On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 6:35 PM, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Ray Saintonge <sainto...@telus.net> wrote: >> George Herbert wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> There is a mailing list for block reviews, this isn't it. We also >>>> don't usually get into discussing specific content issues here unless >>>> there is a point of wider significance to the encyclopedia. >>>> >>>> You believe Holocaust denial can only be defined using the separate >>>> definitions of "Holocaust" and "denial", and want the article to >>>> reflect your definition. Others state (correctly) that the term >>>> "Holocaust denial" taken as a whole is used to refer specifically to >>>> denial of the Holocaust of Jews (Shoah). Perhaps if we try to glean >>>> wider significance from this incident, it would be in the area of >>>> dealing with specious arguments from editors of long tenure who have >>>> become sophisticated in their misuse of dispute processes. >>>> >>> This dispute looks either like some combination of original research, >>> disruption, or possibly active but intellectual support of holocaust >>> denialists. >>> >> Original research perhaps; disruption perhaps, but it is dishonest to >> call it "intellectual support of holocaust denialists." Expanding a >> term to a wider application certainly does not equate to holocaust >> denial. It merely recognizes the plain fact that those who deny the >> suffering of other victims than the dominant group are just as guilty of >> denying the Holocaust. >> >> I don't dispute that the Jews were the dominant victims of the >> Holocaust, but it is extremely disturbing when some appear to abuse that >> dominance to minimize the suffering of others. That the victimized Jews >> were more numerous than the others increases the likelihood that they >> have relatives to write about them. The higher value that Jews attach to >> literacy also increases the same likelihood. Gays had a much lower >> number of progeny to write on their behalf. So I fully expect that more >> will be written by Jews about Jews, but the smaller numbers of others >> does not make the fate of those others any less tragic. >> > This is an amazing thing you've written. I've read your posts for > perhaps two years, but I will read all future comments in an entirely > new light.
I'm not endorsing what anyone has said in this thread (I think Ray put things the way he did very clumsily), but it doesn't take much Googling to find seemingly reputable sources on stuff related to this (I searched for "overemphasis" and "Holocaust"): http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&source=hp&q=overemphasis+holocaust&btnG=Google+Search&meta=&aq=f&oq=overemphasis+holocaust&fp=5328dbdaa6a8f0fa Now, among those are the usual suspects of far-right and other anti-semitic groups, but also some that are superficially, or actually, reputable. First the superficially reputable one: http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=131913 "Critical Holocaust Anthology" "Today, the language of the holocaust cannot be understood apart from the Jewish experience. Historically, this argument is suspect, if not inadequate. The intent of this proposed anthology is to understand why this national investment is made and to what extent these terms impact debates concerning genocide beyond the Jewish community. [...]" However, further searching seems to indicate this anthology was never published (or if it was, that it was not widely reviewed or well-received). That call for papers was dated 2003, but was circulating earlier as well. I found a criticism of it here: http://www.atlanticblog.com/archives/000104.html Moving on to something that (to my mind) is more clearly reputable: http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=052138057X "After Tragedy and Triumph - Essays in Modern Jewish Thought and the American Experience" [Published November 1990] "The story of American Jewry is inextricably entwined with the awesome defeat of the Holocaust and the rebirth of the state of Israel. However, for Michael Berenbaum, and others of his generation, whose adult consciousness included the war in Lebanon and the Palestinian Uprisings, the tale is more anguished [...]" Chapter 4 is titled: "Is the centrality of the Holocaust overemphasised? Two dialogues". We have an article on the author of that book, Berenbaum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Berenbaum Another article he has written is here: http://giving.ajula.edu/Content/ContentUnit.asp?CID=982&u=4444&t=0 "The Complexity of the Jewish Narrative in Our Times" >From that article, we have: "Dr. Berenbaum is the Director of the Sigi Ziering Institute Exploring the Ethical and Religious Implications of the Holocaust. He is the author and editor of 13 books, scores of scholarly articles and hundreds of journalistic pieces on the Shoah. This fall he will publish two books, A Promise to Remember: The Holocaust in the Words and Voices of Its Survivors and Martyrdom: The Psychology, Politics and Theology of An Idea." The Sigi Ziering Institute is mentioned in our article on the American Jewish University: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Jewish_University But whenever I get the feeling that coverage of something is (for me) overwhelming and saturating, I meet someone who doesn't know what the Holocaust was, or is only dimly aware of the horror of the Holocaust. And I realise then how difficult it is to make sure people don't forget what happened, and how important it is to make sure people do remember (and that applies to other things as well, such as the World Wars in general). Staying on the general topic, the whole phenomena of how coverage of certain areas of history rises and falls, is fascinating. The number of books on certain subjects goes through the roof when anniversaries arrive (as has been seen recently with the commemorations of the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of WW2). There was a big spike in books about WW1 a few years ago, when the 90th anniversary commemorations were being held. And so on. The way in which coverage and reaction to the Holocaust has varied over the years is in some ways similar, but in other ways very different. I also found this: http://www.humanitas-international.org/holocaust/methods.htm A guide to how to present the Holocaust. Is that something worth considering (if it is any good - I looked around a bit for stuff on "Humanitas International" but couldn't find that much)? Founded by Joan Baez, apparently: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Baez Carcharoth _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
