Rethinking the Dynamics of Occupation: Time and Space in Diaries from the Occupied Netherlands, Ukraine and France (1940-1945)
Laura Eckl (Bergische University of Wuppertal) and Gaëlle Fisher (Leibniz Institute for the History and Culture of Eastern Europe)
The experience of living under German occupation in World War II in different countries and regions of Europe could last from 22 months to six years. Instead of relying on the dates of the invasion and withdrawal of German troops to define periods of occupation, which perpetuates the timelines and temporalities of military history, in our panel we argue that the perception and periodization of occupation regimes would drastically change if we also focused on the experiences of members of occupied societies and how they experienced time and space. By examining concepts of time, temporality and space through the lens of the history of everyday life, we aim to shed light on similarities and differences of experiences in various occupied societies throughout Europe. How did local civilian communities perceive different phases of occupation, and how did interactions with the occupiers in public or semi-public spaces change over time?
The presentations in this panel examine the beginnings and endings of the German occupation in the Netherlands, Ukraine and France between 1940 and 1945. Members of the occupied societies experienced these moments – which might be considered the first and last phases of occupation – at vastly different rhythms, unaware of the specific timestamps that researchers would later use for retrospective periodization. For members of occupied societies the first weeks of the German occupation marked the first sharp break with their existing assumptions of normality. They had to adapt their routines and community structures in order to deal with changing social spaces that were reshaped by the occupiers’ violent, repressive and racist policies as well as their constant presence and the possibility of becoming the victim of violence without jurisdiction. The scope of action of the Jewish population was particularly limited. Throughout Europe, those designated as Jews had multiple persecution experiences: As members of the occupied societies, they faced the everyday life struggles and pressures of occupation but had to simultaneously deal with antisemitic policies targeted at them specifically, fear social isolation and deadly persecution. In addition to closely observing the occupiers, Jewish members of the occupied societies also paid attention to how non-Jews responded to their situation. Daily encounters became moments of testing, revealing either solidarity or hostility toward them.
During the final two years of the war, members of occupied societies remained uncertain about when, how or even if the occupation would come to an end. The distance from the front lines became a vital factor for how individuals perceived time and made sense of their situation or assumptions about upcoming events. Regions that were close to the front lines had the daily prospect of new rulers approaching and taking over while still living in fear of how retreating German troops would act or what would happen if they reconquered the area. When the Germans returned to Kharkiv in March 1943 after a one month interregnum of the Red Army, the occupied society experienced this second occupation as an even more violent period than the first: German occupiers took revenge based on alleged “disloyalty” after the Red Army had left the city. Throughout Europe – as in France and in the Netherlands – Germany’s ever worsening military fate in the war and the expansion of resistance activities did not prevent the occupiers from committing harsh acts of “retaliation” and ongoing deportations to concentration camps.
In this panel, diaries written under occupation serve as our primary sources. Thanks to their proximity in time to the everyday lives of their authors, diaries offer privileged insights into people’s perceptions, expectations and emotions. Analysing them makes it possible to identify specific temporalities and spatial dimensions of experiencing occupation. The central questions we pose are: How did the lived experience of occupation change as time went on? How did diarists write about and cope with these changes? What similarities and differences do we see across different spaces and communities? Making a concerted effort to include diarists who capture the diversity of occupied societies, our panel seeks to move beyond a static understanding of experiencing occupation and focuses instead on its multiplicity, asynchronicity and processuality. By examining everyday life beyond national frames and through the analytical lenses of time and space, we aim to contribute to a deeper understanding of how different local societies perceived and navigated the dynamics of occupation.
Panel speakers and presentations
Chair/discussant: Tatjana Tönsmeyer (University of Wuppertal)
Paul Bakkum (Amsterdam): Different Spaces, Different Occupations? Space and Time in Dutch War-Time Diaries
Laura Eckl (University of Wuppertal): ‘Summer’ and ‘Winter Germans’: Experiencing “Slow” and “Fast” Violence during the German Occupation of Kharkiv
Gaëlle Fisher (Institute for the History and Culture of Eastern Europe (GWZO), Leipzig): ‘We live hour by hour, no longer week by week’: Time, Space and Emotions in the Diaries of French Jews in Occupied Paris
Photo credits:
Cover picture: Photo of people fleeing the police because they illegally demolished and stole firewood from empty buildings because of the fuel shortage in The Hague, 1944-45 in the last year of the German occupation of the Netherlands. Street photography by Dutch photographer Menno Huizinga.
Source: Wikimedia Commons
Recent Comments