Jan Tomasz Gross books belongs to the very controversial books and still not only serious debate but it seems to me to a high degree hysterical debate in Poland starting from the . . his first book about the Neighbours . . about the killing in Jedwabne. According to my experience it is generally the audience or the readers of this type of book which took place in the discussion about Jan’s books is divided into two parts. One part and all those people who already knew without reading, that he is right. Then is the second part who those of . . who never read the book but they knew he is totally wrong. Now its possible, my question, is its possible to find the third group, this group actually which tries to, which is open to the debate, to try to specificate all those arguments which are serious as presented in his books.

Link to transcription of Gross' Lecture

Normally, those who it seems to me those who don’t read the book and don’t want to discuss they use in the Polish debate about his books such statements that he is anti-Polish, offensive to Poles, or that he is preparing grounds for the Jewish restitutions claims in Poland. And it seems to me immediately we close an entirety of debates. What it is necessary is the serious . . the serious approach. And what my role here is actually to provide you with some sort of a context, with a context, what reaction was to the Golden Harvest in Poland since publication of this book in March.

In a special issue of Znak, Catholic monthly magazine, the editor in chief of this monthly magazine, identifies three layers of discussion about the Golden Harvest. The first, which he wrote, is the debate about the finding on the so called third phase of the Holocaust, which means this phase which took place from 1943 to 1945 when there was an elimination of the Ghettoes and the Jews escaped and tried to hide. Then the second layer of the debate is a deep discussion about the methods applied in his book. And the third layer is the polemics in relation to the author’s conclusions.

I went through all those three elements and then try to add something from me, what is mine about the collective memories and the role of these books in the restortirisation of the collective memories in Poland. As far as the first phase is concerned, let me stress that these interesting and worth noting especially for Poles that within the general community of historians in Poland, there is nobody, nobody, in Poland who questioned the facts, facts actually. What I want to say, and it was mentioned hare by Jan Tomasz Gross already, is that actually empirical background for his books came from the Polish historians works. And that should be . . . . seems to me shows that such . . . that this is something which is going on in Poland in coming to terms with the past. And I want to also add something to two other books, and two histories which published it seems to me after publication of The Golden Harvest, I mean Barbara Engelking books Jest Taki Piêkny S³oneczny Kraj, and the book about the Jews trying to hide, looking for shelters in Polish villages. In 1942 and to 1945 and Jan Grabowski’s book Judenjagdt, the Jew hunting between in . . . 1942 and 1945. The study of the some special audience the special administrative circle in, near, Kielce. And in the debate there were voices asking the questions actually, why so many years after the event, we have to discuss such issues.

There is however much national energy, it seems to me, devoted to the, and rightly so, to the debate about the study of the massacres in Katyn and the massacres involving committed against Poles by the Ukrainians. In these types of debate are worth effort, but others not. It seems to me the others, they were fellow citizens, that means there is some moral justification, not moral to discuss these other types of killings which took place on the Polish perimeter.

The issue is that the aim of Gross books is reconstruction, seems to me, of Polish collective memory, and opening up space to incorporate others who were fellow citizens. It is very difficult to achieve such an aim, especially that the witness competition . . . . that we witness competition between two types of victimhood. On the one hand there is Jewish victimhood which claim is a special part of the Holocaust and then there is also Polish claim to victimhood that the Poles also suffered, and they did also suffer as well. So we’ve got at the same time Poles crying that their suffering is being not recognised, basically properly, around the world.

So we see the clash basically between the two claims to that victimhood. In such a situation it is extremely difficult sometimes to review, to restructure the discussion about the past and about reconstruction of the collective memory. I must say that such debate and recumulation of the collective memories extremely important to assess. And then due to the first book, it means Neighbours, the most important debate of the Polish self-identity after 1989 took place around 1990 to 2000 and this was the book which started with the publication of this study about Neighbours.

