Read on Twitter
[THREAD] On historians, difficult subjects, and academic freedom.
A #Holocaust historian @ankahajkova has been sued by the family of a survivor for suggesting that she had engaged in a lesbian relationship with an SS guard.
This case is so important for historians. See below:
![[THREAD] On historians, difficult subjects, and academic freedom.A #Holocaust historian @ankahajkova has been sued by the family of a survivor for suggesting that she had engaged in a lesbian relationship with an SS guard.This case is so important for historians. See below:](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EpxDzuVXUAA7zpA.png "[THREAD] On historians, difficult subjects, and academic freedom.A #Holocaust historian @ankahajkova has been sued by the family of a survivor for suggesting that she had engaged in a lesbian relationship with an SS guard.This case is so important for historians. See below:")
A #Holocaust historian @ankahajkova has been sued by the family of a survivor for suggesting that she had engaged in a lesbian relationship with an SS guard.
This case is so important for historians. See below:
The background:
Dr. Hajkova is an expert on the Holocaust and focuses particularly on the queer history included in it. In the course of her research in archival sources, she concluded that a prisoner had engaged in a same-sex relationship with a guard.
Dr. Hajkova is an expert on the Holocaust and focuses particularly on the queer history included in it. In the course of her research in archival sources, she concluded that a prisoner had engaged in a same-sex relationship with a guard.
When this research was made public, the daughter of the (deceased) survivor, sued Dr. Hajkova in a German court alleging "defamation" of her mother's memory which is possible under German law which protects the reputations of the dead. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/oct/08/survivors-daughter-sues-historian-claim-lesbian-liaison-nazi-guard
(I am not a legal expert but this law seems super problematic. Perhaps others can weigh in on it and any similar laws in other countries.)
In the end, the court ruled that Hajkova should not use the survivor's real name as one's sexuality was deemed private, but it did not endorse the charge of defamation or damage to reputation, despite @guardian reporting to the contrary.
Hajkova has now been fined 4000 euro because, despite her efforts, a third party failed to remove the survivor's real name. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/dec/21/court-fines-historian-over-claims-holocaust-survivor-lesbian-affair
There are so many seriously troubling elements to this case. First, the daughter seemed to see both the relationship with the guard AND the implication that her mother might have had a same-sex relationship as defamatory.
I think the homophobic elements of this are clear.
I think the homophobic elements of this are clear.
It is quite clear that much of "harm to reputation" claimed is as a result of the lesbian element. Certainly, we all know that being LGBTQ is not a smear (and also that Holocaust victims were confronted with many "choiceless choices" where they had to act to survive.)
(For example, I am not aware of similar action being brought against historians for revealing collaboration of prisoners with guards or prisoners victimizing other prisoners. We have to ask how important the LGBTQ element was here.)
Using the courts to "protect the reputations" of historical actors seems like a deepy problematic road to go down. We historians routinely uncover information about the past that may not be flattering and which relatives may not like. That doesn't make it false.
On the one hand, we have an historian who is an expert in the field, has seen the primary source documents, and has made a scholarly interpretation that a lesbian relationship of some kind existed between two people under incredibly fraught conditions.
On the other, we have a relative who denies this. We are faced with an appeal to authority based on family ties vs. the considered conclusion of an expert in the field with literally NO personal axe to grind. (Indeed, Dr. Hajkova identifies as a lesbian herself.)
As an historian who has also published on sexual violence in the Holocaust, I find it completely reasonable that the survivor in question would not have shared her sexual history in the camp with her children (for about a 100 reasons).
Family histories are important, but fraught and do not always yield complete truths. As a grand-daughter of a Jewish Holocaust survivor, Dr. Hajkova knows this from both personal and professional sides.
Moreover, it has only been in the last 20 years or so that scholars like Hajkova, @remueh, Chalmers, Hedgepeth, Saidel, Bergen, Shik, Sinnreich, and others have done the painstaking work of uncovering sexual violence and sexual relationships in the Holocaust.(tag them if you can)
In order to work on these taboo and uncomfortable topics, scholars often have to work around the edges, carefully analyzing testimony from multiple perspectives in order to make judgments. Despite the daughter's contentions, there is no evidence of malpractice by Hajkova.
While we should always be sensitive to how we portray history, we are also not obliged to whitewash or obscure it to spare the feelings of others. If the history is important, it must be heard. The perspectives of family are CRITICAL but do not override others.
And to be frank, relatives aren't usually in the position to determine the professionalism of a scholar's research. It's deeply disturbing to me to see an historian literally taken to court over historical conclusions that seem entirely reasonable and ethical.
On a personal note, I should say that I work closely with survivors and their families in my research. I am so thankful for their willingness to share their painful histories. I have not been in a similar position, but I would hope I would be able to work with them.
It's also impossible to know all the descendants who exist and to contact them to "clear" the language of a publication.
On the other side, I have also worked with the families of Nazi perpetrators and have had to tell them explicitly that my depictions of their relatives will not be flattering but are grounded in fact.
In conclusion, the larger issue is one of real academic freedom. Assuming that a researcher has acted in good faith and lived up to the standards of their discipline, they should not be open to charges of reputation smearing simply because their findings upset others.
Were such a principle to be upheld as a rule, the chilling effect on scholars would be disastrous. We write not to attack individuals (certainly not Holocaust survivors!) but to inform and educate about the past and the present.
Even having won a small settlement, the litigant is still pursuing actions against Hajkova now at her institution which seems unjustified.
For a better and more fair narrative of the case, see this Spiegel article (which can be accessed in English) https://www.spiegel.de/geschichte/lesbische-beziehungen-im-kz-zu-intim-fuer-die-forschung-a-74df1056-ec60-44f9-a2b4-5697493d7a3f
For a better and more fair narrative of the case, see this Spiegel article (which can be accessed in English) https://www.spiegel.de/geschichte/lesbische-beziehungen-im-kz-zu-intim-fuer-die-forschung-a-74df1056-ec60-44f9-a2b4-5697493d7a3f
Please feel free to tag others and to comment. I do not claim to have all the answers with regard to treating difficult historical subjects, but this case illustrates (to me) all the wrong ways of handling them.
Dialogue is important here as is support for Dr. Hajkova.
Dialogue is important here as is support for Dr. Hajkova.
P.S.- If you would like to learn more, please read this and consider signing the letter of support within. http://newfascismsyllabus.com/opinions/in-support-of-difficult-history/
Oh, and @David_Batty should be ashamed for the salacious and shallow articles on the topic.
Do some research.
Ask some of us who actually do this work.
Do some research.
Ask some of us who actually do this work.
Another important piece of information for those interested in privacy issues in relation to the Holocaust from @NorthumbriaLaw
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3343476
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3343476
This is a critical point. The survivor's daughter found the implication of a lesbian relationship (not a relationship with a guard) to be the painful bit. https://twitter.com/kyfrack/status/1341060756637245441?s=20
