After eighty years of steady immigration, Britain’s Polish community has become the United Kingdom’s largest foreign population. Despite the physical and generational separation of Anglo-Poles from Poland, controversies surrounding Polish-Jewish 29 historical memory frequently arise within the community. British-Polish groups have responded bitterly to this divisive issue, most notably in their responses toward international cinematic representations of Polish-Jewish wartime relations. The ongoing responses from Anglo-Poles toward films depicting World War II are noteworthy because their sentiments mirror the international controversies surrounding the current Polish government’s denial of Polish-Nazi collaboration. The growing importance film plays in historical education, national memory, and self-identity thus make it a trigger for Anglo-Poles. Academics such as Jan Gross, Anton Polonsky, and Joanna B. Michlic currently lead international debates on Polish historical memory. They warn of the dangers of the “martyrdom” narrative adopted by many nationalist Poles that emphasizes Polish-Catholic wartime suffering over the significantly more lethal treatment Polish Jews faced, sometimes at the hands of their own neighbors.
This analysis seeks to examine two principal questions: Why, despite their physical and generational separation from Poland, do Anglo-Polish communities mirror ongoing Polish debates surrounding wartime cinematic portrayals?; and do they react strongly against critical cinematic portrayals because the films are historically inaccurate, or because some Anglo-Poles retain connections with Poland and therefore feel personally attacked? Through an analysis of the contemporary wartime TV series Generation War, translated Polish Underground pamphlets, eyewitness testimonies, and post-war collaboration trial reports, this study will argue that, despite historical evidence, a significant number of Anglo-Poles still reject cinematic portrayals of Polish anti-Jewish wartime actions. The vociferous reactions some Anglo-Poles exhibit towards Holocaust cinema mirroring Poland’s current debates suggest that Anglo-Poles might identify more with their Polish than with their British heritage.
GENERATION WAR: THE PRAISE AND CONTROVERSY OF DEPICTING NAZI COLLABORATION
Generation War exemplifies the current progression of Holocaust films because of its emphasis on the emotional complexity of the war for Germans and other wartime perpetrators. Carefully developed over a period of ten years, director Philipp Kadelbach’s purpose for Generation War was to force Germans to acknowledge the trauma inflicted by the war, as well as their own families’ contributions to the Reich. Inspired by his father’s post-traumatic stress disorder and guilt as a post-war Wehrmacht soldier, Kadelbach believed that Germany had reached a critical point in its history. Younger Germans, he argued, now could engage in difficult discussions surrounding the legacy of World War II because enough time had passed for them to press their remaining relatives to recount their actual wartime experiences. Through these discussions, younger German generations could finally begin to comprehend their familial ties to the Third Reich, allowing their older relatives to make peace with their crimes before their approaching deaths.1 Even though Germany is internationally praised for acknowledging its culpability for the Holocaust, Generation War boldly confronts Vergangenheitsbewältigung, how Germany remembers its past. Filmmakers like Kadelbach believe that it is not enough simply to assume responsibility for the war; Germans must also analyze the emotional effects and guilt that linger along the blurred lines of collaboration, complicity, and ignorance.2
Originally released in German, Polish, and Russian as an hour-and-a-half, three-part television series, Generation War immediately became an international sensation. In addition to costing over fourteen million dollars and capturing the attention of a quarter of all German TV watchers by its final episode, the series received global acclaim when it was awarded the international Emmy for Best TV Movie/Mini-Series.3 Unexpectedly, the series was released in eighty different countries, from Britain and Australia to the US, where Generation War became the first German TV series in American history to be shown in theaters.4 Generation War’s international success hinged on the shock value it created; never before had German broadcasters, in this case Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (ZDF), produced a series that portrayed German perpetrators as both victims and collaborators.
The series documents the lives of five German friends from 1940 to 1945, depicting their emotional and psychological depletion by the war’s end. Four of the five friends directly contribute to Nazi Germany’s war effort: one as a nurse, one as a radio singer, and two as Wehrmacht soldiers on the Eastern front. The fifth character is a German Jew named Viktor who survives the war in part due to his time in the Polish Underground Resistance. The first episode opens with each of the five friends promising that despite the personal journeys each will endure during the war, they will reunite to spend “Christmas in Berlin,” assuming that Germany would quickly win the war and that the Reich would be established.5 The graphically-portrayed warfare, death, dehumanization, and sexual assault that follow, however, contradict their aspirations for “Christmas in Berlin.” The viewer sees this in various situations illustrating the dehumanizing effect of warfare and the compromising of ethical standards for survival. The series concludes by borrowing from the genre of documentary, providing the birth and death dates of all but one of the characters, the survivor reinforcing the point that secret wartime trauma and memory lingers even today within our family and friends.
