New York Times o sprawie freslow Schultza
DonJose
June 24, 2001
From a Mural, New Life in a Debate Over Memory
By CELESTINE BOHLEN
or almost 60 years, a series of wall paintings by Bruno Schulz, the
Polish-Jewish writer and artist, lay buried beneath a coat of pink paint on a
pantry wall in the once-Polish, now-Urkainian city of Drogobych where Schulz
was shot and killed in 1942 by a Nazi storm trooper. In that state, the
paintings survived — unseen, but untouched.
But as soon as the murals were discovered last winter, their future became a
matter of dispute, a dispute so painful and bitter that last month the work was
divided in half — like the baby in the biblical story, had King Solomon not
intervened.
On May 21, representatives from Yad Vashem, the main Holocaust memorial in
Jerusalem, removed five fragments from the wall and took them to Israel,
reopening the rawest of post-Holocaust wounds, namely the quarrel over who has
the right to stand guard over the memory of Jews killed in the Nazi slaughter.
It is a not a new question, but it may have changed in the last decade, as
Eastern Europe slowly, sometimes uncertainly, reawakens to its own past. So,
now that the cloud of Communism has been lifted from the memory of the
Holocaust, can the victims' legacy be safely trusted to the countries where
they lived and were killed, or should it remain the rightful property of the
world's surviving Jews, wherever they may live?
The legality of Yad Vashem's action is under question, but in a statement, a
Yad Vashem spokeswoman laid claim to a "moral" right to the property of the
Holocaust's Jewish victims — a right that summarily dismisses the Poles'
claim to Schulz as a writer, and any recognition of him as Drogobych's native
son.
In questions like this, the Jewish perspective is loaded with layers of pain
and distrust built up over centuries, of which memories of the Holocaust are
only one part. Survivors, and their children, point out the failure of the
Poles, Urkainians and others to protect the Jews from the Nazi slaughter, or in
some cases, of joining in. Others point to the slowness with which these
nations recognized the special tragedy suffered by the Jews, and instances of
modern-day anti-Semitism.
On the Polish and Ukrainian side, there is a reluctance to admit how deep those
wounds are, and how easily they were set aside and forgotten once the Jews were
gone from the region.
But now, increasingly, some say that debates like the one over Schulz's legacy
only serve to perpetuate these cycles of distrust. "There are two sides to this
debate and the problem is that the way it is discussed now, no one can win,"
said Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, a director of CLAL/Center for Learning and
Leadership, a Jewish institute based in New York. "Maybe," he continued, "the
question should be: Do we look at this legacy as a zero sum thing, or do we
look for ways to commemorate the Holocaust in ways in which we can all
participate?"
Rabbi Hirschfield and others say the time has come to change the debate, in
part because so much has changed in Poland and other countries since the dead
weight of Communist Party ideology was lifted. "The new freedom has actually
evoked Europeans' ability to respect the particular nature of the Jewish
suffering in the Holocaust," said Rabbi Hirschfield. "And that makes me turn to
the Jewish community to say we have an obligation to connect the particular to
the general."
From the annual festival of Jewish culture in Cracow, to the opening of Jewish
restaurants and houses of prayer, to the reopening of the synagogue in
Oswiecim, a mile and a half from the Auschwitz death camp, Jews and non-Jews in
Poland have begun the process of putting together the shards of a culture that
was virtually destroyed in the Holocaust, and suppressed under the Communism
that followed.
The last known Jew in Oswiecim died a year ago, just as the restored synagogue
(which had been converted during Communist times into a carpet factory) was
being reopened, along with a nearby Jewish center. An anticipated 50,000
visitors, half of them non-Jews, are expected to come to the center this year,
said Daniel Eisenstadt, executive director of the New York-based Auschwitz
Jewish Center Foundation.
There are several reasons for the revival in Poland of a Jewish culture without
Jews. Tourism certainly is one, suggesting that the motive in some cases is
simply profit. Another is a kind of folkloric nostalgia that seeks to recreate
the past shared by Poles and Jews as seamless and painless — which it most
clearly was not.
