Witnessing the Ghost, Letting the Ghost Witness: Exploring the Impediments of Witness Narratives in Holocaust Camp Testimonies through Spectrality and the Metaphor of the Muselmann

IF 0.2 3区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies Pub Date : 2023-07-31 DOI:10.1353/sho.2023.a903285
Alexander Williams
{"title":"Witnessing the Ghost, Letting the Ghost Witness: Exploring the Impediments of Witness Narratives in Holocaust Camp Testimonies through Spectrality and the Metaphor of the Muselmann","authors":"Alexander Williams","doi":"10.1353/sho.2023.a903285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Within debates surrounding \"Levi's Paradox\"—the idea that through their survival, survivors are not necessarily the \"complete witnesses\" of the Holocaust—the Muselmann is frequently posited as able to reconcile this conundrum. Within testimonial literature, these emaciated prisoners were perceived as ghost-like entities who were neither alive nor dead but somehow between life and death. The observed absence left in witness narratives thereby appears to be testimony from inside the experience of these Muselmänner. What is ubiquitously overlooked in such analyses is that the Muselmann primarily functions as a metaphor—rendering the absent dead legible in language. Ignoring this risks instrumentalizing the Muselmann, which threatens to allow the metaphor to become shorthand for something more generic—obfuscating the reality that Muselmänner signify real Holocaust victims.However, all metaphors contain a potential for semantic flexibility. Cannot the Muselmann's ability to pollute rigid dichotomies therefore be approached productively and more ethically when refocalizing him as a ghostly entity in testimonial literature? By examining passages from Primo Levi's If This Is a Man and Charlotte Delbo's Auschwitz and After, this article asks: if the Muselmann is viewed as a ghostly or spectral metaphor—a haunting force within the Holocaust's literary corpus—how might this spectral witness be able to draw attention to erasure and historical blind spots? Constituting an ethical and an interpretive undertaking, this refocalization simultaneously allows one to speak with the Muselmann and enables these anonymous victims to manifest themselves anew as haunting forces through literary testimony.","PeriodicalId":21809,"journal":{"name":"Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies","volume":"41 1","pages":"185 - 211"},"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.a903285","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

Abstract

Abstract:Within debates surrounding "Levi's Paradox"—the idea that through their survival, survivors are not necessarily the "complete witnesses" of the Holocaust—the Muselmann is frequently posited as able to reconcile this conundrum. Within testimonial literature, these emaciated prisoners were perceived as ghost-like entities who were neither alive nor dead but somehow between life and death. The observed absence left in witness narratives thereby appears to be testimony from inside the experience of these Muselmänner. What is ubiquitously overlooked in such analyses is that the Muselmann primarily functions as a metaphor—rendering the absent dead legible in language. Ignoring this risks instrumentalizing the Muselmann, which threatens to allow the metaphor to become shorthand for something more generic—obfuscating the reality that Muselmänner signify real Holocaust victims.However, all metaphors contain a potential for semantic flexibility. Cannot the Muselmann's ability to pollute rigid dichotomies therefore be approached productively and more ethically when refocalizing him as a ghostly entity in testimonial literature? By examining passages from Primo Levi's If This Is a Man and Charlotte Delbo's Auschwitz and After, this article asks: if the Muselmann is viewed as a ghostly or spectral metaphor—a haunting force within the Holocaust's literary corpus—how might this spectral witness be able to draw attention to erasure and historical blind spots? Constituting an ethical and an interpretive undertaking, this refocalization simultaneously allows one to speak with the Muselmann and enables these anonymous victims to manifest themselves anew as haunting forces through literary testimony.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
见证鬼魂,让鬼魂见证——从“幽灵”和“缪斯曼”的隐喻看大屠杀集中营证言中证人叙述的障碍
摘要:在围绕“李维斯悖论”(Levi's Paradox)的辩论中,幸存者不一定是大屠杀的“完整见证者”,穆塞尔曼经常被认为能够调和这个难题。在证言文献中,这些瘦弱的囚犯被视为幽灵般的实体,他们既不活着也不死,但不知何故处于生与死之间。因此,在证人叙述中观察到的缺席似乎是来自这些Muselmänner经历内部的证词。在这些分析中普遍被忽视的是,Muselmann主要起到隐喻的作用——在语言中使缺席的死者清晰可见。忽视这一点有可能使Muselmann工具化,这可能会使这个比喻成为更通用的东西的缩写——混淆Muselmänner象征真正大屠杀受害者的现实。然而,所有隐喻都包含着语义灵活性的潜力。因此,当穆塞尔曼在证明文学中将他重新塑造为一个幽灵般的实体时,就不能有效地、更合乎道德地对待他污染僵化的二分法的能力吗?通过研究普里莫·李维(Primo Levi)的《如果这是一个人》(If This Is a Man)和夏洛特·德尔博(Charlotte Delbo?这种重新定位构成了一种道德和解释事业,同时允许人们与Muselmann对话,并使这些匿名受害者能够通过文学证词重新表现出令人难忘的力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Ladin in Lineage: Through the Doors of Jewish Gendered Life at Yeshiva University's Stern College for Women Un-Settled Questions: Frontier Logic and Satmar Political Theology A Specter Haunting Holocaust Studies: The Muselmann Did Jews Die as Muslims in Auschwitz? Specters of the Muselmann Transmatriation? Avishag the Shunammite in Three Contemporary Israeli Novels
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1