So that means . . . now what I wanted also to argue is that despite the call to the boycott of The Golden Harvest, this book for two months was on the top, first place of the best seller lists in Poland since publication, which means in April and May. It shows something that is extremely, that there is interest in, as such, in such titles of the study about the past in Polish territory.

And then the second part means, the second part of the debate in Poland about The Golden Harvest is about methodology. And very often there is such an attempt to depassionate actually the Jan Tomasz Gross findings by claiming that, well he is not a professional historian, and his books are described as not being written by a true professional historian so it means they are not actually bringing anything new. I want to stress that in all of his books actually, well he is more interested in understanding, not in the describing, not in the qualitative, quantitative type of approach to the reverse, approach to the issue, not in the statistical approach but in the quality and the meaning actually of what happened and try ask what he told us here to explain why such a lot of things happened. He took his method and applied in this book The Golden Harvest, from a well known anthropologist, Clifford Geertz. It means this method of a thick description. It means a thick description when he tried actually to show the path of such of the meaning. In his book Geertz himself claimed that the people’s behaviour cannot be analysed in strictly functional point of view because the meaning changed in context.

Gross used this method in order to find the relation between Jews and how should people in Poland. By focusing on how Jews were killed he tried to reconstruct and unveil part of the relation between these two communities. Garbled in this approach is to focus on understanding garbled a different meaning garbled possesses its own limitation and there is always a law that it is never ever possible to get to the truth with a capital T, which means to find this truth. And that’s so in all these methods possesses its own limitation. And according to Geertz this limitation which means intercultural distance that involvement of researchers in they describe this high process, the process which occurred.

Here it seems to me we have got something which is at garbled. Since the importance of the thick description for the entire book it is important to actually to look at what type of context is taken by the authors. And Jan Tomasz Gross used this photography. At least let me draw . . . oh it has disappeared. But in the book he used this reference to the Susan Sonder. Susan Sonder, in her essay on photography uses such an expression as that each photography is anti-memory. There is not only memory, there is anti-memory. What she meant by anti-memory is that all what is in the context of photography is lost. Which means we focus only what is there, but not what is outside. And then it seems to me this context, another type of context and the criteria for choosing this context is always opened up to debate in this discussion.

So what type of criteria. Let’s put the first one, which it seems to me, entitled garbled, through to the discussions. The normative shift which occurred at the beginning of the war means to what degree there was garbled there was stabilisation in institutions in the country. There was the acceptance of the existence of war. When the war started the outcome of that was a change of the norms within the . . . which means the Poland norms, that means within the society. And that such type of a social change it means should be probably to much higher degree taken into account in this, in the explanatory manner.

Then the second, it means the problem of the so called in Polish szabel, I translate this szabel as plunderers. It means Maciej Zareba, a Polish historian, wrote an article basically article called Garaczka Szabelu and described the, and in this article basically what he claimed is that since 1939 is that is a plunder everywhere. And this plunder exists basically up to the 1947, which according to my reading it confirms only the change not only to the property rights but it confirmed some sort of the changing of this normative shift which occurred during the war in the Polish society. Then also, it’s not only to Jews, let me make one example, In this article by Maciej Zareba, they describe the situation which occurred on the 14th August, 1945, in the village called Mieszkowice Wierne. What happened there in the night of the 14th of June, the planes, with seven pilots inside crashed, and when the peasants, the local peasants discovered this plane, well the Germans arrived. Who was on the plane, they were Polish pilots flown from London, who arrived with some sort of ammunition and help to the Home Army. Well the Germans took the ammunition and guns and insignia and ordered the peasants to bury all those dead soldiers. The outcome of that was that the peasants basically stripped the soldiers of everything including underwear. They put only their dead naked bodies in the grave. Why, well how we know about that, well it’s happened that the local Home Army unit learned about that and send the penalty expedition, basically, to punish peasants who plunder the soldiers.

