on 27 Januaiy1999,Germany's
newlydesignated
"HolocaustRemembrance
Day"marked
to coincidewiththe 1945liberation
of
Auschwitz;
(3) its locationwouldbe the 20,000-square-meter
siteof the
Ministers
Gardens,
betweenthe Brandenburg
GateandPotsdamer
Platz;

MEMORIAL* 69
HOLOCAUST
GERMANY'S

wouldbe invitedto
teamsfromthe 1995competition
(4)theninefinalists'
andcritisuggestions
revisetheirdesignsandconceptsafterincorporating
cism fromthe presentcolloquia;and (5) the winningdesignwouldbe
chosenfromthereviseddesignsof theoriginalninefinalists.3
attackbythe
Notonlydidthedesignscontinueto comeunderwithering
invitedexperts,butthe aimsof theprojectitselfwerenowcalledstrongly
into question.Amongotherspeakersat the firstcolloquium,historian
JurgenKockasuggestedthatalthoughtherewas an obviousneed for a
to encomJews,theneedfora memorial
to Europe'smurdered
memorial
Other
clear.
as
was
just
pass the memoryof the Nazis'othervictims
whether
thesiteitself,
thenquestioned
suchasMichaelSturmer,
speakers,
dimensionssomehowinvitedpreciselythe kindof monuits gargantuan
mentalitythat had alreadybeen rejected.Othercriticsfocussedmore
theme:"WhyThereShouldBe a Holoon the firstcolloquium's
narrowly
caustMemorialin Berlin,"concludingthatwith the authenticsites of
be a
Berlin,thereshouldn't
throughout
andmemoryscattered
destruction
atall.
centralmemorial
weremetby a seemingly
Thesevociferouschallengesto the memorial
stonyindifferenceby the speakerof the BerlinSenate,PeterRadunski,
who had been appointedto convenethe proceedings.Becausethese
hadnoplaceontheagenda,he said,theyneednotbe addressed
criticisms
here. LeahRosh'sresponsewas less measured.She openedthe third
witha bitterattackon whatshe calledthe "leftistintellectual
colloquium
both the processand by
responsiblefor undermining
establishment"
Jews.Theaimherewashowtogo
ofEurope'smurdered
extensionmemory
veryraisondetre,which
forward,she said,notto debatethe memorial's
was alreadyestablished.Her angrywords,in turn, merelyservedto
oppothe criticsandhardenthe positionsof the memorial's
antagonize
and
writers,
historians,
elite
of
Germany's
many
nents,who included
Salomon
Schoeps,
Julius
culturalcritics,includingReinhartKoselleck,
GunterGrassand
Meier,andeventually
Korn,StefanieEndlich,Christian
PeterSchneider.
both the
By the time I spokeat the thirdcolloquiumin mid-April,
in Berlinhad
at the Stadtratshaus
anda largepublic-audience
organizers
bythespectacleoftheirtorturedmemogrownvisiblyandaudiblyagitated
Overandoveragain,the otherspeakers senators,art
rialdeliberations.
andartists bemoanedthe abjectfailureof theircompetition.
historians,
overtheincivility
bytheiracuteembarrassment
Allofthiswascompounded
of politics
andthequagmire
thename-calling,
of it all,thepettybickering,
intowhichthe wholeprocessseemedto be sinking.Badenoughthatwe
to me,worsethatwe
theJewsof Europe,onesenatorwhispered
murdered
them.
can'tagreeon howto commemorate
3. From Peter Radunski's"OpeningRemarks"to the First Colloquiumon Berlin's
Memorialto the MurderedJewsof Europe,11 January1997.

