Through our Meet the Fellows series, we introduce the researchers in our fellowship programme and the questions that shape their work. In this interview we speak with Alexander Walther whose doctoral project explored discourse about the Holocaust in East Germany and shows how Holocaust survivors from early on were actively involved in the commemoration of the Holocaust in the GDR and how they negotiated their identity in its wake.
Can you briefly describe your doctoral research project for a non-specialist audience?
My dissertation explored how the Holocaust was commemorated, represented, discussed, or marginalized in East Germany between 1945 and 1990. I was particularly interested in exploring the role of Jewish survivors in this field, especially since they acted in a German environment, and, thus, a post-perpetrator society.
I was mostly intrigued to pursue this topic due to two reasons: first because I was keen to understand how Jewish survivors, at least those who chose to return to or stay in Germany, made sense of their existence in this country, and how they managed, if so, to articulate their experiences of persecution under National Socialism. Second, I was struck that when I started with my project in 2014 there was quite a bit of research on this topic, however most texts, especially from the 1990s, disregarded almost altogether any efforts made by Jewish survivors to contribute something to the discourse.
How does your current work engage with wider themes or ongoing debates in your academic field?
For a few years now, scholars have challenged the notion that in the first 15 or so years after the end of the war, the Holocaust was not dealt with entirely. Seemingly, it took the trial against Adolf Eichmann that sparked a first interest. However, this disregards the efforts of various survivors, some of whom already started to document the crimes while they were still going on. This new research has shown how energetic Jewish survivors acted, how they tried to convey their experiences, and what consequences they drew from it. Especially the networks of these survivors, sometimes spanning the entire globe, are fascinating and are still being researched.
How has the LBI fellowship influenced your research and academic progress?
It may sound overdramatic, but without the fellowship I wouldn’t have been able to finish my PhD, at least not in the form I did. The fellowship allowed me to enter the scholarship programme of the Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes which helped me pursue my research during the Covid-19 pandemic and beyond. Also, during the LBI fellowship I met the most amazing people who have helped me greatly, either by reading parts of my texts or providing literature I couldn’t get otherwise.
The LBI has been part of my academic journey for much longer, though. In 2013, I was an intern at the LBI, and got to meet a few academic legends like Peter Pulzer and the great Arnold Paucker. Paucker actually features in my dissertation as well since he had been in contact with East German Jewish historian Helmut Eschwege since the 1970s. When I met in 2013, however, I hadn’t started my dissertation so had no idea about the connection. He passed before I could talk to him about it, but I’ve talked with his wife, Pauline, about Eschwege.
If you could share one insight or piece of advice with future researchers interested in German-Jewish studies, what would it be?
Again, it may sound overdramatic, but do go with your guts and trust your instinct. If you have a hunch that you might be on to something, you likely really are. It is, however, always good to share your ideas so do apply for the fellowship, share your ideas, and be inspired. If you can’t convince a single of the other fellows, however, you might need to think again about your approach.
Picture copyright: Karla Mohr | mohrfeeling
