LAUGHING ABOUT RAPE

Can laughing about rape change rape culture?

Reality Check

“I’m a very special Holocaust survivor. I was in the camps with my wife and my girlfriend; and believe me, it wasn’t easy.”

Jack Polak recites parts of his Holocaust testimony with a cheeky smile across his face. Jack—a young, Dutch, married, Jewish man—had fallen in love with Ina—the other woman. And even deportation to a Nazi camp couldn’t get in the way of their passionate affair.

Jack and Ina’s story is the heart of the documentary Steal A Pencil For Me. I teach the film because it reminds us that the Nazis and their collaborators didn’t commit atrocities in a vacuum; the Nazis persecuted and murdered ordinary people who were trying to live ordinary lives. As Jack grins, we smile along and sometimes laugh gently at the complicated reality of his Holocaust experience.

So when I first watched the short film Meet My Rapist (you can watch it here) by director-writer-actor Jessie Kahnweiler, my uncomfortably-amused response felt comfortably familiar.

Confronting Rape

Interested in how we can engage young people and the public in questions about human rights—which includes confronting rape, sexual violence, misogyny, and rape culture—I invited Jessie on a video date. And she said yes!

It was your usual chatter. Y’know... filmmaking, humor, rape, “Holocaust survivor speed-dating,” that sort of thing.

I asked Jessie about using comedy to draw attention to rape culture. “What feels natural to me is using comedy to trick people into giving a shit,” she explained. “I wasn’t like 'I wanna make a rape comedy, like let’s really stir it up,' I wanted to fucking deal with my rape and this is how I deal with it.”

So the film is a form of testimony? I asked her.

“It had been eight years since I’d been raped. And I felt like I’d done everything I was supposed to do. Therapy, y’know—. You could supplement any other kind of trauma or skeleton or stuff people don’t wanna deal with. The film is about me confronting my own denial, and how I’ve moved through all these steps of healing. In this effort to be this strong feminist chick, I forgot to just be.”

Bubble Wrap

I told Jessie why I thought her film works so well as an educational device. In one scene, Jessie brings her rapist home to meet her parents. In another, Jessie’s rapist gatecrashes a job interview and distracts her by popping a sheet of bubble wrap. At the heart of the film is the reality that rape and the aftermath of rape are ever-present. “Will you stop it?! Just stop it!” Jessie snaps.

Moments within the film are so jarring, and the script is so embarrassingly funny, that the viewer is forced to consider how we, collectively, think about and talk about rape and sexual violence. “I was like raped, but I wasn’t like raped,” Jessie smiles apologetically.

“You laugh because you’re uncomfortable,” Jessie explained to me. And I was reminded of teenagers who laugh at photographs of open mass-graves and naked women about to be shot. Laughter indicates surprise and shock and the failure of expectations—and learning.

The 'R' Word

As the film builds, its unexpected scenes reveal questions that survivors of rape rarely ask out loud, in part because our culture of “first-world rape” (as Jessie put it) and victim-blaming and misogyny force survivors to keep their memories and trauma hidden from view. “What’s my rapist doing now?” Jessie wondered out loud. “And does he remember me? And how the fuck am I gonna get over him?”

Rape is taboo.

I toured Auschwitz last summer, I told Jessie, and an employee of the museum told us that Auschwitz tour guides are explicitly discouraged from talking about sexual violence in the camp.

In Meet My Rapist, Jessie Kahnweiler does the opposite. The film’s genius lies within Jessie’s bravery and audacity to say out loud what we’ve been trained to keep silent. “No one here wants an angry woman,” the interviewer warns her. “Because honey,” her therapist smirks, “Nobody wants to marry a rape victim.”

Responses

I asked Jessie about the public’s response to the film.

“I’ve gotten both positive and negative feedback. Some people just don’t get it,” she said, accepting that the film doesn’t speak to everyone. “What I’m most interested in as a filmmaker is how people think the way they do and why they believe certain things. In terms of rape culture, people are like, 'Rape is really bad.' But we’ve gotta open up the conversation. The fact that people are offended by the title Meet My Rapist—now that’s a fucking problem.”

When Jessie talked about the thanks she continues to receive from other survivors of rape, it became clear that the power of Meet My Rapist has even surprised its filmmaker.

“I mean, you wanna talk about the greatest moment of my life? The email from a rape victim. Or the guy who is a father of three who had been molested. I’m being honest about my shit, and it connects with people and helps them heal. As personal as it is, it feels like this issue is so much bigger than me.”

