Baer (2000) To Give Memory A Place - Holocaust Photography and The Landscape Tradition

University of California Press
To Give Memory a Place: Holocaust Photography and the Landscape Tradition

Author(s): Ulrich Baer
Source: Representations, No. 69, Special Issue: Grounds for Remembering (Winter, 2000), pp. 38-
62
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2902900
Accessed: 25-10-2015 15:33 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Representations.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 129.78.139.28 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 15:33:24 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ULRICH BAER
To Give Memory a Place:

Holocaust Photography
and the Landscape Tradition
Whenthemorning lightcomesup
Whoknowswhatsuffering was?
midnight
Proofis whatI do notneed.
BrendanKennelly,Proof'
THE PHOTOGRAPH(fig.1) showsa clearingthatextendsto a low forest,

more wild growththan forest,whichholds a view hemmedin by shortpines. The
picture'selongatedformatinvitesus to scan theimage withour eyesand see ifthe
~~~im
38 REPRESENTATIONS 69 *Winter 2000 ?0 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
skywill not open up entirelywhenwe advance into theclearingjust a bit.Because
the picture'sspace is powerfullycenteredby sharplyrenderedtiersof grass and
shrubsand trees,the lightlywooded land in thisstretched-out printreadilyoffers
a single-pointperspectiveand point ofview.The skyis cut offby thepicture'sun-
usuallylow framing,which lends the image a palpable sense of heaviness.In the
photographer'seffort to captureeach pine needle and stalkofgrasswithtechnical
precision,the skyhas been overexposed;onlya fainttrace ofclouds remains.This
exactitudedevoted to the place betraysan interestand familiaritythat contrasts
with the site's lack of conventionalvisual appeal and the absence of identifiable
markers.Since the photographerDirk Reinartz uses the large panorama format
that is normallyreservedforsweepingvistas to capture a ratherconfinedspace,
the impressiondeepens thatthis opening in the woods was cleared at some time
fora reason.
But whydoes nothinggrow in the sandypatchesin the front?We mistakenly
assume thesepatchesof nongrowthto lie at the picture'scenter;theyare in facta
good two-thirdsbelow the upper marginof the print.If the perspectiveachieved
in thisimage pulls us in, thesepatcheskeep us fromfullyenteringthephotograph.
. .
FIGURE 1. Dirk Reinartz,"Sobibo'r:ExterminationCamp Grounds." Repro-

duced by permissionfromDirk Reinartz,DeathlyStill(New York,1995), 232-33.
To Give Memorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

and theLandscape Tradition 39
The pines on the marginsof the visual fieldhad firstblended withthe ratheruni-
formand decidedly secondary background; theynow emerge as sentinelsof a
darkerforestlocated just beyond the confinesof the image. Trees to the leftand
rightinitiallyseemed to be recedingintospace but,upon prolongedinspection,are
recognizedto be uncomfortably close; thebristly
pines nearlybrushour eyes.These
dwarfedtreesnow signalthatwe have alreadybeen broughtintothe middleofthe
clearingwhilewe keptlookingat thesiteas ifit had been placed in frontofus. The
way theyspill out past the print'ssharplyposited framesuggeststhat what had
initiallyappeared to be a tightlyorganizedvisual fieldis in facta settingthathas
notbeen fullymasteredand contained.As ifheld back by a premonitionor a spell,
we do not wish to projectourselvesinto the middle of the blotchyclump of trees.
While we contemplateour positionin relationto the black-and-white print,there
is a sense of trespassthathoversnear the bald patches in the grass.Althoughthe
picturepositionsus as the onlypossiblepoint ofreference, thissense ofnonbelong-
ing and exclusion,ofhaving arrivedapres coup,too late and perhaps in vain, is al-
mostpalpable. As ifenlivenedby a breeze,the silentprintis animated by an aura
or "spiritofplace": we get the sense thatthe groundsare haunted,even spooked.
In Mikael Levin's "NordlagerOhrdruf,1995" (fig.2) we are facedwithanother
studyofspace, but,unlikethefirstimage discussed,thisprintemphasizesthevast-
ness of a sitethattodayis not merelyinaccessiblebut also virtuallyforgotten. The
photographshows a marshymeadow, dottedwith rush grasses and thistles,and
borderedby trees.A shallowpatch of stagnantwaterat the bottomof the printis
cradled by the slightlyrisingmeadow on both sides. The photographdraws this
puddle toward its viewersinstead of allowing our gaze to centeron it. Since the
groundslantsslightlydownwarda fewinchesto theleftofthepicture'slowerright
corner,onlya clump ofspikygrassseemsto keep thewaterfromspillingout ofthe
image on to our feet.The brightspotsin theforegroundcounterbalancethe dark-
ness of the treesin the backgroundso thatthe viewer'ssightsettleson the nonde-
scriptarea lyingin between.This photographis even more brutallyexposed than
Reinartz'simage: thewaterpuddlesreflecta skythatis devoidofthesymbolicorder
affordedby cloud patternsor astral constellations.Only the shinystalksof grass
seemto spella crypticmessageagainstthedarkerground.Since a nearlyblackband
ofbushesseparatesthismeadow scriptfromtheentirelywhitesky,theimpressionof
spatial depthand perspectiveproduced by thevaried graysin thepicture'sbottom
halfis herebroughtto a halt;an actual surveyofthearea, itseems,would heremeet
with an impenetrablelimit.What littlesense of depth is presentin these bushes
vanishes into the flatwhite,and the groups of shrubsmelt into abstractdesigns.
Whetherdue to thephotograph'sextremeexposureor to darkroomwork,it looks
as if some leaves had detached fromthe trees and were meltinginto the sky's
brightvoid.
Levin places theviewerbeforea landscape the spatialdepthofwhichis on the
vergeofcollapsingintotheflatnessofabstraction.Solid treesdissolveintothinair;
40 REPRESENTATIONS
FIGURE 2. Mikael Levin, "Nordlager Ohrdruf,1995." Reproduced by
permissionfromMikael Levin, WarStory(Munich, 1997), 131.
the stalksof grassbeneathour eyesmeltinto the soggyground.If thispicturetells

a story,it is the storyofthetransformation ofthedepthofthe landscape, seen at the
bottomoftheprint,intotheuninhabitableterrain and theabstractwhitenessfound
toward the picture'stop. Trained by habit, the viewer infersthe space and per-
spectiveof the image, and thusher own positionin relationto the site,by translat-
ing the print'smany shades of grayinto suggestionsof proximityand distance in
the scene. The landscape's imagined depth-where experience,imagination,and
memorymaybe contained vanishesintoutterlyabstractedand inhospitableter-
rain.2We are made to entera sitethatfailedto accommodate human experience
in thepast and thatwill not allow itselfin the present,as a photographicsight,to
be completelyfilledin by the imagination.
The tensionbetweentheprint'slandscape character,as a settingforexperience
and memory,and theabstracteddepictionofinhospitableterrainputsus in a pecu-
liar position.We are allowed to entera site thatwill not fullyaccommodate our
view.The illusionof space in thispicturedoes not engender,at all points,a sense

ofplace;we are led into a sitethatfinallyexcludesus. The way Levin has structured
thisimage resemblesReinartz'sorganizationofspace into a landscape view in the
otherprint.Our nearlyreflexiveimpulseto assume theintendedpoint ofview and
share thephotographer'sline ofsightis stoppedshortby thepicture'sresistanceto
being fullyconquered by means of visual projection.In both of theseimages,the
invitationtoenterthe siteis fusedwithan aura of exclusion.
The firstimage, oftheformerNazi exterminationcamp at Sobibor in Poland,

was publishedby the German photographerDirk Reinartz in his 1995 book en-
titledDeathlyStill:Pictures ofFormer GermanConcentration
Camps.3All of the images
in Reinartz'sbook are similarlyaestheticized,but unlikethissingleimage of Sobi-
b6r,theyall show evidenceor memorialsofthe crimesonce committedthere.The
secondimage,oftheformerconcentrationcamp ofOhrdrufin Germany,was taken
in 1995 and publishedin a book entitledWarStoryby theAmericanphotographer
Mikael Levin. Though unaware of each other'swork,the two photographersrely
on thesame artisticconventionsoflandscape artto finda place forabsentmemory.4
Reinartz'sand Levin's images offormercamps are unlikemostotherpostwar
images ofHolocaust sites.Their images containno evidenceoftheirhistoricaluses,
and theyrelyexplicitlyon the aesthetictraditionoflandscape art and the "experi-
ence ofplace" in orderto commemoratethedestructionofexperienceand memory.
In mostoftheimages offormercamps or killingfieldsbyothercontemporarypho-
tographers, we are confronted withtheoversaturated referentsofruins:theremains
ofbuildingsonce builtto kill and now maintainedto commemorate,the sky-blue
shards of enamel cooking pots broughtby unsuspectingvictims,the scraps of
barbed wire, the memorial stones.5Instead of showing such markers,these two
images referto theHolocaust onlyvia thetitlesand contextsoftheoriginalpublica-
tions:theseare Holocaust sites.
Since theydo not contain evidence to reveal theirimportance,these photo-
graphs ask to be regardedon strictly modernistterms:as iftheirsignificanceand
meritderivednotfromknowledgeoftheircontextbutfromintrinsicformalcriteria
alone. By thusfocusingon a formalapproach as an appropriatemode ofrepresent-
ing theHolocaust, Reinartz and Levin forceus into a positionofseeingthatsome-
thingcannot be seen, and theyshow that somethingin the catastropheremains
inassimilableto historicist or contextualreadingswithout,however,attainingspiri-
tual significance.These photographs,as I will argue,silentlyquestionthe reliance
on a historicalcontextas an explanatoryframe.These images situateus in relation
to somethingthatremainsoffthe maps ofhistoricist readings.
