大屠杀研究的幽灵:缪斯曼

IF 0.2 3区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Sharon B. Oster
{"title":"大屠杀研究的幽灵:缪斯曼","authors":"Sharon B. Oster","doi":"10.1353/sho.2023.a903287","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Attention to the figure of the Muselmann in Holocaust studies is finally picking up steam, in what is a long overdue conversation. Recent studies of the concept and phenomenon are challenging long-held assumptions about to whom and what the term Muselmann refers, what it meant in the Nazi concentration camps, and what it means now. This essay responds to two pieces published here, \"Did Jews Die as Muslims at Auschwitz? Spectres of the Muselmann,\" by Kathrin Wittler, and \"Witnessing the Ghost, Letting the Ghost Witness,\" by Alexander Williams. Raising key questions about the term Muselmann, these essays together illustrate the ongoing problems it poses for Holocaust studies. While Wittler provides a historical excavation of the Orientalist and colonialist associations that cleave to the word Muselmann, one desperately needed in Holocaust studies, Williams approaches the subject theoretically, in effort to make the term perform sweeping conceptual work. Explaining \"spectral\" figures in Holocaust testimony remains fruitful, but doing so through inherited definitions of Muselmänner, based on a few iconic survivor testimonies, simplifies the ethical implications of the phenomenon, and perpetuates its problematic semantic history. I therefore argue that scholars would do well to use the term carefully and critically, lest we perpetuate these problems. Other recent studies on the topic that look at a wider variety of survivor perspectives prove the Muselmann to be an incoherent category and raise new ethical questions about concentration camp prisoner agency. As such work shows, it is time to demystify the specter haunting Holocaust studies.","PeriodicalId":21809,"journal":{"name":"Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies","volume":"41 1","pages":"225 - 232"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Specter Haunting Holocaust Studies: The Muselmann\",\"authors\":\"Sharon B. Oster\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/sho.2023.a903287\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Attention to the figure of the Muselmann in Holocaust studies is finally picking up steam, in what is a long overdue conversation. Recent studies of the concept and phenomenon are challenging long-held assumptions about to whom and what the term Muselmann refers, what it meant in the Nazi concentration camps, and what it means now. This essay responds to two pieces published here, \\\"Did Jews Die as Muslims at Auschwitz? Spectres of the Muselmann,\\\" by Kathrin Wittler, and \\\"Witnessing the Ghost, Letting the Ghost Witness,\\\" by Alexander Williams. Raising key questions about the term Muselmann, these essays together illustrate the ongoing problems it poses for Holocaust studies. While Wittler provides a historical excavation of the Orientalist and colonialist associations that cleave to the word Muselmann, one desperately needed in Holocaust studies, Williams approaches the subject theoretically, in effort to make the term perform sweeping conceptual work. Explaining \\\"spectral\\\" figures in Holocaust testimony remains fruitful, but doing so through inherited definitions of Muselmänner, based on a few iconic survivor testimonies, simplifies the ethical implications of the phenomenon, and perpetuates its problematic semantic history. I therefore argue that scholars would do well to use the term carefully and critically, lest we perpetuate these problems. Other recent studies on the topic that look at a wider variety of survivor perspectives prove the Muselmann to be an incoherent category and raise new ethical questions about concentration camp prisoner agency. As such work shows, it is time to demystify the specter haunting Holocaust studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21809,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"225 - 232\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/sho.2023.a903287\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/sho.2023.a903287","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:对大屠杀研究中Muselmann形象的关注终于开始了,这是一场早该进行的对话。最近对这一概念和现象的研究正在挑战长期以来的假设,即Muselmann一词指的是谁和什么,它在纳粹集中营意味着什么,以及它现在意味着什么。这篇文章回应了这里发表的两篇文章,凯瑟琳·维特勒的《犹太人作为穆斯林死于奥斯威辛吗?缪斯曼的幽灵》和亚历山大·威廉姆斯的《见证鬼魂,让鬼魂见证》。这些文章提出了关于Muselmann一词的关键问题,共同说明了它给大屠杀研究带来的持续问题。虽然Wittler对东方主义者和殖民主义者的联想进行了历史挖掘,这些联想与大屠杀研究中迫切需要的Muselmann一词有关,但Williams从理论上探讨了这个主题,试图让这个词进行全面的概念工作。解释大屠杀证词中的“光谱”数字仍然富有成效,但通过继承Muselmänner的定义,基于一些标志性的幸存者证词,简化了这一现象的伦理含义,并使其有问题的语义历史永久化。因此,我认为学者们最好谨慎而批判性地使用这个词,以免我们使这些问题长期存在。最近关于这一主题的其他研究着眼于更广泛的幸存者视角,证明Muselmann是一个不连贯的类别,并提出了关于集中营囚犯代理的新的伦理问题。正如这些工作所表明的那样,是时候揭开困扰大屠杀研究的幽灵的神秘面纱了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Specter Haunting Holocaust Studies: The Muselmann
Abstract:Attention to the figure of the Muselmann in Holocaust studies is finally picking up steam, in what is a long overdue conversation. Recent studies of the concept and phenomenon are challenging long-held assumptions about to whom and what the term Muselmann refers, what it meant in the Nazi concentration camps, and what it means now. This essay responds to two pieces published here, "Did Jews Die as Muslims at Auschwitz? Spectres of the Muselmann," by Kathrin Wittler, and "Witnessing the Ghost, Letting the Ghost Witness," by Alexander Williams. Raising key questions about the term Muselmann, these essays together illustrate the ongoing problems it poses for Holocaust studies. While Wittler provides a historical excavation of the Orientalist and colonialist associations that cleave to the word Muselmann, one desperately needed in Holocaust studies, Williams approaches the subject theoretically, in effort to make the term perform sweeping conceptual work. Explaining "spectral" figures in Holocaust testimony remains fruitful, but doing so through inherited definitions of Muselmänner, based on a few iconic survivor testimonies, simplifies the ethical implications of the phenomenon, and perpetuates its problematic semantic history. I therefore argue that scholars would do well to use the term carefully and critically, lest we perpetuate these problems. Other recent studies on the topic that look at a wider variety of survivor perspectives prove the Muselmann to be an incoherent category and raise new ethical questions about concentration camp prisoner agency. As such work shows, it is time to demystify the specter haunting Holocaust studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信