Throughout our conversation, it was obvious that Jessie doesn’t have a particular message or specific agenda. “I don’t have any of the answers. But in my work, the fun is in asking the questions.” Jessie wants people to think and reflect. “I don’t wanna tell you how to feel about the film. That’s your job, to be honest,” she said with a smile. “Sit with it. Be uncomfortable. Do some work.”


Interview with Jessie Kahnweiler, director of Meet My Rapist, December 3, 2013.

This is the first part of a series on teaching about rape culture. Read part two, here: Getting Teens To Talk About Rape

GAYS, GYPSIES & GENOCIDE

“How did you get into Holocaust education?” is a common question and I tend to answer differently depending on who’s asking and what’s on my mind.

Why I Do What I Do: Reason #3

Exactly 69 years ago, Nazi guards at Auschwitz murdered in one night almost all Birkenau prisoners categorized as “Gypsies.”

Three months earlier, when Auschwitz guards surrounded and sealed off the Birkenau Zigeunerlager (Gypsy camp), the prisoners armed themselves with shovels and iron pipes and refused to leave their barracks. In response, over several weeks, Auschwitz administrators transferred Roma and Sinti prisoners capable of work to other camps. Just under 3,000 people—mostly children, the elderly, and the sick—remained.

On the night of August 2nd 1944, Birkenau guards marched with their guns into the Gypsy camp and forced the women, men, and children toward and into the gas chambers.

Until a few years ago, I didn’t know that the Nazis had systematically sterilized, ghettoized, and murdered people of Roma and Sinti descent. Just as the Jewish community refers to the Nazi genocide as the Shoah—catastrophe—, the Roma community uses the Romani term Porajmos—devouring. The Nazi regime and its collaborators murdered approximately 25% of the one million Roma and Sinti living in Europe.

Yet the Roma and Sinti were not recognized as victims of Nazism until 1979.

The Nazi genocide of European Jewry echoed through familial and community memories into my 1980s childhood. The Holocaust films we watched in Jewish youth clubs, the Jewish Holocaust survivors we listened to at school, and the hushed conversations we overheard at home ensured that our Jewish identities would be molded by a Jewish responsibility to remember our dead. The dead Sinti and Roma were never mentioned.

It wasn’t until 2005 that I started to notice.

I’d just moved from London to Chicago. I was getting used to the larger food portions and the divisive politics. And I started to become involved in the gay and trans rights movement. I came across a news article that would change the way I think about Holocaust history: In January 2005, world leaders gathered at Auschwitz-Birkenau to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the camp. But Polish authorities had prevented representatives of the gay community from attending.

I asked one of my professors if, instead of sitting an upcoming exam, I could research and write a paper on Holocaust memory, focusing on how and why the narratives of homosexual victims of Nazism had been pushed to the margins of genocide commemoration.

I knew a fair amount about the Jewish Holocaust narrative, but I felt embarrassed, as a politically engaged gay guy, that I knew so little about the Nazis’ persecution of homosexuals. I began to explore books and articles. I didn’t know about the origins of the pink triangle. Or the German anti-homosexuality law Paragraph 175. Or that the Nazis considered lesbians non-threatening—a euphemism, perhaps, for “easy to rape.” I learned about the Nazis’ forced castration and arbitrary torture of homosexual prisoners. In some concentration camps, concerned about masturbation, the Nazis forced homosexual prisoners to sleep with their arms outside of their blankets, even in the dead of winter.

My work led me to ask questions about collective memory and silenced histories.

I learned that, after liberation in 1945, British and American lawyers recommended that homosexual prisoners of the Nazi camps be re-incarcerated. Homosexual survivors were denied reparations. Paragraph 175 remained on Germany’s books for decades. And in the 1990s, Ultra-Orthodox rabbis and conservative Christian clergy protested against any inclusion or mention of homosexual victims in U.S. Holocaust museums. Homosexuals persecuted during the war were not considered victims of Nazism—and did not qualify for reparations—until 2002.

Marginalized victimhood became the focus of my doctoral research. And my work broadened. Surely, I began to argue, if a goal of Holocaust education is to identify warning signs of future atrocities, then students should learn about the relationships between different forms of Nazi prejudice, policy, and persecution. This approach is especially vital in the face of continued government-led oppression of Roma, LGBT, and other minority communities around the world.

