Gisella Perl - Out of the Ashes

When deciding what to write my final paper on, I knew I wanted to research about something that had to do with the experimentations that took place in the concentration camps, namely Auschwitz. Though I ultimately decided to focus on Mengele and the twin experimentations, I read a lot about Gisela Perl while doing my research. After reading through her memoir, I was a Doctor at Auschwitz I realized that I'd heard her story before. It had been made into a movie for Showtime called Out of the Ashes. Both pieces of media tell the same story and I think they offer a somewhat unique perspective because they come from a woman who was a prisoner in Auschwitz, but also a physician there.



Before the war, Perl had been working as a gynecologist in Sighet. She was deported to Birkenau in 1944. After passing the initial selection, Gisella Perl became an inmate and was selected to work in the camp "hospital." She was hopeful that she would be able to help her fellow inmates, but there was a lack of instruments, medical supplies, and food. Dr. Perl performed surgery on hundreds of patients without anesthesia in the hospital at Auschwitz. She most commonly worked on women - performing abortions and trying to mend the wound inflicted upon them by other surgeons. For many of the inmates, she could offer no help but an encouraging word. Besides the highest level of perpetrators, it is nearly impossible to determine who else should be guilty. Especially in this case - where the alleged perpetrator is also a victim. Perl's story goes to show how complex the Holocaust is and that there will never be ultimate justice or settlement in regard to its atrocities and events.

(patient in the infirmary)

The most fascinating thing about Perl's story as it relates to aspects of the Holocaust discussed in class is that her role as a physician in Auschwitz has caused to subject of ethical scrutiny. Some people consider Perl a murderer, and some a hero. No one knew the motive behind Mengele's actions before it was too late. Perl did not know why he asked her to find all the pregnant woman at first -- she did not know they were all to die. Once the tides changed and pregnant women began to be experimented on, Perl desperately tried to perform abortions on the women in an effort to save or prolong their lives. Many post-war considerations of Dr. Perl's actions understand the choices she was forced to make while in Auschwitz. Most of her fellow prisoners understood the doctor's rationale and appreciated her efforts. This was not always the case, however. She had to undergo interrogation by the Immigration and Naturalization Service in an attempt to ensure she did not sympathize with the Nazis after she received a temporary license to lecture in the US after the war. She was prepared to testify against the murderer as a war criminal, Mengele eluded authorities and was never brought to trial. Dr. Perl was able to practice gynecology again and later moved to Israel where she died in 1988.

The question of guilt plays a pivotal role in Dr. Perl's story. The line which determines guilt and innocence in regard to the Holocaust is incredibly blurred. Most people would agree that Mengele was guilty of war crimes, but what about people like Perl? I think that it is almost impossible to point fingers as someone like Gisella Perl because nobody - not even other prisoners - know what it was like to be in her position.

Stolpersteine

Learning about all of the different types of museums and memorials that are dedicated to the Holocaust through our group presentations in class was really insightful. Of all of the places and projects we discussed, I found the Stolpersteine project to be the most engaging and creative.

The project was started in 1995 by Gunter Demnig. Itt serves as a reminder of the persecution of Jews and others during the Nazi regime. The “stumbling blocks” are 4X4in concrete blocks with hand engraved brass plates that are embedded in the pavement. A plate on each block shows the name of the victim, some information about the life, and the place of their murder and each block is placed in front of the entrance of the last residence, office, or workplace of the person. Demnig was inspired to the the project when he heard a woman say that no gypsies had ever lived in her neighborhood. He said: "It is so easy for people to deny something. I wanted to ensure that this would not happen." The project started out quite small, with just a few dozen stones in Cologne. It has expanded immensely, however, and there are now hundreds of thousands of stones all across Europe.



I think that there are a few things about Stolpersteine that make it stand out from other forms of memorial. Decentrification is one of them. The project not one giant reminder that can be walked away from; It many small and simple yet constant reminders. Public Involvement is also really central to Demnig's project. Student volunteers conduct archival research & requests for new stones are made by friends and family members. Many school children are also involved with the project as a way to learn about contemporary history. The ongoing expansion of the project is also a key component of it, which is possible due to low cost and private funding. In relation to what we have discussed in class, Adorno was concerned that people would forget, and were actively trying to forget. He was also afraid that forgetting would allow a return of National Socialist ideology. These Stolperteine are a way of remembrance and of preventing the anti-Democratic forces by providing a small, but constant reminder.