But still, there is an attempt to acknowledge the role of Jews and Jewish
culture in Poland, and can that be bad? "There is an awful lot happening," said
Mr. Eisenstadt. "Some of it is to serve visitors, but part of it is a genuine
effort to present a Polish-Jewish past in an authentic light."
Rabbi Hirschfield, who helped in the restoration of the Oswiecim synagogue,
argues that the fight over Schulz's legacy is in itself a sign that Poland has
shifted beyond an exclusively nationalist view of its own identity. "Could we
imagine a large number of Poles competing to carry the legacy of a Jewish
writer back in the 40's?" he asked. "Here we have Poles standing and saying
this was a good Pole. If Poles had felt way about Jews 60 years ago, perhaps
fewer would have died. Now it is the other way, with Jews saying no, he is not
Polish, he is Jewish."
But these arguments hold little sway with some Jews, who argue that the
defining moment for Schulz's identity was his death, which they feel the Poles
tend to overlook. "Will the Poles value Schulz for his powerful Polish prose,
or will they value him as a Jew too?" asked the writer Cynthia Ozick. "If he
were honored as a Jew, as well as a Polish writer, then Yad Vashem might not
have undertaken what they perceive as a rescue."
Some argue that Drogobych, a city of 100,000 30 miles from the Polish border,
is hardly the place to honor a writer of international standing like Schulz.
"If memory is the central issue, then the place of memory is preeminently Yad
Vashem, and it belongs there," said Iosif Hayim Yerushalmi, a professor of
Jewish studies at Columbia University. "The town of Drogobych is not a place of
memory. A few tours might go by to see the flat, and that would be it."
But to Dora Katznelson, 80, a literary scholar who is also vice president of a
Reform Jewish congregation in Drogobych, those arguments ignore the desire of
the city's residents to honor a man they now — belatedly — recognize as one
of their own.
"There is nobody here — Ukrainians, Jews, Poles, Russians — who doesn't
care about this except maybe the authorities," she said, "but then you have to
remember that in Communist times, the local authorities sold off an organ out
from the Polish cathedral."
Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information
popUp
had felt way about Jews 60 years ago, perhaps fewer would have died."
Yes, indeed. Polish partisants should have overrun the death camp in
attempt
of rescuing its prisoners.
Please. Have some imagination.
"Now it is the other way, with Jews saying no, he is not Polish, he is
Jewish."
And that's the way to go. Any Jew having dilema of his own nationality
should be picked up by Yad Vashem and moved to Israel.
I have no problem with it.
popUp
Użytkownik DonJose <don...@aol.com> w wiadomości do grup dyskusyjnych
napisał:20010624121313...@ng-fi1.aol.com...
> Dzisiejszy NYT. Week in Review
>
>
>
>
> June 24, 2001
> From a Mural, New Life in a Debate Over Memory
> By CELESTINE BOHLEN
> or almost 60 years, a series of wall paintings by Bruno Schulz, the
> Polish-Jewish writer and artist, lay buried beneath a coat of pink
paint on a
> pantry wall in the once-Polish, now-Urkainian city of Drogobych where
Schulz
> was shot and killed in 1942 by a Nazi storm trooper. In that state,
the
> paintings survived - unseen, but untouched.
>
> But as soon as the murals were discovered last winter, their future
became a
> matter of dispute, a dispute so painful and bitter that last month the
work was
> divided in half - like the baby in the biblical story, had King
Solomon not
> intervened.
>
> On May 21, representatives from Yad Vashem, the main Holocaust
memorial in
> Jerusalem, removed five fragments from the wall and took them to
Israel,
> reopening the rawest of post-Holocaust wounds, namely the quarrel over
who has
> the right to stand guard over the memory of Jews killed in the Nazi
slaughter.
>
> It is a not a new question, but it may have changed in the last
decade, as
> Eastern Europe slowly, sometimes uncertainly, reawakens to its own
past. So,
> now that the cloud of Communism has been lifted from the memory of the
> Holocaust, can the victims' legacy be safely trusted to the countries
where
> they lived and were killed, or should it remain the rightful property
of the
> world's surviving Jews, wherever they may live?
