Teksty Drugie 2013, 2, s. 13-26
Special Issue – English Edition
The Holocaust as a Challenge for
Literary Reflection.
Przemysław Czapliński
Przeł. Benjamin Koschalka
http://rcin.org.pl
Przemysław CZAPLIŃSKI
The Holocaust as a Challenge for Literary Reflection
There is no single definition for H olocaust literature. M ore o r less, th o u g h , we know
th a t it n u m b ers several th o u san d books and m o re th a n a dozen th o u sa n d articles w rit­
ten in well over a dozen languages over th e course o f m o re th a n sixty years. This is too
m u ch for anybody to have m anaged to read all o f th e m and en ough for som ebody to have
m anaged to overlook everything; to o little to express th e H olocaust and too m u ch to for
th e axiom s o f the hum anities to rem ain unchanged.
This is also an outline o f th e challenge rep resen ted b y th e H olocaust for literary
reflection. It com pels us to p a rt w ith o u r dream s o f synthesis an d synthetic th in k in g
itself, an d at th e sam e tim e, urges us to consider fu n d am en tal m atters.
A different story
Is th e 20th cen tu ry h isto ry of Polish1 and E uropean literature2 n o t w o rth rethinking?
If anyone doubts w h eth er th ere are g ro u n d s for such a revision, one could reply th a t
a few stage plays by Beckett, Ionesco, G enet, an d A dam ov w ere en ough for th e theater
o f th e absurd to be form ed - an d this revolu tio n ized E u ro p ean d ra m a an d created
a sharp divide in history. At play here, m eanw hile, is a set of several th o u san d pieces w ith
O ne o f the first attem pts to make such a synthesis revisiting the European literature
o f the 20th century is Alvin Rosenfeld’s book A Double Dying: Reflections on Holocaust
Literature, Bloom ington, IN : Indiana University Press, 1988.
http://rcin.org.pl
13
A t least two texts provide a very instructive trial run for the history o f Polish literature
seen from the perspective o f the Holocaust and w riting about it: Grynberg, Henryk,
“H olocaust w literaturze polskiej,” in: Prawda nieartystyczna, Warszawa: Państwowy
Instytut Wydawniczy, 1994; Low, Ryszard, “Uwagi do przyszłej historii literatury
(polskiej) o Zagładzie,” in: Brodzka-W ald, Alina, Krawczyńska, D orota and Leociak,
Jacek (eds), Literatura polska wobec Zagłady, Warszawa: Z IH , 2000.
H o loca u st in Literary and C u ltura l Studies
a b eg in n in g and apparently n o end, ex panding w ith th e backw ard wave o f th e debates
in France3 an d G erm any,4 as well as in th e countries o f C en tral an d E astern Europe.
It is in our p a rt of th e c o n tin e n t - in Poland, th e C zech R epublic, Slovakia and H ungary
- th a t th e H olocaust cu rre n t is am ong th e liveliest, ab o u n d in g in m o m en to u s b o oks (just
lo o k at Im re K ertész an d Jachym Topol) an d w orks th a t are still able to cause conflict in
society and tran scen d literature, as h ap p en ed w ith th e dispute w ith H en ry k G rynberg5
or th e debate on Jan Tom asz G ross’ Neighbors.6 O ne m ig h t say th a t for th e society of
th e fo rm er Soviet bloc th e H olocaust, like th e trau m atic recollection o f totalitarian rule,
constitutes a lexicon o f fu n d a m e n tal political concepts aro u n d w hich th e n ew identity
o f state and society is negotiated. Yet co n stru ctio n o f this id en tity requires th a t certain
accepted tru th s m u st b e questioned.
“R eth in k in g ” th e h isto ry o f E u ro p ean literatu res w ould m ean first o f all asking
about th e relationship o f m o d e rn ism an d p o stm o d ern ism - th e tw o strongest aesthetic
form ations o f th e 20th cen tu ry - w ith th e H olocaust. For avant-garde authors, society
was a u n ity of functions, a stru ctu re lacking in te rn a l con trad ictio n s or endow ed w ith
th e stren g th to rem ove th em , an d finally a w hole th a t was p a rt of a certain process of
accum ulation o f experiences aim ing to achieve one o f th e p lan n ed - b u t also predictable,
belonging to som e so rt o f o rd er - ultim ate objectives. Was th e avant-garde, belonging
to m o d ern ism and w ith its categories o f w hole, coherence an d evolution, capable of
perceiving th e loom in g danger?7 D id th e rev o lu tio n ary and fu n ctio n alist views visible
in the program m es o f Italian, Russian an d Polish fu tu rism an d th e Russian jo u rn a l LEF,
constructivism an d B auhaus n o t m ake artists indifferent - an d som etim es enthusiastic
- observers o f th e in tro d u ctio n o f totalitarianism ?
The lack of reaction to an ti-S em itism and th e N u rem b erg Laws th a t was ch aracter­
istic o f th e m ajority o f groups w as a sign th a t th e desired u n ity was m o re im p o rta n t for
th e avant-garde th a n killing o f otherness. It was this indifference o f avant-garde trends,
how ever, th a t show ed th a t th e anti-bourgeois sentim ents th a t w eighed so heavily on
th eir w orldview was one o f th e largest m in d traps o f 20th-cen tu ry art. As it tu rn e d out,
it was possible to hate th e bourgeoisie in th e desire for social justice and w o rld peace,
an d at the sam e tim e su p p o rt totalitarianism . To b e m o re precise, avant-garde th o u g h t
See Rousso, Henry, The Vichy Syndrome: History and Memory in France since 1944 (trans.
A rthur G oldham m er), Cambridge, M A: H arvard University Press, 1991.
See e.g. Goldhagen, D aniel J., H itler’s Willing Executioners. Ordinary Germans and the
Holocaust, N ew York: Vintage Press, 1997; Browning, C hristopher R., Ordinary Men.
Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the F inal Solution in Poland, N ew York: HarperPerennial,
1993.
See also Zaleski, M arek, “Różnica,” in: Formy pamięci. O przedstawianiu przeszłości
w polskiej literaturze współczesnej, Warszawa: Instytut Badań Literackich 1996;
Tokarska-Bakir, Joanna, “Skandalista H enryk G rynberg,” Res Publica Nowa 2003 no. 6.
