Postmodernism and Holocaust Denial (Postmodern Encounters)

I have to laugh at the review by "A reader" in which the book is given only 2 stars and the reviewer says: "Another book in the Postmodern Encounters series where the author presents an argument against Holocaust denial that is based on a postmodernist perspective." Hello, "Postmodernism and Holocaust Denial" is: 1. in the "POSTMODERN Encounters" series, and 2. titled "POSTMODERNISM and Holocaust Denial." I don't really think you can fault a book for being of a postmodern mind/persuasion when it so blatantly and clearly states (in two places) that it is coming from a postmodern perspective. That is like going into a Chinese restaurant and getting mad that they don't serve Italian food. This is an evocative and worthwhile book that spends a lot time explaining why we should discredit Holocaust denial, but doesn't touch on some of the deeper nuances of, say, collective memory, the impact of history in our lives, how and why we choose to highlight certain historical events more than others, etc. Nonetheless, it's a well-argued, tightly focused, and agreeable book, although I think mentioning or exploring the Errol Morris documentary "Mr. Death" (about a man who doubts the Holocaust happened) would have made it better. It's not the strongest or best in the Postmodern Encounters series, but not the worst either. Makes some good points and addresses a disturbing period in human history.

As other reviewers have suggested, Robert Eaglestone appears to be as concerned about postmodernism as he is about Holocaust denial. They are, he implies, diametrically opposed. As a result, he suggests that employing postmodern strategies can indeed help historians confront denial. To make clear his point, Eaglestone refers to the 2001 case of David Irving versus Deborah Lipstadt, in which Irving was suing Lipstadt for libel.Now, some people think that it was up to the judge to decide whether the Holocaust did or did not happen, but that is untrue. Because the trial took place in England, it was Lipstadt who had to prove the truthfulness of her statements about Irving (ie. that Irving "is a Hitler partisan wearing blinkers.") If she could not, then Irving's status as an historian would have been secure. Surely, it would also have been a victory of sorts for Holocaust denial in general. But Lipstadt's team did prove her case. In fact, Irving was destroyed during (and later, because of) the trial. As Eaglestone suggests, this was not simply the result of Irving's not having been objective in his writing. Objectivity is, of course, simply a long-cherished myth. No, the author makes it clear that Irving did not follow the proper conventions of history, ergo, he was (and is) not an historian at all.How does postmodernism fit in to all of this? Postmodernists' having been so successful at exposing the inherent subjectivity in historical writing, what better "genre" than postmodernism to help expose the goals and motivations of Holocaust deniers? Just to make this abundantly clear, never does Eaglestone suggest that there is no such thing as "truthful" history, and that ONLY postmodernism can successfully confront Holocaust denial. On the contrary, he states explicitly that there is a bedrock/foundation on which histories are built. Unfortunately, arguing with Holocaust deniers on the basis of the evidence alone is a fruitless task, for they and their arguments simply aren't reasonable. Historians must go deeper, and expose deniers for who they really are, and for HOW, not just what, they write. Employing postmodernism as a corollary to evidentiary means should help do exactly that. It will assist in making readers aware of deniers' goals, motivations, and strategies. Only then will readers, many of whom simply aren't familiar with Holocaust studies and might then be coerced by denial literature because of its scholarly appearance, be confronted with a stark reality: Holocaust deniers aren't interested in the truth at all. Holocaust denial is simply a way to disguise their anti-Semitism, display the Jewish conspiracy theory in which they seem to believe, and portray their work as legitimate. Eaglestone's book is important because it makes evident the imperative to combat deniers by making these things clear to all readers alike.

A beautifully and clearly written little book explaining the Postmodern ideas on History in general and they relevance to the phenomena ofHolocaust denial in particular. Starting with, and having as a guiding threadthe case of Irving vs. Lipstadt, the book clearly and sucintely states the postmodern positions on the issues of objectivity, impartiality, and Historygenre rules. As the author states (pg 51) "[S]ome writers, categorised aspostmodern, have indeed written rather foolishly on history and no oneshould defend bad scholarship or lack of thought." This work certainlydoes not belong to either of those categories and can be read with muchpleasure.