Wie ist die Forschung der Bibliothek in der Bibliothek? Ja, willkommen jetzt zum Vortrag von Roma Sendika mit dem Titel Depths of the Field – Bystanders Art, Forensic Art, Practice and Nonsites of Memory. Roma Sendika ist Kulturanthropologin und arbeitet viel auf dem Feld der Memory Studies. Sie ist Professorin und sie unterrichtet an der Universität Krakau. Der Vortrag, nur kurz als Hinweis, man merkt es dann eh gleich, wird auf Englisch erfolgen. Und es sind ungefähr 30 Minuten Zeit für den Vortrag, eben besprochen, und dann haben wir auch noch 10 Minuten Zeit für die Diskussion. Bitte, Roma Sendika. Also, guten Morgen. Es ist für mich sehr angenehm, dass ich hier bin und es tut mir leid, dass ich an den zwei ersten Tagen abwesend war. Aber leider haben mir die Verpflichtungen in Krakau nicht erlaubt, hier früher zu kommen. Aber ich beginne auf Deutsch, aber dann will ich ins Englische springen. Ich beginne im Medias Res mit einem Foto. Das ist so ein einfaches Feld hinter einer Scheune. Es ist ein einfacher Bauhof und es gibt hier keine Anzeichen von Trauma. Also weder Verwahrlosung oder Erinnerung. Also beide Möglichkeiten sind nicht da. Also nochmal benutzt und sieht sehr gewöhnliches, aber wir können sagen, ja, nicht Gewöhnliches, weil 65 Millionen starben im Zweiten Weltkrieg, wie uns kürzlich in Erinnerung gerufen wurde, also vor zwei Tagen, gestern, wir haben viel davon gehört. Und die Orte ihres Todes sind sicherlich zahlreich. Es ist einfach. Und warum dies etwas Besonderes ist, das war unsere Frage in Krakau, in der Gruppe und in diesem Projekt, das ich jetzt beschreiben will. Also warum das für uns wichtig war, weil dort noch menschliche Überreste gibt, also die im Boden liegen. Und solche Orte haben wir genau in unserem Projekt nicht Erinnerungsorte genannt. Und ich werde jetzt ins Englische wechseln und erzählen, was sie sind und wie die Kunst in so einem Fall um Ermittler, also ein Ermittler werden kann. Das ist, was ich jetzt also so So this is basically also a report from a project as we heard before. I will try to keep it short and leave some space for more discussion. So that's the title of my speech. Thank you for inviting me. It's very nice to be there. And I'm really flattered to be part of this discussion. I'm really sorry. I did not have the chance to hear what was said in the last two days, but I hope the recording will let me jump into the gist of the topic in the future. So in the first part of my speech, I will summarize the results of the interdisciplinary project Uncommemorated Genocide Sites and their impact on collective memory, cultural identity, ethical attitude and intercultural relations in contemporary Poland. This project brought together researchers, but also artists and practitioners to construct something that we envisioned as operational tool, something that could be used for scholars and practitioners, especially from the field of memory studies, who are confronting abandoned post-genocide geographies in central, in Poland, but we also thought perhaps it will be useful in Eastern Europe, Central Europe and beyond. In short, we followed sites of history, so places where something happened important or from historical records that have witnessed wartime violence, but have not been given the status of symbolic objects that anchor the community relationship with the past. That's the definition of Liedememoire by Piernok. Thus we hypothesized that these clandestine, abandoned, post-violence sites at first glance left for natural forces to swallow, just leave them there, let them be swallowed, let them be into the non-human. We thought they are as constitutive for group and identity, either local or more substantially national, as noras, piernoras, positive sites of memory. Contemporary history and memory studies have developed tools for exploring cultural memory based on the act of symbolization, so textual documents, visual photos, representations, have developed tools for exploring culture memory based on the act of symbolization, so textual documents, visual photos, representations. And since the un-commemorated post-violence sites typically lack the readily available culture scripts, there's nothing to follow that allow visitors to respond to the violent past, to understand the protocol, it is the newer mnemonic methodologies like post-anthropocentric, that definitely were part of your discussions, ecological forensic material that perhaps can allow, may allow us to successfully engage with them from newer perspectives. In what will follow, I will mention our collaborations with artists in the project and our conclusions regarding the ecological dimension of post-violence sites. And I will also refer to some case studies from our artist collaboration. So, the authors of the recent fourth already volume dedicated to violence the Routledge History Handbook of Central and Eastern Europe in the 20th century critically referred to the terms recently applied to the region like bloodlands by Timothy Slider or shutter zoning borderlands by by Omer Bartov that reported on the and they reported on the need for further, more in-depth, non-victimizing studies to assess, I quote, the interaction between ethnic conflicts on the one