|
View the h-german Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in h-german's November 1997 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in h-german's November 1997 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the h-german home page.
Submitted by: Alan Buel Kennady
Ehrlich606@aol.com
I am not exactly clear what distinguished Ms. Birn's review of Goldhagen's
book from, say, the reviews of Fritz Stern (_Foreign Affairs_, Winter,
1996), or Jacob Neusner (Internet, early 1997) which I considered rather
spectacular eviscerations. I am also aware that Goldhagen has made some
rather biting comments himself (compare his comments on Christopher
Browning or Arno Mayer in various locations.)
We must assume therefore that Ms. Birn has crossed some kind of line, but
then it becomes absolutely necessary to establish what and where that line
is. Until that is done, and appropriately "legislated" there will be an
inevitable chilling effect.
It is known that Goldhagen's book has been harshly criticized by many
prominent academicians. It is now known (apparently) that one of these is
being threatened with legal action. One is led therefore to some
conclusions, concerning not only Goldhagen's book, but also Goldhagen
himself. My personal advice to Goldhagen would be to drop the matter.
There may be those who see in the present suit an extension of tendencies
of self-censorship already present in this field that are justified on
moral, emotional, political or interpretative grounds. In a sense, I
would agree, insofar as the study of German history at this time is still
fraught with great emotion and strong feelings that sometimes are only
barely kept in check, and I am sure that this current dispute is at least
related to this atmosphere.
I know for myself that if I was publishing in a field where such an action
was filed I would be strongly inclined to simply withdraw, undergo an
"inner emigration" and keep mum. But we have all heard of that before. I
cannot say that German history is veering towards a stultifying orthodoxy,
because I do not personally know the parameters of allowable dissent. But
I do know that to attempt to limit free expression among German historians
simply means that lively dispute, creative interpretation, and novel
theories will become even more the province of precisely those who are
_not_ German historians.
That would not be, I think, a good advertisement for the discipline, a
positive signal for the next generation of scholars in this field, or an
inspiring record for posterity.
 Humanities & Social Sciences Online 
|