Reinartz's and Levin's images confrontus with a dimensionof the Holocaust
that cannot be fullyaccounted forby drawing on materialor documentaryevi-
dence. Yet the deliberateexclusionofhistoricalmarkersin thesepicturesis not an
irresponsible, vain, or ahistoricistgesture.Rather,Reinartz and Levin relyon the
aestheticas a categoryto draw attentionto the unbridgeablegap between,on the
42 REPRESENTATIONS
one hand, philosophicalefforts ofunderstandingand historicist attemptsat expla-
nationand, on theotherhand, theactual eventoftheextermination.These images
open severalunansweredquestions:How do we remembertheshoahwithoutforget-
tingthatthiseventunderminedthe human capacityformemoryand questioned
the notionofsurvivalin wayswe are stillstrugglingto comprehend?6Where is the
proper positionfromwhich to face this starktruth,and how is this notion of a
positionrelatedto the experienceofplace? Priorto all efforts at commemoration,
explanation,or understanding,I would suggest,we mustfinda place and position
fromwhichwe may thengain access to the event.By castingthe enormityof the
Holocaust withinthe traditionalgenre of landscape photography,Reinartz and
Levin emphasizethatthisquestionofourposition, as belatedwitnessesto theoriginal
witnesses,precedesall effortsto confrontthe past, to remember,to learn, and to
understand.
In accordance with the conventionsof Romantic landscape depictions,these
images createthesenseoffeelingaddressedand responsiveto thedepictedsiteand,
crucially,ofseeingthesitenotforitsown sake but as pointingback to our position.
The impulse theyinvoke to locate ourselveswithina space organized as land-
scape is an only recentlyacquired response.With European Romanticism,the
environmentthathad once been groundto cover,plow,or conquer became an aes-
theticentityto be contemplatedby an enrapturedsubjectin a continualprocessof
introspectionand increasingself-awareness.7 To look at a landscape as we do today
manifestsa specificallymodern sense of self-understanding, which may be de-
scribedas theindividual'sabilityto viewherselfwithina larger,and possiblyhistori-
cal, context.Ifthisrelationto one's surroundingssomewhatpredatestheRomantic
era, itis theRomanticsubjectwho emergesas theprototypeofthemodernindivid-
ual who looks at a beautifulvista not to see the landscape but to encounter"an
earlierinstantiationof the self"8Accordingto the Romantic sensibilitythat still
organizesboth our sightand the contemporarypracticeoflandscape photography,
to look at a landscape means,as JosephKoernerhas argued,to "turnthelandscape
back on theviewer,to locate us in our subjectivityas landscape [art's]truepoint of
reference."9The two photographsI discuss here,however,relyon and alter this
aesthetictraditionto place us in referenceto experiencesthatare characterizedby
theirresistance to being integratedinto memory,historicalnarratives,or any other
mitigating context.While theseimagesframethesitesaccordingto artisticconven-
tionsthatforceus to assume a viewingposition,theyalso block these sightsfrom
being subsumed as "pleasing" vistas into the viewer'sprocess of increasingself-
awarenessthroughidentification or projection.10
By pullingtheviewerintoa settingthatseemsinhospitableand placeless,these
photographspoint to a linkbetweenthe "experienceofplace" and the enigmatic
structureof traumaticmemories.They also remindus thatmost otherHolocaust
photographsblock access to the event instead of facilitatingthe process of self-
aware,ratherthanrote,commemorationand witnessing.By relyingon an aesthetic

convention,theseimages point to thelimitsofcontainingthecatastrophethrough
historicistreadingswithoutreleasingus fromthe taskofviewingour own position
in relationto it.
The viewer'ssense of being positionedin referenceto an eventthatis partly
definedbyitsresistanceto integrationintomemorychangesa crucialmethodologi-
cal questionabout thestatusoftheimage in general.A constitutive questionofboth
traditionaland morerecentart-historical inquiriesconcernstheextentto whichthe
readingofan image may be inflectedby (prior)knowledgeofitshistoricalcontext.
I suggestrephrasingthisquestionbyaskinghow to contextualizean image through
referenceto a historicaleventthatconsistedin the lastingdestructionof explana-
toryreferential framesand contextsforunderstanding.I relatethisquestionabout
theviabilityofcontextualor historicist readingsto a subtlebutimportantshiftthat
is currentlytakingplace in debatesabout Holocaust representation. For severalde-
cades, thesedebates have circledaround the tropesof the "unspeakable,"the "in-
effable,"and the "limits of representation"of the Holocaust. But these onto-
theologicaltermsare being displaced by the question whetherthe obligationto
confrontthe Shoahwill diminishand finallydisappear withthepassing of the last
survivorsand witnesses.How can youngergenerationsbe taughtthattheHolocaust
poses a problem forrepresentationexcept by representingit, how can its sense-
lessnessbe conveyedexceptby turningit into a (negative)lesson,and how can its
shatteringeffectson all categoriesofthoughtand knownmodes oftransmissionbe
conveyedexceptbyturningitintoa circumscribedand thusfinallygraspableobject
ofinquiry?1What, finally, places individualsin the positionof havingto face the
Shoahas a watershedeventof history?
Paradoxically,the stillgrowingscholarly,artistic,and media attentionto the
Holocaust obscures and even blocks an understandingof the Holocaust's impact
on all formsofculturalpractice.Saturatedby referencesto the catastrophe,many
people are no longeraware of any difficulty in imaginingand mentallypicturing
an eventthathas been so successfully packaged and depictedin StevenSpielberg's
Hollywood creations,in theUnited StatesHolocaust Museum in thenation'scapi-
tal, and on the nightlynews.A floodof Holocaust kitschin popular literatureand
film includingworksby criticallyacclaimed artists heightensthe impression
thatthereis littledifficulty
in remembering, representing, and communicatingthe
shoahand thattheHolocaust is availableto anyone.3 The decades-longdebatesover
the Holocaust's resistanceto representationand conceptualizationare no longer
recognizedas originatingfromwithinthecatastrophebut are increasinglyand in-
correctlyviewed as mere academic habitsof thought.
We are compelledto addressthefactthatthecontemporaryglutofimages and
informationabout the Holocaust, even when part oflaudable efforts to document
and commemorate,may lead to the "disappearance ofmemoryin the act ofcom-
memoration."14 The veryword holocaust triggersa surgeof derivativeand familiar
mentalimages. These images substitutea reductive,and thusassimilable,version
44 REPRESENTATIONS
ofthepast forthe difficultand oftenpainfuland unbearable encounterswithwhat
continuesto be the intangiblepresenceof an absence,whichJacques Derrida has
called the "hell in our memory.""5In cases wheretheyhave not become mutecli-
ches, on the otherhand, the forceof graphic images may completelydisable the
viewer'scapacityto rememberor to respondeithercriticallyor withempathy.The
discussionof two photographschosen fromthe vast canon of Holocaust imagery
thatdo not produce such reflexiveresponsesor cognitivenumbingalso raisesgen-
of representingtrauma and of the
eral questionsabout the structuraldifficulties
poetics ofwitnessing.
The Experience of Place
Reinartz'sand Levin's picturesreopen stillrelevantquestionsabout the

statusand reliabilityof the image, datingback to the firstlandscape photographs
in the 1840s. Early landscape photographersdeliberatelypaired an aestheticizing
visionofthesurroundingswiththetruthclaimsinherentto themediumofphotog-
raphyin orderto draw theviewer'seyesand mind as a potentialsettler'sor visi-
tor'sgaze intounknownregions.In critiquesofsuchimages,thelandscape tradi-
tion has been problematized as "naturalizing," by means of the aesthetic,the
nefariousapproaches and appropriationsof territory by particulargroups;land-
scape depictions are now frequentlyviewed as the symbolic and aestheticizing
counterpartto brutal campaigns of colonial expansion. What littlebucolic inno-
cence theremayhave been in landscape depictionscertainlyvanishedwiththeNa-
zis' explicitappropriationof thatgenreand the enlistmentof the mythsof "blood
and soil" and Lebensraum in an ideologythatled to thesenselessmurderofmillions.
Reinartz and Levin relyon the landscape traditionnot to point at the historical
eventor the genre'scorruptionbut to positionus in relationto the factthat the
event consistedin the radical destructionand unavailabilityof any explanatory
context.It is theunavailability markers,and notinformationthatcould
ofreferential
be embedded in historicalcontexts,thatis captured in these images as the truth
of history.