14
See also Steinlauf, M ichael, Bondage to the Dead.• Poland and the Memory o f the Holocaust,
Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1996.
http://rcin.org.pl
See Bauman, Zygm unt, Ciało i przemoc w obliczu ponowoczesności, Toruń: W ydawnictwo
Naukowe Uniwersytetu M ikołaja Kopernika 1995, 15-18.
Czapliński
The Holocaust as a Challenge for Literary Reflection
8
W ood, D avid, “Introduction,” in: W ood, D avid and Bernasconi, Robert, Derrida and
Differance, Evanston, IL: N orthw estern University Press, 1988, ix.
9
Benjamin, Andrew, The Lyotard Reader, Oxford: Blackwell, 1989, 387.
10
Rubinstein, Richard L., The Cunning o f History: The Holocaust and the American Future,
N ew York: H arper Perennial, 1987, 2.
11
In part because o f contem plation o f the Holocaust, postm odernism abandoned the
search for the fundam ental T ruth, deciding that it is always o f a discursive-institutional
character th at is dependent on the context; departure from the philosophy o f first
principles offers an incentive for creating “counter-narratives” that question the
dom inant versions o f history, This is discussed by Alan M ilchm an and A lan Rosenberg
in Experiments in Thinking the Holocaust: Auschwitz, Modernity, and Philosophy, New
York: Palgrave M acmillan, 2006, 14.
http://rcin.org.pl
15
h ad a dichotom ous character (either-or) and w as b ased on projects for holistic social
order, b u t n o t on individuals’ rights. This was w hy left-w ing avant-garde groups w ere
anti-fascist, b u t at the sam e tim e pro -to talitarian . In tu rn , th e institu tio n alizatio n of
th e avant-garde th a t to o k place in Italy an d Soviet Russia before th e w ar an d after it in
th e socialist bloc dem onstrates th a t th e goals o f th e to talitarian state - achieving social
unity, ad m in isterin g th e w hole - w ere dangerously close to th e aspirations of authors.
O ne can therefore venture th e hypothesis th a t th e d isintegration o f th e avant-garde,
w hich h ad proceeded from th e 1940s th ro u g h desperate attem pts at revival o r co n tin u ­
ation, did n o t take place in th e 1960s, b u t in fact d u rin g th e H olocaust. For anyone w ho
did n o t u n d erstan d th a t indifference to th e H olocaust was a sign o f to talitarian th in k ­
in g awoke a little later w ith th e p o st o f state avant-gardist. A nyone w ho saw th e crim e
w ith th eir ow n eyes began to d ism antle th e avant-garde illusions o f th e fun ctio n ality of
language, indispensability o f authors, or ratio n ality of history.
Perhaps it is this dism antling th a t gives rise to p o stm o d ern ism . This stands on the
side of difference, and n o t similarity, otherness and n o t unity, aim lessness or m u ltitu d e of
aims, and against functionalism as a p rinciple o rd erin g social life. As one scholar w rites,
p o stm o d ern ist th in k in g should “em phasize dissonance, separation, disparity, plurality,
distinction, change, over against those w ho w ould continue th e search for unity, identity,
presence, perm anence, foundations, stru ctu res, and essences.”8 Such a stro n g opposition
regarding m o d ern ist th o u g h t derives fro m th e conviction th a t absolute categories w ere
b eh in d th e H olocaust. W h en th in k in g a b o u t culture, we should always rem em b er th a t it
has its social im plications. “If th ere is to d ay an ethical or political question and if there
is som ew here a O ne m ust, it m u st lin k up w ith a one m ust m ake links with A u sch w itz”
claim ed Jacques D errid a.9 In this sense, th e H olocaust is a headstone for m o d ern ity and
a fluid foundation o f p o stm o d ern ity ; since th e H olocaust it has no longer been possible
to forget th at “Auschwitz has enlarged ou r conception o f th e state’s capacity to do violence.
A b a rrie r has been overcom e in w h at for m illen n ia h ad been regarded as th e perm issible
lim its o f political action. The N azi p erio d serves as a w arn in g of w h at we can all too easily
becom e w ere we faced w ith a political o r econom ic crisis o f overw helm ing proportions.”10
To so m e e x te n t, p o s tm o d e rn is m em erg es fro m th e e x p e rie n c e o f th e defeat
tasted by cu ltu re in its en c o u n te r w ith th e H o lo cau st.11 T h eo d o r A d o rn o claim ed th a t
H o loca u st in Literary and C u ltura l Studies
“A ll post-A uschw itz cu ltu re, in c lu d in g its u rg e n t c ritiq u e, is garbage.”12 F ro m th e n on,
“th in k in g - if it is to b e tru e to d a y .. .m u st also b e a th in k in g ag ain st itself. It th o u g h t
is n o t m easu red by th e ex trem ity th a t eludes th e con cep t, it is fro m th e o u tset in
th e n a tu re o f th e m u sical acco m p an im e n t w ith w h ich th e SS liked to d ro w n o u t the
scream s o f its victim s” (A d o rn o 1973: 512). It w o u ld ap p ear th a t lite ra tu re after th e
H o lo cau st becom es ju s t su ch th in k in g a n d w ritin g ag ain st itself - p ra ctisin g plurality
a n d co n trad ictio n , c o n stan t testin g o f v ario u s n arrativ e m o d els, c o n tin u a l changes
in perspectives, search in g for a language w h ic h c a n n o t b e re d u c ed to a concept. This
negative co n n ectio n o f p o stm o d e rn ity w ith m o d e rn ity m ean s th a t th e re is n o need
to decree an absolute b eg in n in g , or a rad ica l b re a k in history. P o stm o d e rn ity has
n o th in g to offer - at least it is a p o licy th a t m akes m ass k illin g possible - a p a rt from
falsifying th e existing order.
O ne m ig h t say th a t for p o stm o d e rn philo so p h y an d literature th e H olocaust has
becom e - or, m ore cautiously, is b eco m in g - a k in d o f B ook o f Exodus: a test to w hich
we inexorably re tu rn and w h ich always leads to expulsion.