>
> The legality of Yad Vashem's action is under question, but in a
statement, a
> Yad Vashem spokeswoman laid claim to a "moral" right to the property
of the
> Holocaust's Jewish victims - a right that summarily dismisses the
> the past shared by Poles and Jews as seamless and painless - which it
> the city's residents to honor a man they now - belatedly - recognize
as one
> of their own.
>
> "There is nobody here - Ukrainians, Jews, Poles, Russians - who
Slava Boyko
currently are of much more importance then the
Jews and WWII. Afterall the Germans don't
walk around moritified thinking about the past, given
they perpetrated the Jewish tragedy, why should
the Poles be constantly reminded about the Jews
and WWII. I think the current economic state (or trap)
that Poland is in, is of much more importance.
- Slava
"popUp" <mab...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9h5fhh$f9l$1...@news.tpi.pl...
jer...@newsguy.com
says...
>
>Dzisiejszy NYT. Week in Review
>
>
>
>
>June 24, 2001
>From a Mural, New Life in a Debate Over Memory
>By CELESTINE BOHLEN
>or almost 60 years, a series of wall paintings by Bruno Schulz, the
>Polish-Jewish writer and artist, lay buried beneath a coat of pink paint on a
>pantry wall in the once-Polish, now-Urkainian city of Drogobych where Schulz
>was shot and killed in 1942 by a Nazi storm trooper. In that state, the
>paintings survived — unseen, but untouched.
>
>But as soon as the murals were discovered last winter,
Panie Anonim,
obrazy Schulza nie zostaly _skradzione_ tylko _odkupione_ (zreszta za czysto
symboliczna sume) od poprzedniego wlasciciela (prywatnej osoby zamieszkalej
w Drohobyczu).
Nie panski zasrany interes, co poprzedni wlasciciel zrobil ze
swoja prywatna wlasnocia (na przyklad sprzedal ja za sto dolarow). Nie
panski zafajdany interes, co obecny wlasciciel robi ze swoja wlasnocia (na
przyklad wystawia na widok publiczny w muzeum). Sprawa nie lezala w
jurysdykcji panskich wladz, jako ze Drohobycz nie lezy na terytorium RP i
polskie przepisy (na przyklad takie wymyslone na poczekaniu i cudownym
sposobem dzialajace wstecz) Drohobycza nie dotycza.
Panskie wydzieranie... buzi, powiedzmy na temat rzekomej "kradziezy" nie
dziwi oczywiscie, biorac pod uwage panskie wyrazane wczesniej sympatie do
Adolfa Eichmanna. Wyjasniam zatem, ze teraz mamy inne czasy, chocby ten fakt
nie wiem jak Pana irytowal.
Dodac nalezy, ze pies z kulawa noga nie interesowal sie wzmiankowanymi dzielami
Schulza do momentu odkupienia tychze przez wyslannikow muzeum Yad Vashem (to w
koncu nie zlote zeby i nie pierscionki).
J.M.
DonJose
>swoja prywatna wlasnocia (na przyklad sprzedal ja za sto dolarow). Nie
Tyz prowda. Ale je sie w tej sprawie nie wypowiedzialem. Zacytowalem jedynie
New York Times.
> Sprawa nie lezala w
>jurysdykcji panskich wladz, jako ze Drohobycz nie lezy na terytorium RP i
>polskie przepisy (na przyklad takie
Skomplikowane. Ja mieszkam w Iowa, i tutejsze wladze faktycznie Drohobyczem sie
nie zajmuja, a szkoda. Ale w kazdym europejskim kraju obowiazuje przepisy
dotyczace dziel sztuki i ichwywozu, n.p. prawo pierwokupu prze panstwo.