We can’t understand—not fully—any one of these victim group narratives without the others. The Nazis conducted experiments with gas as a method of murder on people with disabilities before building the gas chambers and ovens that consumed the Jews, Sinti, and Roma. While the Nazis tried to find a “cure” for homosexuality, they considered people of Jewish or Gypsy or African descent as “incurable.” If we omit the non-Jewish victims of Nazism from our collective Holocaust memory, then we lose something critical to our understanding of the Nazis’ full intentions.

I understand why Simon Wiesenthal was frustrated with the insistence of some prominent historians and scholars that definitions of “The Holocaust” refer to only Jewish victims. Definitions matter. Definitions determine what and who makes it into history textbooks and exhibitions and remembrance ceremonies.

I now focus my work on helping educators find ways to include—meaningfully and appropriately—all of the Nazis’ victims within Holocaust commemoration and education. After all, if the Nazis made room for all of these categories of people in their concentration camps, if they made room for them in the same mass-graves, then we have a responsibility to make room for all of the dead in our classrooms, museums, and memorials.


What I Do What I Do: Reason #1

What I Do What I Do: Reason #2

A PLAYGROUND AT BIRKENAU

“How did you get into Holocaust education?” is a common question and I tend to answer differently depending on who’s asking and what’s on my mind.

Why I Do What I Do: Reason #2

As our group walked through Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau, one thing we saw disturbed us over and over again: Tourists with children.

When I was eight years old, I saw something I shouldn’t have seen. We were at the home of my parents’ friends. With the adults in the kitchen, I was in the TV room upstairs with the older kids. Flicking through the channels, our eyes became fixed on the screen: A teenage boy watched naked women and children walk toward the gas chambers of a Nazi camp. He couldn’t look away. In another scene, men who had tried to escape the camp were about to be executed when the Nazi officer in charge explained the full punishment: each condemned man was ordered to choose an additional prisoner to be shot. The hundreds of other prisoners—women and men—were forced to watch the mass execution. If any were to turn their heads or close their eyes, they would also be killed.

This was the made-for-TV film “Escape From Sobibor,” based on real events. I imagined myself in the shoes of the Nazis’ victims and, for years, those violent and confusing scenes gave me nightmares. I can still remember myself sitting on the carpet, looking up at the screen, finding it impossible to look away and stunned into silence. I was too young.

When it comes to Holocaust education, how young is too young? Should Holocaust museums and Holocaust sites set minimum age requirements for visitors? The Imperial War Museum in London sets age requirements for entry to its Holocaust history and crimes against humanity exhibitions. Holocaust museums in the U.S. leave the decision to parents. There was a time, our guide told us, when children under 14 year olds were not allowed on the site of Auschwitz. But that ban was lifted.

Over our three days at Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau last week, we watched toddlers playing—and sometimes throwing tantrums—inside the preserved barracks and prison building of Auschwitz. Seven and eight year olds walked by the ruins of the gas chambers of Birkenau. And they stared at the exhibits of human hair and piles of shoes and explicit photographs of emaciated prisoners and listened through their headphones to the Auschwitz State Museum tour guides who described the gruesome details of mass-murder and Nazi experiments.

As we watched these children and their parents tour Auschwitz, I became more and more troubled. What were the parents’ justifications for bringing their children to these sites of atrocity? Weren’t they concerned about traumatizing them?

Or do the lessons about prejudice and extremism outweigh the emotional risks? How should parents explain this history to their children? At what age are children able—cognitively and emotionally—to comprehend the Nazis’ intentions and actions?

In 1943, the Nazis built a playground in Auschwitz-Birkenau. It was placed in the “Gypsy camp” and it included a sandbox, swings, and a carousel. Unlike most Jewish children who arrived at Auschwitz, children of Roma or Sinti descent were not gassed on arrival. Instead, they were allowed to remain with their families and many were used in Nazi experiments before the “Gypsy camp” was liquidated in August 1944.

Throughout the Nazi era, children witnessed extreme violence. Jewish children smuggled food into the Nazi ghettos. They kept diaries and created art. Jewish parents saved the lives of their children by sending them on the Kindertransports to Great Britain. Meanwhile, German “Aryan” children were indoctrinated into Nazi ideology. The Germans kidnapped Polish children who looked “Aryan” and raised them as Germans. Jewish children, along with the elderly, were often the first to be murdered in the Nazi camps. The experiences of children are woven into the fabric of Holocaust history. But that does not make Holocaust history a child-friendly topic.

One of the reasons I do what I do is out of concern for young learners who, despite the good intentions of teachers and parents, are often exposed to violent Holocaust content too early or in problematic ways.

