It Takes More Than Plain Learning to Understand History
"Talking to young people I see that they learnt by rote at school that fascism and national socialism were bad but quite often they are not able to explain why it is so," regrets Ksenia Srednyak, a 29-year-old historian from Russia. Marius Drasovean, a 31-year-old manager from Romania adds: "We learn the events, facts and key leaders by heart, but we are not yet capable to understand the importance of the lesson that stands beyond the historical moment." Those two young Europeans are former prize winners of a national EUSTORY history competition and took part in a survey, which has been conducted among EUSTORY-Alumni by the Koerber Foundation on the occasion of the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II.
In 2005, Ksenia and Marius were part of the EUSTORY Alumni project “The Long Shadow of World War II: Young Europeans on ‘The Future of Remembrance’” along with 40 participants from 19 different countries. During their nine months research about different ways of remembrance of World War II they found out how European countries attach different importance to different historical events. Ivan Nikolić from Serbia was surprised to discover 10 years ago: "My history book does not mention German concentration camps at all."
The participants used those experiences to draft proposals for the future of remembrance, such as a multi-perspective approaches towards the history of WW II. They also called for a redesign of memorials, the fostering and strengthening of a national and cross-border dialogue and including young Europeans in the development of films and (text) books about WW II.
Ten years later, in April 2015, four of the former project participants from Great Britain, Romania, Russia and Slovenia, today between the ages of 28 and 34 years, rethink the legacy of World War II and the effects of their project inthe context of in the context of the new EUSTORY focus: "War Children in Europe." They all agree upon the outstanding importance of fostering a transnational dialogue among generations and a constant exchange of different perspectives on historical events. Benedict Schofield, 34-year-old University Lecturer from Great Britain explicates: "Five years into a European financial crisis and the resulting polarisation and radicalisation of political parties on the right and the left, and the return to rhetoric and national stereotyping grounded in a simplistic and dangerous WWII rhetoric, it is clearly still of paramount importance that we work towards an enlightened and mutual understanding of the events of WWII."
Ksenia Srednyak challenges the idea that historical knowledge could be of any help or guidance in the political debates of nowadays. "From today’s point of view I would like to see more history than politics in the remembrance of WW II. Unfortunately we witness the opposite: the politicians change, use and explain the essence of the war as they like, they make it the part of their ideological constructs."
That is why the encounter with eye-witnesses and the unmediated discourse between the generations is most important, argues Tomaž Čebela, a 28-year-old Master of European Studies from Slovenia. "Asking difficult questions and listening to the heart-breaking life-story from a Polish eyewitness who survived Buchenwald, was a mind blowing and a life changing experience for an 18-year-old high school student."
Apart from the considerations of the influence of historical knowledge on politics, Benedict Schofield points out a possible change in dealing with history thanks to the latest technological developments. "The discussions we had over redesigning memorials has, in many ways, been overtaken by the digital revolution. Smartphones, apps, and so many of the tools can be used to reanimate memorials – they seem to me to be a key way in which a greater level of interaction with sites of remembrance can be achieved."
Read the contributions of:
Benedict Schofield, Great Britain
Ksenia Sredniak, Russia
Marius Drasovean, Romania
Tomaž Čebela, Slovenia
Benedict Schofield (34) Great Britain
University Lecturer, Head of German at King’s College London
Does it make sense to deal with WW II still today, 70 years after the end of the war?
One of the most important lessons I learnt by participating in the EUSTORY project 10 years ago was the need for a nuanced and genuinely transnational engagement with the legacy of WWII. Coming from the UK, where at that time the dominant narrative of WWII was one of a simple victory-defeat binary, it was fascinating to work with fellow young Europeans from across the continent in trying to explode such simplistic narratives and discover the common features in the war experience which brought us together in the present, and which would prevent such events from happening again. Now, five years in to a European financial crisis and the resulting polarization and radicalization of political parties on the right and the left, and the return to rhetoric and national stereotyping grounded in a simplistic and dangerous WWII rhetoric, it is clearly still of paramount importance that we work towards an enlightened and mutual understanding of the events of WWII.
How was your family affected by WW II?
My grandfather fought in WWII, though it was never a topic for discussion. What was discussed repeatedly, however, was the need for European reconciliation. After the war, my grandfather became a German teacher, and in this small way attempted a rapprochement between the UK and Germany – his own attempt to shift the debate away from “victors” and the “defeated”.
Ten years ago, you together with the other participants of the project »The Long Shadow of WW II« came up with some very concrete proposals concerning the future of remembrance on WW II, amongst others a multi-perspective approach towards the history of WW II, a timely redesign of memorials, strengthening the national and cross-border dialogue and including young Europeans into the development and production of films and (text) books about WW II.
Thinking about the future of remembrance on WW II nowadays, ten years after you have been involved in our project – what is most important to you? Which of the proposals listed above do you still consider valid?