hand and occupation powers, authoritarian regimes, and totalizing dictatorship on the other, in order to give a more nuanced understanding not only of their interplay amongst this puralling violence but also in addressing its legacies. In other words, efforts are still needed to reconstruct something that could be non-simplicistic map of violence in central eastern or southern Europe in the 20th century, which will not be two dimensional, bipolar, and will be a little bit more complex than black and white. And one which historically will be more complex, but also that one that will abandon thinking of the region as lying on the margins of the European history and marked with particular violence stigma. On the other hand, the violence of course is important and we need to understand, one need to understand from this anthropological stance, we need this anthropological stance to understand the consequences experienced in post-violence territories, especially in cases where violence had permanently affected social relations and the potential for the open articulation of the past. So interestingly in 2008 when discussing the region as a site of genocide, Bartow, Omer Bartow, wrote, in many parts of contemporary Eastern Europe, one finds today innumerable sites from which vast chunks of history have been completely erased. Those who remember or know of this vanished past find very few physical traces on the ground. Crucial bits of evidence are missing, but these are not sites of memory and never were. The historian called such abandoned, clandestine sites of violence, of wartime violence, which often still contain the bodies of the victims, sites of forgetting or sites of non-memory. Clearly distinguishing from the sites of memory, it means the topographical and symbolic objects defined in the seminal series of historical essays collected in these already mentioned four volumes of Les Lieux de Memoire edited by Pierre Nora between 1984 and 1992. Indeed, one can be confronted with multitude of un-commemorated sites of dispersed violence in the region, which seem to be the opposite of what Nora defined as leading to social cohesion. So what we meant by known sites of memory were physical symbolic objects, centers of a unique condensation of ideas important to the community. So what we mean that we are working not with these, so we are opposing, we were opposing this symbolic object centers of condensation of ideas important for community, national identity, publicly accentuated, recognizable, being these mini laboratories for the construction of collective memory that binds communities together. However, I would like to stress that the uncommemorated clandestine sites are not, contrary to Bartow's assertion, completely forgotten. And this is the most important finding or hypothesis of our project. Our team of scholars assumed and tried to prove that such sites also unite communities, but in an effort not to disclose, make visible, celebrate certain site. We were looking for a term and of course, we found some. Claude Lanzmann was actually, to our knowledge, the first intellectual to recognize the potential of places already in the 70s with strong ties to the past in Central or Eastern Europe to challenge the positive national building concept of sites of memory. He was definitely wrestling with Nora in the same moment of 1984, 1985, one which was gaining immense popularity at the time. He called sites to be filmed for his Shoah, deformed sites, les lieux des figures, the disturbing character of which, in his reading, lay in the disorderly merging of two temporal planes, here and now, there and then. In 1986 interview, he referred to such places merging of two temporal planes, here and now, there and then. In 1986 interview, he referred to such places as non-lieu de la mémoire, so non-sites of memory, and according to one of the commentators, Dominique Lacapra, he meant traumatic sites that challenge or undermine the work of memory. Another commentator on Landsman's dispute with Nora suggested that this negativity should not be upheld but transgressed and he suggested moving beyond the filmmaker excessive double negative idea of disfigured sites and the foreign memory. So both parts of the term are actually defunct, and propose understanding such sites as a challenge, as something that is a task for contemporaries to understand, respond to and commemorate. It was Georges Didier Bermond who urged us to return to the site in spite of all. That's his famous phrase. And call such locations, the sites by excellence, the essential sites. us to return to the site in spite of all. That's his famous phrase. And Colesage locations, the sites by excellence, the essential sites. So this is a short summary how we conceptualize after three years of work and almost four years of work, these objects, we choose the term as a central one for our project. Our initial assumption was that the site sought and studied would be both topographically and mnemonically deficient. It means difficult to identify in the field, not resembling these accentuated, easily recognizable sites of memory. On the other hand, we expected they may reveal deficits, difficulties in remembering certain events, or atypical