There’s no perfect solution. Because of the nature of Holocaust and genocide education, we can’t avoid the possibility of traumatizing young learners. But we can minimize the risks. Before choosing to expose learners to violent images—in photographs and on film—teachers, youth educators, museum designers, and parents need to tread carefully:

1. INTRODUCTIONS: When we first introduce children to Holocaust history, we do not need to show them images of starved Jewish children in Nazi ghettos or open mass graves. Violent images can overwhelm and stifle critical thinking. We can teach about Holocaust history through words—spoken or on the page. That way, each learner has a chance to move through content at her or his own emotional pace.

2. PREPARATION: When learners are ready to view violent images, we have to prepare them properly. Although Holocaust history is shocking, we don’t want to shock young people into silence. Before sharing violent images—or before a trip to a museum or historical site—we need to ask learners: What do you expect to see? Then, if their expectations are off, we need to tell them what they will see. That way, we minimize the shock and set the stage for conversation and reflection, later on. (To be clear, we should not tell them how they will feel, because everyone responds differently.)

3. VIEWING: When showing violent images to young people we must provide context. We have to go beyond the image. We can ask learners: Who took the photograph or film, and why? What might have been happening beyond the frame? What might have happened before the photograph or film was taken? What might have happened afterwards? How did the photograph or film survive the war? What evidence does each photograph and film provide?

4. REFLECTING: After viewing violent images, we have to help learners reflect on what they saw. We can ask learners: Did anything surprise you? Did you find it easy or difficult to look at the image, and why? How do the images add to—or even contradict—what you already knew about Holocaust history? What new questions about the Holocaust and genocide do you now have?

My hunch is that the children we saw walking through the Auschwitz sites weren’t prepared or supported in these ways. I’m worried that, when those young and older children look away from the piles of hair and photographs of mass graves, they’ll keep their thoughts and questions to themselves, unable to process and learn from what they saw.


Why I Do What I Do: Reason #1

CRYING TO BE HUMAN

As far as I can remember, learning about the Holocaust has never made me cry. How would I respond in Auschwitz?

I cried when I said goodbye to my friends and family before moving from London to Chicago. I’ve been known to cry when I've had a few too many drinks! I cried when my grandmothers died.

I teach about Nazi eugenics and the development of gas vans and Nazi experiments on pregnant women. And rail cars and Jewish and Roma and homosexual survivors and post-war suicide and inherited trauma. I’m an avid reader of Holocaust literature, particularly for young adults, and I watch and teach Holocaust films. I’ve listened to many Holocaust survivor testimonies—both recorded and live—and I’ve explored Holocaust museums around the world. I’ve tried to wrap my head around the fact that the Nazis murdered so many children who were disabled or Jewish or Roma or Sinti. I learned about the Holocaust in primary school and at home. But the horrific content of Holocaust history, testimony, film, and fiction has never made me cry.

Today, as we stood by the ruins of a gas chamber in Auschwitz-Birkenau, I talked about my personal connection to the Holocaust. My grandfather escaped Nazi-occupied Holland, I explained. But, as far as I know, he didn’t talk about his family’s story. We don’t know the details, but we’re pretty sure that many members of his extended family were murdered in the Nazi camps.

As a teenager, during an organized trip to Yad Vashem, I took myself up to the museum’s archives. The woman behind the desk warned me that finding information about my murdered family would be unlikely; unless, she said, they were Dutch and had an unusual name. “They were from the Netherlands,” I replied, “and the name is Ziekenoppasser.” She led me to the books of the dead. In the final book, on the final pages, I found a list of men and women with the last name Ziekenoppasser, deported from Amsterdam and other Dutch cities and towns, murdered at Sobibor and Auschwitz-Birkenau. Today, the Yad Vashem online database lists 33 entries for Ziekenoppasser. I suspect some of these people are our relatives, but we might never know.

This morning, in the Birkenau prisoner processing center, I found myself searching the anonymous family photographs for people who resembled my Mum’s side of the family. I felt sick as I looked at each image—children playing, weddings, family portraits. But I didn’t cry.

A little while later, standing at the ruins of Gas Chamber III, I recited to my group the little I know of my family’s story. As I did, I wondered if this was exactly where they were murdered and I felt—suddenly, unexpectedly—as if I was honoring their memory. But I didn’t cry. Instead—and this now seems absurd—I realized that I might want to return to Auschwitz, one day.

Yesterday, at Auschwitz I, we stood inside the still-standing gas chamber and walked through the reconstructed crematorium. We wandered into rooms displaying piles of adult shoes, stolen before their owners were gassed. The shoes of murdered children were displayed separately. When I saw the mounds of human hair, I felt a pain in my chest—like a punch. I found myself asking our guide a question about the exhibit, perhaps to prevent myself from crying.