So I only use this as an illustration, I am not involved in any competition who is suffer more, it is only to show the illustration that is plunder as such, szabel, exists to all type of people, not only in the relation to Jews. And then the second element is the Polish historian, Dariusz Stola, used it seems to me, quite useful explanation that szabel according to him is plunder, it was not in relation to people to people, but relation of people to things. It is true at the same time, if you remember what was discussed, Jan used this citation here that well there was a perception or view by adjusting all the, that what he called the holders of some plots. That means that this up to the explanation to what degree there was not only maybe of garbled there was the same treatment of Jews, as basically the kind, the things, not as human beings.

Then the second element which in context is not taken into account it seems to me, is the structure of the Polish village. We don’t know too much at the moment how the structure of the Polish village during the occupation looks like. But what I want to bring in is on the one information which is present in the recent book by Jan Grabowski, which means Judenjagdt, which means to hunt for Jews, Jew hunting what he describe there was the occupational authorities appointing in each village, so called hostages. Hostages that were not taken with Germans but zakladnicy, hostages appointed by Germans, normally in the war situation the hostages came from the local elites, means there was Soltys, or the head of the administrative self government in the village and their responsibility, they were responsible for carrying on the German orders. If the order is not carried on then they would be the first group of people who were penalised. In what sense I don’t know, but it looks like that such type of the deconstruction of the village should be taken in this context into account.

And then the next point it means to the discussion about the polemics about the author’s conclusion. Well as you, what Jan said a few minutes ago, is that, its seems to me the first, there are six main conclusions, the first one. The main reason for killing was greed. I’ve got my doubts. It means in the explanation, to what degree only greed played an important role. Probably within the pattern coming to a scarce degree. But then it seems to me that to a high degree the elements of the other, the different, it means that not fellow citizens but not a member of community, also should be taken into account.

Then the second in the conclusion, plunder was broadly spread and supported by social norms. That I agree it seems to me.

The third, murders were committed openly and later discussed by local communities. Possibly, I can’t completely deny, it seems to me it is quite plausible.

Fourth, after the war there was a solidarity of silence about the committed murders. Possibly, but it seems to me but not everywhere, it means that well that required this szerprnowkis, or despite of the information on the cases, the court cases based on this legal act, which was adopted by the Communist authorities in 1944. It needs further study. It means to what degree there was a silence, to what degree it seems to me, there was some sort of opening up of this area for the future for criticising some elements.

Then the next is point number five. It means in the conclusions. Murders came from the local elites and their status has been preserved after the war. Well that is very plausible, but what I want to say is it seems to me, is that was it possibly connected also with the implementation of the new type of the regime. Remember in 1944 the Communists already …. already set up a Government in this country. It means now such if there was a silence, if there was a type of dirty togetherness, of those who commit crimes as such, then it was much easy, it seems to me, from the communist point of view to control and dominate of such societies which has some or communities which possess something to hide.

And last point, the most important point. Murder of Jews was so broad spread that equals norm not pathology. Well, it is up to the discussion. What I wanted it seems to me that nicely was put by the editing point in her book, that it was common. Which means it was powszechne. Powszechne in Polish but not, not . . sorry, powszednie but not powszechne, it means common but not on the other word we have got powszechne, in my understanding is a common with acceptance. In the first it occurred, it took place, very often, but it does not mean that it met with approval with acceptance. So it seems to me in this last point that it is a possibility to explain that it was powszechne, powszednie, sorry, powszednie but at the same times not powszechne. And if so, then in some ways it is possible to change the interpretation. And the last part, means the last part is this type of a discussion from the collective memories, and the role of this book in the discussion about the collective memories.

The first . . . . so that . . . . lets leave the discussion so that the questions what we could draw from the . . . . from Jan’s books, Jan’s writing. And the first of all what struck me is the picture, . . . the picture of the moral condition of the Polish society . . in or society in Poland, Polish society in 1944 and 1945, and that it seems to me, I don’t know too much about such type of analysis of historiography ,garbled of the moral condition of the society after the war. That which I call society.