I maintain thatthe modernist,arguablyEurocentric,and wholly"aesthetic"
approach to the landscape photographas autonomousimage is particularlywell-
suitedto addresstheHolocaust as thehistoricaleventthatcalls thatentiretradition
intoquestion.16 Preciselybecause a trulyungovernablemass of"hard facts"(which
are ofteninvokedin polemicsagainstaestheticallyorientedreadings)blocksaccess
to an eventthat,as Jean Baudrillardhas pointed out, due to "continual scrutiny
. . . has [become] less and less comprehensible,"our tasktodayconsistsnot exclu-
sivelyin loggingmore data.17We have not met our responsibility by historicizing
or contextualizingtheimage butwe mustalsofindourhearings in relationto theevent
thatdestroyedthe possibilityof takingrecourseto such contexts.An aesthetically
and theLandscape Tradition

To Give Memorya Place: HolocaustPhotography 45
orientedreading of theseimages countersoverlyhistoricistreadingsof landscape
artthatregardtheaestheticdimensionofthattraditionas littlebut theveneerover
imperialistor fascistideology.'8
Reinartz'sphotographof Sobibor showsthatstrictadherenceto the currently
favoreddirectiveto alwayshistoricize means to forgetthe irremediablefactthatan
eventmaybe historicalpreciselybecause itdestroyedor made unavailableall refer-
ences to itshistoricalcontext.In the case ofthe Shoah,theloss,whichremainsim-
measurable,comprisedin manycases also thecapacityto experience,and insepara-
blytiedto thiscapacity,to remember.Even whenwe arm ourselveswithknowledge
gleaned fromthe vast archives,a sitelike Sobibor confrontsus head-on with the
realizationthatno amountofknowledgecan counterthefundamentalsense ofun-
groundingfelthere. To contextualizethe image of such a settingby drawingon
historicalexplanations,or on thepowersoftheimagination,would mean to forget
or denythefactthatin Sobibor's shockinglysmall area ofcertaindeath,thepossi-
bilityofknowledgeand comprehensionitselfwas destroyed.In orderto be recog-
nized at all, however,thisencounterwithirremediableloss needs a frameto impli-
cate theviewervisuallyin the nondistinct,empty,and easilyoverlookedsetting.In
thepicturesanalyzed here,thecompositionalconventionsoflandscape artprovide
this "frame," which situates the viewer in referenceto the limits of historical
knowledge.
Reinartz'sphotographrestores a senseofplaceto thehistoricaleventthatappears
both geographicallyand conceptuallyplaceless to us. "The Holocaust seemsto have
no landscape or at best one emptiedoffeaturesand color,shroudedin nightand
fog,"writesSimon Shama, and the eerie elusivenessof the geographicsiteswhere
ultimatelynothingis foundhauntsmostvisitorsto the sitesoftheformercamps.19
This geographicplacelessnessin "the mythicalterritory 'further to theEast' where
the documentsoftheNazi administrationsituatedthe ultimatedeportationofthe
Jews" has its conceptualequivalent and what Nadine Fresco termsits "definitive
[symbolic]beyond" in a realm wherethe most immense accumulationof knowl-
edge does not attainclosure.20Althoughcommittedto establishingtheconceptual
groundingfromwhichwe would build a contextfortheseimages,when facingthe
Shoah's"no-man's-landofunderstanding,"mosthistoriansfeel"despair and doubt
and [possibly]recognition... but assuredlyno understanding."21 Even when ar-
chives, sources, memoirs, and testimonieshave been consulted, there remains
somethingconfoundingand inexplicableabout the existenceof a place like Sobi-
bor. The storiesin historybooks are finallymost eloquent about theirownfailure
to offerclosure,to make sense,or,in thecase ofsurvivortestimonies, to appropriate
an experienceforan individualthatis all toomuchhis or herown.22Each detailadds
to thepicture,but a place like Sobibor neverbecomes "whole." Survivoraccounts
oftenrecountthe deportationto a non-place and the destructionof the symbolic
notionofa "place" thatcould hold experiencetogether.23 A visitto a formercamp
underminesour faithin thequestforknowledgeas a fundamentally liberatingpro-
46 REPRESENTATIONS
cess.My strategicisolationofthisimage fromitscontextofcaptions,texts,and titles
indicatesthisfundamentalunavailabilityand destructionof a stabilizingcontext.
Reinartz'sphotograph,however,partlydispelsthe mythicstatusof the Holo-
caust'sunavailable location, at once inaccessibleand yetprofuselydocumented,by
depictingthesiteas a landscape.24 The photographdoes notleave thesitefully"un-
storied,"to use an older termthat distinguishesplace,which refersto the "land-
scapes thatdisplayus as culture,"fromspace,as "the environment[that]sustainsus
as creatures."25 But the "story"offeredin thisimage is familiarnot fromhistorical
accounts.The storyoftheloss oftheexperienceofplace is made accessiblethrough
artisticconventionsthat situateus in referenceto the actual and metaphoricde-
structionof experience,place, context,and belonging.
Reinartz's strictlycomposed fieldof vision leaves littleroom forthe viewer's
eyesto roam. The picturepointsback to one viewingpositionalone and places all
of its viewersin the same line of sight.Beforethis photograph,we all share one
perspectiveand one pointofview: thisis whyI insiston thecollectivewebeforethe
siteofan eventthatall but completelyshatteredthemostbasic human bonds. The
photograph'sstrictspatialorderingturnstheviewers'attentionnotto thesite'snat-
ural beautyor the marksof cultureon the land but to their positionin reference
tothe
depicted site.The forestclearingappears worthyofattentionnotforitsown sake but
because ofthepeculiarityoftheviewer'sposition.26 The taskoffindingour position
as viewersconsistsin findingour bearingsin referenceto a place thatis absorbing
yetunstable.
PicturingNothing: Levin's Image
a' voir[Theymust
Ilfautdonner bemadetosee].
_CharlotteDelbo27
Mikael Levin's photographdates from1995 and showstheformercon-

centrationcamp at Ohrdrufin Germany.Ohrdrufwas discoveredby American
soldiers,among themLevin's fatherMeyer Levin, one day afterthe SS had aban-
doned thecamp (and beforeNazi Germany'sdefeat).The youngerLevin'staskcon-
sistsnot onlyin capturinghis father'soriginalsense ofshockbut also in conveying
the distancethatseparatesus fromit. Levin mustcreate a visual space to contain
the absence thatdefinedtheseplaces withoutsuggestingthathis father'ssense of
loss has been overcomeand thatthe absence he firstwitnessedhas been filledin.
But Levin's photographcannotbe read accordingto a logic ofdeferredmean-
ing so thatitbelatedlybestowsmeaningto a sighttoo overwhelmingto be grasped
in the firstencounter.Rather,Levin's image furnishesa positionfromwhich to
addressthe knowledgethatcontinuesto proveexcessive,destabilizing,and indeed
blindingfifty yearslater.The youngerLevin seeksto show thatthe originalsense

To GiveMemorya Place: HolocaustPhotography 47
ofdestabilizationand excess thefactthatnot onlythesurvivorsbutthewitnesses
as well could not,as his father'scable back to theUnited Statesputsit,"personally
cope" has not diminished.28
In his war diary,Meyer Levin describeda search forevidence of the crimes
committedby the Germans. Levin and a fellowwar correspondentwere led to a
"half-dugpit as large as a swimmingpool, filledwith ooze" fromwhich a Polish
survivorservingas theirguide pulled a partlydecayed human body (129). Here
the SS had unsuccessfullytriedto exhume and burn the bodies of thousandsof
victimsonce the discoveryoftheircrimesby theAllied Forceswas imminent.Just
one day afterthe SS had abandoned the camp, however,Meyer Levin was faced
withthe factthatnothing can be seen here: "On top of the hill therewas a rutthat
gave out, and thennothing... We were going to turnback when the Pole suddenly
got his bearingsand motionedto a clump of trees. Wesaw nothing. We drovethere
and gotout and stillwesaw nothing special"(129; emphasisadded). While theselines
precede the discoveryofthemass grave,theyregister, above all, the overwhelming
experienceofencounteringnothing in theinhospitableterrain.This experiencecan-
not be undone by evidenceuncovered.Levin's narrativemovesfroma firstnothing
of impatienceand fear (ofmines or "bitter-endSS who could pot us off")to the
sightofnothing thatcharacterizesthepit in thistestimonialtale. Yet thefactthatup
to thispoint theyseenothing createsnotjust narrativesuspense.Nothing is alreadya
referencethat denoteswhat the witnessesare about to see, beyond the "nothing
special": a pit "with a sectionof narrow-gaugetrack. .. beside it,reachingfrom no-
wheretonowhere" (129; emphasisadded). Althoughthepit is the end point of their
search and would presumablydispel the sense of nothing,it containsan absence
withoutproperframeor closure,a pool of slime thatcannot be called a grave,an
openingin thegroundthatwill notofferrestto thousandsofprisonerswhosenames
and facespassed unrecorded.At theverymomentofitsdiscovery, thesiteis literally
sinkinginto oblivion and symbolicallydriftingtoward the peripheryof a public
memorythat is yetto be created,and that will monumentalizeotherHolocaust
sitesbut leave Ohrdrufunstoried.
Meyer Levin's account of the visitends with the followingwords: "Now we
knew.Nothingafterwardtoldus more.Buchenwald,BergenBelsen,Dachau[:] we
became specialists"(130). The camp at Ohrdrufremainsunsurpassedin horror,
and Levin realizes alreadyin 1945 thatthe encounterwitha radicallyvoided site,
withtheshockinglyvacant "nothing"witnessedtherewouldbe outdonebynothing
else. Even today,now thattheRussianArmyno longerusestheplace forwar games,
the siteof the formercamp of Ohrdrufremainsa militaryzone entirelyclosed off
to visitors.
Mikael Levin'sphotographis nottheactual butthesymboliccenterofhisbook;
it marksthe place fromwhichwe are made to see the unfathomablevoid firsten-
countered by his father.The image discloses nothing except the viewer's help-
lessnessbeforethesite.In whatwe recognizeto be a paradox once we have grasped
48 REPRESENTATIONS
thatall "landscapes" are culturalconstructions, Levin's printcapturesthesiteas a
landscapewithout us init.When we searchforthesite'ssignificancein MeyerLevin's
detailedand reflective testimony,we are remindedthatthissignificanceconsistsin
thesite'sdisclosureofnothing. This is notto saythatthenothing witnessedbythetwo
Levins is insignificant.The Levins' dilemma, however,is how we, as secondary
witnesses,are to "getour bearings"in relationto a sightthatlefteventhesurvivors,
aftertheyhad pointed to the evidence,at an absoluteloss.