Shouting, gibberish, non-speech
O ne o f the first concen tratio n cam p scenes in R oberto B enigni’s film Life Is B eautiful
depicts an SS officer p resen tin g p riso n ers w ith th eir new living regulations. The m ain
protagonist, G uido, acts as his in terp reter, despite not know ing G erman. A n absurd
translation ensues: th e officer spouts g u ttu ral an d h arsh sounds, his sentences apodictic
an d his in tonation th reatening. G uido repeats his gestures, uses sim ilar-length sentences
an d im itates his in to n atio n, b u t says so m eth in g com pletely different (and this solely
to his young son G iosue, p resen tin g th e stay in th e d eath cam p to h im as a “gam e about
a real tank.” This is a gam e in w hich “you’re n o t allowed to ask for a second helping of
dessert” and “You lose tw o p oints for co m plaining to m um .”
A lth o u g h a lm o st b u rle sq u e , th is scene reveals a ce rta in h id d e n side to th e role
o f language in th e H o lo cau st. F irst, we see h o w th e v ictim s are m u ltilin g u a l and
th e ir ex ecu tio n ers m o n o lin g u a l. T h e p ro b le m o f tra n sla tio n th ere fo re tak es cen tre
stage, in b o th a p p a re n t a n d v e ry re a l te rm s. T h is issue is e n tire ly re a l (m o re a b o u t
th e “a p p earan ce” in a m o m e n t), b e c a u se th e H o lo ca u st w as a p h e n o m e n o n ro o te d
in n a tio n a lism , an d y e t at th e sam e tim e , as it to o k o n s u p ra n a tio n a l d im en sio n s,
re q u ires m u ltilin g u a l studies.
H ow m an y languages w o u ld any sy n th esis o f th e lite ra tu re o f th e S h o ah have
to encapsulate? W ith o u t n u llify in g th e resp o n se to th is q u estio n , we can assum e th a t
any n u m b e r h ere w ill b e to o sm all. This is because th e ghetto s an d cam ps gave rise
to stylistic an d ling u istic m ix tu res w h ich ex ten d e d th e list o f languages im m easurably.
The cam p slang attested in h u n d re d s o f d o c u m e n ta ry reco rd s, th e p ro se o f T adeusz
B orow ski o r M arian P ankow ski and, for exam ple, M ieczysław L urczyński’s d ram a
91
12
http://rcin.org.pl
Adorno, Theodor W ., Negative Dialectics (trans. E.B. A shton), L ondon: Routledge
& Kegan Paul, 1973, 367.
Czapliński
The Holocaust as a Challenge for Literary Reflection
13
1st edition entitled Stara Gwardia, H annover 1946; 2 nd ed. —A lte Garde, L ondon 1970;
3rd ed. —Die A lte Garde, in: Ratajczakowa, D obrochna (ed.), Polski dramat emigracyjny
1939-1969. Antologia, Poznań 1993. O n this dram a see G uderian-Czaplińska, Ewa,
“‘A lte G arde’” Mieczysława Lurczyńskiego,” in: Kiec, Izolda, Ratajczakowa, D obrochna
and W achowski, Jacek (eds), Teatr i dramatpolskiej emigracji 1939-1989, Poznań 1994.
N ote that Lurczyński believed that owing to its language the play should n ot be widely
disseminated; in his introduction, he writes: “The language o f this book, the language o f
the hum an dungheap, forces m e to closely supervise the w hole publishing event.. .I am
very m uch aware th at the book is not intended for the general reader. I am having 200
copies printed, and shall personally send each volume to people w ho can w ithstand the
harsh w ind blowing from its pages.”
14
Translated from Polish version: Kertesz, Imre, Język na wygnaniu [“A Language
in Exile”] (trans. Elżbieta Sobolewska), Warszawa: WAB, 2004, 194.
http://rcin.org.pl
17
The O ld G uard,13 give us an ex tra pro b lem ; for to th e list o f languages w e m u st add
n o t ju s t th is v ernacu lar, b u t also th e q u estio n o f tra n sla tio n , th e issue o f th in g s “lost
in translation," as Eva H offm an p u t it. O f course, th is is th e case w ith every text, yet
th e d ram atic pow er o f th e u n tran sla ta b le is revealed all th e m o re stro n g ly w h en w hat
is said is crucial for living an d does n o t possess re ad y sym bols.
In his b o o k I f This Is a M a n , P rim o Levi w rites o f a th ree-year-old child at A uschw itz
w hose only identifying m a rk was a n u m b er tatto o ed on his forearm . The b o y ’s nam e
- H u rb in ek - was given to h im by o th er prisoners. H e could say only one, inco m p re­
hensible w ord: “m assklo” or “m atisklo" To parap h rase th e title of Levi’s book, we m ig h t
ask: is this a language? Perhaps it is th e case - as every read er o f H olocaust texts m ust
have w ondered at som e p o in t - th a t this incom prehensible w ord th a t was H u rb in ek ’s
w hole language is w hat should be treated as a m o d el of th a t language. In o th er w ords,
even w hen we are dealing w ith H olocaust texts w ritten in an u n d erstan d ab le language,
w e should see in it w ords fro m o u r w orld and an entirely alien one, expression th a t is
inconceivable and yet crucial. The w o rd spoken b y H u rb in ek belongs exclusively to him ,
b u t sim ultaneously form s a com m on foreign language - th e only code th a t could n o t serve
as the basis for segregation of th e w orld, com posed o f separate sym bols n o t belonging
to any syntax, w ith no illusion o f any belonging to th e w orld. As Im re Kertész stated, “the
H olocaust does n o t and can n o t have its ow n lan g u ag e "14 This m eans th a t a story about
the H olocaust is always told in sup ran atio n al language, speaking o f th e supranational
character of the H olocaust, an d at th e sam e tim e in a foreign language, extractin g the
om inous detac h m en t th a t lies in co m m o n values.