In my opinion, the forms are criticism that have presented themselves in relation to Stolpersteine are not surprising. All memorials and museums have their critics and it is impossible to make everyone happy. It is also important to realize that there is criticism from all side -- members of the Jewish communities who don't want people defacing or wiping their muddy boots on the stones as a sign of disrespect as well as politicians and German citizens who do not want to be reminded of the atrocities of the Holocaust on a daily basis. I think what makes these criticisms so interesting is that they all hold a facet of validity.

René and I

This documentary film focuses on the lives of René and Irene, surviving twin prisoners and experimentation victims at Auschwitz. As a twin, I was really drawn to their story - especially because they are boy/girl twins like my brother and I. What makes their time at Auschwitz especially interesting is not necessarily they fact that they were subjected to horrific medical experimentation, but that they were given the chance to live. Most other children their age were sent immediately to the gas chambers upon arrival at the camps. Their story is really quite chilling - both in the camp and their experience afterwards.



Irene and Rene were born Renate and Rene Guttmann on December 21, 1937 in Teplice Sanov, Czechoslovakia. Their family moved the Prague shortly after they were born. Their father was taken by the Germans in 1939 and sent to Auschwitz, never to be seen by the family again - he died there in December, 1941. Irene, René, and their mother were deported to the Theresienstadt ghetto, and later to the Auschwitz camp in 1943. They were separated from their mother and never saw her again. Shortly after, René and Irene were separated, spotting each other just once through the barbed wire during their almost three year stay at Auschwitz. While there, they where they were experimented on by Josef Mengele as part of his twins research. René was used as the control while Irene was subject to numerous injections and tests that made her very ill. Mengele wanted to find a way to understand the genetic code of twins because he believed that he would be able to repopulate post-war Germany with the master, Aryan race.



After liberation, René and Irene were still separated for quite some time. They were both taken in by people - Irene by a Polish woman and René by a Czech doctor. René then went to live with the Mann family. Irene was later sent to an orphanage in France. She said that even there, she was always alone - no one knew what had happened to her and her story was much different than any of the other girls there. She was taken to the United States and eventually adopted by a Long Island family - The Slotkins. When she told them that she had a brother, they did everything in their power to find him and bring him to the United States so they could adopt him, too. They did - and René and Irene were reunited after twelve years of separation.



An activist, Irene wants to make the Holocaust known. When she was younger, most people in the United States knew of the atrocities committed to the Jews of Europe and worse yet, most did not care to know. Both René and Irene say that after liberation, they never talked about what had happened to them - not even to each other, for a very long time. The focus of the film is not even necessarily what happened to them in the camps. Yes, they suffered, but they also feel lucky to have been able to live through it. It is more about what it was like for them after the war. Never having a childhood. Having lost their entire family. Separation from one another for over a decade. Strange, new environments and constant readjustment. At one point in the film, they discuss a trip they took to Jerusalem in 1985 to meet up with other twin survivors so that they could hold a mock trial against Mengele. They recall that when they found out that Mengele's body had been discovered in Brazil, they were upset that he would never be brought to justice and that his evil nature would live on as demonic hearsay for most people rather than factual truth as they had witnessed it.

The film serves as a tribute to tolerance, to the endurance of the human spirit, and to the triumph of good over evil. One of the lines that stood out to me was something Irene said at the very end - the road to Auschwitz is paved in silence. I found this to be really interesting and remniscent of some of the discussions we've had in class about guilt and remembering. The holocaust happened and it must be discussed.

Auschwitz Theft

Something that was all over the news this past December was the theft of the original 'Arbeit Macht Frei' gate sign from Auschwitz. It caused a huge uproar around the world and reactions to the theft were very interesting.


December 18, 2009: Poland declares a state of emergency. Why? The infamous wrought iron 'Arbeit Macht Frei' sign that hovered over the gate of Auschwitz was stolen. Some might think it was a trivial reason to declare a state of emergency, but at the same time, the sign was incredibly symbolic to many, many people. More than a million people died at Auschwitz -- and they along with the those who were lucky enough to survive -- all passed under the cynical phrase.

Every public authority figure seemed to be in shock and incredibly upset about the theft. BBC reported the following statements: Polish ex-President Lech Walesa described the theft as "unthinkable", while Poland's chief rabbi said he could not imagine who would do such a thing. Polish President Lech Kaczynski called on the public to help recover the sign, which he described as a "worldwide symbol of the cynicism of Hitler's executioners and the martyrdom of their victims". Israeli President Shimon Peres also condemned the theft during a special meeting with Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk.