Historicalaccountsbreak down in the effort to documentwhatunrealizedpo-
tentialand unfoldedstoriesvanished in the Holocaust. We enterinto sitesout of
whichonlydeath was supposed to lead; we are confrontedwithspaces designedto
destroyall memoriesof thosewho were broughtthere.The deliberatedestruction
oftheevidenceofthesesites'terriblehistoricalsignificanceis bothpartoftheevent's
historicaltruthand a limitto thepossibilityofitstelling.Everynarrative,and thus
everyeffort to historicize,ultimatelyglossesoverthisirremediableabsence sensed
in such a place.
The Photograph's Reference
By freezingwhateverhistoricalnarrativeoftheHolocaust we mayknow
intothedeathlystillnessofa photograph,bothReinartzand Levin curtailtheland-
scape genre'spower of absorptionby appealing to the photograph'smelancholic
dimension,which excludesthe viewer.In everyphotographicimage, the viewer's
hereandnow herabilityto drawon different explanatorycontexts is read against
thephotographedmoment'sthenandthere.29 Everyphotographshows,regardlessof
itssubjectmatter,an inalterablemomentof thepast thatcannot be broughtback.
Even in our "post-photographicera," when sensoryperception is being refor-
mattedaccordingto new technologicalparadigms,we continueto view everypho-
tographicimage as evidenceofa past thatis knownto be unreachableforus.30 This
sightis here,immovably preserved
andprinted,butyouareelsewhere. Beforeit yieldsany
information,each photographconstitutesevidence thatwe have arrivedafterthe
picturehad been taken,and thustoo late: our responseto a photographis stillvery
muchmodeled,viscerallyand againstbetterknowledge,on our responseto thereal.
While Reinartz'sand Levin's images,like all landscape depictions,absorb the
viewer,theyalso maintain,like all photographs,this "irretrievableothernessfor
theviewerin thepresent.""3 These photographspresentus witha shotthatwe know
to belongto thepast,and thusexcludeus fromthesiteas powerfullyas theconven-
tionsoflandscape artpull us in. The sense ofnonbelongingin theseimages,then,
originatesnotonlyfromtheparticularity ofthephotographedscene or thepictures'
framing.The feelingofexclusionresultsalso fromthemelancholicretentionofthe
referent foundin all photographs:we feelexcludedregardlessofour knowledgeof
the site's historicalsignificance.The auratic sense of place that I locate, against

To Give Memorya Place: HolocaustPhotography 49
dominantreadingsof the historyofphotography, in thesepictures,is here paired
withthemedium'sparticulareffects in orderto showthatabsence itselfhas become
thepicture'sreferent.32
These darklyauraticpicturesby Reinartz and Levin hoveringon the brink
ofour resilientfaithin theevidentiarystatusofthephotograph are all butuseless
as documentsforhistoriansand otherprofessionaltruth-seekers.33 While thereis
none of the usual kind of documentaryinformationin thesesilentpictures,how-
ever,thesephotographsnonethelesstellthetruth. They challengeour notionofwhat
constitutesknowledgeby relyingon our deep-seatedtrustin photography'sreality
effectto show that reallynothingis picturedhere or, to phrase this observation
differently,thatnothingin thispictureis real. Since thisnothingofinformationis
cast accordingto the aestheticconventionsoflandscape art in a photograph(with
its apparentlyunshakeable truthclaims),I do not mean spiritual,ontological,or
existentialNothingnessor "nothing"but the sense the premonitionor uncanny
aura thatsomethinghas disappeared,thatthe place has not been changed and
yetleftless than itwas before.Photography'spalpable power to capturethe real
thesensethat"nothingin theimage can be refusedor transformed" is herecom-
bined withour visual absorptionin the landscape to documentthe destructionof
memoryitself.34 The image turnsthisradical voidingintothereferent foran event
thatinvolvedthe effortto obliterateall tracesof its occurrence.While the reality
representedin otherreferentiallymore stabledocumentaryphotographsmay shel-
terus fromthisdevastatingtruth,thesephotographsvacate our understandingof
referenceitself.35
The Limits of Allegory
Reinartz'sand Levin'simagescould be faultedforundulyaestheticizing

the sitesof atrocities."Yet both photographerssteerclear of the derivativepathos
that characterizesbooks oftensold at memorialsites,and that rendersus doubly
helplesssince it is feltto be sincereand yettrivializesthe eventby drawingon the
clichesofprefabricatedsentimentality. Reinartz and Levin resistthetemptationto
infusethe lightlywooded area withthe markersof the terriblyspectacularor the
mass-producedsublime.
In additionto riskinga lapse intothetriviality ofkitsch,Reinartz'sand Levin's
relianceon the landscape genrealso raisesthe specterof the Nazis' appropriation
ofthetropeofthelandscape in theirgenocidalredefinitions ofthenotionsofnation,
home, and Heinat as categoriesto be administeredby decree.37When Reinartz
and Levin photographformercamps as forestclearings,theysubvertthe Nazis'
ideological uses ofthe German soil and forestas anchoringa people's destiny.But
we cannot regardthe treesin thisimage as symbolsof the hundredsof thousands
ofvictimsofSobibor and Ohrdrufwithoutrecallingnature'spotentialas an actual
50 REPRESENTATIONS
aid in the killingcampaigns. In 1943 and 1944, the Nazis planted real trees at
Sobibor,Treblinka,and Belzec to conceal thetracesoftheirstaggeringcrimes.Rei-
nartz and Levin take picturesat Sobibor and Ohrdruffivedecades later: nature
has almost completelycovered everything.It has become Reinartz's and Levin's
task to unmask this sylvantranquillitywithoutdenyingwhat Gitta Sereny has
called its "misleading air of normalcy,"and withoutdramatizingthe siteswhere
everysense ofthetragicwas surpassed.38Their photographsshowthetreesas part
oftheNazis' designand recordthisdeceptiveair ofnormalcy,withoutsuccumbing
to it,as evidence of the scope of the destruction.The treesdo not onlysymbolize
the vanished masses; theyare themselvesevidence. Reinartz and Levin focuson
thisliteralstatusthatcurtailsan allegoricalreadingoftheforestas placeholderfor
an all but vanishedpopulation.39
Landscape and Trauma
In thesetwo images, the vieweris exposed to a clearingin the woods,

centeredand renderedparticularby means of compositionallaws thathave been
internalizedto a degreethatthe sightappears unedited,natural,and inevitableto
us. The pictures'fieldofvisionseemslikea pointofview thatwe wouldhave chosen
on our own, and somethingin the area seems to returnour gaze and suggestthat
ourplacementas thepicture'sonlypointofreferencemaynotbe whollyaccidental.
The sense thatwe have been depositedbeforethesesitesby the course of our lives
originates,in actuality,
withthecompositionalconventionsadheredto in theimage.
Landscape photographscast an unknownplace in thehauntinglightofdeja vu to
produce themild shockofrecoveringwhatseemsto be an unremembered rather
than forgotten experience.
The appeal of thesetwophotographsderiveslargelyfromtheirrefusalto dis-
close withinthe image the specificsourcefromwhichtheyaddressus. We are left
with the impressionthat these placesshouldconcern becausewe neverknew
usprecisely
them.The sense ofbelongingproduced by theimages' visual perspectiveand point
ofview standsin conflictwiththeequally powerfulsenseofnonbelongingand tres-
pass produced by the pastnessof the momentcapturedin the photographs.This
tension betweenthelandscape's invitationto theviewer'sprojectionand photog-
raphy'sinalterablepastness findsa parallel in the difficultiesofrepresenting his-
toricaltrauma.
Historicaltrauma also needs to be cast in an idiom thatinvolvesthe observer
or addresseewithoutglossingovertheevent'sessentialinaccessibility. The uncanny
sense,in landscape art, of being watched froman unidentifiablespot in the pic-
ture theillusionofthereturnedgaze maybe compared to feelingpossessedby
a traumaticeventthatis unambiguouslydirectedat an individualbecause it is re-
tained as an absolutelyliteralinscriptionon the mind withoutbeing properlyre-
To GiveMemorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

membered.Maurice Blanchotwritesthatsuch an experience"cannot be forgotten
because it has always already fallen outside memory."40 To the extentthat such
topographiesexistand can be accuratelymapped at all, an individual's "mental
landscape" may in factbe organized around what Cathy Caruth has called such
"unclaimed experiences"thatregisteras painfullyreal butcannotbe fullyaccessed
by consciousness.4" when such fragmentsof traumaticmemoryintrude
Strikingly,
upon commonmemory,theyoftenemergeas memoriesofa particularsite.Trauma
survivorsoftenrecall a particularplace or area in greatdetail withoutbeing able
to turnthissiteinto a coherentsetting.42
The genre of landscape art likewiselocates the individualin her subjectivity
by imbuinga scene withauraticsignificancewithoutnecessarilylinkingthissense
of familiarity to the experiencedpast; althoughit cannot be preciselylocated, the
site'ssignificanceappears to derivenot fromthe settingbut fromthe self.A struc-
turalsimilarityexists,then,betweendepictionsofuninhabitedlandscapes thatre-
ferthevieweror readernot to a specificspotin naturebut to a heightenedsense of
self,and the puzzlinglyexact encoding of spatial markersin traumaticmemory
thatsignalsthepresenceofsignificant eventslocated outsideof,and yetwithin,an
individual'smind. The aura of the photographedlandscape seems to tap into a
regionof our memorythatwe did not know existed.We finda significancethatis
at once directedat us yetseemsnot part ofus. Conceptuallyas well as visually,we
are subjectedto somethingthatwe recognize to be cruciallyimportantbut that
finallyeludes us.