>
>Panskie wydzieranie... buzi, powiedzmy na temat rzekomej "kradziezy" nie
>dziwi oczywiscie, biorac pod uwage panskie wyrazane wczesniej sympatie do
>Adolfa Eichmanna
Jeszcze raz. To nie ja. To Nyew Yorl Times.
>Dodac nalezy, ze pies z kulawa noga nie interesowal sie wzmiankowanymi
>dzielami
>Schulza do momentu odkupienia tychze przez wyslannikow muzeum Yad Vashem (to
>w
>koncu nie zlote zeby i nie pierscionki).
>
Nieprawda. Pisaly o tym polskie gazety. A w dodatlu, freski Schultza zostaly
powaznie uszkodzone w wyniku tego, jak nimi zaopiekowali sie przedstawiciele
Yad Vashem.
jer...@newsguy.com
says...
>
>Skomplikowane. Ja mieszkam w Iowa, i tutejsze wladze faktycznie Drohobyczem sie
>nie zajmuja, a szkoda. Ale w kazdym europejskim kraju obowiazuje przepisy
>dotyczace dziel sztuki i ichwywozu, n.p. prawo pierwokupu prze panstwo.
>
takich "krajach europejskich", jak ZSRR, NRD, PRL, Wegierska Republika
Ludowo-Demokratyczna itd itp. W normalnym swiecie panstwo ma g... do gadania w
kwestii dziel sztuki znajdujacych sie w prywatnym posiadaniu. Dlatego wlasnie
dziela sztuki zmieniaja wlascicieli na licytacjach Sotheby czy (jesli w Szwecji)
u Bukowskiego, a nie sa rekwirowane w ramach "prawa pierwokupu" przez jakis
Narodnyj Komissariat Kultury i Isskustwa.
Dodac mozna PONOWNIE, Mosci Ksywa, ze Drohobycz nie lezy w jurysdykcji tego
panstwa, ktorego niektorzy przedstawiciele czuja sie cala sprawa do zywego
dotknieci. O protestach zas wladz Ukrainy w omawianej sprawie jakos nie
slyszalem.
J.M.
DonJose
>takich "krajach europejskich", jak ZSRR, NRD, PRL, Wegierska Republika
>Ludowo-Demokratyczna itd itp. W normalnym swiecie panstwo ma g... do gadania
>w
Istnieje takze we Wloszech. Polega to na tym, ze w wypadku cennego dziela
sztuki, plsiadajacego wartosc historyczna (to sa, rzecz jasnan, niezbyt ostre
pojecia), panstwo ma prawo je nabyc placac tyle, ile wynosila suma ustalona w
prywatnej transakcji.
>Dodac mozna PONOWNIE, Mosci Ksywa, ze Drohobycz nie lezy w jurysdykcji tego
>panstwa, ktorego niektorzy przedstawiciele czuja sie cala sprawa do zywego
>dotknieci. O protestach zas wladz Ukrainy w omawianej sprawie jakos nie
>slyszalem.
I tutaj chyba sie zgadzamy. Cos tam wladze ukrainskie na ten temat mowily, ale
jakos polgebkiem. Zdaje mi sie, ze najostrzej zareagowala gmina zydowska w
Drohobyczu.
jer...@newsguy.com
Przeciekawe. Jakos tego nie zauwazylem. Pan oczywiscie potrafi linki podac?
> A w dodatlu, freski Schultza zostaly
>powaznie uszkodzone w wyniku tego, jak nimi zaopiekowali sie przedstawiciele
>Yad Vashem.
>
Nie panski zas... interes, co prywatny wlasciciel robi ze swoja wlasnoscia. Jego
sprawa, nawet jesli swoja wlasnosc nie tylko "powaznie uszkodzi", ale nawet w
piecu nia napali.
Rozumiem, ze komus wychowanemu w totalizmie trudno jest przyswoic sobie pojecie
prywatnej wlasnosci. Rozumiem nawet, ze komus takiemu jak Pan trudno pojac, iz
ustawy norymberskie pozbawiajace Zydow prawa wlasnosci juz nie obowiazuja.
Niemniej jednak takie sa realia.
