I would like to thank Berel Lang and Julia Adeney Thomas for very productively disagreeing with me and offering cogent critiques and encouragement. The anonymous readers for History and Theory also posed crucial questions that were important to address. An earlier version of this essay was presented at “Collective Memory and the Uses of the Past: An Interdisciplinary Conference,” University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, July 2006.
CHOOSING NOT TO LOOK: REPRESENTATION, REPATRIATION, AND HOLOCAUST ATROCITY PHOTOGRAPHY†
Article first published online: 29 SEP 2008
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2303.2008.00457.x
© 2008 Wesleyan University
Additional Information
How to Cite
CRANE, S. A. (2008), CHOOSING NOT TO LOOK: REPRESENTATION, REPATRIATION, AND HOLOCAUST ATROCITY PHOTOGRAPHY. History and Theory, 47: 309–330. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2303.2008.00457.x
- †
Publication History
- Issue published online: 29 SEP 2008
- Article first published online: 29 SEP 2008
ABSTRACT
This essay considers, from ethical and historical-critical perspectives, alternatives to unconditional public access to Holocaust atrocity photographs. Photographic images have become the common coin of public awareness and historical information about the Holocaust. For the generations immediately following the genocide, atrocity photos and images of Nazi crimes served as vital testimony. For succeeding generations, however, access to certain “recirculated” images (Barbie Zelizer) has created a sense of familiarity with the Holocaust and with the National Socialist era that may prevent, rather than facilitate, engagement with the historical subject, particularly for students. Few of the victims of the Shoah pictured in either the best known or the least circulated images were willing subjects. As such, the bulk of Holocaust and National Socialist photography should perhaps fall under the same category as the results of Nazi medical experiments: they have been rendered inadmissible because they are ethically compromised materials, made without the participants’consent. While I am not advocating the wholesale destruction of Holocaust photographs, I will suggest that removing them from view or “repatriating” them might serve Holocaust memory better than their reduction to atrocious objects of banal attention. Just as the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 provided a mechanism for the reclassification of human remains, from ethnographic to spiritually sacred artifacts, we should consider what a similar reclassification of Holocaust photographs could offer. Have Holocaust atrocity photographs reached the limits of their usefulness as testimony?

1468-2303/asset/HITH_centre.gif?v=1&s=1dbd4b55667923b89d14e7cf1c0647722e87b515)
1468-2303/asset/HITH_right.gif?v=1&s=790f8346dd02269cc464f390302425d8aa4329ea)