It was quite shocking at the time. No one knew why someone would do something like that or how they went about it. First of all, it would have been difficult to take because the area is closed off, watched by cameras, and patrolled at night. Second of all, the sign is so well known, it would have been very difficult to sell had that been the motive for taking it.

A few days later, after intensive searching, five men were arrested and the sign was recovered, albeit in three pieces. The thieves had turned out to be ordinary criminals (not neo-nazis as some has speculated) with past records of brawling and theft, who had wanted to sell the sign for money.



I think that this event is most important in the way that it conveys the importance of the Holocaust to different people. For many people - especially Jewish individuals and Holocaust survivors - the theft was horrible. To them, the sign was incredibly symbolic of what they as a people had endured. It is really difficult to understand how the men that stole the sign could not understand the severity of their action. Not in terms of punishment (which could be up to ten years in jail) but in terms of emotional stress that it caused. It seems like the importance of an event is incredibly subjective. The men clearly knew that they were doing was wrong - stealing - but one would question their integrity in relation to human condition. It is unfathomable that while the sign might have been of no importance to them, they did not understand its importance to others. They had to know -- otherwise there would have been no motive for theft.



On the other hand, it is interesting to see the perspective from the other side as well. Some people do not understand or recognize the significance of the sign. I have seen numerous comments on video clips and news articles that say "big deal, who cares" and other things with the same sentiment. Some are are incredibly ignorant, and it really goes to show how little has changed over time - that some people still recognize the severity of or want to try understand the Holocaust.

In anycase, I found the theft to be an interesting example of how the Holocaust is ever-present in society. It is still stirring emotion within people more than sixty years after the camps were liberated.

The Diary of Anne Frank

Even though Anne Frank's diary is geared toward a younger audience, I still feel like it plays an important role in remembering the Holocaust. I read it in the second grade and can still remember details of Anne's accounts of her life. One of the things that is most important about the Diary of Anne Frank is that it is a a first hand account of a coming-of-age victim of the Holocaust in a way that differs from any other accounts from people her age that I have seen. Anne was a victim of the concentration camps, but the diary does not cover that portion of her life. Instead, it covers to events that many, many other people faced - hiding from the Nazis.

Anne's diary begins on her thirteenth birthday: June 12, 1942 - three weeks before she and her family are forced to go into hiding with four other people in a small annex. The diary describes her life in hiding. She had been born in Franfurt, Germany but lived most of her life in Amsterdam. While ethnically Jewish, the Frank family did not observe all of the Jewish customs or traditions. Nonetheless, Nazi occupation of the Netherlands meant that she and her family were trapped there and, as persecution of Jews increased, they were forced to go into hiding. Frank's early entries spoke of the mundane, day to day aspects of her life. In summer 1942, she lists some of the restrictions that had been placed upon the Jews in the Netherlands. In July, she writes that she and her family have to hide. One in hiding, she discusses what life was like living in such close confines with not only her own family, but four other individuals as well - the Pels family and Dr. Pfeffer, a friend of her father's.

Something that is so interesting about Anne's account is how life continued to go on even under such strange circumstances. She discusses being annoyed at how intrusive people - especially Dr. Peffer - were and even develops a romance with Peter Pels who was sixteen when they went into the annex. I remember that the few times I read it when I was younger, I found Anne to be relatable. She was a young girl just like I was. The small points in her life were similar to mine, yet the ways in which we lived were vastly different. The diary opened my eyes up to the Holocaust in way that I find suitable for young people. First of all, it's a true account - not something that has been developed for the young mind. I think that this is really important because it does not sugar coat anything. The fact that it was written from the perspective of someone you was young is also important because all the innocence and naivity is real.

It's last entry was on 1 August 1944, when the family and the people they were hiding with were found and transfered to Bergen-Belsen. Of the eight people in hiding, only Anne's father, Otto, survived. Anne had died of typhus in early March 1945, just a couple of weeks before Bergen-Belsen was liberated. Otto returned to Amsterdam and found the diaries. He had them published in 1947. What is even more interesting that the diary itself is the legacy that it has made for itself and for it's author. I think one of things that make this account of the Holocaust so interesting is that it was not an account from inside the camps. It is not a memoir. It shares in the moment confusion from the perspective of a girl who was hiding from the Nazis.

In some ways, I believe that what came after the publication of the diary is almost more important than the diary itself. Since the publication, a number of memorials and museums have been developed. In Amsterdam people can visit the Anne Frank House. In Berlin or the US, The Anne Frank Centers. In London there is an Anne Frank Educational Trust - just to name a few. It is so fascinating that the story of one little girl has inspired so many people to delve further into the history of the Holocaust. For many years, Anne Frank's story was my only insight into the Holocaust because it still isn't talked about all that thoroughly in schools in the United States and even then, it is not even touched upon until high school in many cases.