A nd this is w here w e com e to th e ap paren t n atu re of th e question o f tran slatio n and
m ultilingualism . The scene fro m B enigni’s film as well as H u rb in ek ’s single-elem ent
lexicon m ake it clear th a t n e ith e r a com plete roll call o f th e languages o f th e H olocaust
(its slang, dialects, jargons) n e ith er th e m o st carefully discussed m atter o f translation
explain anything. O r perhaps even: th e m ore th ey explain, th e closer th e y w ill be to som e
com m on sem antic core for various languages an d th e m o re fully th ey w ill m ystify this
reality. This Achilles p arado x results fro m th e fact th a t in th e context o f th e H olocaust
the belief in language as th e m o st im p o rtan t com m unication to o l in th e h u m an universe,
H o loca u st in Literary and C u ltura l Studies
as well as the conviction o f th e existence o f an essence o f language, proved p itiful and
lethal. There is no language th a t can express th e tr u th of th e H olocaust, because language
expresses n o th in g , and th e H olocaust does n o t have its tru th .
As Benigni shows, language is neither the only, n o r the m ost im p o rtan t com m unication
tool: w ithout gestures, intonation and context we w ould n o t un d erstan d anything. A nd
w hen gestures, intonation and context appear, it is alm ost insignificant. We do n o t have
to understand the w ords o f violence if violence itself does n o t ensure th a t anything other
th an utter obedience results from this understanding. If there was any essence o f language
th at was m anifested in th e H olocaust, it was linked w ith its m agical function - creating
things th rough words. A nd it was this pow er o f creation th at proved to be completely indif­
ferent to understanding. S om ebody w ho can use language like a god, or w ho can decide
on som eone’s life th ro u g h language, is n o t concerned w ith w heth er he is understood. He
expects nothing b u t obedience, and n o t listening, from the objects over w h o m he rules. The
opposite is also true: we conceive the language o f extrem e violence w ithout understanding;
we kno w w hat it is saying to us w ithout und erstan d in g th e w ords, and we know th at it
com pels us to obey and w arns o f dire consequences for th e slightest infraction. For such
language to be a m eans of com m unication, its “essence” w ould have to be n o t so m uch
translatable as sym m etric, transitive, reflexive - th at is to say th a t it w ould have to serve
b o th the “creator” and the created object equally. W ithout this transitivity, language is above
all a means o f discipline. A nd only as a com ponent o f discipline can it be seen as a tool.
In very m u ch sim plified term s, th en , these are th e challenges o f th e linguistic side
o f th e H olocaust faced by literary reflection. It is obliged to take into acco u n t an d care­
fully - in the 19th-cen tu ry spirit - piece to g eth er th e infinite m u ltitu d e o f languages of
victim s, as well as to fix and system atise th e rules o f tran slatio n . At th e sam e tim e, all
actions seeking ord er en co u n ter th e h id d en side o f language revealed b y th e Holocaust:
it is n o t a tool of u n d erstan d in g , n am in g th e w orld an d expressing feelings, as th e m ore
it fulfils these objectives, th e closer it is to b ein g a to o l of d o m in atio n an d a m e th o d of
creating the w orld. The essence o f language is n o t decided on b y sym bols and m eanings,
b u t relations betw een th o se w ho say so m eth in g to each other. F rom th e p o in t o f view of
language and translatio n , th e H olocaust w as a unification o f linguistic differences and
rem oval o f th a t sm all elem ent of every statem en t th a t c an n o t be translated.
Unable to fit
It m ay be th a t th e H olocaust - and its unique non-lan g u ag e15 - com pels us to perceive
th e unnam eability and th e inexpressibility o f experiences as a co m m u n icatio n al rule,
an d n o t an exception. Yet th e H olocaust also com pels us to d istinguish th e m o d ern istic
an d po stm o d ern istic u n d ersta n d in g o f this question.
In m o d ern istic practice, “expressing th e inexpressible” m ean t aesthetic form atio n of
w hat was n o t self-contained in its b ein g - i.e., w hatever was in a fluid, unready, in co m ­
plete state before the act o f expression. A n d since chaos, fluidity, d isturbance to th e order
81
15
http://rcin.org.pl
This term was used by M aria Janion in her article “N ie w iem ,” in: Żyjąc tracimy życie.
Niepokojące tematy egzystencji, Warszawa: WAB, 2001, 397.
Czapliński
The Holocaust as a Challenge for Literary Reflection
and inability to fit th e m od el is th a t w h ich is O ther, w e can say th a t m o d e rn expression
cam e o u t o f fear and fascination w ith O therness. The reverse o f this ap p ro ach to b eing
was a desire to prevail over O th ern e ss16 - b y adopting, m arginalizing, or excluding. The
O ther, experienced negatively, could com e to th e fore in th e fo rm of eccentricity, oddity,
exception, or adored or co n d em n ed subject.
It seem s th a t it is n o t th e change in ap p ro ach to th e “inexpressible” th a t w as deci­
sive in th e transform ations in 20th century art, b u t ra th e r th e changing attitu d e to the
O ther. In th e place o f th e O th er as a - fascinating o r th re a te n in g - alternative to the
order, as th at w hich questions th e o rd er by its v ery existence, O th ern ess appears as an
indelible co m p o n en t o f every N orm . P o stm o d ern ism therefore goes fro m in terest in
“styles o f seeing” - w hich allowed O th ern ess to be seen in various ways - to reflection
on “looking” itself. If it is only th ro u g h in tro d u cin g differences th a t we can u n d erstan d
reality, th en p o stm o d ern art desires to m ake it possible to see th e m echanism s by w hich
differences are p roduced. “See w h at seeing allows,”17 “express w h at expression m akes
possible,” “cognize w hat is d eterm in ed by cognition”18 - all o f these sentences call fo rth
I owe my fundam ental inspiration in this passage to Ryszard N ycz’s article “‘W yrażanie
niewyrażalnego’w literaturze nowoczesnej,” in: Literatura jako trop rzeczywistości.
Poetyka epifanii w nowoczesnej literaturze polskiej, Kraków: Universitas, 2001.