In the Auschwitz prison block (a prison within a prison), we looked at the original bunks, we walked past standing-cells, and we stared at walls covered in official photographs of camp prisoners in their striped uniforms, emaciated men, androgynous women, all soon to be dead. I didn’t cry.

I followed our tour guide, as if in a trance, staring at a pile of hairbrushes and toothbrushes and shaving brushes. My mind took me to the perpetrators. How did the Nazi guards allow themselves to participate in these horrific crimes? How could human beings treat other human beings in these horrific ways? It’s unfathomable.

As I walked through Auschwitz, I thought about my family, murdered here. But I didn’t cry. And I thought about the Nazi guards who led them to their deaths. The Nazis must have been in some kind of trance, I found myself thinking. These murderers had hypnotized themselves. They weren’t thinking things through. They were confused, intoxicated by the mist that moved through the system of violence and murder that they had designed. If the Nazi guards and their leaders had stopped for just one second, surely they would have realized what they, as humans, were doing to other humans.

Last night, I shared this notion—of Nazi guards in a trance—with the rest of my group. “The Nazis knew what they were doing,” people in my group reminded me, “they knew what they believed.” I was listening carefully to what they were saying, but it didn’t make any sense.

When I teach about Holocaust history, I not only strive to humanize the Nazis’ victims; I also strive to humanize the Nazis themselves. Too often, through Holocaust films and museum exhibitions and fiction and the sensationalist media, we portray the Nazi leadership and lower-level camp guards as monsters. We display photographs of Nazi officers in their pressed uniforms, smiling with their fingers on the triggers of their guns, watching with cold eyes as children are marched to their suffocation. We call them evil. Monsters. As if their actions were inevitable, uncontrollable. By doing so, we excuse them; we ignore the decisions they made. The frightening truth is that the Nazis were just as human as their victims. Years before they became Nazis, as children, they played games and did their homework. They had life dreams and ambitions. They fell in love. They had children of their own. But if we paint these men and women as monsters, we keep the perpetrators at a distance. Look what they did, we say. This is what evil looks like! By painting the Nazis as inherently inhumane, we are saying that “real” human beings could never perpetrate or become complicit in genocide; we could never be capable of committing such atrocities, we tell ourselves.

The image of Nazi guards, walking in a trance, following murderous orders, replayed again and again in my head. How can it be possible to see others as anything but human? “It’s impossible,” I said to my colleague. “No. It’s possible,” he said to me, “—it’s just impossible for you.” I understood what he was saying and, for a moment, I choked on my tears.

FROM MY HOTEL ROOM IN AUSCHWITZ

We just arrived in the town of Oświęcim (pronounced Oshvienshim; renamed Auschwitz by the Nazis). We’ll be here for one week. But I’m ready to return home.

It’s as if everything we’ve seen and talked about so far has been leading to this.

I arrived in Poland with a number of misunderstandings. I didn’t expect its towns and cities and buildings to be so beautiful. I didn’t expect to be eating at sushi restaurants while listening to Adele and Justin Timberlake. I didn’t expect to meet people dedicated to rebuilding the Polish Jewish community. The Poland I’m experiencing is modern and vibrant and, at the same time—like every country in the world—struggles with its past.

Last year, when President Obama referred to a “Polish death camp”—rather than a Nazi death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland—his comment enraged Poles and others around the world. The Nazis murdered approximately six million Polish people, around half of them Jews. From 1939, the Nazis kidnapped tens of thousands of Christian Polish children who looked “Aryan” and raised them as Germans. I understand why it’s so offensive to think of these sites of atrocity as Polish sites. The so-called “Hitlerites” are hated here.

After our arrival in Kraków, we visited the Gestapo headquarters and prison where we learned about the Nazi brutality against Polish intellectuals and clergy. We entered the cells that had witnessed obscene violence and murder. Just as we were leaving, an old man arrived—he was a former prisoner of the Nazis, our guide told us. We toured the old city. We talked to survivors of Nazi camps. We met with modern-day Jewish leaders. We explored the areas that were once the Jewish ghettos of Kraków, Warsaw, and Łódź. We stood inside synagogues, some restored, some in ruins. We met with a woman who risked herself to save Jewish lives. We explored sites of Jewish, Roma, and Sinti deportation. We walked into Jewish cemeteries. We met with a man whose grandfather was a high ranking Nazi officer. We stood at the mass grave at Płaszów. And we walked through the killing field at Treblinka. I came to Poland and to these sites of Nazi atrocity for a purpose. To see for myself. To become a better educator. To be a witness of memory.