To be sure,Reinartz'sand Levin's landscape photographspositionus in refer-
ence to places made significant by history,even ifthissignificanceis here brought
out by relyingon an earlierartisticconvention.Their picturesneitherconfirmnor
add to our knowledgeof history;fromthe picturesthemselves,we cannot deduce
what distinguishesthesesitesfromcountlessotherslike it.And yet,regardlessand
even in spiteof our knowledgeof theirhistoricalimport,theseimages pull us in.
They tryto "speak fromwithinerasure,"as Claude Lanzmann's Shoahhas also
attempted;theyseek to give to loss a "topography"by showingus thatnothing-
not knowledge,empathy,commemoration,indignation,mourning,or shame
can fillthese silentspaces.43Through this powerfulattractionand appeal to an
irremediablevoid we are thusexposed to(in thesenseofbeinginvoluntarily subjected
to and abandoned to) the siteof a destructionso extremethatitsincontrovertible
evidence is absence. No amount of contextualinformationwould allow us to de-
duce fromit or, inversely, to engenderthe magnitude of this destruction.4' The
point is no longerto establisha contextforthepicture,but to note thatthephoto-
graph stagesthevoidingof the contextas itssignificanceand meaning.
The difficulty of traumaticmemoryand knowledge,however,does not only
consistin its unavailabilityand resistanceto representation.Much like a photo-
graph,traumaticmemoryis also characterizedbythe retentionoftoo muchliteral
detailthatcannotbe integratedinto a nontraumaticmemoryor comprehensionof
52 REPRESENTATIONS
thepast.45The recoveryoftraumaticmemoryalwaysconsistsin makingthe event
thathas been etchedonto the mind seem lessunrealby drainingit of itsvividness
and color.Reinartz'sand Levin's photographssharewithtraumaticmemoriesthe
exactnessand theunforgiving insistenceon therealityofa place whose significance
cannot be deduced fromanythingwithinthe image. The sites are broughtinto
focusand mitigatedwithoutbeing reduced to insignificanceor merefacticity. The
landscape conventionsheltersus fromthe lastingtrauma thatfora long time si-
lenced many of the survivorsand witnesseswho nonethelesshad no choice but to
feeladdressed.
The Limits of Documentary Photographs
In representationsoftheHolocaust, theefforts at abstraction,whichare

necessaryprocessesforunderstandingand remembering, riskrepeatingpart ofthe
originalinjusticebydenyingthevictimsyetagain thesingularity ofwhichtheywere
systematically deprivedeven in theirdeaths.In orderto dispel the anonymization
inherentto statistics, portraitphotographsof individualsdating frombeforeand
duringtheeventare oftenused in books,memorials,and museums.46 Like theheaps
of now ownerlesspersonal belongingsexhibitedin museums today,such photo-
graphsofvictimsare commonlyshownwithoutany captionsor explanations:the
oversizedprintsare supposed to speak forthemselves.
Everyphotograph,however,is as much an aide-memoireas itis a testamentto
loss. Each photographmakes theimplicitand melancholicclaim thatthe depicted
sightis preservedin spite of,and as if to underline,the disappearance oftheactual
referent.If these forestsettingsgive a place fromwhich to witnessthe voiding of
contexteffectedby theHolocaust, thenthesephotographsalso framea less readily
discerniblemoral concern in the use of documentarymaterials.Since all photo-
graphspresentthepast as absolutelyunalterable,everyphotographicimage prom-
ises momentaryrelieffromthe obligationto comprehendand to remember.Here
is the photograph,everyimage shows: this is the truth.In the case of the Shoah,
thissense of havingreached a momentaryendpointto our inquiryproduced by a
photographconflictswiththe awarenessthatthewishforcompleteunderstanding
oftheeventeithercannotbe fulfilled or is morallysuspect.47Reinartz'sand Levin's
picturestry to resistthis implicitclaim made by all photographsto put a stop to
reflection, whichseems to cut shortlong-windedattemptsat explanation.
Since Reinartz'sand Levin'sphotographsinsist withoutpromisingclosure-
on theexpressiveness, and theexpressibility,ofan irremediableabsence thatcannot
be undone througheitherimaginationor research,theypointto a second difficulty
in relyingon documentaryphotographsforeducational or commemorativepur-
poses. Reinartz'sand Levin'spictureswere evidentlytakenafterprolongedvisitsto
theseplaces in orderto keep thescene fromretracting upon contactwiththeviewer

and thephotographer'slens. In their"deathlysilence,"thesetwo images distance
themselvesfromthosephotographstakenby theperpetratorsto humiliatethevic-
tims.While reproductionsofsuch Nazi-authoredimages may aid in research,they
also riskcomplicity literallya sharedpointofview withthe regimeof strategic
visual terrorand abuse underwhichtheywere taken.
Reinartz'simage does notmatchtheevidentiaryforceofpicturesused in muse-
ums and textbooks,and, even withinitsspecificcaptionsand frames,Levin's work
cannot rival the informationalcontentof his father'swar diaries or the wartime
picturesthat originallyaccompanied thattext.And yettheirworkschallenge an
existingunderstandingof the nature of proof by presentinga staged and self-
conscious refusalof information emptinessitself as evidence of the crime's
enormity.48 At a momentwhen theHolocaust is rapidlyfadingfromlivedmemory
to recordedhistory, the landscape printsof Sobibor or Ohrdrufdo not formatthe
past according to the specificationsof existingarchives.In castingthe finalityof
the photographicimage withinthe experienceofplace,these images extend the
sense of being addressedor calleduponthatseems no longerself-evident formany.
The Viewer as Witness
The matter-of-factnessof the photographs,theirseeming literalityor

"realityeffect,"captureswhat exceeds historicalnarrativization(or emplotment)
and conceptualization.49 These images uncannilystage withoutresolving the
tensionbetweenthe sense of being drawn into thissite (ofviewingit as place)and
the sense of being excluded fromit (of regardingit as space).In responseto this
oscillationbetweenbeing enthralledby the image and being denied knowledgeof
thesourceforthisattraction,we become consciousofour positionin frontofa sight
thatappears significantbut offersno conclusivesense or meaning.Compelled by
the strongsense ofperspectiveand point of view,we examine theseprintsto find
the hidden source of the picture'sattraction.But thisprocess of visual inspection
is continuallyfrustrated, since the source of the pictures'almost hypnoticappeal
originatesnotwitha specificand identifiablepiece ofevidencebutwiththeillusion
of distanceand depthin theflatprints.The thwartedeffort to locate thepicture's
hidden source of significance,then,leads us to the realizationthatthe absence of
understandingis linkedto our positionas viewers.
It has been suggestedthatanyindividual'sengagementwiththehistoricalevent
oftheHolocaust willbe affectedbythatperson's"subject-position." The Holocaust,
it has been argued, "presentsthehistorianwithtransference in themosttraumaticfform
conceivablebut with a transference thatwill vary with the differencein subject-
position."50 Anyonewho engages with any aspect of the Holocaust, it is asserted,
oughtto become aware of how theirparticularidentityshapes theirresponse.As
virtuallyeverysurvivortestimonyattests,however,thecomfortsofan easilyclaim-
54 REPRESENTATIONS
able "subject-position" and the inherentsense of identity are by no means
available to everyone.The awareness of an individual's psychologicalreactions
(whethertheyare "mosttraumatic"or "merely"difficult) when encounteringmat-
tersrelatedto the Holocaust, is undoubtedlyimportant.I would suggestthatprior
to an individual'sreflectionofher "subject-position"in relationto the shoah,how-
ever,it is necessaryto recall thatall conceptionsof culturaltransmission, identity,
and "subject-position"are inflectedbytheeventthatexposed not onlythedialecti-
cal natureof enlightenment culturebut also the corruptibilityand deadly instru-
mentalizationof a politicallydistortedunderstandingof "identity."My argument
about thetwophotographspointsto thefactthateveryonewho findsherselfin these
pictures'line ofsightis placed in thepositionof a relative"outsider,"regardlessof
personal background,or of assumed or imposed identity. At a momentwhen the
Holocaust is passingrapidlyfromthefracturedmemoriesofsurvivorsintorecorded
historyand media, the event'scontaminatingforcediminishesforsome groups
whileitmayincreaseforothers.As anyonecan attestwho has attemptedto teach-
ratherthan simplyconveyinformationabout materialrelatedto the Holocaust,
the encounterwiththecatastrophedoes notfacilitatebut oftenfracturesor derails
the processofidentification withany given"subject-position."
By creatinga strongexperienceofplace forareas designedto destroythevery
possibilityofexperience,Reinartz'sand Levin's workshowsthatthecommemora-
tion of the Holocaust is no longer site-specific. The act of secondarywitnessing
depends less on actual geographicor culturalpositionthan on the process of be-
coming aware of our placementin relationto somethingthatno one everwanted
to be in a positionto know.51
These picturesshowthatthesesitesare radicallyinhos-
pitable and that the imaginarycolonization of the Holocaust's emptyspaces via
identification and imaginaryprojectionpostfactum by establishinga transferen-
tialbond- is illusoryat best.It is an inevitableeffectofthepassage oftimethatthe
reflectionand investigationofhistoryonce fueledby an overwhelmingand widely
sharedsenseoftraumais now promptedbyan aestheticrepresentation oftheevent.
