Challenges of Holocaust Representation

Any testimony of the supposed witness must be weighed and valued against the very significance of silence, for later, as practice well regarded also acts as a revered preserve of memory. a ‘minute of silence’&nbsp.&nbsp. in commemorating the dead is but a familiar practice in modern times the world over. A dignified silence may well be of great value in the face of such a moral quandary. Indeed as Lanzmann put it, events such as the Holocaust are but unique. so o the extent that they create boundaries not to be crossed, and silence may well serve as the safest zone to be reached by the enemy.
The problem of the impossibility of total objectivity in the documentation of history, and the Holocaust to be precise, always faces quite a lot of challenges. First and foremost, “error is to human”, so is old adage, for with the human element added to the process of cataloging of empirical data, out of necessity, interpretation occasionally creeps as evident almost in the entire film Shoah, in effect, initiating in earnest a debate of the sort over the correctness of each and every version of thoughts therein. It is undeniable, more so in academics, that historian, and so to other writers delving on certain topics, only have absolute authority over they produce, and that at no time can /will they be seen as the ultimate authority over any given piece of history, the Holocaust included. Accordingly, they [historians] history compile their content based not merely on whether the evidence adduced in their analysis is true or false, but also based on their thoughts. giving meaning at times on events larger than what they deliver to their audience. Irrespective of the circumstances and armed with the supposed God-given intellect, historians often immerse themselves into the historical record, in the end drawing conclusive meanings in relation to the documentary evidence before them, occasionally oblivious of the danger of such certainties.