Then the second point seems to me, is the . . well . . . connection between the implementation, Holocaust implementation of communism. The issue which should be somehow investigated. So what I want to say is that probably the silence which occurred from 1944 to 1989, to a high degree was connected with that Holocaust and the involvement of the lower classes in killing and also plunder was that secret foundation with, of the communist regime in Poland. This relation between the communism and the Holocaust should be further explored.

And the third one is about the . . .basically, the attempt to change the collective memories. It means what generally speaking, guys, it seems to me is that in the past or maybe up to today in some societies the main actor in formulation of structure in collective memories is the State. Not nowadays, in democracy, and with a pluralistic . . . more and more pluralistic society there is a shift, the change from that one collective memory that is homogenous, to let’s say some of the collective remembrance and that more and more actors from the pluralistic society are playing an important role in this generation, or reformulation of the collective remembrance. And one of them is Jan Tomasz Gross with his writing. What is good, it seems to me. is that we could observe some sort of the civilised approach to all those not nice parts to say of literature for Poles. In this . . . in 19 . . . in 2000, in 1989, 2000, when the Neighbours were published, there was merely hysteria, it seems to me, nowadays we are in a totally different place, when there is a much more inclusive type of discourse, and based on the already open, public space for the inclusion of a different interpretation of collective remembrance.

And last part, because Martin said to me I have to cut, is the . . . something which is the connected with that morality, garbled in his book about the . . . about the ethics of memory, he asked the question or actually he formulated the thesis, that there is a lot of ethics which means that common norms, or moral norms, in connected with the . . . with the . . . collective memories, but is not much connected with the what he called morality, which means universal type of what is right to do. And it seems to me we could interpret this finding or this thesis garbled from the different point of view. That actually challenging . . . challenging of collective memories, forcing or attempt to reformulate, to make them inclusive as such, is connected with the insider with precisely a lot of morality with something what is right to do. Thank you very much.

Martin Krygier

We will now open up the time to questions

Question 1.

I‘ve got a question about something I don’t understand about this idea as if in 1939 to 1945, garbled, the way that we see for example the refugees at the moment being treated as the other is shocking exactly in my own life because I think my father, he told me as a teenager in the garbled .. er a Catholic organisation did participate and I think for this to happen, I don’t think there was a shift in 1980 in garbled society to allow this to happen.

Question 2.

In making such statements as Mr Gross and Mr Czarnota, at the of this debate there will be a debate. It wasn’t a debate it was just a glorification of one thing which is the main subject of the Jan Tomasz Gross book, Golden Harvest. When you look to the Polish history and when you look to the beginning of the Second World War, especially in 1941, when Germany attacked, oh, sorry, beginning in the Second World War first, when Russia attacked Poland, the Jews, and I will quote here Mr Woroszynski, which was a communist, and Jew, and his memoirs Jan Gross should know quite well, I think, he stated the Jews were involved very garbled, in the east of Poland, in denouncing of Polish families, of Polish citizens, of Polish officers, to the communist Russians and they were either killed, or sent to Siberia or Kazakstan, and it wasn’t a single occasion, it was many cases like this in thousands, so, in the south of Poland, if you look to that situation, I am not surprised that people were not sympathetic to Jews, as such and to help them, when it came to the picture which Jan Tomasz Gross showed on this screen, that was proven to him, in Poland, quite well, that that picture doesn’t describe, doesn’t show what he is claiming, that picture is showing. If you could see, if you could show it again, you can see on the picture, that they are, it shows us, officers of the Polish Communist Army or Militia, which were taking part in that garbled, so, for this reason it wasn’t just so called robbery, made by Polish peasants on the mass killing fields of Treblinka, it was most possibly an official work of securing those bones and putting them to rest. If you look to the Mr garbled pages, …

Martin Krygier

Wind up if . . .

Audience interjecting

Argumets within audience and some asking for the question to be continued

Martin Krygier

He has had two questions, I would like him to wind it up.

Audience interjecting

Garbled . . let him finish . .

Martin Krygier

I can’t let him finish, it will take twenty minutes. . .