Some formerkilling fields sites such as Ohrdrufwhere thousands were mur-
dered were nevermarkedon the itinerariesof disastertourism,are rarelymen-
tionedin historicalstudies,and will sinkintocompleteobliviononce thelastsurvi-
vorshave passed away.52The framingof such sitesin termsoflandscape art forces
us to recognizethe disappearance of the eventas part of itsinherentand original
dimensionand possiblymotivatesus to haltthisdisappearance.Reinartz'sand Lev-
in's images compel all viewersto reflecton how theirnotion of identityhas been
affected,and possiblypermanentlydamaged, by the shoah.Their images award a
moreliteralsense to thelargely"figurativeexperience"ofHolocaust memory,and
theycreate a new place of memoryforthose who are geographically,historically,
or culturallyremovedfromthe existenceof the camps.53
Severalwritershave describedas shockingtheexperienceofmatchingthereal
contoursofthecamps withthedevastatingsenseofemptinessin ourminds.54Land-

scape photographsoftheHolocaust do notmitigatethatexperience,and theforest
clearingsat Sobibor and Ohrdruflose nothingof theirbleak nondescriptiveness
when immobilizedin print.Yet theylinktheneed to fitplacelessmemoriesinto an
imagined or imaginaryplace with the effortof findingone's moral bearingsand
point ofview.Reinartz'sand Levin's photographsultimatelytrainour gaze on the
web of relationslinkingvisual and moral perspectiveand let us realize that what
we see is alwaysa questionof how,andfromwhere, we see it.
The landscape genre,so closelylinkedto theenlightenment philosophicalideal
ofthesubject'sdialecticalprocessofincreasingself-awareness,is hereused to block
a momentof self-positioning frombeing turnedinto intellectualgain. Reinartz's
and Levin's photographsturnus into secondarywitnesseswhose positionis ulti-
matelyas much moral and personal,as much spectatorial,as fueledby a thirstfor
knowledge.The aestheticimperativeofferedin theseimages remainscontempla-
tive:itservesas no measureforour actions;itcompelsus to respondwithoutteach-
ing us how to do that.It merelyprolongsthesenseofinevitabilityand responsibility
that had been feltby the generationsgrowingup in the Holocaust's more direct
shadows.These images are visuallyarrestingdead ends,well-composedbut futile
effortsto admonishand appeal. In theirblack-and-whiteneutrality,theyapparently
refuseto judge and to indicta situationwherea neutralstance appears immoral.
But unlike traditionaldocumentaryphotographs,which are oftendisplayedto si-
lentlyaccuse, theybringus to thepositionofhavingto face somethingthatwe may
neverknow.The rushofmoral indignationthatoftenaccompanies the encounter
withothergraphicpicturesof atrocitiesmay be narcissistically Yet such
satisfying.
a responsemayalso freetheviewerfromtheresponsibility ofplacingherown expe-
riences in relationto somethingthat finallyremains incomprehensible.55 These
photographsshow that the devastationof massive trauma consistsnot merelyin
the ensuingdifficulties of commemorationand forgetting but also in the factthat
theerasurewas so completethatitneverenteredeithermemoryor forgetting at all.
Conclusion
I do not disputethatwe do and should approach all images of the past

in the hope that this encounterwith evidence of time gone by may improveour
chances of shaping both the presentand the future.Yet the expressivesilence of
Reinartz's and Levin's picturesdoes not lead to a prematuresense of closure,but
beckons,withouthintingat redemptionor restitution, in thesetightly
framedshots
forthoughtand language to reachfromwithinthe Holocaust's imploded sitesto a
place beyondit.Fromotherimageswe mayavertour gaze (whichcould serveforget-
tingand denial), or we could endow the eventwitha sanctitythata human cam-
paign of destructiondoes not merit.Withmy analysisof theseimages in termsof
landscape art,I tryto articulatewhat remainsto be said in responseto an absence
56 REPRESENTATIONS
thatcannotbe undone. There is no optionofturningawayor ofevadingthisradical
vacatednessbyleavingourpositionand pointofview;thepicture'sperspectivecan-
not be alteredor escaped.
Reinartz bypassesthecamera's complicityby excludingwartimephotographs
fromhis book; he also highlightstheevent'srealitybyshootingin thedocumentari-
an's idiom. Levin showsthateventhesecond generationmaynot absorbtheshocks
and fillthe hole in memorycaused by the firstwitnesses'originalencounterwith
thesesights.He conveysto us thatthe second generationinheritsfromtheirprede-
cessorsnot somethingthat had been learned but somethingthat remains a loss.
Both Reinartz and Levin put to use photography'sclaim of realism the illusion
thatthe shutterstampsan experiencewithinalterablefinality to show thatthis
absence is immuneto belated rescuemissionsin theformofrestitutive or redemp-
tivethought.Their worksemphasizethatpart ofthe realityoftheshoahconsistsin
thefactthatthe eventhas notreceded intothepast. Their picturesask us to recog-
nize that self-awareness,or the effortto situatethe selfspatiallyand temporally
withina greaterwhole,does not inevitablylead to understanding.In theirwork,a
place is offeredfromwhichto addressthequestionofhow to situatefuturegenera-
tionsin relationto an eventthatcalls into questionour beliefin thevalue ofpeda-
gogyand knowledgeand forcesus to reexamineour understandingofidentityand
ofcultureat large.Finally,thesetwophotosshowthatproofas BrendanKennelly's
abysmallyambiguousphrase suggests,is whatwedo notneed.
Notes
Research forthisarticlein Poland in 1995 was made possibleby a grantfromthe Re-

marque InstituteforEuropean Studies,New YorkUniversity. I raised some relatedis-
sues in a talkat theconference"Discontinuities1933-1945-1989" at Duke University
in Septemberof 1996; this conferencepaper was publishedin SouthAtlanticQuarterly
96, no. 4 (Fall 1997). I wish to thank Dr. Clare Cosentino, Dr. Bruce Reis, Dr. Sue
Grand, and Dr. JudieAlpertfromtheNew YorkTrauma StudyGroup forhelpfulcom-
ments.Charles Baraw,Astridvon Chamier,Eva Geulen, AvitalRonell, and Niobe Way
made equally usefulsuggestionson earlierversions.I also wish to thankthepublishers
ofDirk Reinartz'sand Mikael Levin's worksand thephotographersthemselvesforper-
missionto reproducethe photographs.
1. BrendanKennelly,"Proof,"in AnthonyBradley,ed., Contemporary IrishPoetry(Berkeley,
1980), 259.
2. WalterBenjamin was among thefirstto note the historicalshiftfromtheperceptionof
the "landscape," as the settingforan individual'spassage throughtime,to a "terrain,"
where coherentexperiencemay no longer be available. The destructionof the land-
scape as the settingforhistoricalexperienceand itsviolenttransformation into mere

"Gelande" was diagnosed byBenjamin in the 1920swhenEurope saw itselfconfronted
withvastand profoundlyscarredareas leftall butuninhabitablebywarfare.The enor-
mous battlefieldsof the FirstWorld War no longer served as a settingforhistorical
experience. The surroundingshad registeredpurelyin termsof theirstrategicuse-
fulnessand propensityto conceal one's position.The landscape became a sitethatwas
carefullymapped and surveyedbyinstruments forthepurpose ofallowinglargegroups
ofmen to vanishfromsightratherthan positionthemselvesin relationto thesurround-
ings.Viewed throughthe crosshairsofa viewfinder, the landscape turnedinto terrain.
For a discussionof Benjamin's responseto and analysisof the destroyedlandscapes of
WorldWar I, see Cornelia Vismann,"Landscape in theFirstWorldWar,"New Compari-
son 18, no. 2 (1995): 76-88; and Bernd Htippauf,"Raume der Destruktionund Kons-
truktionvon Raum. LandschaftSehen Raum und der Erste Weltkrieg,"KriegundLi-
teratur/WarandLiterature 3, no. 5/6 (1991).
3. Dirk Reinartz and ChristianGraf von Krokow,DeathlyStill:PicturesofFormerGerman
ConcentrationCamps(New York, 1995).
4. Mikael Levin, WarStory, textby Meyer Levin (Munich, 1997).
5. Not all of thesebooks are uniformlysuccessful.Erich Hartmann's In theCamps(New
York, 1997) containsoftenhighlystylizedimages of formercamps and contemporary
memorials;besides rehearsingpervasivetropesof Holocaust imagery(some of which
are also foundin Reinartz'sbook), Hartmann'sbook ends withimages suffusedwitha
sentimentality verymuch at odds withthe enormityofthe catastrophe.
6. See Lawrence L. Langer,HolocaustTestimonies: TheRuinsofMenmory (New Haven, 1991).
7. See also Joachim Ritter,"Landschaft,"in Subjektivitdt (Frankfurt,1974), 141-65; and
J.H. Van den Berg,"The Subject and His Landscape," in Harold Bloom, ed., Romanti-
cismand Consciousness: Essaysin Criticism(New York,1970), 57-65.
8. Cf. GeoffreyH. Hartman's "Romanticismand Anti-Self-Consciousness,"'in Bloom,
Romanticism and Consciousness, 46-57.
9. Joseph Koerner,CasparDavid Friedrich and theSubjectofLandscape(New Haven, 1990),
20.
10. John Barrell's studies of the poor in English landscape painting addresses a similar
concern. Althoughhe warns against the illusion of identificationwith the rural poor
in landscape paintings,the canvases analyzed byhim permittheviewerto projecther-
selfinto the sitein waysthatI showto be cut shortin Reinartz'sand Levin's works;see
John Barrell's TheDark Side oftheLandscape:The RuralPoorin EnglishPainting,1730-
1840 (Cambridge, 1980).
