Tourists as post-witnesses in documentary film: Sergei Loznitsa’s <em>Austerlitz</em> (2016) and Rex Bloomstein’s <em>KZ</em> (2006)

<p>This article compares two documentary films that address an apparent crisis of post-witnessing at memorials that commemorate the victims of National Socialism. In the context of contemporary debates about appropriate behaviour for tourists at sites of &ldquo;dark&rdquo; or &ldqu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: David Clarke
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Oñati International Institute for the Sociology of Law 2020-06-01
Series:Oñati Socio-Legal Series
Subjects:
Online Access:http://opo.iisj.net/index.php/osls/article/view/1047
Description
Summary:<p>This article compares two documentary films that address an apparent crisis of post-witnessing at memorials that commemorate the victims of National Socialism. In the context of contemporary debates about appropriate behaviour for tourists at sites of &ldquo;dark&rdquo; or &ldquo;difficult&rdquo; heritage, Sergei Loznitsa&rsquo;s <em>Austerlitz </em>(2016) and Rex Bloomstein&rsquo;s <em>KZ </em>(2006) take very different approaches to observing the act of visiting concentration camp memorials. Whereas Loznitsa adopts an observational documentary mode, constructing a cultural hierarchy between the touristic observer and the cinematic observer at memorials in Germany, Bloomstein&rsquo;s film uses a participatory mode to prompt the viewer to consider the complexities of the affective-discursive practice of tourists engaging with the suffering of victims at the Mauthausen memorial in Austria. The article argues that Bloomstein&rsquo;s decision to adopt a participatory approach is more productive in allowing us to think about the significance of responses to victims&rsquo; suffering at such sites.<br /><br /> Este art&iacute;culo compara dos documentales que giran en torno a una aparente crisis del post-testimonio en monumentos a las v&iacute;ctimas del nacionalsocialismo. En el contexto del debate actual sobre c&oacute;mo deben comportarse los turistas en lugares de herencia &ldquo;oscura&rdquo; o &ldquo;dif&iacute;cil&rdquo;, <em>Austerlitz </em>(2016), de Sergei Loznitsa, y <em>KZ</em> (2006), de Rex Bloomstein, observan de forma muy diferente el acto de visitar antiguos campos de concentraci&oacute;n. Mientras Loznitsa adopta un modo de observaci&oacute;n documental, construyendo una jerarqu&iacute;a cultural entre el observador tur&iacute;stico y el cinem&aacute;tico, Bloomstein opta por un modo participativo para exhortar al espectador a considerar las complejidades de las pr&aacute;cticas afectivo-discursivas de los turistas que se comprometen con el sufrimiento de las v&iacute;ctimas. El art&iacute;culo argumenta que la decisi&oacute;n de Bloomstein de adoptar un enfoque participativo es m&aacute;s productivo a la hora de propiciar nuestra reflexi&oacute;n sobre el significado de las respuestas al sufrimiento de las v&iacute;ctimas en esos lugares.</p><p><strong>Available from: </strong><a href="https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1045" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1045</a></p>
ISSN:2079-5971