70 * THEPUBLICHISTORIAN

Whenmyturntospeakcame,I beganbytryingtoreassure
theaudience:
decorumis nevera partof the memorial-building
process,notevenfora
Holocaust
memorial.
"Youmayhavefailedtoproducea monument,>'
I said,
"butifyoucountthesheernumberofdesign-hours
that528teamsofartists
andarchitects
havealreadydevotedto the memorial,
it'sclearthatyour
processhasalreadygeneratedmoreindividual
memory-work
thana finishedmonument
willinspirein itsfirsttenyears."
I thenproceeded
to tell
the storiesof other,equallyfraughtmemorial
processesin Israelandthe
UnitedStates,thefuriousdebateinIsrael's
Knessetsurrounding
thedayof
remembrance
there,andthememorial
paralysis
inNewYork,LosAngeles,
andWashington
thathadeventually
resulted
inseveralcompeting
memorials,allof themcontested.I couldalmosthearthecollectivesighof relief.
In fact,hereI admitted
thatuntilthatmoment,I hadbeenoneof the
skeptics.Ratherthanlookingfora centralized
monument,
I wasperfectly
satisfied
withthenational
memorial
debateitself.Better,I hadthought,
to
takeallthesemillions
ofDeutschMarks
andusethemtopreserve
thegreat
varietyof Holocaustmemorials
alreadydottingthe Germanlandscape.
Becauseno singlesite canspeakforall the victims,muchless forboth
victimsandperpetrators,
thestateshouldbe reminding
itscitizensto visit
the manyanddiversememorial
andpedagogical
sitesthatalreadyexist:
fromtheexcellent
learning
centerattheWannsee
Conference
Housetothe
enlightened
exhibitions
attheTopography
ofTerrorattheformerGestapo
headquarters,
bothin Berlin;fromthebrooding
andever-evolving
memoriallandscape
atBuchenwald
tothemeticulously
groomed
grounds
andfine
musuemat Dachau;fromthe hundredsof memorial
tabletsthroughout
Germany
marking
thesitesofdeportation
tothedozensofnow-empty
sites
of formersynagogues-and
allthespacesforcontemplation
in between.
HereI alsoadmitted
thatwiththisposition,I hadmademanyfriendsin
Germany
andwasmaking
a finecareeroutof skepticism.
Mostcolleagues
sharedmyfearthatChancellor
Kohl'sgovernment
wanteda "memorial
to
Europe's
murdered
Jews"asa greatburialslabforthetwentieth
century,
a
hermetically
sealedvaultfor the ghostsof Germany's
past.Insteadof
incitingmemoIy
ofmurdered
Jews,wesuspected,
itwouldbeaplacewhere
Germans
wouldcomedutifully
to unshoulder
theirmemorial
burden,so
thattheycouldmovefreelyandunencumbered
intothetwenty-first
century.A finishedmonument
would,in effect,finishmemoiyitself.
On the one hand,I said,we mustacknowledge
the publicneedand
politicalnecessityfora German
national
Holocaust
memorial;
atthesame
time,wemustalsorecognize
thedifficulty
ofanswering
thisneedinasingle
space.If the aimof a nationalHolocaust
memorial
in Berlinis to drawa
bottom-line
underthiserasothatareunified
Germany
canmoveunencumberedintothe future,thenlet us makethisclear.Butif the aimis to
remember
forperpetuity
thatthisgreatnationoncemurdered
nearlysix
millionhumanbeingssolelyforhaving
beenJews,thenthismonument
must

MEMORIAL * 71
HOLOCAUST
GERMANY'S

questionsat the heartof GermanHolocaust

alsoembodythe intractable
memoIyratherthanclaimingto answerthem.Otherwise,I fearedthat
Platzwouldnot
whateverformthe monumenttakesnearthe Potsdamer
markthe memoryof Europe'smurderedJewsso muchas buryit altogether.4
andI amstill
againstthemonument,
arguments
Thesewerepersuasive
willplayinBerlin.
monument
abouttheroleacentralHolocaust
ambivalent
Butat the sametime,I said,I havealsohadto recognizethatthiswasa
couldafford,
positionof luxurythatperhapsonlyan academicbystander
theprocessitself.As
interestwasin perpetuating
someonewhoseprimary
instructiveas the memorialdebatehad been, however,it had neither
neo-Nazis partof
of xenophobic
warnednorchasteneda newgeneration
And
whoseidentitydependson forgettingthe crimesof theirforebears.
plentyof shamein Germans,
debatehasgenerated
thememorial
although
argument notforthemass
itislargelytheshametheyfeelforanunseemly
in theirname.In goodacademicfashion,we had
murderoncecommitted
issuesattheheartofthememorial
withthefascinating
becomepreoccupied
to whatwassupposedto be rememindifferent
processandincreasingly
voidit leftbehind.
bered:the massmurderof Jewsandtheresulting
tenorof ourpositionhadalso
andself-congratulatory
Theself-righteous
to the
skepticalapproach
begunto makeme uneasy.Ourunimpeachably
to soundjusta littletoocertain
wasnowbeginning
of monuments
certainty
"thesecescalledthemselves
in skepticism
of itself.MyGermancomrades
moveturn-of-the-century
to
the
gesture
self-flattering
a slightly
sionists,"
What
of
the
Nazis.
victims
mentof artists,manyof whomwouldbe Jewish
of
rigorousandethicallypureinterrogation
hadbegunas anintellectually
the Berlinmemorialwastakingon the shapeof a circular,centripedally
Itbegantolooklikesomuchhand-wringing
argument.
driven,self-enclosed
kindof spectatorsport."Butcan
evenan entertaining
andfence-sitting,
parliamensuchanimperfectprocesspossiblyresultin a goodmemorial?"
tarianPeterConradiaskedme at one point.I repliedwithan American
I said,
to his Germanears:"Yes,"
unfamiliar
thatwasaltogether
aphorism
"forperfectis alwaysthe enemyof good."To this day,I'mnot surehe
mypoint.
understood
hadbegun
Andhere,I realized,myownpersonalstakein thememorial
in April,
to change.The dayafterI returnedfromthatthirdcolloquium
calledtoaskifI would
PeterRadunski,
ofCulture,Senator
Berlin'sMinister
of fivemembersappointedto finda suitable
joina Findungskommission
memorialdesign.Whowerethe otherfour,I asked.He repliedwiththe
namesof the directorsof the GermanHistoricalMuseumin Berlin
4. For articulateargumentsagainstthe memorial,see ReinhardKosellek,"Werdas
die Opfer,"Die Zeit, no. 13 (19
hierarchisiert
vergessenwerden?Das Holocaust-Mahnmal
March1998);GyorgyKonrad,"Abschiedvon der Chimare:Zum Streitum das HolocaustDenkmal,"FrankfurterAllgemeine Zeitung (26 November1997):41.