Audence interjecting

We are not objecting, just be balanced

Question 2 responds

Just let me finish,

Audience interjections

Further argument

Question 2 person responds There are plenty of Jews, I can see probably a few of them here, garbled, which survived the Second World War only thank to Polish families and Polish citizens, Polish peasants, which saved them. And when it came to robbing their bodies, or sorry . . ok. . .

Martin Krygier

Question 3

I am a child Holocaust survivor, I lived in Poland, from after my parents were brought back to Poland, and I lived in Poland from 1946 to 1961, whoever said that the communists, whatever they blame it on, it’s not right, it has nothing to do with communism, it has to do with nationality, I was called a bloody Jew, a dirty Jew, and I was an eight years old child, and I didn’t know why I was called that, all the time, until the day I left Poland, when I came to Australia nobody called me a dirty and a bloody Jew. So blaming it on communists, or regime, or whatever happened, that’s not right. Don’t wash it off. It happened, this happened, just don’t wash your hands off

Question 4

I just want to know if Professor Gross believes in individual responsibility or collective guilt.

We will have an answer to some of these questions then we will return to somebody else

Jan Tomasz Gross answers (Q4)

Well, I’ll start with the last one, I do believe in individual responsibility . . .

Question 4 being partially repeated

Individual responsibility or collective guilt, I think that’s very important in the discussion

Jan Tomasz Gross answers to (Q4) continued

I do believe in individual responsibility, no collective guilt for me. However one can er, since . er. live in communities, one can speak about histories of communites and parts of behaviour in communities, that’s not really large a responsibility. In a community in a way by describing what has happened, a war period for instance.

Answers to question 2

The gentleman from the Polish Association, asked some issues like, you brought first of all the question of behaviour of Jews in territories, in eastern territories of Poland, that have been occupied by the Soviet Union, in the first part of the war, when Stalin and Hitler were allies. And this is a subject matter which I devoted more or less twenty years of study. I published several books on .. and while I appreciate very much the question of ..er … of er .. perception on the part of the Poles, that Jews have benefitted . . favoured by the Soviets during . . during the period of occupation and acted as their agents in some way, the fact that such views were expressed by local Poles at the time . . . a study of this period shows quite clearly that this is a myopic ex..er ….perception … which the perception which signifies more about the person who made the garbled than about what had actually … not the case that particularly the deportations and arrests that have taken place and carried out by the communists were ..er .. in the bad way .. connected or inspired by Jews. One looks at the number of people who had been deported, into the Soviet interior, the Jews were actually .. proportionally the larger . . the largest group that had been sent into the Soviet interior in the oppressive acts of deportation. More so, about thirty percent of the entire population that had sent inside, that were Jews, while they constituted no more than about garbled. It was very simple, a lot of Jews wanted to come back or went to escape under the German occupation they tried to enlist which they identified themselves as one big way of deportation garbled they were rounded up and sent by the Soviets as enemies of the … What has happened under Soviet rule was er . . um garbled were by … by. . all the ethnic groups were treated equally, so to speak . . . with the .. . there was access open to Jews for positions in the State administration of various garbled and jobs that were previously impossible for them to take, during the period . . . the interwar period we don’t know they had a full equality or discrimination that applied at the time, in this area especially, and er and with garbled so suddenly seeing a Jew as a post .. er .. a clerk in a Post Office, utterly surprising to a lot of garbled who never imagined that . . . in any case this is . . .er . er .. . this is simply. . .er .. . mm .. does not square to the facts this story.. er.. that you describe here, and er . . besides . .er . . one, one wonders in cases such as Jedwabne for example and many other episodes which . .which Jews are killed by Poles in the first period in the east. . .er . . these are acts of violence that are directed against . . er . er. .. all people, not against agents . . er . . or those against women, against children, in Jedwabne, everybody gets burned and they garbled the villages in this area which has been . . .er . . . victimised.