Critics and historians acclaimed the series for confronting the emotional trauma of the war embedded in German society. By representing complexities of the war that had never been portrayed in mainstream media, the show was praised for exploring juxtapositions of victims and perpetrators, as well as the gray zone in between, which the series suggests describes most Germans during the war. Psychoanalyst and sociologist Christian Schneider praised Generation War for fostering new dialogue in German historical memory by addressing how Germans can now begin to reconcile the crimes they had committed with their own wartime suffering.6 Historian Robert Moeller stressed the importance of the series because it made visible to the world the extent to which Holocaust memory still affects Germans. Although they have ceased denying their role in the Shoah, a broader understanding of how the Holocaust impacted German society has yet to be developed.7 Additionally, historian Norbert Frei argued that, despite its historical inaccuracies, the series should be applauded because it highlights a variety of war-related themes, issues, and events rarely shown on German television.8 Generation War’s depictions of Eastern European battlefields, inclusion of recent historiographical research concerning the Wehrmacht’s participation in Einsatzgruppen killings such as Christopher Browning’s 1992 Ordinary Men, and lingering anti-Semitism in postwar Germany underscore the validity of the series.
Despite the international acclaim and attention Generation War received, the portrayal of the five German friends and the anti-Semitism within the Polish Resistance sparked multiple controversies. Numerous critics and historians argued that the German friends were portrayed too innocently, and that their ignorance of the murderous intentions of the Reich was implausible. These characters, after all, were in their early twenties and had been raised under Nazi legislation and indoctrination. Historian Ulrich Herbert argued that instead of accurately depicting the complicity and devotion of young adults to the Nazi party, the series instead portrayed how most Germans wished they were during the war – unaware and innocent of the horrors and implications of Nazi anti-Jewish policy.9 Other critics contended that the overall premise of the series was inappropriate as it portrayed those responsible for perpetrating World War II in a sympathetic light. The online Jewish magazine Tablet emphasized the inappropriateness of showing “Nazi mass killers with love in their hearts,” decrying the implication of the series that Germans were to some degree also victims of the war. The magazine insisted instead that all Germans were “enthusiastic racists who endorsed Hitler’s program of conquest, subjugation, and colonization.”10 In short, many viewed the decision to depict the suffering of Germans as an attempt to reject German guilt and responsibility for the war and the Holocaust.
Four specific scenes pertaining to Viktor’s interactions with the Polish Underground after he escapes from an Auschwitz-bound train with Alina, a Polish woman, incited anger internationally. These scenes resulted in protests, lawsuits, and denunciations by the Polish government. The first depicts the aggressive questioning Viktor receives from the Armia Krajowa (also known as the Home Army or Polish Underground) leader before he is officially allowed to join the local Home Army unit. After testing Alina’s loyalty to Poland, the leader immediately grabs Viktor’s face, smells him, and asks if he is Jewish.11 Without hesitating, Alina replies “No,” for she knows Viktor’s safety is at risk if the AK discovers he is Jewish. Unconvinced, the leader places a knife under Viktor’s throat, and Alina lies, claiming that she and Viktor are lovers. By doing so, she implies that he could not be Jewish as she would never risk defiling her Polishness by having sexual relations with a Jew. The second scene to cause a Polish backlash occurs during a conversation between the AK unit and the local Poles with whom they collaborate. At one point, a local Pole asks, “Are there Jews among you?”, to which the Resistance leader quickly replies, “Jews? Are there any here? Are there any Jews present? No, no. I can’t stand Jews.” Once the local Pole is satisfied with this answer, another Home Army member proudly comments, “We drown Jews like we do cats.”12
The third portrayal of negative Polish-Jewish wartime relations occurs when the AK commandeers a German train in hope of stealing German supplies. The AK is disappointed to find that the majority of the cattle cars are filled with Jewish prisoners. Extremely perturbed by the suffering of the Jewish prisoners, Viktor immediately asks the partisans if they will assist the hundreds of Jews they have discovered. One partisan quickly replies, “They are mostly Jews. Jews are just as bad as communists and Russians. Better dead than alive.”13 Despite his ability to restrain himself from speaking out against these anti-Semitic statements, Viktor disobeys the Resistance by abandoning their pillaging of the German supplies in order to unlock the cattle cars and free the Jewish prisoners. While members of the Resistance watch in shock as Viktor singlehandedly helps Jews escape, Alina and the leader exchange guilty looks as they realize Viktor has just implicated himself as a Jew, making him a target of the Resistance.