11. ArthurA. Cohen was the firstto interpretthe Holocaust as an onto-theologicalevent
whenhe termedita "caesura" or "tremendum"in The Tremendum:A Theological
Interpre-
tationoftheHolocaust(New York, 1981); quoted in RobertJan van Pelt and Carol Wil-
liam Westfall,Architectural in theAgeofHistoricism
Principles (New Haven, 1991). Two of
themostwidelyknownrepresentatives ofthisline ofinterpretationare Elie Wiesel and
Claude Lanzmann; see, in particular,Elie Wiesel, "Trivializingthe Holocaust," New
YorkTimes,4 April 1978; and Claude Lanzmann, "Le lieu et la parole," in Au sujetde
Shoah: LefilmdeClaudeLanzmann,ed. Michel Deguy (Paris, 1990),and "The Obscenity
of Understanding: An Evening with Claude Lanzmann," in Cathy Caruth, ed.,
Trauma:Explorations inMemory(Baltimore,1995).
12. Forimportantdiscussionsofthequestionsofpedagogy and culturaltransmissionofthe
Holocaust, see Kali Tal, WorldsofHurt:ReadingtheLiteratures of Trauma(Cambridge,
1996) and GeoffreyH. Hartman, The LongestShadow:In theAftermath oftheHolocaust
(Bloomington,Ind., 1996).
58 REPRESENTATIONS
13. IMiartin Amis, Time'sArrow, orTheNatureoftheOffense(New York,1991); D. M. Thomas,
Pictures at an Exhibition (New York, 1993).
14. See Reinhard Matz, Die unsichtbaren Lager.Das VerschwindenderVergangenheit imGedenken
(Frankfurt,1993); Geoffrey H. Hartman, "Introduction:DarknessVisible,"in his Holo-
caustRemembrance: The ShapesofMemory(Cambridge, Mass., 1994); Yael Zerubavel,
"The Death ofMemory and theMemory ofDeath: Masada and the Holocaust as His-
toricalMetaphors,"Representations 45 (Winter 1994): 72-100.
15. Jacques Derrida, "Shibboleth forPaul Celan," in W/l'ord Traces:ReadingsofPaul Celan,
ed. Aris Fioretos(Baltimore,1994), 50.
16. A more recentdebate centerson the Romantic and aestheticrepresentationofthe sur-
roundingsand assertsthatall landscape art,since it triesto make the real desirableby
means of aestheticconventions,amountsto the artisticequivalentof militaristiccolo-
nial desire.New historicistcriticsexpose the presumablyaestheticfocusof influential
criticsof landscape art such as John Ruskin in the nineteenthcenturyand Kenneth
Clark and E. H. Gombrichin our centuryas in factcomplicitwiththenefariousnation-
alistic and Eurocentric tendencies of their time. Such new historicistsdraw on the
"hard facts"and "social energies"ofhistoryand citethe social contextsoftheproduc-
tion and receptionof landscape art to point to the imperialistdrive that is allegedly
ignoredin traditionalaestheticallyorientedart criticism.See John Ruskin,Lectures on
Landscape(London, 1897); E. H. Gombrich,"The Renaissance Theory ofArt and the
Rise ofLandscape," in NormandForm:StudiesintheArtoftheRenaissance (London, 1966);
Kenneth Clark,LandscapeintoArt(1949; reprint,New York, 1976). For the mostperti-
nentcritiqueofthisline ofcriticism,see theessaysin W.J.T. Mitchell,ed., Landscapeand
Power(Chicago, 1994). The assertionis thatthepurelyaesthetic,Ruskinianapproach to
landscape art carried out in termsof organizationof space, illusionof depth,viewer's
placement,and the "experienceofplace" remainswillfullyblind and indeed complicit
withthe enlightenment's darkundersideand the tremendoushuman costsofEurope's
industrialand culturaldevelopment.The complicitybetween the artisticpractice of
landscape depictionsand the cultural and political practice of aggressiveexpansion
cannot be denied.
17. Jean Baudrillard, The Transparency ofEvil, trans.James Benedict (London, 1993), 91.
18. For sophisticatedreadingsofthelandscape traditionand itsrelationto imperialistam-
bition,see the essaysin Mitchell,LandscapeandPower.
19. Simon Shama, LandscapeandMemory(New York,1995), 27.
20. Nadine Fresco, "Rememberingthe Unknown," International ReviewofPsycho-Analysis
11, no. 4 (1984): 424.
21. Firstquote fromDan Diner, "Zwischen Aporie und Apologie. Uber Grenzen der His-
torisierbarkeit der Massenvernichtung,"Babylon2 (Fall 1987): 33; second quote from
H. G. Adler on Raul Hilberg,quoted in Raul Hilberg, Unerbetene Erinnerung: Der Weg
einesHolocaustForschers (Frankfurt,1994), 174-75. See also Saul Friedlander,"'The
Final Solution': On the Unease in Historical Interpretation,"in Memory, History,and
theExtermination ofthejews (Bloomington,Ind., 1993).
22. See Lawrence L. Langer's analysisofwhat he terms"common" and "deep memories"
in his landmarkstudyofHolocaust survivortestimonies,HolocaustTestimonies: TheRu-
insofMemory (New Haven, 1991). See also Shoshana Felman and Dori Laub, Testimony:
Crisesof Witnessing in Psychoanalysis,
Culture,andHistory(New York,1992).
23. The term"concentrationaryuniverse"hintsat thisunbridgeabledistancebetweenthe
notions of a "place" or "world,"and the occurrencesin these non-places; see Michel
Pollack,L'Expe'rience Essai surlemaintien
concentrationnaire. del'identite'
sociale(Paris, 1990).

On the relationbetween the "places" of the Holocaust and the knowledge of these
places, see also Lanzmann, "Le lieu et la parole," 294.
24. The tensionbetween a landscape photograph'spictorial or aestheticappeal and its
documentarydimensionshas resultedin debates about the possibilityof categorizing
landscape photographseitheras aesthetic"landscapes" organizedin termsofflatness,
illusion of depth, "and aestheticsignification[of] sublimityand transcendence" or
as purely informational"views" where space is properly"grounded, coordinated,
mapped ... not so muchbyperspectiveas byphotographicgrid."Rosalind Krauss has
emphasized the differencebetween"landscapes" and "views" in discussionsofphoto-
graphsmeant to documentthe terrainintendedforindustrialor militaryexploitation;
see Krauss, "Photography'sDiscursive Spaces: Landscape/View," in The Originality of
theAvant-Garde and OtherModernistMyths(Cambridge,Mass., 1985), 133-35. See also
Alan Trachtenberg'sReadingAmerican Photographs:Imagesas History(New York,1989).
25. The term"unstoried"was firstused by WashingtonIrving in the prefaceto his 1819
"Sketchbook"to referto the expanses of theAmerican Westbeforetheircolonization
by European settlers.D. W. Meinig distinguishesbetween the environmentand the
landscape in D. W. Meinig, ed., The Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes:Geographical
Essays(New York, 1979), 2.
26. Koerner,CasparDavid Friedrich and theSubjectofLandscape,15.
27. Quoted in Lawrence L. Langer's introductionto CharlotteDelbo, AuschwitzandAfter,
trans.RosetteLamont (New Haven, 1995), xiv.
28. Levin, WarStory,155. Page numbershereaftergivenin the body ofthe text.
29. This melancholicdimensionmay seem less pronouncedin a landscape image than in
portraitsof even unknownfaces.WalterBenjamin developshis influentialthesisin 'A
SmiallHistoryof Photography,"in One-WayStreetand OtherWritings, trans.Edmund
Jephcottand Kingsley Shorter(New York, 1978); and Roland Barthes extendsit in
CameraLucida:Reflections onPhotograpiy,trans.Richard Howard (New York,1981). Sieg-
friedKracauer proposes thatphotographymay ultimatelyredeem the physicalreality
of even the mosthorrificsuffering in the last chapterof TheoryofFilm: The Redemption
ofPhysicalReality(New York, 1960). GertrudKoch has identifiedthe "inner limit" of
Kracauer's conceptionas his insistenceon the "primacyofthe optical," whichfinally
provesuntenablein the face ofthe mass destructionofhuman life.See GertrudKoch,
"... noch nirgendsangekommen,"in Dan Diner, ed., Zivilisationsbruch: Denkennach
Auschwitz(Frankfurt,1988), 99-i 10.
30. WilliamJ. Mitchell,TheReconfigured Eye: VisualTruthin thePost-PhotographicEra (Cam-
bridge,Mass., 1992).
31. Allan Sekula, "Reading an Archive,"in BrianWallis,ed., BlastedAllegories:An Anthology
of Writings byContemporary Artists
(New York, 1987), 121.
32. Aura may be more accuratelydescribedas a ghostlypremonitionor a spell ratherthan
the innocentand nostalgicglow ofchildhood warmthand simplertimesas whichit is
oftenmisconstrued.In our century,the termaurawas firstemployedby thearchaeolo-
gistAlfredSchuler,who maintainedthatwhenfirstexhumed,excavatedRoman ruins
exuded a breeze thatquicklydissipated.I revivethissource (also tapped by Benjamin)
and furtherfollow,and adapt, Harold Bloom's efforts to rid the notion of aura of its
overlyRilkean shadingsand restoreits propersense of awe and inassimilableghostli-
ness.In Agon(New York,1982), Harold Bloom fusesBenjamin'sdefinitionofaura with
earliertheosophicand psychologicalexplanationsas "an invisiblebreathor emanation;
an air,as ofnobility,characterizingpersonor thing;a breeze,butmostofall a sensation
or shock,the sortofillusionofa breeze thatprecedes the startofa nervousbreakdown
60 REPRESENTATIONS
or disorder"(230). Benjamin's notion of the disappearance or destructionof the aura
throughtechnicalreproductionhas become a commonplace in photographycriticism.