difficult memory responses to the past that have not yet been described by memory researchers. We understood non-sites of memory as disparate sites of various genocides, ethnic cleansings, and other similarly motivated acts of violence. And the basic indicator is a lack of information altogether or of proper founded information. So there might be some erroneous information, not exact one, of lack of material forms of commemorations like plaques, monuments or monuments, and lack of separation so that we do not know where is the line we should not cross so non-sites of memory also have in common the past or continued presence of human remains that's what Susanna definitely talked about yesterday so these sites are not they do not have any shared physical characteristic, they might be extensive or very small, urban or rural, they are quite often yet characterized by some blending of organic matter, so human remains, plants, animals, presence and inorganic orders or ruins or new construction. The victims who should be, could be commemorated on such sites typically have very, have different collective identity distinct from the society that currently is living in the area. And the self-conception of this society, this group, this community might be threatened somehow or changed by the occurrence by putting forward the non-side of memory as a mnemonic object. Such localities are over these years of being non-commemorated of course they were transformed, manipulated, neglected or contested in some other way. Often they are overgrown, devastated, littered, overbuilt. The resultant forsaking of memorialization is leading to ethnically problematic, of course, revitalization and gross criticism. The perspective allowed the team to conceptualize non-sites of memory as a set of spatial temporal knots which can be interpreted in terms of relations, continuous transformation and multi-scale historical processes drawn together in one place. At the same time, we were concerned with the complexity of the everyday experience of the users. So we were actually not, we did not have this historical gaze that looked for what happened, but we asked as to what's happening now. We tried to demonstrate that the specific character of non-sites of memory can only be properly understood by moving away from classical tools for thinking about space and investigating such places in terms of intensity, rather than extension, while being aware of various kinds of topographical interruptions. aware of various kinds of topographical interruptions. Therefore, although we used the methods of such disciplines as history, cultural studies, memory studies, ethnography, sociology, literary studies, we also drew on vocabularies and perspectives provided by sites themselves and their users. So part of our thinking was stemming from grounded theory from social studies. And thus the theoretical lenses of necrotopology allowed us to build a series of categories such as listed here, necrotopography. I'm listing here my colleagues who authored text that build up new terms and tried to build this new vocabulary for this phenomenon of places, sites that never been commemorated yet they are so important for historical reason. that never been commemorated, yet they are so important for historical reason. So these were testimoniality, vernacular historiography, communities of implication, religious imaginaries, commemorative anomalies, forensic art, memory alert, soil as a medium of memory, affects as part of topographical experience, negative forms of remembrance or non-memory, and politics of nature. These are topics that are part of our output, and this is the output, so that's the bibliographic section, that's actually the end of my talk. But of course I will have some examples as well. So this is what could be referred to or read if someone wants to find out what we came up with. Heritage, Memory and Conflict, co-edited by Zuzanna Dziuban, is the journal that contained most of the theoretical output, but the first three green volumes are published in English. We are currently trying to win budget for English translation, or for all of them. However, perhaps the theoretical one, the number two, which is covered in this shortened version in the AJMC could be for your reference, could be interesting for the audience here. We also worked with local communities with some kind of a shorter introduction to the project. So to introduce ourselves, so this has also online version. So this is what can be consulted. And what I would like now to stress and explain my first photograph and go to the issue of examples and artistic cooperation is that we often heard that why do we care, why do we work? These are mass graves, so they have theory, they are absolutely clear objects. They could be then worked upon as sites that can be commemorated by. But what's the conceptual conundrum that we have here trying to explain this entanglement of human and non-human in more complex ways since we can use something that is more obvious. we can use something that is more obvious. And we, actually the very center of my book in this three books presentation is the chapter on how these sites are not graves and should not be easily conceptualized