The most complex scene depicting Polish-Jewish relations occurs in the final encounter between the Resistance and Viktor. After the revelation of Viktor’s Jewish identity, the partisans await the AK leader’s reaction. Two Resistance members drag Viktor out of their hidden bunker into the woods, and the leader approaches Viktor while loading a pistol, insinuating he is going to execute Viktor. As Viktor begins to walk away expecting to be shot, the leader stuns him by stating: “You’ve been a good comrade. But there is nothing I can do for you. Go, Viktor. The war won’t last much longer. I wish you luck and hope you survive it.” Instead of executing Viktor, the leader then throws his gun to Viktor so he can protect himself.14 The scene remains one of the most striking because it portrays the range of emotions Viktor experiences, as he moves from fearing death, to feeling emotionally distraught, and eventually numb, as the man he thought would kill him not only spares his life but trusts him with his own weapon so that he, a German Jew, could live to see the Allies win.
Despite portrayals of some sympathetic Poles, many Polish communities around the world—especially in the United Kingdom—vehemently condemned the show as anti-Polish propaganda. While the historical accuracy of the show was not specifically mentioned, the Polish government and some members of the Anglo-Polish community in Britain criticized the show claiming that, in an effort to mitigate German guilt, it deliberately portrayed Poles as anti-Semites. The main spokesperson for the International Home Army Association, Tadeusz Filipkowski, condemned the show, claiming, “We believe it to be evil slander and an attempt to justify Nazi crimes by setting them against the alleged anti-Semitism that existed in Poland before the war. Our government should not ignore this attack on our reputation.”15 Generation War’s depiction of the Underground, specifically the four scenes described earlier, was considered so offensive by Poles that some sued ZDF, the production company, for its portrayal of the Home Army. AK veteran Zbigniew Radlowski sued ZDF in a Polish court in Krakow, claiming that by depicting anti-Semitism within the Polish Underground, the television series violated his right to freedom from hate speech and his personal rights to national dignity, pride, and identity.16 Finally settled in 2018, the Krakow court fined ZDF 5,000 euros for Generation War as the judge Kamil Grzesik concluded, “The film represents the AK soldiers in an incorrect way that is not in accordance with the truth, [and therefore] it directly impacts [Radlowski’s] honor and dignity.”
The animosity of Polish communities towards Generation War was further catalyzed when the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) announced it would air the show in the UK. In response, Jerzy Marganski, Polish ambassador to the UK, issued a complaint letter stating, “The Polish Home Army and the majority of Poles are presented in the show as people under the influence of anti-Semitism, almost not very different from the German Nazis.”17 Some Anglo-Poles mirrored these sentiments and condemned the show. Protests organized by Polish Media outside of the Polish Embassy in London and the BBC Broadcasting House in London demanded that the BBC not air the show.18 In addition to angrily waving signs exclaiming “Stop Nazi Propaganda” and “HOLOCAUST MADE IN GERMANY,” many Anglo-Poles criticized the show, arguing it presented “anti-Polish slurs and insults to the memory of Poles fighting against German occupiers—at a time when Polish patriots, including the heroes of the Home Army, are being presented in a false light, attempts are being made to belittle the scope of Nazi crimes.” 19
Kadelbach and the producers quickly responded to the critical feedback they received questioning the accuracy of their portrayals of Poles in the series. Addressing the controversy surrounding the AK/Polish-Jewish relations, the producers issued a statement explaining that their portrayal of the Home Army was “based on historically vetted material,” further clarifying that “not under any circumstances was it our aim to diminish historical facts nor German responsibility [for war crimes].”20 As a compromise, the BBC agreed to air a forty-minute debate following the final episode of Generation War, in which panelists discussed the controversial aspects and possible historical inaccuracies of the television series.21 Overall, Kadelbach and the producers emphasized that the controversy caused by Generation War was their purpose for the show: to create a national discourse around aspects of current World War II historiography that had been purposely under-examined and ignored.