But I’ve seen enough. I want to go home. I miss my family.

It’s after midnight now. Here in my hotel room. Here in Oświęcim. Peaceful, pretty Oświęcim where I ate pizza for dinner. The Auschwitz camp complex is just a short walk away. We’re scheduled to head over to Auschwitz tomorrow afternoon. The next day, we’ll tour Auschwitz-Birkenau. We’ll see the brick buildings and barbed wire. The barracks. The gas chamber of Auschwitz I. The mounds of shoes and the piles of disintegrating human hair. We’ll be here in Oświęcim for one week.

I’m trying to push away any expectations. I’m trying to swallow my fear. I’m trying to pretend that being here is normal. People live here in Oświęcim. Thousands of tourists and teenagers walk through Auschwitz every summer. I’ve seen Treblinka. How much worse can it get? Every day, I read news reports about ongoing genocide. I walk past people starving on the streets of Chicago, all the time. I watch news clips of mass shootings in American schools. And gang rapes in India. And fire-bombings of Roma homes in Hungary. And petrol burnings of gay men and transgender women in Iraq. Seeing Auschwitz shouldn’t be any different. Human suffering is human suffering. Mass-murder is mass-murder. Right?

WHAT THE FAKE?!

(HOW TO TRIVIALIZE TRAUMATIC HISTORY AND TRAUMATIZE YOUR AUDIENCE AT THE SAME TIME.)

In coming to Poland to visit sites of Nazi atrocity, I’ve tried to keep an open mind around my expectations. But there was something I never expected to see.

“Where are we?” A train station, attempting to flee the impending attack. But it’s too late. Three steps forward and we’re surrounded by falling, crashing bombs, darkness, smashing glass, screaming. As we turn the corner, Nazi flags block our path. We weave between them and find ourselves on a street. Uneven cobblestones, a tram. We walk into what looks like a courtroom. A Nazi officer’s hat rests on a podium; behind us, a stranger puts it on. Suddenly there are Swastikas covering the floor. As we step on them, triumphant German music blasts on loudspeakers above—a celebration. After boarding the tram, we arrive at St. Michael’s Prison. At this point, we’re frightened to move on. The bottom of the dark stairwell is out of sight but, compelled to climb down, we discover a dark doorway. Behind the locked door, we hear terrifying sounds—coughing, shouting, screaming. It’s not real, we tell ourselves. Running back up the stairs, we find ourselves in the ghetto, weaving through shadows of dark and narrow alleyways, Jewish faces staring out at us. We look through windows of crowded apartments at white figures, ghosts, paused in sadness, illness. Each step is more frightening. Then sunlight, blinding us—this is a quarry, white stones cover the ground, we look at frozen prisoners in the distance through the barbed wire fence. We are standing in Płaszów Concentration Camp, a site of Nazi brutality and mass-murder...

This is the fairly new exhibition “Kraków under Nazi Occupation 1939-1945” at the actual site of the Schindler Factory (where Oskar Schindler employed Polish Jews and succeeded in saving the lives of over 1,000 people).

We had expected an exhibition focusing on Schindler’s story. Instead, we experienced a twisted theme-park ride. A Holocaust House of Horrors. Genocide at Disneyland. We cringed and gasped and recoiled; not at the often vague historical content, but at the designers’ irresponsible decisions.

When I teach about the design of Holocaust museums, I usually share with students a working theory I have: Holocaust museums in the U.S. are more likely to sensationalize history through immersive environments and simulations than museums in the U.K., Germany, Israel, and elsewhere. The elevators at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C. resemble the interior of the Nazi gas chambers. The floor and walls of a room at the Illinois Holocaust Museum and Education Center mimic the killing fields and mass-graves of the Einsatzgruppen (the Nazis’ mobile shooting squads). The Virginia Holocaust Museum warns on its website, “Guests should wear appropriate attire to crawl through an exhibit.”

Through my work, I warn against such designs because...

1. Trying to recreate the experiences of Holocaust victims and survivors trivializes the actual events and real stories of the Nazi era. We’ll never know what it felt like to suffocate inside a gas chamber. We’ll never know what it felt like to starve in a ghetto before being deported in an over-crowded rail car to an unknown destination. We can never understand, so why try?