72 * THEPUBLICHISTORIAN

(Christoph
Stoelzl)andtheMuseum
ofContemporary
Artin Bonn(Dieter
Ronte),as well as one of Germany's
preeminent
twentieth-century
art
historians
(WernerHoffmann)
andoneof Berlin'smostwidelyrespected
andexperienced
arbiters
ofpostwar
architecture
(JosefPaulKleihues)-all
authorities
he believedto be abovereproach.
Wewouldbe givenfreerein
to extendtheprocessaswe sawfit,to invitefurtherartists,andto makean
authoritative
recommendation
to thechancellor
andthememorial's
organizers.I wasto be the onlytrueexperton Holocaust
memorials,
he said.
And,asI thenrealized,I wouldbe theonlyforeigner
andJew.
Beforeanswering,
I hadto askmyselfa seriesof simplebut cutting
questions:Did I wantGermany
to returnits capitalto Berlinwithout
publiclyandvisiblyacknowledging
whathadhappened
thelasttimeGermanywas
governed
fromBerlin?
Withitsgargantuan,
evenmegalomaniacal
restoration
plansandthefloodofbig-industry
moneypouring
intothenew
capitalin quantities
beyondAlbertSpeer?s
wildestdreams,couldthere
reallybe no spaceleft forpublicmemoxyof the victimsof Berlin'slast
regime?How,indeed,couldI setfootina newGerman
capitalbuiltonthe
presumption
of inadvertent
historical
amnesiathatnewbuildingsalways
breed?AsAdornohadcorrected
hiswell-intentioned
butfacile(andhackneyed)"NachAuschwitz
. . ."dictum,maybeitwasalsotimeformetocome
downfrommyperchof holydialectics
andtakea position.
But as one of the newlyappointedarbitersof GermanHolocaust
memoxy,
I wouldalsofindmyselfin a strangeanduncomfortable
predicament.The skeptics'whisperedasidesechoedmyownapprehensions:
a
meredecoration,
this AmericanJew,a sop to authorityand so-called
expertise.
I askedmyself:
wasI invitedasanacademic
authority
onmemorials,orasa tokenAmerican
andforeigner?
Isit myexpertise
theywant,or
aretheylookingfora Jewishblessingonwhatever
designis finallychosen?
IfI canbecreditedforhelpingarbitrate
officialGerman
memory,
canI also
beheldliableforanother
baddesign?Infact,justwhereisthelinebetween
myroleas arbiterof Germanmemoryandmypartin a fraughtpolitical
processfarbeyondmyowngrasp?
SowhenaskedtoserveonthisFindungskommission
forBerlin's
"Memorialto theMurdered
Jewsof Europe,"
I agreed,butonlyonthecondition
thatwe writea preciseconceptual
planfor the memorial.
Perhapsthe
greatestweaknessin the firstcompetition
hadbeenits hopelessly
vague
conceptual
description
ofthememorial
itself,leavingartists
tofounder
inan
impossible
seaof formal,
conceptual,
andpolitical
ambiguities.
Incontrast,
wewouldbe clear,forexample,
thatthismemorial
wouldnotdisplacethe
nation's
othermemorial
sites,andthata memorial
to Europe's
murdered
JewswouldnotspeakfortheNazis'othervictims,butmay,infact,necessitatefurthermemorials
to them.Norshouldthismemorial
hidetheimpossible questionsdrivingGermany's
memorialdebate.It shouldinstead
reflectthe termsof the debateitself,the insufficiency
of memorials,
the