You say that the . . the photograph . . er . . er . . does not do something that I do, claim that I do garbled that periodically people were being chased out from, from the er . . . er . . . from the . .. er. . um . . er .. the site . . when . . when .. digs were being carried out. Digs were carried at the site of every . .er . .extermination camps in Poland, Treblinka is just one example, there is Belgesc, Auschwitz, Sobibor, Majdanek, there are massive phenomena written about in Polish newspapers immediately after the war in 1945. So er this er. .this is garbled nobody was cleaning up this area garbled at that time. The first cleanings that occur, is in the late 1950’s and . . er ..the first markings of any kind of monument that were put there occurred in the 1960’s only, so . . er .. er . . . any other interpretation of this, of this photograph is of course er . . er. . . doesn’t fly. There were attempts to deflect the discussion about the book, these were discussions about the photograph in Poland but er …

Audience interjection

Garbled to me this is around Treblinka, so this is not true photo because in Treblinka is a totally different police

Jan Tomasz Gross answer to (Q2) continued

Oh, I see, yeah well very good yeah

Audience interjection

Today

Jan Tomasz Gross answer to (Q2) continued

Today, so maybe it’s another . er .

Answer to question1

Now what was a name of this kind of behaviour, er. I think, I think to .. to a large extent one must approach garbled about the …er.. role…. anti-Semitism garbled of er...er..garbled Europe at the time and for a long time thereafter, as well and of course this is the background, but it was not a name of by itself the er…er.. um.. the murderous behaviour, . . what . . what I think was, I think was murderous behaviour it seems to me are two elements. First of all er . . er . that . . er journalist state organisers of the public order to this ..er . actively behave in this manner. And secondly garbled so in other words this area where all sorts of garbled and all er. disciplines garbled this kind of position and carried out through the exercise of state functions is suddenly disappears in a Polish state. I doesn’t exist anymore unlike garbled a lot of behaviour er otherwise ..ah er….er.. would not have been allowed, because the state would not allow it .er..the state could not allow assaults on property, for example, garbled, could not allow assaults on life garbled suddenly this this element of social control is garbled so ….yeah . . . Question 1 being clarified

If, if I may, I guess garbled

Jan Tomasz Gross answer to clarified (Q1 )

The church, the church plays a terrible role in this, in this story. Garbled everywhere of course, the churches function garbled a lot of priests end up, end up in gaol, the Germans are executing Polish society at large and including the priests, they are not exceptions, but there is, there is no statement or attitudes er expressed openly by any institutionalised elements and and figures within the hierarchy of the Polish church, that would, would um identify the situation as one garbled act on their instinct, as it were, and the nation to garbled persecute the Jews, there are a lot, a number of individual priests who help and the er .. er ..particular there are some female convents that were very well known garbled essentially garbled once sentence to finish is church records are not available, for this story garbled

Interjection

That is not true (then garbled as Gross and audience member are talking over one another). Audience member says Not true at all. Plenty of church, Polish garbled (agaon talking over one another).. were fighting Jews.and we are totally . . .

Martin Krygier

We have time for two more questions and unfortunately we are going to have drinks

Interjection

I am waiting one hour I keep my hand

Martin Krygier

Ok, you can be one of the two questions and there will be one other, David Knoll will be the other and please keep garbled and then we will adjourn and we will continue the discussion

Question (A)

My name is Lech, I was born in Poland, small town Chelm, between Sobibor, Majdanek and far away Oswiecin. I was really sorry and passionate about Jewish people because when I was seven, I, my school authorised trip to Sobibor, to show how Jewish people suffer, after Majdanek and Oswiecin etc. Now, I feel like, I don’t want to be Polish any more, but I don’t want to be Jewish any more, even if I thought for a moment because, if we are talking about neighbours, okay, what about, it was sixty something years ago, what about neighbours now, Israel and Arabs country . .

Interjection

That has nothing to do with it. It has nothing to do with it.

Question (A) continues speaking

But wait, excuse me is doing that much and also your answer was like a statement, you mentioned first you mentioned Germany, you mentioned other countries, which didn’t treat Jewish well, and also garbled many people said ‘you bloody Jewish’ over there, you didn’t say anything, you just talked about Polish people. Why? So I have a right now to ask you if Polish people are bad, how good are you as a Jewish in Israel now with the Arabs countries? Ask yourself this.