Many of the proposals seem entirely valid today. The cross-border dialogue still seems to be the most important feature for me of any future discourse. From today’s perspective, the discussions we had over redesigning memorials has, in many ways, been overtaken by the digital revolution. Smartphones, apps, and so many of the tools can be used to reanimate memorials– they seem to me to be a key way in which a greater level of interaction with sites of remembrance can be achieved. Similarly our discussions on a pan-European WWII text book could surely now be envisaged in the form of an app, or common online resource. Certainly many national institutions, bodies and museums have attempted to put this into practice. What is perhaps still needed is a way for those national stories to interact with other national stories, in order to genuinely create the European discourse we hoped for 10 years ago.
What is the core day of remembrance that commemorates WW II in your country? What exactly is commemorated on that particular day and how is this commemoration celebrated?
In the UK, Remembrance Day is held on the 11th November. Although it marks the moment that WWI ended it is now used to commemorate those that have died in all wars, not just in WWI, though in the popular imagination it is still heavily associated with WWI and the poppies that many wear as a sign of remembrance. We also observe Holocaust Memorial Day on the 27th January, an event which also encourages us to think beyond WWII and to subsequent genocides. At specific moments – usually at major anniversaries – there is often coverage of D-Day (the start of the liberation of Europe); and V-E Day (Victory in Europe) and V-J Day (Victory over Japan).
Ksenia Sredniak (29), Russia
Historian and Lecturer at the Nizhny Novgorod Technical University
Does it make sense to deal with WW II still today, 70 years after the end of the war?
Yes, because of the millions of victims and the various variations of nationalism that became increasingly popular in different countries. Talking to young people I see that they learnt by rote at school that fascism and national socialism were bad but quite often they are not able to explain why it is so.
How was your family affected by WW II?
The family of my father lived in Stalingrad, so the first sources about the Stalingrad battle were the stories of my granny. She was 7 years old, when the Stalingrad battle began. Till today she says that she hears the rumble of the Messerschmitts in her sleep. Her two siblings and her mother survived but their father, my great-grandfather Alexey Degtyarev was killed in the environs of Kerch in 1942.
From my mum’s side my great-grandfather Ivan Sheronov also took part in the WW II. He passed half of Europe with the Red Army and took part in the liberation of Berlin. My brother and I loved to examine his medals closely in our childhood.
Ten years ago, you together with the other participants of the project »The Long Shadow of WW II« came up with some very concrete proposals concerning the future of remembrance on WW II, amongst others a multi-perspective approach towards the history of WW II, a timely redesign of memorials, strengthening the national and cross-border dialogue and including young Europeans into the development and production of films and (text) books about WW II.
Thinking about the future of remembrance on WW II nowadays, ten years after you have been involved in our project – what is most important to you? Which of the proposals listed above do you still consider valid?
Ten years after the project I see the great importance of each of the statements. From today’s point of view I would like to see more history than politics in the remembrance of WW II. Unfortunately we witness the opposite: the politicians change, use and explain the essence of the war as they like, they make it part of their ideological constructs. The voice of the historians is too low to be heard by society.
In the past 10 years the remembrance on WW II has been part of my professional interest. I participated in conferences, as the Open Space in Volgograd and organised projects which addressed young people. In 2012 and 2013 in collaboration with colleagues from Hamburg and the German-Russian Museum Berlin-Karlshorst we collected interviews with young people from Russia and Germany, which should become the base of an exhibition. Our respondents are integrated by their interest to WW II, particularly the Stalingrad battle: they write poems about it, take part in the reconstruction of war episodes or wear “Stalingrad 43”-T-Shirts etc., so all of them commemorate the war in an active way. The idea was to make an exhibition not about the war, but about the remembrance and the forms of commemoration.
In other projects I participated in we produced some materials – texts, web-pages, presentations, etc. For example, in 2010 as a result of a collaboration with students of History and Art (Volgograd State University and Academy of Visual Arts, Frankfurt) we made some films, based on the letters of the German soldiers from Stalingrad (https://vimeo.com/16941592).
What is the core day of remembrance that commemorates WW II in your country? What exactly is commemorated on that particular day and how is this commemoration celebrated?
The core day in Russia is the 9th of May. It is one of the main national holidays; it is celebrated with a review of the troops, meetings on the squares, official speeches and gun salutes. People bring flowers to the war memorials and sing war songs. The official commemoration is concentrated on the heroes, victory and triumph, but in families like mine, we remember our relatives that passed away during the war.
Marius Drasovean (31), Romania
Manager of a marketing and consultancy company
Does it make sense to deal with WW II still today, 70 years after the end of the war?
Yes, definitely. If we are looking now at the geo-political map of Europe, in particular, and at the map of the whole world, in general, we can clearly see that there are many problems to deal with worldwide. And, unfortunately, these problems primarily labeled as threats were easily transformed afterwards in actions, mostly military actions (e.q. the war in the Eastern Ukraine).