GERMANY'S
HOLOCAUST
MEMORIAL * 73

contemporary
generation's
skepticalviewof officialmemoryandits selfaggrandizing
ways.Afterall, I had been arguingfor yearsthat a new
generationof artistsand architectsin Germany includingChristian
Boltanski,
NorbertRadermacher,
HorstHoheisel,MichaUlmann,Stihand
Schnock,
JochenGerz,andDanielLibeskind-hadturnedtheirskepticism
of the monumental
intoa radicalcounter-monumentality.
In challenging
andfloutingeveryone of the monument's
conventions,
theirmemorials
havereflectedanessentially
Germanambivalence
towardself-indictment,
wherethe void was madepalpableyet remainedunredeemed.If the
government
insistedona memorial
in Berlinto"Europe's
murdered
Jews,2'
thencouldn'tit tooembodythissamecounter-monumental
critique?
Ratherthanprescribing
a form,therefore,we describeda conceptof
memorialization
thattookintoaccounta cleardefinitionof the Holocaust
andits significance,
NaziGermany's
roleasperpetrator,
currentreunified
Germany's
roleasrememberer,
thecontemporary
generation's
relationship
to Holocaust
memory,
andtheaestheticdebateswirling
aroundthememorialitself.Insteadof providing
answers,
we askedquestions:
Whatarethe
nationalreasonsforremembrance?
Aretheyredemptory,
partof a mourningprocess,pedagogical,
self-aggrandizing,
orinspiration
againstcontemporaryxenophobia?
Towhatnationalandsocialendswillthismemorial
be
built?Justhowcompensatory
agesturewillitbe?Howanti-redemptory
can
it be?Willit be a placeforJewsto mournlostJews,a placeforGermans
to
mournlostJews,oraplaceforJewstoremember
whatGermans
oncedidto
them?Thesequestionsmustbe madepartof the memorialprocess,I
suggested,so let thembe askedbythe artistsin theirdesigns,evenif they
cannotfinallybe answered.
Here I alsoremindedorganizers
thatthiswouldnot be an aesthetic
debateoverhowto depicthorror.TheHolocaust,
afterall,wasnotmerely
theannihilation
of nearly6 millionJews,amongthem1.5millionchildren,
butalsotheextirpation
of a thousand-year-old
civilization
fromtheheartof
Europe.Anyconceptionof the Holocaust
thatreducedit to the horrorof
destruction
aloneignoredthe stupendous
lossandvoidleft behind.The
tragedyof theHolocaust
is notmerelythatpeoplediedso terribly
butthat
so muchwas irreplaceably
lost. An appropriate
memorialdesignwould
acknowledge
the voidleft behindandnot concentrate
on the memoryof
terroranddestruction
alone.Whatwaslostneedsto be remembered
as
muchashowit waslost.
In addition,I suggestedthatorganizers
mustbe prepared
to acceptthe
factthatthismemorial
wasbeingdesignedin 1997,morethanfiftyyears
aftertheendofWorldWar
II.Itwouldnecessarily
reflectthecontemporary
sensibility
ofartists,
whichincludesmuchskepticism
overtheveryappropriatenessof memorials
andtheirtraditional
functionas redemptory
sitesof
mourning,
national
instruction,
andself-aggrandizement.
Tothisend,I also
askedorganizers
toencourage
acertainhumility
amongdesigners,
a respect

74 * THEPUBLICHISTORIAN

such
thatamemorial
Itisnotsurprising
ofsuchamemorial.
forthedifficulty
verywella generation
chosen:it represented
wasinitially
asJacob-Marks's
thatfelt oppressedby Holocaustmemory,whichwouldin turnoppress
subtler,more
withsuchmemory.Butsomething
generations
succeeding
by
modestandsuccinctmightsuggesta balancebetweenbeingoppressed
by
marked
byit,atensionbetweenbeingpermanently
andinspired
memory
theHolomemoryanddisabledbyit. Asothernationshaveremembered
as
to theirfoundingmythsandideals,theirexperiences
caustaccording
toits
according
willalsoremember
Germany
victims,orfighters,
liberators,
welikethemornot.Let
whether
motives,
andself-abnegating
owncomplex
to the
relationship
suitably
tortured
reflectits
officialmemorial
Germany's
Jews,I said.
genocideof Europe's
we alsohadto addresstwofurtherconcernsshared
Beforeproceeding,
andthe memorial's
bothby us, as membersof the Findungskommission,
inclined,
siteonly,orpedagogically
Shoulditbeacontemplative
opponents:
forthe
serveasacenterofgravity
wouldthismemorial
aswell?Byextension,
locatedattheactual
centersalready
andpedagogical
dozensof memorials
or wouldit somehowdisplacethemandevenusurp
sitesof destruction,
memoryin
Becausewe didnot see Holocaust
authority?
theirmemorial
thattherewasindeedroom
project,weconcluded
asa zero-sum
Germany
spacesandpedagogiforbothcommemorativein Berlin'snewlandscape
were
In fact,Berlinandits environs
institutions.
callyorientedmemorial
on the
exhibitions
alreadyrichwithexcellentmuseumsandpermanent
genocides-fromtheWannsee
andother,morecontemporary
Holocaust
of Terror,fromthe new JewishMuseumon
Villato the Topography
to
fortheStudyofAnti-Semitism,
Institute
andtheproposed
Lindenstrasse
andSachsenhausen.
atBuchenwald
exhibitions
thecriticalandinsightful
or a
Thequestionwasneverwhethertherewouldbe onlya memorial
museum.But rather:in additionto these alreadyexistingpedagogical
space
housesof memory,wasthereroomas wellfor a commemorative
Again,we
andnationalceremonies?
contemplation
meantfor memorial
sites,therewasindeed
ofmemorial
constellation
thatinBerlin's
concluded
onethatwouldinspire
landscape,
node
in
this
memorial
roomfora central
thepublicto visit
of thepast,evenasit encouraged
publiccontemplation
nearbyand
museums
many
other
andlearnthespecificsof thispastin the
thecountry.
throughout
asaform,I alsobeganto
ofthemonument
Infact,thoughstillsuspicious
capital
restored
itwouldbeto adda spaceto Germany's
seehowimportant
Jews.This
ofEurope's
themass-murder
toremember
designed
deliberately
asthe
bythekillersthemselves,
designed
wouldnotbe a spaceformemory
asa
are,butonedesignedspecifically
campsitesinevitably
concentration
attemptto
deliberate
site,onedenotingthecurrentgeneration's
memorial
thedozens
tosupport
mustcontinue
Ofcourse,thegovernment
remember.
Buttheseare,
thecountry.
sitesaround
andpedagogical
ofothermemorial