The Life and Death Orchestra

When trying to find interesting things to write about for a journal entry, I stumbled across something called The Life and Death Orchestra. There was not much information to be found about the group, but I did gather that it is a musical group that focuses it's artistic energy on the events of the Holocaust. The composers and main performers of The Life and Death Orchestra are Bill Smith, Bim Sinclair, Angi Mariani and Herbie Flowers. Their album, Songs for the Betrayed Worldis a compilation of Holocaust survivor's poems set to music. It took 25 years to put together. In a BBC interview in 2004, Bill Smith, the creator of the album, says that it came about because he read a book called "The Poetry of Survival" and it was really moving to him. He set a few of the poems to music and decided to expand the project and met with a Jewish composer to complete the project. He wanted to use poems that provided eyewitness accounts of the Holocaust. A passage from Elie Wiesel's Night is also recorded on the album.




I found this to be a really interesting way to commemorate the Holocaust. It is different because it is not something you can read, or watch, or look at. It is something that you hear. The Life and Death Orchestra focuses on the need to let the voices and feelings of guilt, and anger be heard and speak the unspeakable. Their songs form pictures and leave lasting messages.
The songs are all really intense and moving.

This Way for the Gas Ladies and Gentlemen is one of the most moving songs on the album. It was adapted from the short story by Tadeusz Borowski and it depicts an ordinary but horrific day in the gas chambers detailing things like the zyklon B, the cruelty of the SS, the transports, the summary executions, and the slaughter that went on there. The song has also been adapted into a short musical production.



Songs
This Way for the Gas Ladies and Gentlemen
Auschwitz 1987
Pigtail
Be Happy
Jacob's Jig
Five Men
(...other songs can be found here.)

BBC Interview
with Bill Smith.

Reviews
"Epic and Powerful" - The Jewish Telegraph

"...astonishing as a piece of music and performed live, equally moving as a piece of theatre." - Jewish Chronicle

"The songs are hauntingly beautiful and will linger in the mind long after the performance is over. It must be one of the most tragic and moving shows." - Edinburgh Guide

The Boys of Buchenwald

Released in 2002, The Boys of Buchenwald is a documentary that follows child survivors of the Buchenwald camp and explores their reassimilation into society following liberation. I found this piece to be particularly interesting in that it focuses not the horrors of life in the camp, but the troubles faced by victims even after they have been liberated. It is a story of how they coped with what had been done to them and how they all leaned on one another to do so.



In the film, a number of men are interviewed - including Elie Wiesel. They share stories of the fraternity and life-long friendships they formed in the camp and explain how the bonds created there remained once the camp was liberated. As children, many of them were left orphans with nowhere to go. The film focuses on a home that was created for 426 of the displaced Holocaust survivors in France. They went and lived and learned together -- both academics and how to assimilate to a society that was vastly different from the lives they knew while imprisoned. Many of the boys had discipline issues and were rowdy. They did not know how to behave in the real world because they had been so suppressed in the camps.




Even though the experiences had by the characters of The Murderers Are Among Us were very different than the boys interviewed for The Boys of Buchenwald, the two films reminded me of each other. They both focus on the impact that the Holocaust had on people even after the war was over. The men talk about about even the most normal things were strange to them. Elie Wiesel recalls being given cookies and how odd it felt to share - to have something to share. What was interesting about the camp survivors was that they were displaced. They had nowhere to go. This reminded me of the occupied apartments in The Murderers Are Among Us. There is a sense of confusion in the Rubble film that is quite comparable to the confusion felt by the men who were interviewed in the documentary. After the boys were in the home in France, they had to move away from one another. Some went to the US, some went to Australia, etc. They went all over the world. Many of them stayed with host families until they were old enough to be on their own or they were adopted. It was interesting to hear about how they assimilated into these new environments as a result.



At the end of the film, a number of the men meet up on the 55th anniversary of their liberation in France at the house where they lived together. They place that they had stayed is now a private residence, but they still remember all sorts of little details of their stay there as they walk from room to room. They reminisce about the impact that each of them had on one another - how they really held each other together. It was a really fascinating film and gave a level of truth to the fact that life after liberation was not easy and that there was still a great deal of pain and difficulty that the victims had to face.

The Boys of Buchenwald | A Clip from Knowledge Network


Awards
Gold Remi Award at the WorldFest International Film Festival (April 2004)
Bronze World Medal at The New York Festival (January 2004)