Since the intent of the show was to shed light on and trigger discussion about controversial aspects of the Second World War, why then did certain Polish communities, specifically the Polish government and certain members of the Anglo-Polish community, view Generation War as anti-Polish propaganda and a direct threat to Polish historical memory? One possible explanation for the Polish rejection of Generation War is that they believed, on the basis of historical evidence, that the series inaccurately portrayed the Home Army unit with which Viktor was affiliated. But an analysis of Jewish and Polish testimonies, eye-witness accounts, post-war collaboration trials, and Jewish sentiments recorded in Home Army pamphlets suggests that the series was, if anything, too kind to the Poles. Based on a reading of a wide range of historical sources, it becomes clear that the accuracy of the series’s portrayal of Polish anti-Semitism is not in question.
THE POLISH UNDERGROUND AND THE REALITY OF POLISH-JEWISH RELATIONS
One of the main complaints from Polish communities regarding Generation War is that it fails to acknowledge the multitude of ways the Home Army assisted, protected, and even saved countless Jewish lives throughout the war. The Polish Underground was the largest European wartime resistance movement, peaking at over three hundred and fifty thousand members and accounting for three-quarters of all European resistance fighters.22 Born from the military branch of the Polish-Government-In-Exile in London, the Home Army was originally comprised of Polish soldiers displaced by the Nazi and Soviet occupation of Poland in 1939. As the war progressed, the AK diversified to include over 300 different military, political, and socio-economic groups and sub-groups.23 Composed of Polish nationalists, socialists, liberals, and communists, the Underground contained a variety of beliefs and ideologies, including anti-Semitism. While the Home Army prioritized freeing Poland from Nazi and Soviet aggression and originally did not concern itself with Nazi policy towards Polish Jews, the AK was forced to acknowledge Jewish suffering following the ghettoization and deportation of the Jews, and the operationalization of death camps beginning in 1941.24 The Home Army’s interaction with the Holocaust was further catalyzed by Jews who escaped imprisonment, mobilized Jewish partisan groups, hid in nearby Polish villages and forests, and revealed the horrors of Nazi brutality. In light of the diverse ideologies and sentiments within the AK, interactions between Jews and the Home Army varied greatly, depending on regional leadership, individual units, and partisan members.
Multiple pamphlets from the Underground provide evidence of pro-Jewish sentiments among AK members. Some pamphlets urged fellow partisan members to save Polish Jews from the Holocaust while condemning those who contributed to anti-Jewish violence. For example, in May of 1942 the AK group Front for the Polish Resurrection published an article, “The Prophecies are Coming True,” urging that:
The problem of demoralization and barbarity which the slaughter of Jews has inflicted on us is becoming a burning issue. It is not only Latvians, Volksdeutsche, and Ukrainians who are being used to perform these monstrous executions. In many places the local population [local Poles] volunteers to take part in these massacres. One must try to keep such ignominious actions in check by every available means. One must bring it home to people that they will earn the name of hired assassins; they must be condemned in the underground press; one must exhort people to boycott the butchers and to promise severe sentences for the murderers once Poland is free.25
The AK also assisted European Jews by establishing aid networks and implementing missions to save Jewish children. Many members personally saved Jews, and the Home Army was the first to report internationally on the Holocaust. The Polish Underground established the Council for Aid to the Jews (Zegota), and the Home Army Jewish Affairs Bureau worked with Catholic organizations and international funding to provide false papers and money to Jews while stopping Polish blackmailers from profiting from the destruction of Polish Jewry.26 A main function of Zegota centered on smuggling Jewish children from ghettos into safety. One of the most successful operations, led by AK member Irena Sendler, saved over twenty-five hundred children from the Warsaw ghetto.27 By 1940, the AK regularly reported on the Holocaust, documenting the Einsatzgruppen killings, local pogroms, ghettoization, massive deportations, and rumours of death camps investigated by couriers like Jan Karski, who repeatedly snuck into the Warsaw ghetto.28 Additionally, the Home Army was the first to internationally report on the Holocaust at the United Nations. The first incarnation of the United Nations began in 1942 as an attempt to mobilize Allied wartime support.29 Following their presentation, eleven countries joined the Allied war effort against Nazi Germany.30 Countless examples of AK members who risked the safety of themselves and their families to save Jews are documented. For example, a Home Army lieutenant, Bronslaw Kryzanowski, helped a Jewish family obtain false papers and used his home as a safe house, risking punishment not just from the Germans, but also from the Underground for secretly obtaining false documents and assisting Jews without official permission.31