GERMANY'S
HOLOCAUST
MEMORIAL * 75

afterall, alreadythere.To builda memorialapartfromthese sites of

destruction,
however,
isnotmerelythepassiverecognition
andpreservation
of the past.It is a deliberateactof remembrance,
a strongstatementthat
memorymustbecreatedforthenextgeneration,
notonlypreserved.
Finally,I wouldhavetoreservetherighttodissentpubliclyoveranyfinal
designwhichI couldnot standby. I wouldagreeto serveon such a
Findungskommission
evenasI stillheldstrongdoubtsthata resolution
was
evenpossible.I wouldsuspend
judgement
onwhethersucharesolution
was
desirable
untiltheend.If intheend,we arrived
atnothingwe couldjustify
totheorganizers,
thenmyearlyskepticism
wouldhavebeenvindicated.
But
if we didfindsomething
in a collaborative
effortwithartistsandarchitects,
it wouldbe ourresponsibility
to explainourchoiceto thepublic.Forif we
couldnotjustifyit formally,
conceptually,
andethically,
thenhowcouldwe
expectthepublicto acceptit?5
TheDesigns
In weighingthe powerof conceptagainstformalexecutionin a final
groupof designs,the membersof the Findungskommission
unanimously
agreedthattwoproposals,
onebyGesineWeinmiller
andtheotherbyPeter
Eisenman
andRichard
Serra,fartranscended
theothersintheirbalanceof
brilliant
conceptandpowerfulexecution.
Thoughequallyworksof terrible
beaut, complexity,
anddeepintelligence,
theproposals
byWeinmiller
and
Eisenman/Serra
derivedtheirpowerfromvery differentsources.The
choiceherewasnotbetweenmeasures
of brilliance
in thesetwoworksbut
betweentwoverydifferentordersof memorialsensibilities:
Weinmiller's
wasthe geniusof quietude,understatement,
andalmostmagicalallusiveness;the collaboration
of EisenmanandSerraresultedin an audacious,
surprising,
anddangerously
imaginedform.Onewasby a youngGerman
womanofthegeneration
nowobligated
toshoulder
thememoryandshame
of eventsforwhichshewasnotto blame;theotherwasbytwowell-known
Americans,
architectandartist,one of whoseJewishfamilyleft Germany
twogenerations
ago.Together,we felt,thesetwodesignswouldofferthe
public,government,
andorganizers
of the memorialan actualandstark
choice.Theircaseswereequallystrong,butin theend,onewouldhaveto
gathertheforceof consensusovertheother.
In GesineWeinmiller's
three-sidedplaza,visitorswoulddescendinto
memoryandwendtheirwaythrougheighteenwall-segments
composedof
giantsandstoneblocksscatteredin a seeminglyrandompatternin the
5. I raisedmanyof these sameissues,in slightlydifferentform,in JamesE. Young,"Gegen
Sprachlosigkeithilft kein Kreischenund Lachen:Berlins Problemmit dem HolocaustDenkmal und meines,"FrankfurterAllgemeine Zeitung (2 January1998):28.