17
M artin Jay writes about this in his book Downcast Eyes: The Denigration o f Vision in
Twentieth-Century French Thought, Berkeley: University o f California Press, 1993; Jay
discusses the privileged position o f the eye and the blindness characteristic o f every
hegem on th at it produces, m anifested by adapting reality to the pictorial outlines
cultivated by cultural schools o f seeing. In other words, ocularcentrism is the cultural
dom ination o f looking that does not see, as it has been cultivated by the tradition o f the
incorporeal looking subject and transcendental perspective. As a consequence, our seeing
ignores the surface o f things in two ways: first, it places on the seen w orld schemes of
appearance which cause “know ” to precede “see”; second, as an action rooted in the
tradition o f transcendentalism , this looking omits the outer layer, supposedly in order
to permeate the centre —and this w ith the “eye o f the m ind” or “eyes o f the soul” to see
the truth (although this compels us to treat the skin o f the world as an insignificant or
even deceptive veil). For Jay, though, as G rażyna Borkowska writes w hen discussing the
art o f seeing in H alina Poswiatowska’s work, “the m ost im portant thing is w hat one does
not see or escapes one’s attention —not because it is buried deep, b ut because, like grass,
it lies on the surface (Nierozważna i nieromantyczna. O Halinie Poświatowskiej, Kraków:
W ydawnictwo Literackie, 2001, 150).
18
Paul K. Feyerabend, considering the ways in which presupposition is revealed, points
to literary means: “how can we possibly examine som ething we are using all the time?
H ow can we analyse the term s in which we habitually express our m ost simple and
straightforward observations, and reveal their presuppositions? H ow can we discover the
kind o f w orld we presuppose w hen proceeding as we do? The answer is clear: we cannot
discover it from the inside. W e need an external standard o f criticism, we need a set
o f alternative assumptions or, as these assumptions will be quite general, constituting,
as it were, an entire alternative world, we need a dream -w orld in order to discover the
features o f the real world we think we inhabit (and which may actually be ju st another
dream -w orld).” (AgainstM ethod, L ondon: Verso, 1993, 22).
http://rcin.org.pl
61
16
H o loca u st in Literary and C u ltura l Studies
an inexpressibility different fro m th e m o d ern istic type. For O th ern ess proves to b e no t
only the fu n d am en tal co m p o n en t, b u rie d deepest, o f every social order, b u t also a co n ­
dition o f seeing O therness. In o th er w ords, p o stm o d ern ity m akes us realise th a t every
story about social diversity an d social plurality is in itself a sm all piece o f this plurality.
O therness rem ains inexpressible, b u t loses its negative u n d erto n e s.19
In th is resp ect, th e H o lo c a u st w as a su m m a ry o f th e h is to ry o f (in)expressibility.
Its so u rce cam e fro m a p recisely p la n n e d w o rld w h ic h w as in its e n tire ty ra tio n a l,
a n d th e refo re sto o d o n th e side o f lan g u ag e, an d w as also in its e n tire ty a-logical:
m ad , insane, co u n ter-lin g u istic. C o n te m p la tio n o f th e H o lo cau st th erefo re con stan tly
circu lates b etw een a c k n o w le d g e m e n t o f th e tru e n e ss o f ev ery H o lo c a u st d o c u m e n t
a n d th e aw areness th a t each o f th e m d ep ic ts o n ly a sm all fra c tio n o f th e H o lo cau st,
a n d fu rth e rm o re , th a t th e se fra c tio n s w ill n e v er piece to g e th e r a w h o le.20 As one
sch o lar w ro te, “th e re a lity o f th e H o lo c a u st is alw ays lo st w h e n a ttem p ts are m a d e
to p o rtra y it.”21
This loss com es fro m th e fact th a t th e “final solution o f th e Jewish question” was
from the very b eg in n in g b u rd e n ed by a curse th a t could n o t be n a m e d - forbidden, b u t
also unfulfilled. First th ere was prohibition:
I also w ant to m ake reference before you here...to a really grave m atter...I am referring
to the evacuation of the Jews, the annihilation of the Jewish people...M ost of you m ust
know w hat it m eans to see a h u n d re d corpses lie side by side, o r five h u n d re d , o r a th o u ­
sand. To have stuck this o u t a n d - excepting cases of hum an w eakness - to have kept our
integrity, th a t is w hat has m ade us hard. In o u r history, this is an u nw ritten a n d neverto -b e-w ritten page of glory.
20
The above w ords w ere spoken by H ein rich H im m ler.22 Rarely in universal h isto ry do we
en co u n ter sentences w ith such far-reaching consequences - sentences fro m w h ich th e
h isto ry o f several m illion people can be extracted. Yet this sh o rt passage, ra th e r lacking
in rheto rical term s and cru d e in its pathos, contains th e reverse o f th e act o f creation.
It predicts m ass m u rd er (“an n ih ilatio n o f th e people”), points to th e technicalization
19
See Lyotard, Jean-Franęois, “A n Answer to the Question, W h a t is the Postm odern?” in:
The Postmodern Explained: Correspondence, 1982-1985 (trans. D on Barry), Minneapolis:
University o f M innesota Press, 1992: “Finally, it should be m ade clear that it is not
up to us to provide reality, but to invent allusions to w hat is conceivable but not
presentable.”
20
There is copious literature on the problems o f portraying the H olocaust —the main
studies include: Bartov, Omer, Murder in our Midst: The Holocaust, Industrial Killing
and Representation, N ew York: O xford University Press, 1996; LaCapra, Dom inick,
Representing the Holocaust: History, Theory, Trauma, Ithaca and L ondon: Cornell
University Press, 1994.
21
Easthope, Antony, “Holocaust i niem ożność przedstawienia,” trans. M . Pietrzak-M erta,
Res Publica Nowa 1997 no. 11, 65.
22
C ited in: Dawidowicz, Lucy, A Holocaust Reader, N ew York: B ehrm an House, 1976,
130-134.
http://rcin.org.pl
Czapliński
The Holocaust as a Challenge for Literary Reflection
23
See also A rendt, H annah, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality o f E vil, New
York: Penguin Classics, 229: “The totalitarian state lets its opponents disappear in silent
anonym ity” (The words o f Peter Bamm , a G erm an army doctor who served on the
Eastern front).
24
C ited in: Korotyński, Henryk, “Kiedy będziem y znali Oświęcim?,” Odrodzenie 1947
no. 34.