Despite these examples, Generation War does not explicitly mention any of the institutionalized ways the Home Army saved Jews. While the show could have depicted the efforts of certain AK members who helped Jews, an argument can be made that the series was justified in its dramatic choices because its purpose was to stimulate national discussion about hidden aspects of Holocaust history. One can also argue that through the characters of Alina and the Resistance leader, and a general absence of depictions of AK violence towards Jews, the series actually acknowledges the more secretive ways AK members assisted and protected Jews. For example, Alina repeatedly risks her safety to conceal Viktor’s Jewish identity; the AK leader spares Viktor’s life and even gives him his gun for protection; and, despite all of the anti-Jewish threats some partisans make when they encounter Jews in cattle cars, the Home Army does not inflict any violence on them. Further, Generation War acknowledges the sacrifices Poles made for their involvement in the Resistance. The show depicts German retributions for Resistance activities through the massacre of Viktor’s AK unit shortly after the Resistance leader spares his life. It is equally as important that the show acknowledges the darker aspects of Polish-Jewish relations normally ignored in Polish historiography.
A variety of evidence confirms the historical accuracy of the anti-Jewish sentiments portrayed in Generation War. Despite the Home Army’s condemnation of anti-Semitism in its publications, other historical documentation demonstrates that some regional units of the AK and partisans participated in anti-Jewish rhetoric and violence. Generation War’s depiction of the Home Army members expressing sentiments such as, “We drown Jews like cats,” is corroborated by a number of AK pamphlets produced by particular groups. For example, in an article from April 15, 1942, the National Radical Camp reported:
We have had to fight the Jews and the Muscovites, but the Germans are liquidating them much better and more effectively than anyone else could hope to do, particularly us. There is no need to dwell at length on the Jews— we know them only too well. There is not much hope of their joining the ranks of nations of good will until they totally cleanse by fire “the eternal revolutionary Jew” and fertilize the sterile and fallow realm of the Jewish soul with the ashes.
An additional slur depicted by Generation War was the common anti-Jewish prejudice of żydokomuna. Zydokomuna is the belief that all Jews are secretly communists who work with the Soviet Union to overthrow the Polish establishment. Especially in Eastern Poland, Judeo-communism became a justification for some partisans to hunt down and murder members of nearby Jewish partisan groups. Zimmerman argues that because of anti-Jewish tropes like Judeo-communism, AK factions operating in northeastern Poland tended to fight and murder Jewish partisans under the pretense that the Jews were communist and Soviet invaders.32
Multiple testimonies also provide historical proof that many of Viktor’s experiences were common throughout the war. The testimony of Polish-Jewish AK member Adolf Wolfgang provides evidence of the importance of Jews hiding their identity within the Underground. After escaping Szebnie Labour Camp and acquiring falsified papers under a Catholic persona, Wolfgang was admitted to the Home Army after he passed questioning to test if he was Jewish. Wolfgang recounted that the AK apologized for the Jewish test and explained that they did it because “there were many Jews hiding in the forests whom they had shot dead.”33 Wolfgang recounts a conversation he overheard between AK members about the inhumane treatment of the Jews:
From different mouths, [one could hear] words of sympathy for the Jewish people. Like, for example: why does the AK shoot dead Jews who hide in the forests and similarly desire to [defeat] the bestial Hitlerites? Everyone turned silent when, at last, someone spoke: [because] they desire a Poland without Jews.34
Testimonies like Wolfgang’s thus validate the accuracy of the TV program’s depiction of Viktor’s interrogation and the anti-Semitic conversations he was forced to endure.