Martin Krygier

Please, David Knowl will have the last question here and then we will proceed.(objections from the audience object) Everybody would like to ask but we are finishing then.with David.

Question (B) from David Knowl

I’d like to open the word if I may, one area that you spoke about only a little bit, and that was the value of anecdotal evidence, and I appreciate that there are some varying historical views in the room, but the use of anecdotal evidence in a civilisation, where the anecdote is the only evidence contrary to the mainstream view, presents a particular difficulty for any historian and indeed for lawyers who want to engage in the prosecution of genocide, whether of any genocide for that matter. Have you formed a view as to what are some of the key tests for a historian or a prosecutor, needs to think through in placing the value of anecdotal evidence.

Audience applauses

David Knowl continues

Might I just add before you answer, the applause was surprising because it comes from those who circulated a document of which David Irving would be proud.

Jan Tomasz answer to question B

Anecdotal evidence it seems to me is a very important element which which makes it er which makes it from which to draw reflections about it. It is er it appears with some regularity, I mean it it garbled differently in different contexts but a theme recurs, a theme recurs and then it taps into ah especially when um the this anecdotal evidence is er in er addressing er in issues that ah ah in order to understand them one, one has to conceptualise them as running contrary to er er to what people would have been taught and, and accustomed, so if one finds the recurrent er appearance or mention in conversations that er garbled Jewish properties taking er er then er then it is striking as a my mind as er a phenomenon that not ah that just somebody crying out in a unique er moment in in specifically in interpersonal relations but rather as reflecting a state of mind which er ah puts it due to er er a change in, in norms and attitudes exactly er. So you know one has to draw case by case in a way, but but er in er garbled of objects which interact er in the the proof and the hesitation is er er is quite a garbled …

Martin Krygier

We’ll do this afterwards we have to close the room garbled .. but sure after the event

Audience interjections

Why can’t we extend the discussion for another half an hour

We started fifteen minutes late

Martin Krygier

Sorry

Audience interjection repeated

We started fifteen minutes late

Martin Krygier

And we will finish this discussion as long as we keep garbled outside

Audience interjection

What’s the point, rest garbled Andrea Durbach closes the discussion

The point is there is a very nice wine garbled. Can I just say, and I am sorry, but we do have to get out of this room and we would be delighted if you come up stairs where there is wine and some cheese and continue this discussion. I am Andrea Durbach, from the Human Rights Centre and I would like just to say in closing to just go back to the question that Adam raised, which is why after all these years, why after all these years must we discuss these issues? Why does Jan Gross need to come along and stir us up yet again? Why now? And I think it’s because what he does is he brings back to our memory the complexity of the practice which give rise to collaboration, to participation and to our complicity in atrocity. He reminds us of the power of denial, indeed by the victims garbled and the struggle for truth. And he leaves us with how we need to feel guilty with justification, with retribution and accountability. With garbled with memories of garbled forgetting, and how easily we need to remind ourselves, how easily collective forces coalesce to shift those questionable motives and actually allows us to dehumanise others. And so Jan, while you might have stirred up Poland, I hope that you continue to stir up the world around these issues with your work and I am very grateful that you have been with us and shared garbled tonight. Thank you very very much.

Applause.

Transcription by Felix Molski

Before the Public Lecture, "Nasza Polonia" had distributed copies of a leaflet. "The Association of Nasza Polonia is deeply concerned by the University of NSW decision to invite Mr J.T. Gross to have a lecture at the Faculty of Law. In our opinion Mr Gross did not deserve so much attention simply because his historical workshop is very poor, full of misinterpretations and false accusations. The letter of prof. Iwo Pogonowski which we quote below shows it in full."
Adam Gajkowski
President.

Polish version of prof. Pogonowski's article available here

Felix Molski - Gross promoting animosity