76 * THEPUBLICHISTORIAN

the areaon threesidescreateda rising

square.The wallssurrounding
horizonas one camefurtherintotheircompass,slowlyblockingoutthe
andtrafficnoise.Thisspacewouldbebothpartofthe
surroundingbuildings
ofthese
wouldthesignificance
fromit.Andonlygradually
cityandremoved
theeighteensectionsof stone
formsandspacesbeginto dawnonvisitors:
(chai);thedescentintomemoryspace
wallrecalllifein Hebrewgematria
of suchmemoryandsuggesteda void
counteredthe possibleexaltation
of largestoneblocksrecalled
carvedoutoftheearth,awound;thestacking
of stones,a
in Genesis,a Saaduthaor witness-pile
the firstmonument
echoedthe
cairn;theroughtextureandcutofthestonesvisually
memorial
destrucTemple's
of
the
ruin
the
Jerusalem,
Wall
in
stonesof theWestern
the
pebbles
construction;
their
of
the
seams
tion;theirroughfitwouldshow
in
sound,
visit
onwhichvisitorstreadwouldslowtheirpaceandmarktheir
aswellasin thevisibletracestheirstepswouldleavebehind.
illusion
Thentherewasa striking,yet altogethersubtleperspectival
pointinonecornerabovetheplaza:theseemingly
createdfromthevantage
compose
wouldsuddenly
wallsegments
of scattered
arrangement
random
intoaStarofDavid,andthenfallapartasonemovedbeyondthis
themselves
in
momentarily
wouldbeconstituted
ofJewsmurdered
point.Thememory
again,thelostJewsof Europereconstithemind'seyebeforedecomposing
here.Builtintothisdesignwas
ofvisitors
activity
tutedonlyinthememorial
textonthegreatwallatthebottomof thedecline
alsospaceforhistorical
Sucha textwouldnotpresumeto nameallthevictimsof the
intomemoxy.
crimebutwouldnamethecrimeitself.Builtintothisspacewasthecapacity
faceof itsmemory.
historyandforthechanging
fora recordof Holocaust
andRichard
byPeterEisenman
theproposal
conception,
Initsoriginal
totheveryideaoftheHolocaust
alternative
a startling
Serraalsosuggested
detheirswasa pointedlyanti-redemptory
LikeWeinmiller's,
memorial.
In
its
architecture.
art
or
in
Holocaust
for
the
compensation
sign:itfoundno
as
it
even
a
cemetery,
echoed
at
once
it
fieldof 4,000pillars,
undulating
the
to
inadequate
were
mourning
impliedthatsuchemblemsof individual
massmurder.Towardthisend,it tookthe vertical
taskof remembering
formsof itspillars-sizedfromgroundlevelto fivemetershigh,spaced92
plane.Rather
cm.apart andturnedtheircollectedmassintoa horizontal
problemin a single,reasmemorial
to answerGermany's
thanpretending
sothat
collectedformsarranged
multiple,
suringform,thisdesignproposed
visitorshaveto findtheirownpathto the memoryof Europe'smurdered
providednot an answerto memorybutan
Jews.As such,thismemorial
questionwithouta certainsolution.
ongoingprocess,a continuing
derived
oruncanniness,
calleditsUnheimlichkeit,
PartofwhatEisenman
in sucha field,thedemand
preciselyfromthesenseof dangergenerated
Andbecausethe
thatwenowfindourownwayintoandoutofsuchmemory.
on filmshotfrom
wouldbe almostirreproducible
scaleof thisinstallation
spaceandnottry
thatvisitorsenterthememorial
it demanded
theground,

GERMANY'S
HOLOCAUST
MEMORIAL* 77

toknowitvicariously
throughtheirsnapshots.
Whatwouldbe remembered
herearenotphotographic
imagesbutthe visitors'actualexperiences
and
whattheyremembered
in situ. As mighthavebeen expectedin a piece
partlydesignedbyRichard
Serra,thisdesignalsoimplieda certainphysical
dangerin suchmemory,a dangermeantto remainimplicitbutso closeto
beingactualized
in itsscaleandformsasto suggestsomething
morethana
merefigureof threatening
memoiy.
Beforelong,publicconsensus(thoughfarfromunanimous)
gathered
aroundthe designbyPeterEisenmanandRichardSerra.It wasreported
thatChancellor
Kohlalsostronglyfavoredthe designby Eisenmanand
Serraandeveninvitedthe teamto Bonnto hearthempersonally
explain
their proposal.Duringtheir January1998 visit with the Chancellor,
Eisenman
andSerrawereaskedtoconsiderahandful
ofdesignchangesthat
wouldmakethememorial
acceptable
toorganizers.
Asanarchitect
whosaw
accomodation
to hisclients'wishesaspartof hisjob,Eisenmanagreedto
adaptthedesignto theneedsof theproject.Asanartist,however,Richard
Serrasteadfastly
refusedto contemplate
anychangesinthedesignwhatsoever.As a result,he withdrewfromthe project,suggestingthat once
changed,theprojectwollldin effectno longerbe his.
Although
weweresorryto see Richard
Serrawithdraw
fromtheproject,
we couldalso fullyunderstand
the artist'sprerogative
to resistrecommendedchangesinwhathe regarded
asa finishedwork.Here,in fact,the
artist's
andthearchitect's
modesofoperation
mayalways
diverge:
wherethe
architectgenerally
seesanaccomodation
to theclients'requestsaspartof
hisjob,theartistis moreaptto see suggestedchanges,howeverslight,asa
threatto hiswork'sinternallogicandintegrity.
Thisconflict,too,is normal
in thecourseof collaborations
betweenartistsandarchitects.
Despiteour enthusiasticrecommendation
of Eisenmanand Serra's
design,in the sheernumberof itspillarsanditsoverallscalein proportion
to the allottedspace,the originaldesignleft less roomfor visitorsand
commemorative
activitiesthanwe hadwanted.Someof us alsofounda
potential
formorethanfigurative
dangerinthememorial
site:atfivemeters
high,thetallestpillarsmighthavehiddensomevisitorsfromview,thereby
creatingthe senseof a labyrinthine
maze,an effectdesiredneitherby
designers
norcommissioners.
Thepotential
forapurelyvisceralexperience
thatmightoccludea morecontemplative
memorial
visitwasgreaterthan
someof uswouldhavepreferred.
Therefore,amongthe modifications
we requestedof PeterEisenman,
nowactingonhisown,we askedfora slightdownscaling
of boththesizeof
individual
pillarsandtheirnumber.In June1998,I spenta dayin Peter
Eisenman'sNew YorkCitystudioto hearhis rationaleandto see the
changeshe hadmade,a daybeforehe senthisnewlydesignedmodeloffto
Berlinforsafe-keeping.
Shortlyafter,I couldreportto the othercommissionersthatoursuggestions
hadnotonlybeenexpertlyincorporated
into