Various witness statements from Poles and Polish Jews also confirm Generation War’s depiction of the AK secretly working in the forests of Poland to execute Jews. For example, Pinkus Kornhauser was almost ambushed and executed by the local AK unit because of his openly Jewish identity. After befriending the local AK leader in hopes of joining the Resistance, Kornhauser was instructed to meet the leader alone in the nearby woods. Finding this demand to be suspicious, Kornhauser snuck to the location of the meeting only to discover two partisans waiting for him with rifles and a double-barreled gun.35 An additional example of Home Army executions of Jews in Polish forests emerges from an account of nine assassinated Polish Jews in 1944. Under the command of Jozef Orczykowski, nine Jews were lured into the woods near the Kielce district of Poland with an invitation to join the Home Army. There the nine were assassinated by an AK unit.36 While the Polish government has argued that Generation War inaccurately depicted the Underground as anti-Semitic in an attempt to make Poles look as bad as Germans, increasing amounts of historical evidence prove that the Underground perpetrated many anti-Jewish crimes throughout World War II.
Historical evidence, in fact, establishes that many of the events the show portrayed actually occurred. Historians Krakowski and Zimmerman have commented on possible explanations for why certain Polish communities still reject these historically accurate depictions of negative relations between Polish partisans and Jews. According to Krakowski, current debates concerning Polish historical memory limit historians’ ability to analyze the variations of Jewish sentiments within the Home Army. Krakowski contends that even engaging in a discussion of Polish-Jewish sentiments in the AK “still evokes strong emotions, and, in the face of political pressures, that has made a factual analysis of this complicated problem extremely difficult.”37 Similarly, Zimmerman explains that because the focus of most Home Army historiography, especially in Poland, has been largely positive in its assessment of the AK’s relations with Jews, discussions of negative encounters between the Resistance and Jews are cast as a taboo threat to Polish historical memory.38 Therefore, a possible explanation for the negative reactions of certain Polish communities towards cinematic portrayals may not rest in debates over historical accuracy, but instead may point towards the way in which anti-Semitism complicates Polish national memory in the postwar and current period.
THE TRANSNATIONAL IMPACT OF POLISH HISTORICAL MEMORY ON ANGLO-POLES
The anger Generation War triggered within certain Polish communities is directly connected to ongoing debates surrounding Polish historical memory. Following the end of the Cold War, Poles began to rebuild their national identity. To receive recognition from the West, particularly Britain and the United States, Poles had to re-imagine themselves in a democratic way that acknowledged that the Holocaust had occurred on their soil. Under communism, the fact that half of all Poles who died during the war were Jewish was suppressed. Instead of re-educating Polish populations about the actual identities of Holocaust victims, the Polish establishment re-directed its attention towards emphasizing Polish-Catholic resiliency during the Second World War and the Cold War.39 Historian Marci Shore described Poland’s prioritization of Polish suffering over that of Polish Jews by explaining, “Polish national self-image is tightly bound up in the dual Romantic notions of Poland as the heroic fighter Za nasza wolnosc (For our freedom and yours), and Poland as the Christ of Nations, an eternal martyr who dies for others.”40
The re-establishment of Polish identity through a lens of ethnic solidarity and self-sacrificing heroism to protect Poland’s Jewish population created three different forms of historical memory identified by historian Joanna B. Michlic. Michlic believed that in order to “create an inclusive Polish society based on a civic concept of national belonging and respect for multiculturalism and humanitarian values,” three distinct modes of memory were established for Poles to come to terms with Polish-Jewish relations: “Remembering to Remember” (Polish attempts to remember and revitalize Polish-Jewish culture); “Remembering to Benefit” (remembering the Holocaust to garner international support and favor); and “Remembering to Forget” (Polish attempts to erase Polish organized violence against Jewish communities).41 “Remembering to Remember” and “Remembering to Benefit” inspired a massive movement within Poland to showcase their surviving Jewish heritage and to emphasize the role that Poland played in protecting, preserving, and revitalizing Jewish communities within its borders. At the same time, no explanations are offered for how a proudly Catholic and ethnically Polish nation lost three million of its three million, three hundred thousand Jewish inhabitants throughout World War II. Jan Gross’s 2000 publication of Neighbors exacerbated tensions caused by the eagerness of nationalistic Poles to “Forget” any negative aspects of Polish-Jewish relations during the war. Neighbors documented an anti-Jewish pogrom perpetrated by local Poles within the village of Jedwabne during World War II; nationalistic Poles and ring-wing organizations immediately condemned the publication as an attack meant to undermine Polish identity and wartime suffering. Historian Natalia Aleksiun commented that Neighbors marked a pivotal point in Polish historical memory, because it directly contradicted Poland’s attempt to project itself as a diverse and westernized democracy.42 Gross’s publication threatened “Remembering to Remember” and “Remembering to Benefit,” because it forced international attention onto the violent Jewish-Polish relations the newly democratic Poland sought to obscure in order to become an established member of the West.
