Pre-Site Visit Reflections
Sachsenhausen concentration camp opened in July of 1936. It was one of the earliest concentration camps and was created as a way to train soldiers, and detain “enemies of the state” in the early years of Hitler and the Nazi’s Third Reich. At that point, they were quite focused on vocal political opponents. In the early years, the camp held predominantly political prisoners, such as communists and socialists. Other “enemies of the state” such as Jews, Roma and Sinti, homosexuals, and people who didn’t fit into Hitler’s “Aryan” ideals were also targeted and made up the camp’s population. By the end of the first year there were 1600 prisoners, mainly political prisoners. At the beginning of 1937 there were only 21 Jewish prisoners. After Kristallnacht in late 1938, there was an increase of 6000 Jewish prisoners, increasing exponentially in the days following. However, the Jewish prisoners were soon released and once again the number dwindled. At the beginning of 1944 the SS began to bring thousands of Hungarian and Polish Jews from other ghettos and concentration camps to Sachsenhausen. Most of these prisoners were women.
In 1942, Jewish prisoners who had talents in art, engraving, and painting were used in a ploy called Operation Bernhard. In all, 142 prisoners were identified by their skills and forced into labour positions where they would forge British bank notes. The idea was that these forged notes could become circulated and destabilise the British economy. Ultimately, the ploy had little impact, and the British currency security measures caught on to the attempt. Despite the harsh conditions, some prisoners sabotaged the operation by intentionally making mistakes in the counterfeit notes.
The evacuation of Sachsenhausen concentration camp began on April 21st 1945. More than thirty-thousand remaining internees were forced to march. Thousands died from intense exhaustion, both on a mental and physical level, or by attempting to flee. On the 22nd of April 1945, units of the Soviet and Polish armies finally liberated around 3,000 sick internees who had been left behind in the camp. Then, in 1956, planning began for the adaptation of the concentration camp site as a national memorial. It was established four years later on April 23rd 1961.
Today the site is a part of the ongoing memorial process, shedding light on those who lost their lives during the Holocaust and the early years of racial, political, and religious violence in the Third Reich. When visiting this site, I think we will encounter many questions that may come with or without answers. Asking these questions and allowing time to observe and reflect will allow us to build on important aspects of the memorial process. Thinking back to our readings we can ask similar questions to those that have already been posed. What are the messages of this memorial? How have they been presented, and by whom? How are these sights and messages internalised differently to different people? There are also concerns about our own well-being at this site. This site is outside the city and may be hard for someone to physically distance themselves if they are feeling overwhelmed. Furthermore, it is our first concentration camp we will be visiting as a group and we might react to the experience in a different way than some of the memorials within the city, surrounded by distractions of everyday life and tourism. I feel that during our pre-discussion of the site it will be important to focus on the significance of the site, the questions we can ask, and the ways which we can engage in a way that is meaningful to our own reflections, as well as to the memorialisation process of all those who lost their lives, or had their lives affected by the violence and inhumanity at the site.
Post-Site Visit Reflections
Sachsenhausen Memorial was our first visit to a former concentration camp as a group during the field school, and was the first time many of us had ever been to a former concentration camp. The anticipation of the visit came with a lot of nerves and uncertainty. We were unsure how it would compare to our previous days filled with memorials around Berlin. In the morning following our visit, we took a class session to reflect on our time visiting Sachsenhausen. The notable drawback of our visit was the limited time we had to explore the exhibits. The guide mentioned that each exhibit was designed to take approximately an hour to absorb, yet we unfortunately had much less time than that to fit all of the exhibits in. Thus, many left feeling that information and necessary experiences were either missed or diminished.
Despite this, there were many noteworthy elements to be taken away from our visit to Sachsenhausen. One highlight was the counter-memorialisation approach used in some of the exhibits. For example, in the infirmary (“Medical Care and Crime”) exhibit, outdated or harmful words and phrases were struck through with yellow lines, accompanied by notes explaining what these terms or narratives are problematic. This method allowed us to see the original narratives while understanding the need to challenge and update them. It also demonstrated the way that historical memorialisation changes over time, and to be mindful of the ways in which we can reflect on our own memorialisation methods.
I felt that the exhibits at Sachsenhausen were quite comprehensive and varied, providing both visual and place-based learning experiences. Larger exhibits seemed to utilise visual elements and substantial text, while some of the smaller exhibits offered more contextual, place-based learning. For instance, when I visited the former prison, it was distinctly different, yet an equally powerful experience compared to the larger exhibits. I found that the lack of text and visuals prohibited me from using the guidance of an information board to create a distance between myself and the site. Without that guidance, I was much more connected to the finer details of the setting and felt more closely intune with the place-based setting. The variety of presentation styles became more interesting to reflect on as we visited more former concentration camps throughout the field school. It was interesting to note the different ways each site approached visual and place-based learning. As well as the different ways sites balanced memorialisation with historical education.
I found that a particularly unique exhibit at Sachsenhausen was the one in Tower A. It focused on the SS guards who monitored the camp. The exhibit detailed the backgrounds of these guards who worked at the camp. It gave extensive resumes of the guards and looked at how they came to work at Sachsenhausen and the inhumane actions they inflicted towards the prisoners during their time working as guards. The exhibit also explored the fates of these guards and demonstrates the shocking amount of them who were acquitted of their crimes, or did not serve time in prison at all. I felt that I left this exhibit with many new questions. It raised critical questions about the collective memory of the Holocaust and how it might have been shaped differently had these perpetrators been held more accountable.
Lastly, another aspect worth noting was the balance of tourists at Sachsenhausen. Compared to Auschwitz, where we often felt overcrowded by the tourists, and Ravensbrück, which felt almost deserted, Sachsenhausen seemed to fall somewhere in between. While there were large groups, especially in the earlier part of the day, they seemed to thin out by late afternoon. I felt this allowed for a more reflective and personal experience, as we could explore more exhibits alone or with few others. This balance seemed crucial during our trips to later former concentration camps, as it allowed space to internalise the information, and time to continue from a certain moment when it felt right to.
Our visit to Sachsenhausen had its drawbacks, mainly due to our unfortunate limited timeframe to explore, but the site offered a rich education and personal experience. The counter-memorialisation techniques, the comprehensive and varied exhibits, and the balance of other visitors all seemed to contribute to a meaningful and thought-provoking visit. I felt I took away a lot from the visit, and have many questions I would like to further pursue. Despite this, I think we only scratched the surface of what can be learned from a site like Sachsenhausen.