J.M.
DonJose
>
>Przeciekawe. Jakos tego nie zauwazylem. Pan oczywiscie potrafi linki podac?
>
To bylo w codziennych internetowych wydaniach GW, Rzeczpospolitej i Naszego
Dziennika. Do innych nie zagladalem.
>Nie panski zas... interes, co prywatny wlasciciel robi ze swoja wlasnoscia.
>Jego
>sprawa, nawet jesli swoja wlasnosc nie tylko "powaznie uszkodzi", ale nawet w
>piecu nia napali.
>
>Rozumiem, ze komus wychowanemu w totalizmie trudno jest przyswoic sobie
>pojecie
>prywatnej wlasnosci. Rozumiem nawet, ze komus takiemu jak Pan trudno pojac,
>iz
>ustawy norymberskie pozbawiajace Zydow prawa wlasnosci juz nie obowiazuja.
>Niemniej jednak takie sa realia.
>
>J.M.
Ciekawe. wydaje mi sie, ze urzednicy Yad Vashem powinni sie bardzo powaznie
zastanowci nad Panskimi slowami.
Jdr
I wonder why it's only the two of us who are able
to see it... but, Slava, rest sure...we cannot do
anything about it. It's beyond our control..;-)
It takes two to tango...;-)
Jdr
"Slava Boyko" <mjs...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:RNsZ6.6386$kx3.6...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Leszek Andrzej Kleczkowski
: Panie Anonim /.../
: zasrany interes /.../
: Drohobycza /.../
: Panskie wydzieranie... buzi /.../
: Adolfa /.../
: kulawa ´/.../
: zlote zeby /.../
: J.M.
Strescil dla potomnosci
Leszek
---
Smart questions to stupid answers
Pisz z sensem - rob dwie spacje po kropce
miro...@iinet.net.au
>> A w dodatlu, freski Schultza zostaly
>>powaznie uszkodzone w wyniku tego, jak nimi zaopiekowali sie przedstawiciele
>>Yad Vashem.
>>
>Nie panski zas... interes, co prywatny wlasciciel robi ze swoja wlasnoscia. Jego
>sprawa, nawet jesli swoja wlasnosc nie tylko "powaznie uszkodzi", ale nawet w
>piecu nia napali.
>J.M.
Znakomite, Panie J.M. Rozumiem ze stanowisko Obersturmkulturtragera
sciepy i okolic mamy niniejszym obsadzone.
Pytanie precedensowe: - czy gdyby poprzedni wlasciciel freskow Shulca
zamiast "sprzedawac" je przedstawicielom Yad Vashem rozbil je mlotem
to bylby antysemita, nazista, zbrodniarzem czy swiadomym prawa
posiadaczem egzekwujacym swoje demokratyczne uprawnienia?
---
Miroslaw Krupinski
http://worf.albanyis.com.au/~matuzal/index.htm
http://worf.albanyis.com.au/~matuzal/Pegaz4.htm
http://members.iinet.net.au/~miroslaw/KRAJ_UTRACONY.htm
http://members.iinet.net.au/~miroslaw/archKU.htm
DonJose
>Jego
>>sprawa, nawet jesli swoja wlasnosc nie tylko "powaznie uszkodzi", ale nawet
>w
>>piecu nia napali.
>
>>J.M.
Nie ma zgody. Czytalem "Sklepy Cynamonowe" oraz "Sanatorium pod Klepsydra". I
dlatego, to jest moj interes.
patient
jer...@newsguy.com wrote:
>
>
> Rozumiem, ze komus wychowanemu w totalizmie trudno jest przyswoic sobie pojecie
> prywatnej wlasnosci.
Bredzisz Pan jak, za przeproszeniem, nawiedzony.
Dzielami sztuki i zabytkami rzadza, na calym swiecie,
troche inne prawa niz najnowszym modelem Toyoty.
Freski Sshultza, zwykla prywatna wlasnoscia?
To czemu zajela sie nimi znana instytucja publiczna?
panslavista
własność?