2. These kinds of simulated environments can be traumatizing for adults, let alone 12-year-olds. I’ve witnessed engaged groups of teenagers walk through these kinds of spaces only to become shocked and silenced and unable to discuss essential questions about history and human behavior. The intellectual purpose of Holocaust education is stifled by careless emotional manipulation.

3. Many young people already understand suffering. Many live in poverty. Some are refugees or children of refugees from war torn countries. Many are bullied at school, or abused at home. Some are survivors of rape. Many are depressed, many self-harm, some are thinking about suicide. When we teach about genocide and human suffering, we need to remember that a teenager may already be trying to cope with her or his own trauma.

4. These experiential, literal designs are filled with fake artifacts, fake streets, fake ghetto walls, fake sounds, fake barbed fences, even fake documents. Next to these fake objects, designers display real artifacts. But, because so much of these environments are make-believe, the authenticity of the real artifacts is called into question. In the face of Holocaust and genocide denial, this is a serious problem.

But still these immersive exhibitions are created. And it looks like this phenomenon isn’t limited to the U.S.; Fake artifacts and fake experiences have found their way onto the actual sites of Holocaust history.

After walking through the Kraków museum’s exhibition, we met with a member of its design team. We asked her about the immersive design. They visited museums in the U.S. and copied their approaches, she explained. “We had to use some simplifications,” she told us. “The museum world is changing. To get young people involved, you can’t use traditional methods.” Those were her exact words.

Have museum designers lost faith in young people? Do museum professionals perceive teenagers as incapable of having respectful, complex conversations about prejudice and hate and social responsibility?

Immersive design within Holocaust education seems to be spreading—and getting worse. Museums are spending millions to manipulate and patronize and traumatize their visitors, and to simplify and sensationalize and trivialize history. We have to challenge and change this.

WASHING MY HANDS AT THE CEMETERY

Until today, because of my adherence to a specific Jewish law, I had never visited a cemetery.

When my Grandma (my Mum’s mother) died, I stood in the doorway of the funeral building and participated, at a distance, in the short prayer service. When my family walked down to the cemetery for the funeral ceremony, I stayed behind. I sat on a wall, overlooking a flower garden, waiting. My Grandma would have laughed and rolled her eyes at the absurdity of the archaic rules.

A year or so later, when the mother of my good friend passed away, I wanted to attend the funeral. My Mum was upset by the idea. “But you’re a Cohen,” she said to me, “ —please don’t go.” I attended the prayer service—I stood in a separate section, away from everyone else—but, respecting my Mum’s request, I didn’t enter the cemetery for the burial.

Cohen is my family name from my father’s side. Cohanim—with lineage passed through males—are considered to be the descendants of the biblical Aaron, the first high priest (and the brother of Miriam and Moses). In ancient times, Cohanim performed the duties of the Temple, including overseeing holy sacrifies of animals and grains. In many Jewish communities today, these priests continue to hold a special status.

As a teenager, during high holiday services, I removed my shoes, I held out my hands to be washed with cool water, and, at the front of the synagogue with the other Cohanim, I stood beneath my talit—my white and black prayer shawl—with my arms and clean hands and fingers outstretched to transmit a blessing onto the congregation.

Because of this and other responsibilities, Cohanim must follow specific rules to remain spiritually pure. One emotionally difficult rule is the prohibition of a Cohen to enter a cemetery. The only exception to this is for a Cohen to attend the funeral of his own parent, sibling, child, or spouse.

On school trips, while my classmates toured cathedrals, because the buildings contained tombs, I waited outside. In my late teens, during visits to Jerusalem, when my friends visited Israel’s national cemetery on Mount Herzl, I stayed on the bus. And I didn’t attend my Grandma’s burial or the burials of my uncles or the burial of my friend’s mother.

As I grew older, I began to adhere to the Reform Jewish position on the status of Cohanim: Since biblical lineage is impossible to determine, and since the notion of Cohanim contradicts the value of egalitarianism, I let go of my priestly identity.

A few weeks ago, I called my Mum. I explained to her that I’d be traveling to Poland for my work. I would be visiting sites of Nazi concentration camps and extermination camps and mass graves and cemeteries. I am a Cohen, but I’m also a Holocaust educator. I have obligations. To witness. To explore and to ask questions. And to teach. My Mum understood why I wanted to break the rule.