In his "Small Historyof Photography,"however,Benjamin assertsthat earlyphoto-
graphsstillharborthetraceofan aura; see WalterBenjamin, "Small HistoryofPhotog-
raphy,"in One-Way-Street and OtherWritings, trans. Edmund Jephcottand Kingsley
Shorter(New York, 1978). The reductivenotionthatall technicallyreproducedworks
lack aura is advanced onlyin thelateressay"The WorkofArtin theAge ofMechanical
Reproduction,"in Illuminations, ed. Hannah Arendt,trans.Harry Zohn (New York,
1969). In AestheticTheory,Theodor W. Adorno critiquesBenjamin's thesisabout the
disappearance of aura in all mass-produced worksin the "Work of Art" essay; see
Theodor W. Adorno,Aesthetic Theory,trans.C. Lenhardt (London, 1984), 82.
33. See also Michael Fried'sworkon absorptionin Realism,Writing, Disfiguration:
On Thomas
EakinsandStephenCrane(Chicago, 1987). For a historyofthe camps and a bibliography
ofavailable survivortestimonieson Sobib6r,see YitzhakArad, Belzec,Sobibofr, Treblinka:
The Operation Reinhard
Death Camps(Bloomington,Ind., 1987).
34. Barthes,CameraLucida,91.
35. Sekula, "Reading an Archive,"121.
36. On the problem of kitschand sublimityin Holocaust representation,see Saul Fried-
lander,Reflections ofNazism:An Essay on Kitschand Death,trans.Thomas Weyr(New
York,1984); andJean-Fran ois Lyotard,Heidegger and "the ews,"trans.Andreas Michel
and Mark Roberts(Minneapolis, 1988).
37. Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe has explicated the ideological reworkingof the Romantic
traditioninto "National Aestheticism"in Heidegger, Art,andPolitics,trans.ChrisTurner
(London, 1989).
38. Gitta Sereny,IntoThatDarkness(New York, 1974), 145.
39. RobertJan van Pelt analyzes the link between Martin Heidegger's thoughton space
and dwelling (to whose work the termLichtung, for "clearing" alludes here) and the
Holocaust in Van Pelt and Westfall,Architectural Principles.
40. Maurice Blanchot, The Writingof theDisaster,trans. Ann Smock (Lincoln, Nebr.,
1986), 28.
41. For discussionsofrepresentations oftheHolocaust informedbytraumatheory,see esp.
GeoffreyH. Hartman, ed., HolocaustRepresentations: The ShapesofMemory(Cambridge,
1994); Dominick LaCapra, Representing theHolocaust:History,Theory,Trauma(Ithaca,
N.Y, 1994); Felman and Laub, Testimony; Tal, WorldsofHurt;Caruth, Trauma:Explora-
tionsinMemory.
42. See, forexample,Lenore Terret al., "Children'sResponsesto the Challenger Spacecraft
Disaster,"American JournalofPsychiatry 153, no. 5 (1996): 624.
43. Felman and Laub, Testimony, 250; second quote fromLanzmann, "Le lieu et la pa-
role," 294.
44. See also Claude Lanzmann, "De l'Holocauste a Holocauste," in Deguy,Au sujetdeShoah,
314-15.
45. Among the vast theoreticalwritingson trauma, the followingtextsare of particular
interestin thediscussionoftheprecisionoftraumaticmemory:PierreJanet,L'amne'sie et
la dissociationdessouvenirs
par l'emotion(1903; reprint,Marseille, 1983); SigmundFreud,
BeyondthePleasurePrinciple, vol. 18 of The StandardEditionoftheComplete Psychological
Works ofSigmund Freud,trans.and ed. James StracheywithAnna Freud,Alix Strachey,
and Alan Tyson(London, 1953-74); SigmundFreudandJosephBreuer,StudiesinHys-
teria,vol. 2 ofFreud,Standard Edition;Jacques Lacan, "Tuch&et automaton,"in Le semi-
naire1 , ed. Jacques Alain-Miller (Paris, 1973); RobertJayLifton,"SurvivorExperi-

To GiveMemorya Place: HolocaustPhotography 61
ence and Traumatic Syndrome,"in TheBrokenConnection (New York,1980); Bessel A.
van der Kolk, Psychological Trauma(Washington,1987); J.L. Singer,ed., Repression and
Dissociation(Chicago, 1990);JudithL. Herman, TraumaandRecovery (New York,1991);
and Caruth, Trauma:Explorations inMemory.
46. The best-knownexample ofthisuse ofdocumentaryphotographsmay be theso-called
Auschwitz Album,takenbyan unknownNazi photographerand discoveredbythesurvi-
vor Lili Meier at the Dora labor camp; see PeterHellmann, ed., TheAuschwitz Album:
A BookBased uponan AlbumDiscovered bya ConcentrationCampSurvivor,Lili Meier(New
York, 1981). See also the articlesby Cornelia Brink,Detlev Hoffmann,and Hanno
Loewy on theuse ofphotographsin postwarHolocaust educationand memorialization
in Fritz-Bauer-Institut, ed. Auschwitz.Geschichte, Rezeptionund Wirkung (Frankfurt,
1996). Marianne Hirsch examinestherole offamilysnapshotsin Holocaust commem-
oration in FamilyFrames:Photography, Narrative,and Postmemory (Cambridge, Mass.,
1997).
47. On the moral concernsabout the desireforabsoluteunderstanding,see, in particular,
Pierre Vidal-Naquet, AssassinsofMemory:Essays on theDenial oftheHolocaust,trans.
Jeffrey Mehlman (New York, 1992), andJean-FrancoisLyotard,TheDifJerend: Phrases
inDispute,trans.Georges Van Den Abbeele (Minneapolis, 1988).
48. Manuel Koppen, ed., KunstundLiteratur nachAuschwitz(Berlin, 1993), 166.
49. On the questionwhetherthe "Final Solution" can be emplottedin a historicalnarra-
tive,see the contributionsby Hayden White,Martin Jay,and Carlo Ginzburgin Saul
Friedlander,ed., Probing Nazismandthe"FinalSolution"(Cam-
theLimitsofRepresentation:
bridge,Mass., 1992).
50. LaCapra, Representing theHolocaust,46 (emphasisadded).
51. The term "secondary witness" occurs in Terence Des Pres, The Survivor (New York,
1976); and in Langer's HolocaustTestimonies. GeoffreyH. Hartman has elaborated on
this concept in "Shoah and Intellectual Witness,"PartisanReview65, no. 1 (1998):
37-48.
52. Anothersuchplace is Bronytschin theUkraine,where 11,OOOJews wereshotin a forest
in 1943. Twelve commemorativestoneswere placed in the forestby Israeli relativesof
the victims;todaytheselarge plates are coveredwithmoss and virtuallyimpossibleto
findin the dense brush.Once the sole survivorofthatcommunityhas passed away,no
one will be leftto locate thissite.On the workofReinhard Matz, who triesto capture
the nature of "memory-tourism," see James Young, "Das Erinnernund die Rhetorik
des Fotos Reinhard Matz," in Matz, ed., Die unsichtbaren Lager,15-19.
53. See James E. Young, The Texture ofMemory(New Haven, 1993), 53.
54. PeterWeiss,"Mein Ort," in Rapporte (Frankfurt,1981); Sereny,IntoThatDarkness,145-
47; Young, Texture ofMemory;Shama, LandscapeandMemory.
55. Such total amnesia is rare in survivorsoftraumabut oftenbecomes a realityforthose
in contactwith them. For an exceptionallyeffectiveaccount of the sense of complete
mystery caused bythevoidingofmemoryduringtheHolocaust, see David Grossman's
novel See Under:Love(New York, 1991).
62 REPRESENTATIONS

Baer (2000) To Give Memory A Place - Holocaust Photography and The Landscape Tradition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Baer (2000) To Give Memory A Place - Holocaust Photography and The Landscape Tradition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of California Press

To Give Memory a Place: Holocaust Photography and the Landscape Tradition

To Give Memory a Place:

THE PHOTOGRAPH(fig.1) showsa clearingthatextendsto a low forest,

38 REPRESENTATIONS 69 *Winter 2000 ?0 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 1. Dirk Reinartz,"Sobibo'r:ExterminationCamp Grounds." Repro-

To Give Memorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

the stalksof grassbeneathour eyesmeltinto the soggyground.If thispicturetells

To Give Memorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

The firstimage, oftheformerNazi exterminationcamp at Sobibor in Poland,

To Give Memorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

The Experience of Place

Reinartz'sand Levin's picturesreopen stillrelevantquestionsabout the

and theLandscape Tradition

PicturingNothing: Levin's Image

Mikael Levin's photographdates from1995 and showstheformercon-

and theLandscape Tradition

The Photograph's Reference

and theLandscape Tradition

The Limits of Allegory

Reinartz'sand Levin'simagescould be faultedforundulyaestheticizing

Landscape and Trauma

In thesetwo images, the vieweris exposed to a clearingin the woods,

To GiveMemorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

The Limits of Documentary Photographs

In representationsoftheHolocaust, theefforts at abstraction,whichare

To Give Memorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

The Viewer as Witness

The matter-of-factnessof the photographs,theirseeming literalityor

To Give Memorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

I do not disputethatwe do and should approach all images of the past

Research forthisarticlein Poland in 1995 was made possibleby a grantfromthe Re-

To GiveMemorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

To GiveMemorya Place: HolocaustPhotography

and theLandscape Tradition

You might also like