Night and Fog/Lubline article discussion questions

While we will obviously focus much of our discussion on the film and its reception, Lubline makes a number of references to concepts that tackle the larger issues surrounding representing the Holocaust. Some of the discussion questions below will ask you to consider representation beyond Resnais's Night and Fog:

1. In the introductory rationale to the article, Lubline notes the example of an Old Navy commercial, in which a student gushes praise for the chronological appeal of history. Thinking back to your own historical education preceding your entrance to university, is this an accurate description of how you were taught about historical events? What are the benefits and drawbacks to linear history? Given the non-linear approach to narrative we have encountered in Delbo and Levi, is the lack of chronology a barrier for you as a reader?


2. Lubline recalls the controversy surrounding The Diary of Anne Frank and its subsequent theatrical adaptation in the late 1950s, specifically noting that passages from the diary pertaining to the Jewish religion were excised from the staged version because the universality of the Holocaust was of central concern at the time. The recent controversy over Anne Frank's diary suggests that Americans are still concerned over how best to represent the Holocaust. What shift in focus does this new controversy suggest? How is the shift similar to the excising of religious passages from the play version of the 1950s? (Note: here is a link to a news story about the current controversy over Anne Frank's diary)


3. What does the censorship of Resnais's films in both Europe and the United States suggest about what Lubline terms the "Americanization" of the Holocaust? What does censorship suggest about the role of visual media in chronicling historical events?


4. Testimony by survivors is a critical facet of representing the Holocaust, and in the absence of witness testimony in the film, Lubline notes that audiences are "put off" by the lack of personalization or access to survivor testimony. How would your view of the film change if survivors' voices had been included? Are you "put off" by this absence?


5. The conditions for Jews in Europe is noticeably absent from the film (and thus to some signaled an apolitical message), yet it was later criticized for what some interpreted as a Zionist agenda. What does the politicization of the film in US circles say about the role of cinema? What does the appropriation of the film (and ultimately the history of the Holocaust) by those protesting the Vietnam War illustrate about the role of cinema?



*A little correction to the Lubline essay is in order: while Night and Fog was effectively banned from top billing at the Cannes Film Festival, it was in fact screened to a small, resistant band of critics, most of whom were appalled at the thought of censorship being tolerated in the art world.