25
Translation by Catherine Sommer: http://nellysachsenglish.w ordpress.com /2013/04/30/
behind-your-lips/ (access: 26.09.2013).
http://rcin.org.pl
21
o f killing (“a th o u san d corpses lie side b y side”), and ennobles extrem e evil (“stu ck this
out...that has m ade us ha rd ”). B ut th ere is so m eth in g m o re in these w ords too - a certain
lin k betw een the exterm inatio n an d th e record. This is n o t only an express forbiddance
o f recording,23 alm ost a divine p ro h ib itio n on creating im ages, b u t also so m eth in g th at
can be called th e curse of inexpressibility.
Today, six decades after th e H olocaust, w e k n o w - fo rtunately - th a t innu m erab le
texts exist to record it. H im m ler’s p ro p h ecy o f this page b ein g “un w ritten and never-tobe-w ritten” w as n o t b o rn e out. A t th e sam e tim e, th o u g h , H im m ler’s w ords w ere spoken
from w ithin a h isto ry th a t was utterly E uropean, and yet terrifyingly alien, em bodying
the idea o f ratio n al order, and incom prehensible, executed w ith technological p erfec­
tion, and barbaric, spoken in a sim ple language o f orders an d scream s, an d illogical. At
the tim e o f th e H olocaust, o r even in th e H olocaust itself, th e m o st im p o rta n t ideas of
E uropean culture - th o se o f order, com m unity, law established by hu m an s, controlling
h isto ry and the functionality o f social organization - reached th e ir apogee. A n d it was
these ideas th a t proved to b e crim inal. This is w hy th e h isto ry o f th e H olocaust can n o t
b e fully nam ed, expressed, or described. In this sense, H im m ler w as rig h t to say th at
the page w ould in som e p a rt rem ain u nw ritten. This is attested b y w ords spoken from
the o th er side:
“There is no person w ho could tell th e w hole tru th a b o u t Auschwitz,” claim ed Józef
C yrankiew icz, testifying as a w itness before th e Suprem e N atio n al T ribunal in W arsaw
in th e tria l o f R udolf H oss, co m m a n d a n t o f th e A uschw itz cam p.24
“I k n o w th a t I have n o t said everything. I do n o t th in k th a t anyone could say every­
th in g about this m o d ern m e th o d o f psychological and physical cru sh in g o f m illions of
people,” w rites M irosław Lurczyński (1993: 30).
“B ehind y o u r lips / the unspeakable w aits / tears at th e um bilical cords / o f w ords,”
w rote N elly Sachs in h er p o em “B ehind Your Lips.”25
This deliberately ra n d o m m ix o f q uotations - w h ich could be ex panded into the
hu n d red s and thou san d s - is supposed to d em o n strate th a t th e h isto ry o f th e Holocaust,
p o rtray ed in diaries, testim onies, m em oirs an d em in en t literary w orks, is tex t afflicted
w ith th e curse o f Penelope - text b o th w oven and at th e sam e tim e dam aged. The w ords
are arranged in it by the authors, and th e w o rk o f d estru ctio n is done b y th e inexpress­
ible - w ords leached out o f th eir m eaning, a language o f exterm in ated sym bols, sym bols
held b eh in d the gate o f recollection. The p arad o x o f th e H olocaust, th e n , is th a t those
w ho w alked th e p a th o f d eath to th e very end are dead, w hile th o se w ho survived do n o t
H o loca u st in Literary and C u ltura l Studies
kn o w everything. W h at th ey do k n o w in any case m eans th a t th ey live w ith o u t a tongue
w ith w hich to speak.26
Another literariness
A lm ost from the beginning, H olocaust w ritin g has been perv ad ed by a heated conflict
betw een th e im perative to b ear w itness and w h at we m ig h t call m istru st tow ards style.
The confrontation o f m enace and trad itio n a l views on th e subject o f literature m eant
th a t the first com m en tato rs w ere decidedly against th e use o f any artistic devices.27 H ere
are a few view s am ong thousands:
Michael Wyschogrod:
I firm ly believe that art is not appropriate to the holocaust. A rt takes the sting out of suffer­
ing...!: is therefore forbidden to m ake fiction of the holocaust....Any attem pt to transform the
holocaust into art dem eans the holocaust and m ust result in poor art.28
Elie Wiesel:
Auschwitz negates any form of literature, as it defies all systems, all doctrines...A novel about
Auschwitz is not a novel, or else it is not about Auschwitz. The very attem pt to write such
a novel is blasphemy.29
Wiesel again:
By its uniqueness, the holocaust defies literature.30
22
Two view s overlap here: an o n to lo g ical one, acco rd in g to w h ic h H o lo cau st literatu re
is im possible, and a m o ra l one, w h ich says th a t it is in a p p ro p ria te. The representatives
o f th e first thesis saw in th e H o lo cau st so m eth in g th a t in its essence w as n o t subject
to literature, so m eth in g alien to it an d im p o ssib le to process into art. The p ro p o n e n ts
26
I am referring here to a w ell-know n passage from Prim o L evi’s I f This Is a M an, quoted
in Hobsbawm, Eric J., The Age o f Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914­
-1991 (1994): “W e w ho survived the Cam ps are not true witnesses. W e are those who,
through prevarication, skill or luck, never touched bottom . Those w ho have, and who
have seen the face o f the Gorgon, did n ot return, or returned wordless.”
27
The same view was dom inant in the views o f researchers —see e.g. Sawicka, Jadwiga,
“Uciec od literackosci,” in: Sw itch, Jerzy (ed.), Swiadectwa ipowroty nieludzkiego czasu,
Lublin: W yd. Uniwersytetu M arii Curie-Sklodowskiej, 1990, 35: “The docum ent
here possesses th at superiority over fiction th at it makes it possible to understand
a phenom enon th at m ight have been taken differently from the production o f a story
or underlining the literary nature than as an actual, crucial experience o f a 20th-century
person.”
28
“Some Theological Reflections on the H olocaust,” Response 1975 no. 25, 68; cited in:
Rosenfeld 1988, 28.
29
“For Some M easure o f Hum ility,” Sh’m a 1975 no. 5/100, 314; cited in: Rosenfeld 1988,
28.