as graves because we heard it many, many times when we worked with local communities, with state or local institutions that they are looking for mass graves, they are commemorating mass graves, and we always made a stop here until it is commemorated. This is not a mass grave, it's simply a pit, a pit with human bodies, with material remains, but grave means ritual reworking. Of course ritual reworking is connected with the intention of the person that is taking the human remains, the victim, and putting into soil. this person or these persons had intention of any kind of honorable ritual, even if there was no religious representative of this group of victim, it could be considered, to my thinking, could be considered grave. But since we do not know their intentions, and mostly the records tell us their intentions were absolutely secular and sanitational, therefore such a pit with bodies is not yet a grave. And when we use this term, this is kind of, you know, an easy way for many to stop thinking about the site. Since it's a grave, what do you want? It's already a grave. It's fine. So we thought it's important to stress these are not yet graves and they need some kind of local memory and also on higher level reworkings to understand them as potential graves and to start the procedure to make them really graves. So I used in the book this concept stemming from geology that describes heaps of living organisms that were scraped by glacier moving on the bottom of the ocean and forming some kind of wedges. And these heaps of formerly living organisms that died together are called in geology thanatosynosis. And I use this as a starting point to think how to proceed from the situation, from the condition of thanatosynosis, so common death from Greek etymologically, to the situation of religious practice. To the right, you can see a fragment of a protocol of the post-war Polish Red Cross investigations, where they were looking for sites of executions. And in this questionnaire, the witnesses were giving as much information they could give. They were using different terms. But what is actually what is interesting is here at the very bottom, where the question is, were the victims of the execution were buried, they used these religious terms like buried or not interred. And it is saying in the woods, in the nearby plot of land by Stanisław Kusiak, I think, and it's exactly in the pit where local community was disposing of sick and dead animals. So it was extreme, this was an extreme example for us, not that often, but happening. We found a few of such examples where Jews executed during the Reinhardt action or Holocaust by bullet phase were put to the ground exactly in the existing carcass pits. So this is the moment, the extreme moment where animal and human bodies were put together for this transhuman existence of non-religious presence in the ground. So this was our most extreme starting point of trying to understand how to proceed and how to understand, of course, how to commemorate such human-non-human interments. So we were interested in some kind of zoom in, understanding sites more closely. Zainteresowaliśmy się zrozumieniem i zrozumieniem miejsc. in a manor house used to be owned by Polish elite person and overtaken by Germans during the Second World War in Eastern Poland near Majdanek camp near Lublin. And an interview done by Foundation Forgotten, Forgotten Foundation is an institution that is actually mirroring Polish Rabbinical Commission for Cemeteries. These are the same people, but different institutional grounding, not religious, but NGO. So we follow this NGO, we worked with this NGO to find sites and to understand sites also from the position of the most interested agents, so the representatives of the community that died in the Holocaust in Poland. And in this interview, as you see, there is this description of how people were buried behind the barn, exactly on the site where disposed objects or dead animals were put. So it was kind of a garbage pit. And this was also kind of a humiliation process, humiliation gesture from the side of perpetrator. So this is actually giving us a little bit more insight into such complex sites we were studying because it's not only human and non-humans there, but also objects. So this is basically a very diverse complex object to be studied in, and especially post-humanism approaches could help us to simply grasp how to understand such sites. So we were trying to zoom in because when we studied history of representing such sites, we quickly realized that what happened was this kind of interest in landscape as a landscape. So, the first round of photographs that documented such sites were putting the observers in this very stable position where I could grasp the whole view and have a certain control over this view. So we were interested in some kind of zooming in and showing this more complex situation. This is a project of Dominika Macocha we worked with, already with this broader version, and a bit closer cadre by Andrzej Kramarz where he shows this kind of disorientation and why this forensic art could be interesting with this forensic lenses of artists of use for us. Do I have still five minutes? Three minutes. So