German Army Museum Dresden - The years 1914-45

[Koppi]

Today pictures from the permanent exhibition in Dresden, years 1914-45. Report in german, introduction in english.

https://thrifles.blogspot.de/2017/09/mhm-dresden-dauerausstellung-1914-1945.html

[Lardy Rich]

Koppi

Thanks for posting this. There does seem to be a real degree of uncertainty in Germany about how to present WWII.  Myself and some friends visited the West Wall earlier this year, specifically the Hurtgen Forest sector and were somewhat surprised to see the information boards at the soldatenfriedhof refer to the German population being "liberated" by the Allies.

I have no issue about accepting that fact that the NSDAP regime did not represent the German people as a whole, but it did seem rather insulting to the German war dead to suggest that they were fighting to against their own liberation and I'd question how many of them would have viewed the Allies as liberators.

It seemed rather childish to me. 

Rich

[carlos marighela]

Just to think, all of the exhibits are fashioned from fine Meissen china!

In a sense, the Germans were liberated. They were liberated from fascism. Some more, some less willingly than others.

[Lardy Rich]

Carlos

That would be in a very 21st century sense.

The allied troops occupying Germany were told in no uncertain terms that they were NOT liberators but conquerors and they were to behave as such.  The Soviet troops attitude towards the German population is all too well known.  In no part of Germany were the defeated population allowed to form their own government, but for years were administered as an occupied territory with minimal rights for the defeated population. 

We could indeed claim the Germans were liberated from National Socialism, as indeed the EU funded notice boards do state, but my point is that this is not a truthful representation of what happened and it certainly was not a view that anyone would have propounded until recently.

My concern here is as an historian.  If we twist historical events in order to suit our modern view of the world, we are in danger of failing to learn any real lessons from history. 

Rich

[Westfalia Chris]

I guess I must step in to curb this discussion right now since you are going straight into the politics territory (and to avoid the inevitable can of worms this always opens, we don't allow ANY political topic).

I don't want to lock the topic as of now, but I would like to add some explanation to put things into perspective.

In this context, it is a pity that the linked blogpost, in its majority, is not available in English, since it is predominantly focused on various didactic concepts concerning museum and exhibition designs, and a perceived inability of German museums to create exhibitions that provide a holistic image. In particular, Koppi highlights that this specific exhibition singularly fails to provide a coherent treatise of its chosen focus, which is indeed a pity, and is an issue with many German museums beyond the fine arts sphere (and even there).

It straddles the line of no politics on the forum, but since it is essentially an external source of some merit, I would prefer to leave the link and topic in.

I do take issue with your viewpoint, Rich, of the "liberation vs. conquest" discourse, which is considerably foreshortened and not an accurate interpretation of the actual discussion, which may be explained by a non-German viewpoint.

In various forms, it has been with us since at least the 1950s, in the early years being used as a tool of exculpation by some and a focal raison d'etre by the left, especially in the former GDR, but gained further momentum in the 1980s. A turning point was 1985, when it was explicitly formulated by then-federal president Richard von Weizsäcker in a speech commerorating the capitulation of May 8, 1945. A centrist, or moderate conservative, he expressed what has today essentially become the public consensus, in that it was an act of liberation, in hindsight.  It coincided with other conservative moves concerning remembrance and historical interpretation (e.g. Chancellor Kohl's notorious visit to the Bitburg War Cemetery), but was well-received internationally and domestically.

The liberation topos became a fundamental element of German remembrance culture, but is explicitly used in retrospective, and in full knowledge (unless used with an exculpatory motive) that it was only perceived as such by elements of German society in 1945 and afterwards and was not a majority opinion then. Revisionists in particular were and are loathe to use the term, and the implication if used in a public context, such as museums, memorials and the like, is essentially that 1945 was a liberation of an evil that Germany and the Germans had wrought upon themselves and were unable and in a considerable majority unwilling to rid themselves of. Better exhibition designs manage to highlight this (such as the Karlshorst exhibition Koppi mentions in its post, which, despite the inevitable Russian/Soviet point-of-view, achieves a stringent and holistic design); poorly-conceived treatments fail to provide the big picture and situate its particulars within it.

Since Museums must cater to the present-day crowd (as much as I miss the classic approach myself), they will have to adopt a 21st century viewpoint on the forefront of scientific research. It is the job of the curators and exhibition designers to put it into historical perspective as well.

With this, I would like to end this discussion right here and now. Please focus on hobby aspects, or I will have to lock this topic.

[carlos marighela]

Thanks Chris!