30
“O ne G eneration A fter,” in: One Generation After, trans. into English by Lily Edelm an
and the Author, N ew York: R andom House, 1970, p. 10; cited in: Rosenfeld 1988, 36.
http://rcin.org.pl
Czapliński
The Holocaust as a Challenge for Literary Reflection
o f th e o th e r view, m ean w h ile, w ere ag a in st th e id e a o f lite ra tu re b e a u tify in g th e
h o rro r o f a d eh u m an ized w o rld , a n d w an ted language to stay as faith fu l as it could
to experiences so th a t n o th in g could obscu re th e c o n c e n tra tio n cam p reality. A co m ­
m o n ju stificatio n for th e tw o view s seem s to b e th e conv ictio n th a t H o lo cau st texts as
sources have fu n ctio n s different fro m m ere aesthetic ones, th a t th e y are n o t subject
to artistic evaluation, or even th a t th e y q u estio n th e existing crite ria o f ho w literary
so m eth in g is. The task o f w ritin g a b o u t th e H o lo cau st is n o t to ad d b e a u ty to tragedy,
b u t to sp eak th e tr u th , estab lish in g a co m plete source th a t is fulfilled in itself an d is
id en tical to reality.
H owever, co m plication s ensue w ith th e p assin g years an d in cre asin g n u m b ers
o f books. Increasingly often it was perceived th a t th ere was n o tran sp a re n t style, or
language fulfilling the req u irem en t of ad h erin g to th e w orld, w ritin g free fro m links
to conventions. The evolution o f views on this subject can b e seen for exam ple in the
opinions o f G rynberg, one o f th e m o st im p o rta n t authors o f H olocaust literature. In the
m id-1980s, he wrote:
Universality and generalization are indispensable for great literature and art, b ut this new ex­
perience is no longer about great literature or great art, but the truth - which is m ost unartistic.
It is covered by generalization.31
By th e end o f th e 1990s, th e w rite r’s views w ere slightly m odified: “I w ould say th a t
econom y and m odesty o f m eans in ho lo cau st literature are practically obligatory. The
h olocaust has dim ensions th a t req u ire distance. The closer y o u are, th e less you see.”32
The difference in views com es fro m th e fact th a t in th e first q u o tatio n G rynberg, like
m any others, sharply contrasts literature and tru th , w hile in th e second he acknowledges
the possibility of using literary m eans, albeit in m o d eratio n . In this opinion, literature
appears as an essential tool for b u ild in g distance, w ith o u t w h ich “th e less y o u see.” This
m eans th a t literature is necessary to “see m ore,” and as such is crucial in w ritin g about
the H olocaust. This is expressed even m o re clearly in th e Polish w ritin g of H a n n a Krall,
w ho stated: “T ragedies devoid o f fo rm are so m e th in g sham eless. F o rm w ith d raw s
to a distance necessary for speaking.”33
This view leaves us on the antipodes o f th e initial conflict betw een tru th and beauty.
L iterary m eans are now n o t ju st possible, b u t essential. No tex t can be pro d u ced w ith o u t
literature - style and com position. M oreover, since it is fo rm th a t allows co m m u n ica­
tion, it also com prehension. It w ould seem th a t we are n o w ju st one step away from
the n ext conclusion - th a t a literary n atu re is inevitable. For years, literary studies has
been discovering th a t this is so m eth in g th a t exists outside of choice, th a t even th e m ost
Grynberg, H enryk, “H olocaust w literaturze polskiej.” in: Prawda nieartystyczna,
Warszawa: Czarne, 1994, 160.
32
Grynberg, H enryk, Szkoła opowiadania, in: Sznajderman, M onika (ed.), Lekcja pisania,
Warszawa: Czarne, 1998, 73.
33
“D ram alurgia uczuć”; first printed in Gazeta Wyborcza, 13.4.1997; reprinted
in Sznajderman (1998).
http://rcin.org.pl
zz
31
H o loca u st in Literary and C u ltura l Studies
unconventional text rem ains a text, and therefore a co m bination o f diverse com posi­
tio n al and stylistic orders. The also applies to do cu m en ts, m ean in g th a t th ey to o are p art
o f the literary universe. In no resp ect does this take away th e ir credibility, b u t it does
m ean th a t reading H olocaust texts m u st take into acco u n t th e necessary m ed iatio n th at
com es betw een language and reality. In terp retatio n can therefore lead tow ards a k in d of
archaeology of text, i.e. uncovering all th e layers - conventions, genres, styles - w ithin
a docum ent, and testifying to th e com m unicational culture to w hich th e au th o r belonged
an d w hich the reader introduces. F u rth erm o re, it is this textual archaeology th a t m akes
it possible to reco n stru c t th e k in d o f read in g reaction th a t th e a u th o r p lan n ed , as well
as th e diverse conflicts th a t em erge, for exam ple, betw een th e m o d e rn reality of killing
an d th e p re -m o d ern convention o f recording. Finally, such a perspective p erm its the
read er h im /h erself to rem ain aware th a t he/sh e is a p articip an t in th e co m m unicational
reality in w hich diverse conventions are used. The read er therefore has n o d irect access
to th e w orld, and should n o t tre at h is/h er u n d e rsta n d in g o f th e text/reality as objective,
tru e, and final.
L iterary reflection on th e H olocaust has, th en , com e a long way: initially im possible
an d undesired, an d w ith tim e valuable and im p o rtan t, it is n earin g a p o in t at w h ich it
w ill b e view ed as inescapable. This is significant as it m akes it clear th a t th e H olocaust
em erged from a cru d e narrativ e w h ich to o m an y people view ed as an ultim ate tru th ,
an d thus an extratextual entity. Yet it is likely th a t anybody w ho u n d erstan d s th a t in life
we quarrel about stories an d m etap h o rs shows less inclination to violence.