Despite continuing discovery of evidence recording the multiple ways some Poles contributed to the murder of Jews in the Holocaust, the current Polish government, and even some historians, try to justify the reasoning behind Polish wartime violence or deflect it by focusing on the selfless ways Poles risked their lives to help Jews. For example, it is constantly repeated that Poles have been awarded the most “Righteous Among the Nations” awards by Israel for risking their lives to save Jews.43 Additionally, some historians, such as Jeremy Black, have argued that accounts of Poles helping Jews overshadow any anti-Semitism or Polish-Nazi collaboration. Black explains that even though Poles do have a history of anti-Semitism towards their Jewish populations, it was only “in very adverse circumstances, [that] there was active or complicit hostility to Jews, including a massacre [Jedwabne]”44 The late historian Tomasz Strzembosz took this argument further as he argued that violence against Jews was necessary because Poles had to fight against Jewish connections to the Soviet Union. Capitalizing on the controversial concept of żydokomuna, Strzembosz called Jews “traitors to the Polish state” and “collaborators with the mortal enemies of Poles [Soviets],” justifying Polish murders of Jews as self-defense against communism.45
These ongoing controversies over cinematic depictions of Poland’s treatment of the Jews are evident at all levels of Polish political and social life. The anger sparked by Generation War was directed also at the 2013 Polish film Aftermath. Written and directed by Władysław Pasikowski and inspired by the Jedwabne massacre, the film depicts a local Polish community coming to terms with its collaboration with the Nazis in murdering its Jewish population during the war. Like the director of Generation War, Pasikowski wanted to use Aftermath to force Poles to address their denial of anti-Jewish violence during the war.46 And like Generation War, the film was condemned by far-right groups and banned from local cinemas. The director and main actors were blacklisted, and some who were accused of secretly being Jewish even received death threats.47
Public protests against these films in Poland and the UK suggest that some Anglo-Poles share a view with the Polish government that similarly seeks to de-emphasize Polish anti-Semitism during the war. Anglo-Poles share the Polish government’s critique of cinematic depictions of the Home Army, perhaps due to a cultural attachment to Poland some Anglo-Poles feel despite their separation from it by decades and hundreds of miles. Poles are the United Kingdom’s largest foreign group, with a population of over 900,000, and Polish remains Britain’s second most spoken language after English. Given this, it is plausible to suggest that Anglo-Poles may continue to identify more with Poland than with the United Kingdom regarding issues of historical memory.48 This may explain why some Anglo-Poles exhibit reactions similar to the Polish establishment’s when faced with the ongoing controversies over the portrayal of Polish-Jewish relations in international cinema.
CONCLUSION: THE PERSISTENCE OF POLISH IDENTITY IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Attracted to work opportunities and a stable socio-economic environment, Poles originally emigrated to the United Kingdom in the later decades of the nineteenth century, and emigration continued throughout the interwar period.49 Yet the modern Polish community in Britain can be traced to the period following the Nazi invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939. Not long after, members of the Polish government and military established their sovereignty in exile in the United Kingdom. To facilitate the 250,000 Poles who served under the British military, Polish communities were established near military bases and locations throughout Britain.50 Despite the Allied victory, thousands of Poles remained in Britain, displaced by the immediate communist takeover of Poland. With an influx of remaining Polish servicemen, thousands of Polish political prisoners who survived concentration camps, and over 21,000 veterans of the Home Army, Polish communities in the UK established throughout the war immediately became hubs of refuge for displaced Poles.51 As a result, in 1947 the British Parliament passed the Polish Resettlement Act, which allowed Poles with direct ties to the military to remain in the United Kingdom in exchange for their labour in industries such as engineering, textiles, mining, and small business shops. By the early 1950s, over 150,000 Poles lived in Britain.52
Polish political exiles, who emigrated to Britain throughout the Cold War to avoid the threat of communism, further strengthened the isolated Polish establishments within the United Kingdom. Throughout the latter part of the twentieth century, the economic ability and the professional training of Polish political exiles enabled them to establish themselves within Britain without having to assimilate fully to British society. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Poland’s admission into the European Union in 2004, a new wave of Poles have sought economic opportunities in Britain. The current migration of Poles in and out of the United Kingdom has strengthened ethnic and cultural ties between Britain’s established Polish population and Poland. According to Britain’s Office for National Statistics (ONS), in 2017 over 905,000 Poles remained in the United Kingdom, and they still form the largest non-British nationality population.53 In light of the physical exclusivity Polish communities have maintained within the United Kingdom since 1941, as well as the constant flow of Polish citizens in contact with Anglo-Poles within the twenty-first century, it becomes increasingly apparent how Anglo-Poles have maintained a sense of Polish historical memory throughout the decades.