78 * THEPUBLICHISTORIAN

ways,to
inunexpected
butthattheyworked,
thedesignbyPeterEisenman,
oftheconceptitself.HereI alsofound
theentireformalization
strengthen
critic,andadvocate all
myrolesasarbiter,
thatI had,in effect,collapsed
towardfindingthe languagethatthe chancellorhimselfmightuse in
public.
hisdecisionto a still-skeptical
justifying
found
thathe hadreducedboththe
design,
I
revised
In Eisenman's
3000)
andtheirheight,so thatthey
numberof pillars(from4200to about
wouldnowrangefromhalfa metertallto aboutthreemetersorso in one
useditssize
hastraditionally
sectionofthefield.Wherethe"monumental"
in itshumanly
thismemorial
orcowviewersintosubmission,
to humiliate
formswouldputpeopleon an evenfootingwithmemoIy.
proportioned
andthe roletheyplayastheywadeknee-,orchest-,orshoulderVisitors
by the
fieldof stoneswill not be diminished
deepintothisundulating
itself,now
butwillbe madeintegralpartsof the memorial
monumental
by
wouldnotbedefeated
dialogue
ofequals.Visitors
invitedintoamemorial
thembythe memory-forms
here,nordwarfed
obligation
theirmemorial
selves,butratherenjoinedbythemto comefaceto facewithmemory.
Ableto see overandaroundthesepillars,visitorswillhaveto findtheir
waythroughthisfieldof stones,on the onehand,evenastheyarenever
act.Ineffect,theywillmake
bythememorial
actually
lostin orovercome
spacesformemory,evenas theydo so
andchoosetheirownindividual
fieldalso
Theimpliedsenseofmotioninthegentlyundulating
collectively.
a kindof memorythatis neitherfrozenin time,norstaticin
formalizes
resistanimpulsetoward
helpvisitors
space.Thesenseofsuchinstabilitywill
closurein the memorialact andheightenone'sownrolein anchoring
in oneself.
memory
sizes,thepillarsarebothindividuated
Intheirmultipleandvariegated
isbrokendownhereand
memory"
theveryideaof"collective
andcollected:
theterrible
murdered,
ofindividuals
withthecollectedmemories
replaced
andnotmerelyunified.Theland
of theirdeathsnowmultiplied
meanings
swaysandmovesbeneaththesepillarssothateachoneissome3 degreesoff
to themass
notreconciled
bysuchmemory,
we arenotreassured
vertical:
byit.
murderof millionsbutnowdisoriented
of some1200pillarsoutof anoriginally
terms,theremoval
Inpractical
openedup the plazafor public
proposed4200 or so has dramatically
activities.It has also maderoomfor touristbusesto
commemorative
ofthepillarsontheouter
thesanctity
visitors
withoutthreatening
discharge
fromnearly
heightofthelowestpillar-tops
edgesofthefield.Byraisingthe
tall,thenewdesignalso
ahalf-meter
toapproximately
flushwiththeground
willnotsteponthepillarsorwalkoutoverthetopsof
ensuresthatvisitors
willtiltatthesamedegreeandangleastherollofthe
pillars.Sincethepillars
intowhichthepillarsareset,thistoowilldiscourtopography
ground-level
In fact,sincethesepillarsareneither
age climbingor clambering-over.
therewouldbenoactualdesecraastombstones,
norconsecrated
intended