The Holocaust - end and beginning
24
The H olocaust disto rted th e h isto ry o f Europe. As a p ro d u c t o f th e p rim a l pow ers
o f m o d ern ity - rationalism , science free fro m ethical checks, a d m in istratio n an d tech ­
nology34 - it revealed th e ir crim in al side. A fter th e H olocaust, uncritical tru s t in reason
an d state, as well as everything th a t adjusted all too sm o o th ly to th e p re-em in en ce of
killing, becam e im possible. This is w hy contem plation on th e H olocaust is n o t lim ited
to collecting d ocum en ts telling o f th e ghettos an d cam ps, b u t is ra th e r o rien ted to the
present. This o rientatio n - m o re p e rm a n e n t th a n o n e-off - involves stu b b o rn ly exam in­
in g the foundations o f o u r civilization - as well as its susceptibility and resistance to the
tem ptation o f ad m in isterin g death.
In this process o f th e distortion o f the present, and o p en in g up its concealed sides,
th e only reason th a t literary studies is n o t located in th e centre is because it m ade this
centre m ovable itself. The read in g o f th e H olocaust th a t it cultivates creates o p p o rtu n i­
ties for asking questions on th e ro o ts o f th e present. At first glance, th e issues p roposed
by literary studies scholars, discussed in b rie f above, are specialized: a n o th er h isto ry of
Polish an d E uropean literature, problem s o f language, tran slatio n an d untranslatability,
th e question of inexpressibility an d th e debate on th e literary approach. Yet one m erely
34
http://rcin.org.pl
I am referring here to the interpretation o f the Holocaust made by Z ygm unt Bauman
in his book Modernity and the Holocaust, Ithaca, NY: C ornell University Press, 1989.
Czapliński
The Holocaust as a Challenge for Literary Reflection
needs to be aware of the d isto rtin g ch aracter o f to d ay ’s reflection on literary studies
to realise th a t these issues are lin ed by th e lively delusions o f E uropean culture. Let
us try to nam e those illusions th a t for centuries operated as fu n d am en tal ideas in the
hum anities (althoug h som etim es th ey w ere closer to obsessions):
1. Fixation on objective tru th
2. C onceiving h isto ry as a u n ifo rm cu rren t
3. ’t t e belief in the possibility o f a com plete tran slatio n of som eone else’s text
4. D istinction of literary texts fro m “d o c u m en tary ” ones.
H ow ever, literary studies - in flu en ced n o t o n ly b y th e H olocaust, b u t to a g reat extent
on th e basis o f th e rad ical n a tu re o f its co n seq u en ces - show s that: 1. The objective
tr u th is a certain narrativ e; 2. H isto ry consists o f m etap h o rs, am o n g w h ich a “tre n d ”
is one o f n u m ero u s aspects - th o u g h even th is suggests co n sisten t ackn o w led g em en t
th a t th ere can b e m any tre n d s, th e “m ain tre n d ” is in d ica ted by th e prev ailin g ones;
3. U n tra n sla ta b ility an d u n re p re se n ta b ility are n o rm s o f h u m a n c o m m u n ic a tio n ;
4. ’t t e difference betw een a d o c u m e n t an d lite ra tu re lies in th e selection o f rh eto ric a l
devices and w ays o f tellin g th e story, ra th e r th a n a rad ical difference b etw een “th e
tr u th ” and “invention.”
L iterary reflection therefore questions th e d o m in an t versions o f social consciousness
every b it as stu b b o rn ly as sociology, political science o r historiography. In doing so, it
enforces on all the particip an ts in debates an ever greater aw areness o f th e relationship
betw een the social behaviours an d n arratives in o u r heads.
As th is show s, the H olocaust forces us to re th in k th e fo u n d atio n s an d b ro ad en
o u r fields of critical observation. We can also ad d fu rth e r problem s to th o se we have
briefly discussed: inversion o f aesthetic categories;35 th e h isto ry o f in san ity in a tim e
o f totalitarianism (th ro u g h w h ich we can u n d ersta n d th e w ay in w h ich irratio n ality is
designated by totalitarian reason as well as th e in san ity of a state d o ctrin e), th e genology
o f the H olocaust, m ean in g an attem p t to describe th e genres an d categories of w ritin g
in H olocaust literature (i.e. searching for an alternative to th e G reek division into lyric,
35
http://rcin.org.pl
sz
’Hie H olocaust w ould appear like no other experience to belong to tragedy, and like
no other to be subject to comedy. Yet one m ight also perceive the task o f art after the
H olocaust as being reclaiming everything that its perpetrators tried to take away from
the victims —so the m ultitude and the mixture o f experiences. In the first respect,
regarding tragedy, the necessary inversion requires th at these categories be conceived
not as an inevitable and irreversible destruction o f a certain value bringing cleansing
(in accordance w ith the tradition o f Aristotle and Scheler), b ut as a “victory o f evil that
was not necessary and is irreversible”; this experience is accompanied by “not coolness,
b ut just disgusting exposure o f the victim and the people caught up in the afterglow
o f tragedy” (Brach-Czaina, Jolanta, Szczeliny istnienia, Kraków: W ydawnictwo eFKa
1998. A similar “reclaim ing” o f the right to comedy —i.e. to comic narrative on the
H olocaust —came w ith Life is Beautiful, and A rt Spiegelman’s Maus means that it is
impossible to claim that low arts are by definition or by nature incapable o f transm itting
the complexity o f the Holocaust. In short, i f art after the Holocaust has its essence, this
is questioning essence (substantiality) —since this category lies at the foundation o f all
segregation.
H o loca u st in Literary and C u ltura l Studies
epic and dram a); styles o f recep tio n ,36 th a t is th e h isto ry o f variable ways o f reading
H olocaust literature, an d also th e always n ecessary review o f to d ay ’s d o m in a n t and
alternative in terp re tatio n m odels.
Perhaps it is the case th a t th e larger th e L ibrary of th e S hoah becom es, th e m ore
problem s we discover - b o th in th e w orks an d in o u r present. Perhaps it is in this th at
we can find one o f th e m o st im p o rta n t tasks o f speaking and w ritin g about th e H olocaust
- n o t allow ing anybody to b rin g this h isto ry to an en d b y u su rp in g th e final w o rd for
them selves. A fter all, it w as fro m ju st such a decree th a t it all started.
26
Translation: B enjam in Koschalka
36
http://rcin.org.pl
'a i s term was coined by M ichał Głowiński —see Style odbioru. Szkice o komunikacji
literackiej, Kraków: W ydawnictwo Literackie, 1977.