Today, as I took my first steps into the centuries old Remuh Cemetery in Kraków’s Jewish quarter, I whispered to my colleague that this was my first time in a cemetery and I briefly explained why. The Remuh Cemetery had been practically destroyed by the Nazi occupiers, our guide told us. We were now looking at a field of rescued gravestones that had been placed somewhat haphazardly over mostly anonymous Jewish graves. Assuming correctly that I wouldn’t know much about the rituals of visiting Jewish cemeteries, my colleague explained to me that it was customary to wash one’s hands when leaving such a site, as a symbol of spiritual cleansing.

We wandered along the pathways between the graves. At the back of the cemetery, broken pieces of gravestones had been pieced together to form part of the cemetery’s wall—a monument to the dead, a metaphor for the Nazi destruction, a reflection of Holocaust survivors’ attempts to rebuild their lives, a symbol of the re-emergence of Jewish life in Europe.

In the afternoon, we visited the site of the Nazi concentration camp at Płaszów (pronounced Pwashouv). The Nazis murdered thousands at Płaszów, mostly with bullets, including Polish Christians and Clergy, Polish Jews, political opponents of Nazism, and a group of Hungarian Jewish women originally destined for Auschwitz-Birkenau. Destroyed by the Nazis at the end of the war, Płaszów is marked by a handful of monuments. But the site looks like—and seems to be used as—a public park. Our guide pointed out a grass-covered dip in the landscape right in front of us—an unmarked mass-grave. We watched parents stroll around the “park” with their children. We watched one couple sitting on the grass taking photographs of their baby.

Earlier, by the exit of Remuh Cemetery, I noticed the sink for ritual hand washing. But I didn’t use it. “I'll wash my hands when I leave Poland,” I said to my colleague. “Or maybe never.”

THE THUNDERSTORM

When we were given the option to attend a Friday night Shabbat service in Kraków, the idea of reciting prayers alongside other “Holocaust tourists” felt forced. I made an excuse and declined the invitation. But then I changed my mind.

As the congregation finished singing Oseh Shalom—a Jewish prayer for peace—the room flashed with lightening. After a boom of thunder, rain began to fall from the vaulted ceiling and onto the people in the middle of the room. (I think there was an open window.) The crowd of American teenagers cheered and laughed at the fun of it. I started to worry, and I suppose others were worried too, that the rainwater would touch the hanging spotlights. Hesitating only briefly, the Rabbi and her accompanying musicians continued to play. The room was filled with both nervousness and excitement, a contradiction pulling me in both directions.

The Shabbat service was being held in the main hall of the Galicia Jewish Museum. The permanent exhibition had been pushed to the hall’s perimeter, allowing for some 250 people to form a makeshift community; around 150 adults on chairs, around 100 teenagers from NFTY (North America's Jewish Reform youth movement) sitting on the floor, at the front.

I was an observer. The adults swayed their shoulders and tapped their knees to the melodies of the familiar Hebrew prayers. The teenagers sang loudly and clapped along to the beat. Between songs, their leaders shushed them whenever they became too rowdy. My eyes took me to the museum’s walls covered by exhibition panels of beautiful color photographs of the Polish countryside, green fields under blue skies, a garden in bloom, the ruins of a building, gravestones, the empty bunks of a Nazi camp barracks. This was the museum’s permanent Holocaust exhibition, pushed to the sides of the room to make space for this joyful prayer service. The realization was jarring; we were surrounded by remnants of the fields and Nazi structures that witnessed mass-murder.

The Rabbi had started the service by reminding us that we were in the middle of the three weeks between the Fast of Tammuz and the Fast of Av when Jews around the world mourn the destruction of the biblical temples. Traditionally, during this time, music and most celebrations are prohibited. But, keeping her words vague while referring to the main purpose of the congregation’s pilgrimage, the Rabbi suggested that we make an exception.

As the musicians played another uplifting prayer, my eyes took me to the exhibit signs hanging from the museum’s ceiling: “Massacre.” “Jewish Life in Ruins.” I glanced down at the photocopied songbook in my hands and began to read the translation. “Unending love have you shown the House of Israel.” My eyes shifted back to the walls and onto the images of encampments and killing fields—God’s unending love! The teenagers continued to clap to the rhythm and harmonize at the tops of their voices in holy praise. As the Rabbi began to sing “Shema, Yisra’el...”—Hear, O’Israel...—the Hebrew words fell from my mouth as if they had been buried inside me and finally had the chance to escape.

Standing for Kaddish, the mourners’ prayer, the Rabbi acknowledged the photographs of graves and empty landscapes on the walls around us. She reminded us that we mourn the loss of many lives and she invited us to speak the names of our dead. I began to whisper the tongue-twisting words of the ancient prayer, but the names of my grandfather’s murdered family were stuck in my throat.