MEMORIAL * 79
HOLOCAUST
GERMANY'S

tionofthemweresomeonetosteporsitononeofthesepillars.ButinJewish
sothe
ofadesecration,
toavoidtheappearance
itis alsoimportant
tradition,
minorchangein the smallestpillarswasstillwelcome.
pillarswillreflectthecolors
theconcrete-form
sandytone,
Intheirwarm,
of the sunandskyon the onehandandremainsuggestiveof stone,even
ontheother.Theconcretewillnothavetheroughlinesof their
sandstone,
Theycanalso
pourformsbutwillbe smooth,closetothetextureofsidewalk.
solutionto makethemeasyto clean.
withan anti-graffiti
be impregnated
in ordernot
to removegraffitiasit appears,
Overtime,it willbe important
groundsurfaceis alsoan
The crushed-stone
to allowit to accumulate.
orlyingontheground,
frolicking,
excellentidea,inthatit inhibitsrunning,
evenasit marksthevisitors'ownfootstepsin bothsoundandspace.
remainunderThearchitectprefersthatthe pillars,thoughstone-like,
stones,pillars,
theyarealternately
andopento manyreadings:
determined
blanktablets,walls,andsegments.Thissaid,in theirabstractforms,they
the referencesprojectedontothembyvisiaccomodate
willnevertheless
tors,the mostlikelybeingthe tombstone.Thisis not a bad thingand
Withwrittentext,they
suggeststheneedto keepthesepillarsblank-faced.
in fact, and so might
tombstones,
like
much
very
to
look
begin
might
somesortof formaltreatmentas tombgeneratea dynamicdemanding
stones,evensymbolicones.
textbe
writtenhistorical
Forthisreason,I suggestedthata permanent,
inscribedon a largetabletortabletsset eitherintothe groundorontothe
ground,tiltedat a readableangle,separatefromthe fieldof pillars.Their
reposeas
evenprayerful
angledpositionwillbringvisitorsintorespectful,
theyreadthe text,withheadsslightlybowedin memory.Thesecouldbe
placedattheentranceoronthesides,underthetreesliningtheperimeter
intact,whilestill
of thefielditselfformally
of thefield,leavingtheintegrity
here.Thusplaced,thememorial
istoberemembered
denotingexactlywhat
textswill not createa senseof beginningor end of the memorialfield,
leavingthe siteopento the multiplepathsvisitorstakein theirmemorial
attemptto fostera senseof
quest.This,too will respectthe architect's
it will not be a memorialwith a narrativebeginning,
incompleteness;
middle,andendbuiltintoit.
tooka seriesof voteson the
On25 June1999,the GermanBundestag
motions:(1)The
It finallypassedthreeprincipal
matterof the memorial.
for the
FederalRepublicof Germanywill erectin Berlina "Memorial
willbe the
(2) Thedesignforthismemorial
Jewsof Europe";
Murdered
center
towhichaninformation
byPeterEisenman,
fieldofpillarsproposed
ofother
madeupofthedirectors
willbe added;and(3)Apublicfoundation
of
fromthe organization
as wellas representatives
memorialinstitutions,
to overseeboththe
bythe Bundestag
willbe established
Jewsin Germany,
centerin theyear2000.
anditsinformation
buildingof the memorial

80 * THEPUBLICHISTORIAN

NowthatGermany's
"Memorial
fortheMurdered
Jewsof Europe"
has
beendedicated
andconstruction
hasbegun,is thistheendof Germany's
Holocaust
memory-work,
as I hadinitiallyfeared?Obviously
not.Debate
andcontroversy
continueunabated.
Moreover,
nowthattheparliament
has
decidedto giveHolocaust
memory
a centralplacein Berlin,anevenmore
difficult
jobawaitstheorganizers:
definingexactlywhatit is to be rememberedhere in PeterEisenman's
field of pillars.Whatwill Germany's
national
Holocaust
narrative
be?Whowillwriteit andto whomwillit be
written?
Thequestionofhistorical
contentbeginsatprecisely
themoment
thequestion
ofmemorial
designends.Memory,
whichhasfollowed
history,
willnowbe followedbystillfurtherhistorical
debate.
Onthededication
of thememorial
in January
2000,fittingly
fraughtas
always,
thedebatecontinued.
Some,likeMayor
Eberhard
Diepken,stayed
homelikeapetulant
childwhodidn'tgethisway;othersstayedhomeoutof
thedeeplyfeltconviction
thatnomemorial
willeverbeadequate
tothetask.
Of thosewhocameto the dedication,
mostcameto remember,
someto
mourn,andsometoshareinthememorial's
unflattering
political
limelight.
HadI beenable,I surelywouldhavecome bothto mournandto watch
withsomesatisfaction
as Berlincontinuedto wrestlewithits memorial
demons.
FromthisAmerican
Jew'sperspective,
thislastyearhasbeenawatershed
forGermanmemoryandidentity.No longerparalyzed
bythememoryof
crimesperpetrated
initsname,Germany
is nowactingonthebasisof such
memory:
it participated
boldlyin NATO's1999intervention
againsta new
genocidepeIpetrated
byMilosevic's
Serbia;
it hasbeguntochangecitizenshiplawsfromblood-toresidency-based;
andithasdedicated
apermanent
placein Berlin'scityscape
to commemorate
whathappenedthe lasttime
Germany
wasgoverned
fromBerlin.Endlessdebateandmemorialization
areno longermeresubstitutes
foractionsagainstcontemporaIy
genocide
butreasonsforaction.Thisis something
new,notjustforGermany
butfor
therestof us,aswell.
ForwhetherGermans
likeit or not,in additionto theirnation'sgreat
accomplishments
overthe lastseveralcenturies,theywillalsoalwaysbe
identified
asthatnationwhichlaunched
thedeadliestgenocidein human
history,whichstarteda worldwarthateventually
killedsome50 million
humanbeings,andwhichusedthiswartoscreenitsdeliberate
massmurder
ofsome6 millionEuropean
Jews.Itisnotaproudmemory.
Butneitherhas
anyothernationattempted
to makesucha crimepeipetrated
in itsname
partofitsnational
identity.
Forthisspacewillalways
remindGermany
and
theworldatlargeof theself-inflicted
voidattheheartof German
culture
andconsciousnessavoidthatdefinesnational
identity,
evenasitthreatens
suchidentitywithitsownimplosion.