Discussion

This page hosts moderated discussions of articles, forums, and book reviews. Letters to the editor are still welcomed and will be published in the journal (see "Information" on this web site). Continuations of discussions begun in letters may also take place here. The same standards of discourse apply as for letters to the editor and authors are encourgaged to be brief and to the point. The editor, who will moderate these discussions, reserves the right to refuse to print, or to publish with cuts, contributions that contain personal abuse or otherwise fail to meet the standards of debate expected in a scholarly journal. -- Submissions to these discussions should be sent to the editor by email, including identification of the author's institution or city of residence.

Continuation of discussion of John Connelly, “Why the Poles Collaborated So Little-And Why That Is No Reason for Nationalist Hubris” (See Winter 2005 and Winter 2006)

To the Editor:

In his response (Slavic Review 65:4) to the letters of Anna Cienciala and Piotr Wandycz
concerning his article "Why the Poles Collaborated So Little--And Why That Is No Reason for Nationalist Hubris" (Slavic Review 64:4), John Connelly poses the question why should we feel pride for things other people have accomplished? In the abstract, I fully agree. In 1969 I happened to be in Europe when Americans landed on the moon. An American friend whom I met there told me how proud he felt of this achievement. My response was to ask him why, what did he have to do with it?

In the abstract this national indifference is laudable, but it is difficult to maintain in the real world of negative stereotypes. Not all scholars have had to deal personally with the view that all Poles imbibe anti-Semitism with their mothers' milk. In the early 1970s as a young ABD I had my first teaching job at Brooklyn College teaching Western Civilization. One day two coeds from my class came to see me, and after chatting amiably for some time, they volunteered that because of my Polish origins they assumed that I was anti-Semitic.

I have no way of knowing how many other people I have had contact with in my academic career made the same assumption, but I know that it has happened. In addition, because the ignorance of Polish history is so abysmal even among fellow Europeanists, not to mention among Americanists, my claims to fellow academics for the relevance of Polish history have often resulted in my being seen as some kind of Polish nationalist. During a conversation about the Battle of Britain, I recall how a medievalist laughed in my face as if I had just told a Polish joke when I mentioned that Polish pilots had participated in the defense of Britain. I know such assumptions were at times made about me because, like the coeds at Brooklyn College, some people later told me that they had made such assumptions.

Connelly writes about "the importance of historical context in shaping individual choice." The problem is that the historical context is often missing with regard to Poland. When a reporter for The New York Times quotes a man in the street making an anti-Semitic remark, as happened recently in Wielgus case, you can count on it being cited as proof of traditional Polish anti-Semitism as if there has been no change in Polish-Jewish relations since 1989. Some years ago on a visit to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, I noted a sign simply stating that 90 percent of Denmark's Jews survived the war whereas only 10 percent of Poland's Jews survived. No historical context was provided.

I do not know if my academic career would have developed differently if my surname were Smith. A few years ago before applying for a fellowship at an institute, I spoke with the director of the institute about my proposed research on the evolution of Polish nationalism after World War II. A specialist in Elizabethan literature, she repeatedly told me that she knows nothing about Poland except of course that it is virulently anti-Semitic. Later when she called to tell me that I did not get the fellowship, she informed me that she found my proposal was "too partisan."

I am all for unearthing "questions long buried by common assumptions." Even if they are not welcomed by the local community. But we must realize that they are often unwelcome not just because its members "derive their sense of group identify primarily from good things in the Polish past" but because others derive their stereotypes of the community's members from the worst things in the Polish past, and usually without any knowledge of the historical context that shapes individual choice. It is the duty of scholars to ensure that the historical context is always present.

John J. Kulczycki
University of Illinois at Chicago