Therefore to deal with a historical event today, but particularly with the WW II, is important. From my point of view, the great disadvantage in the education about WW II is that it is narrowed down to the questions: What happened? When? And who is responsible for what it? We learn the events, facts and key leaders by heart, but we are not yet capable to understand the importance of the lesson that stands beyond the historical moment.
How was your family affected by WW II?
One of my grandfathers fought as an artilleryman in the Tatra Mountains in Slovakia, but also on the battles on the river Don in Russia. I was only 7 years old when he died so I can’t remember his stories from the war. I only remember one story about a shell that exploded in his proximity burying him almost entirely. If his colleague had not been there to take him out of the ground, he probably would have died.
Ten years ago, you together with the other participants of the project »The Long Shadow of WW II« came up with some very concrete proposals concerning the future of remembrance on WW II, amongst others a multi-perspective approach towards the history of WW II, a timely redesign of memorials, strengthening the national and cross-border dialogue and including young Europeans into the development and production of films and (text) books about WW II.
Thinking about the future of remembrance on WW II nowadays, ten years after you have been involved in our project – what is most important to you? Which of the proposals listed above do you still consider valid?
It is important to learn the lesson that stands beyond WW II. In this regard, all the proposals mentioned are still valid. Even if in some countries these proposals have been put into practice, their repetition will only increase the public awareness on the importance of the WW II today.
Regarding Romania, strictly from my point of view, I believe that there are still many things to do. I lost touch with the educational system so I do not know exactly if the students are learning more or less about WW II nowadays in comparison with ten years ago.
But what I know for sure is that the mass media, taking into consideration its primarily role to inform the population, has less interest for historical topics in comparison with the appetite for “breaking-news”. To some extent this aspect is understandable, but not excusable. Unfortunately, there are just a few TV channels here in Romania which include on their agenda-setting news regarding the commemoration of historical events.
At the end of 2014 I had the idea of implementing a project meant to inventory all the historical monuments dedicated to the WW I and WW II in Romania. The Ministry of Culture, and each city hall have the list (completed or not) with all these monuments. But, the added value of the project consists of the stories of these monuments presented by local people. A project like this will increase the awareness on the importance of the monument within and for each community, and, most important, will reveal the lessons learned by these communities.
What is the core day of remembrance that commemorates WW II in your country? What exactly is commemorated on that particular day and how is this commemoration celebrated?
In the Communist period it used to be 23rd of August, which was also the National Day of Romania. On the day of 23rd of August 1944, King Michael removed the government of Ion Antonescu which supported Nazi Germany.
After the 1989 Revolution, the National Day became the 1st of December, representing the Unification of Romanian territories at the end of WW I in 1918.
Nowadays, the celebration of war heroes (not particular of those from the WW II) is closely connected with the religious celebration of the Ascensions of Jesus. On this day, funeral wreaths are presented by official representatives in front of different monuments around the country, religious services are being kept, and in the big cities military parades are performed. From my point of view, these celebrations can be summarized in this way: a lot of investment in festiveness, and less investment in the importance of the lessons’ learned from history.
Tomaž Čebela (28), Slovenia
Master of European Studies
Does it make sense to deal with WW II still today, 70 years after the end of the war?
Yes, because Europe has not overcome its divisions yet! I believe we would lose our compass again if we would stop remembering the consequences the war brought to the European continent.
How was your family affected by WW II?
By stories that my father and aunts were telling me from my childhood – how the Partisans came and took the cows from our farmhouse, how Germans were looking for them in my region and kept pressuring the population to sell them out and how partisans almost took my grandfather with them. And if he would have disappeared, which was normal for that time, my father would never have been born and I would never have been born, either. Stories like this are still present in today’s Slovenia; nobody wants to bury them, not the older generation at least.
Ten years ago, you together with the other participants of the project »The Long Shadow of WW II« came up with some very concrete proposals concerning the future of remembrance on WW II, amongst others a multi-perspective approach towards the history of WW II, a timely redesign of memorials, strengthening the national and cross-border dialogue and including young Europeans into the development and production of films and (text) books about WW II.
Thinking about the future of remembrance on WW II nowadays, ten years after you have been involved in our project – what is most important to you? Which of the proposals listed above do you still consider valid?
The most important thing for me was the opportunity to take part in this history project 10 years ago. Walking among the stones in the concentration camp Buchenwald, asking difficult questions and listening to the heart-breaking life-story from eyewitness Maria Kosk, a Polish woman, who survived Buchenwald, was for an 18-years old high school student mind blowing and a life changing experience.
Therefore strengthening the dialogue among different generations is in my opinion one of the most important aspects in revitalizing the remembrance of WW II. Without participating in the project 10 years ago, I would have neither understood the different narratives and perspectives of history nor would this experience have become a part of me.
What is the core day of remembrance that commemorates WW II in your country? What exactly is commemorated on that particular day and how is this commemoration celebrated?
On 27th of April Slovenia commemorates the day the Slovenians joined forces and resisted the aggressors. People have this day off and there are official ceremonies in every municipality with the laying down of wreaths on memorials and places of remembrance