we were looking at artists that were trying to grasp a detail and understand how this very specific look, like a look of someone who's a detective trying to find the traces of a crime, help us to understand the physicality of the object. So we were looking for these situation where sites were not kind of readable objects of certain like textual or textual structured of sight or object or a phenomenon but to be understood as something complex that could not be stratified in this archaeological imagination. So you're using the term prism. And we worked with a certain artist with a few artists who helped us go through these issues and with their practice, we sometimes like in the case of Karolina Grzywnowicz, we followed her archive to understand one of the Ukrainian Polish Ukrainian conflict sites. We worked also with Anna Zagrodzka, who is a biologist by training. So she offered us the zoom in with laboratory approach and microscope to understand what kind of life grows up on this on the interrogated sites. So happens on the interrogated sites, so happens on these interrogated sites. And we also worked with Salomon Nagler and Angela Henderson, and this project was prepared for Warsaw Biennale. They also followed a rabbinical commission for cemeteries and interrogated sites, so the soil with echograms and objects that are still there, so nature on the ground. So to sum up, non-sites of memory may be considered objects of complex ontology and as such, they could be understood best as topographical interruptions. Thus, they constitute entities that undermine the binary divisions between life and death, human and non-human, culture and nature, past and present, organic and non-organic, and evoke strong, effective resonance. They foster a particular experience of space and encourage specific spatial practices. They function in complex networks of local and central identity discourses, politics of memory and social practices. Due to their unstable status, both precarious and explosive, they compel their communities living in its vicinity on different level, vicinity understood in different dimension to confront their own implication or in less tinted term entanglement with the past. Finally, they demand unorthodox methodological approaches combining the academic with the vernacular, with the artistic, the personal with the communal, and the rational with the affective. Thank you. Vielen Dank für den Beitrag. Thank you very much for your lecture. Ist es Ihnen lieber, wenn die Fragen auf Englisch gestellt werden oder auf Deutsch? Das ist mir egal, aber ich werde auf Englisch etwas Nächstes beantworten. Ich denke, ich bin noch nicht da, mit Deutsch in der Akademie zu sprechen. Ja, ich denke, wenn wir von der Mittagspause ein bisschen was abzwacken, dann können wir uns jetzt die zehn Minuten oder elf Minuten bis zwölf Uhr noch als Diskussionszeit nehmen. Ich denke, zu dem Beitrag gibt es sicher einige Fragen oder viele Fragen und möchte nun bitte die Runde eröffnen. Thank you very much for your talk. And I'm very much interested about the communities around these sites. How do they react? And how do they tradire? I don't know the word in English. How do they remember those sites? That was part of our research and to be honest, one of the most interesting, I think that the results from this anthropological research were most surprising because we thought, we came with this assumption these sites are forgotten, but it turned out that they actually, there are some kind of minuscule, very small gestures of remembering them. Some of them positive, some of them were extremely negative. So positive gestures of such communities were included, for instance, that these vernacular historians that tried to describe them, safeguard them, save them from oblivion by describing them or collecting the last testimonies or photographing them over years simply. Some of them tried to mark them with some kind of text markers or on the trees as we have on the poster of this conference. So this practice was also present with safeguarding them by putting stones over the top of such pits with human remains but this action actually had their variants that were well they start to be the disputable when you have branches of on the top of such a pit there's a question is that the echo of an old Celtic practice of safeguarding the dead and building up this apotropaic barrier between the dead and the living? Or is it already kind of a littering, like leaving the leftovers? Because the next step is leaving garbage there. And that was simply the most, the easiest way to find out such a site in the middle of woods. When we were walking and looking for such a location, we knew this is this area of the wood. We would easily find it by the fact that it was like safeguarded but it was also of course a very negative gesture of um of of like denigrating uh the the community that was there in the ground so the the practices there was kind of a complex set of interactions we called non-memory because we realized that this is communal effort at once, like past the knowledge, because next generations, even children, they knew that these are these Jewish pits, or we will take you where the Jews were killed or were