In addition to sharing a physical community, Anglo-Poles since 1939 have preserved their Polish heritage and culture, providing an additional reason for Anglo-Poles’ expressions of Polish historical memory. In the 1960s, historian Sheila Patterson identified the fierce preservation of Polish identity and culture despite relocating in the United Kingdom. Patterson explained that the emotional trauma and damage caused by the war promoted a desperate prioritization of “Polishness” within the immigrant community. She believes that the emphasis on preservation of Polish language, identity, and family was fueled by the trauma of Soviet/Nazi aggression, as well as by the anger many postwar immigrants felt when forced by the Soviets to leave their native country.54
Through decades-old Polish heritage establishments and institutions, many Poles immigrating to the United Kingdom are able to relocate into communities that foster solely Polish heritage and language. Dependent on organizations founded by the Polish government-in-exile, Anglo-Poles have not needed to assimilate fully into British institutions, as they can engage with Polish versions of the Red Cross, YMCA, political parties, schools, sports teams, newspapers, and even Boy and Girl Scouts.55 Additionally, because of the economic self-sufficiency of most twentieth-century Polish immigrants, many were able to purchase land and establish community centers and Catholic churches to preserve Polish culture. By 1960, over 6,000 Poles were homeowners, and they owned over 2,500 small businesses. Patterson also reports that Polish-owned property served as informal community centers where immigrants could speak Polish, find missing family members, gossip about the current state of Poland, and enjoy regular dances.56 Polish Catholic churches were quickly established throughout the United Kingdom to preserve the integral role of Catholicism in Polish identity. By 1960, seventy-two Polish Catholic parishes were established to maintain, as Patterson explains, “the association of Polish national values and identity with Catholicism.” The Church highlighted the wartime suffering of Catholic Poles, preached against the atheistic threat posed by communism, and emphasized the importance of Polish education through Sunday schools that teach the Polish language, traditions, and holidays.57
Despite the overall lack of Polish assimilation, physically and culturally, into British society, some studies suggest that more recent generations of Poles are beginning to relate more symbolically to the United Kingdom instead of Poland. Psychologist Emilia Lewandowska’s 2008 study examined the ability of second-generation Poles to recognize Polish and British icons and symbols such as notable Polish politicians and the British Royal Family.58 She discovered that even though second-generation Anglo-Poles all held at least a basic understanding of the Polish language and were aware of traditional Polish celebrations and ethnic holidays, the majority of Anglo-Poles in her study recognized more British than Polish symbols.59 Yet even with these changes, the Polish community in the United Kingdom remains coherent. Numerous Polish cultural organizations in Britain exhibit the secured presence of Polish heritage, including the Federation of Poles in Great Britain CIO, Polish Underground Movement Study Trust, Federation of Polish Folklore Groups, and the Polish Veterans Association. It is possible, then, to see how the cultural and physical isolation some Anglo-Poles have maintained from mainstream British society and culture could enable some members to identify more with Polish, than with British, historical memory. This would also account for their reactions to depictions of Polish-Jewish relations in media like Generation War.
The perplexing connection between Polish historical memory and its role in Anglo-Polish communities remains under investigation. Current British-European politics and the ongoing development of post-Soviet societies continues to influence Anglo-Polish self-identity. Yet the negative response of some Anglo-Poles to accurate wartime depictions validates lingering cultural ties in Poland. The rejection of Holocaust cinema by some Anglo-Poles additionally highlights the influence of film in mainstream society. Historian Barry Langford argues that some Europeans struggle to accept their wartime portrayals: “For neither in the blood-crazed zealot, nor in the desiccated bureaucratic killer, do we see our own reflection.”60 Regardless of whether modern media is portraying German guilt or Polish anti-Semitism, popular culture will continue to provide an unapologetic platform for Europeans to confront the lingering effects of the Second World War on their society.