shot. They never used the word grave, to be honest. That was also an indicator for us, like a mind-blowing moment. Well, how everyone used the word grave when we go and we talk about this phenomenon in Warsaw, but no one uses this term when we go to the actual location. So that was kind of, you know, awaking and gave us this trigger to think differently a bit about these sites. So the relations are extremely complex, but I think only started from the very location can display the whole range of variants. And this is important, I will stress that, because it's easy to accuse these communities of negligence, and this is very often so. And I would say the situation is far more complex. I'm not saying positive, it's complex in a positive and in a negative way. Like this is a spectrum, and usually in each location, the spectrum includes several different gestures. It's not that easy to simply say yes or no. Yeah, but that's the most important dimension, I think, to approach to such uncommemorated leftover clandestine sites. Yeah. Thank you. I was wondering if you also had a look to these, let's say, sites or graves or whatever you call it, where Roma were buried or shot or murdered. And if you find or could find any differences how the local community reacted or if that was just the same. Thank you. reacted if that was just the same? Thank you. Yeah, we started from Holocaust sites, but we at some point realized that we have to have to compare asking ourselves, is this negligence a factor of anti-Semitism or the negligence comes from other factors. So we added sites factors. So we added sites that contained German soldiers, Polish returning from forced labor, Ukrainians and Roma. And Roma place was important, already well known, Bielcza with this beautiful beautiful monument of Małgorzata Mirgatas. She was our representative in Wiennese Biennale two years ago. So she's a well-known artist. I'm sure when you see her work, you will realize that you already know her. And this monument was done from wood and was vandalized in the moment we started the research in Bielcza. So we were following the reactions to the vandalization and how the new monument was then created and re-established. And Roma Sinti sites are a bit easier because they were mostly exhumed. There were not so many, and the bodies were relocated to the cemeteries. So they are not that transgressive and not that full of questions, not raising so many questions, since the sites of violence are there, and of course the remains of human remains are also there, but the exhumations and relocations already happened. The most transgressive sites, the ones that worked the most, that had the highest affective powers, were those that still contain human remains, because they are really anthropologically difficult to handle. It's something between a comment and a question, and a reflection that actually brings us back also to uh to the team of the conference and the differences between poland and austria what would be the english translation of okopisco carrier pitch career i did not find anything better, I'm afraid. Okay, so this body disposal pit in which previously animals were also thrown, which was a Polish word, especially in Galicia, that was used also before the war to describe Jewish cemeteries, actually. So it's a word that survived the Holocaust and perpetuated speaking to a certain continuity and I found it fascinating because Eva Menasse used it in Dunkerblum also but she borrowed it from IHAT, so from Ukrainian, mostly from Ukrainian vernacular language and she projected it onto Reśnice. I found that totally fascinating. And Reśnice is, of course, a very specific case because the remains are there, and they are constantly deterred and disappearing and dislocated, and with every research, actually they become more far away from being discovered. And during the last investigation I was there, it was totally fascinating because it seems that the local population is actually capitalizing on the possibility of having this body disposer pit at their possession because they are, maybe it's not like a public information, but they are getting money for allowing the investigation to take place, and the investigation to take place. The remains are not there, so another person volunteers with their land to be investigated. So I was thinking about also the potential, not only symbolic, but also capital in a direct sense of the term that those communities could gain from having a body disposal pit at those specific localities. And did you ever encounter something like that in Poland as well? But also I was thinking that most of the sites that we spoke about, maybe I wasn't aware of that also, in Austria there are no human remains or most of the remains that were at those locations have already been exhumed at some point. And this also, not always of course, not always, but I think that this also unsettles a little bit the transfer of concepts. From, for instance, research that is done in Eastern Europe to research that is done in Austria. Something that I experienced very much exactly when reading Menasseh and her borrowing from Ukraine. and her borrowing from Ukraine. So, I don't know, it's just like wild comments with something of a question in between. I would only be extremely happy, beyond happy, if concepts from Eastern Europe would be transferred and not only, you know, this reverse direction, reverse to the habitual one will happen. That would be wonderful. And I think there is enough conceptual power in Eastern Europe to simply offer this. And I quite often cite Bartóf that said that actually, and also Snyder, those historians who work in Eastern Europe say that actually for Holocaust, that was the center, and also archives are here. This is the center for the research and for these investigations. So conceptually, it could also be revered or actually a bit listened, a bit more listened to. So it would be a change. So I would cherish this. And as far as this question about capitalizing, the small, tiny sites we investigated, I did not meet this kind of event. And I even asked Agnieszka Nieradko, the head of the Foundation Zapomniane, they researched hundreds of sites until now and they mark the sites they identify with wooden matzovot. Wooden means so unstable materially that does not allow, does not require any kind of erlaubness. So there is no necessity to go through this very elaborate process of getting permissions to put a monument on the site. So we thought these massacres will be easily vandalized, but they are not, but they're also not turning into some tourist attraction so they are too tiny simply to be kind of a you know a center of new processes new new like building new interactions with new communities they anchor something they anchor memory but do not push to to the to the edges and the new interests. It's a short question. I was wondering about knowledge transfer, because you said people do know, they do still know these sites, even children were guiding you to these sites. Because my experience is that people say, local people say, they have forgotten this site, they don't know anything about this site. So how does knowledge transfer go from one generation to the next within the families, did you find out? It's a bit depending on what you consider knowledge transfer because if you look for data and documents, you won't find much or anything. But if you look for embodied embodied knowledge for instance like people where people go or they don't go or some uh or there's a kind of embodied knowledge that is uh exposed by gestures or facial expressions or by the way people uh talk differently when they talk about certain fields they slow down down or they start using different mimics. So there is this kind of what we called non-discursive knowledge. And actually, we think this is extremely interesting part of knowledge that is not turned into symbols, but still there and is transferable. And it allows to give this kind of implied knowledge. And over years in interaction in a given community, members of this community somehow get to the point. They know what is this about. So they build up, I think that there is a bit of knowledge how this could be understood by two Polish sociologists, Elżbieta Neyman and Maria Hirschowicz, who worked as emigres, Jewish emigres in, so one was Jewish, from England and France. And they described exactly this as this kind of reverse negative memory They termed it non memory exactly and and they said this is part of the what is repressed of what is consciously stopped But it's part of something of this non discursive Issue and also Roma Sinti researchers were from your capacity a very influential Roma Sinti history researcher Also points to the fact that if you look at the social structures, behaviors, customs, you could find on this level traces of reactions to the past. And this is exactly this non-discursive, non-symbolic level of transferring knowledge of violent past. You showed us a picture of a project about nature, which is also speaking and giving information. Did I get it right that nature is also speaking and giving information. Did I get it right that there was grass not growing on mass graves? Is that right? That's a very common belief, and we worked with Caroline Stadikos who developed this non-invasive Holocaust archeology, and exactly archeologists who do not want to dig, do not want to disturb the ground. They start from observing the outer level and they protocol together these signs stemming from nature. So discoloration of leaves, of grass. In the quotation we had from Czesławica, stems stemming from nature. So discoloration of leaves, of trough of grass. In the quotation we had from Czesławica, the interviewer said, well, there were some graves along the railway to Majdanek and we always knew where these Jews who jumped and they were covered with soil were lying because the grass was completely different there. So basically I meant this grass was greener or grass was not green enough Vielen Dank an Roma Sendika für den Vortrag und an alle Diskutantinnen und Diskutanten. Wir kommen jetzt in die Mittagspause. Auch wenn sie jetzt ein bisschen kürzer ist, würde ich trotzdem bitten, dass wir uns um 13.15 Uhr wieder hier treffen, damit wir einfach nicht zu weit nach hinten kommen und im Zeitplan bleiben. Also Treffpunkt hier um 13.15 Uhr, dann geht es wieder los mit dem vorletzten Panel. Vielen Dank. Thank you.