Lea Rosh - Public Debate

Public Debate

Michael Naumann first had opted against the Berlin Holocaust Monument and (similar to the less known Eike Geisel) had interpreted the attempts as a self finding process of the German Bourgeoisie and a hidden conclusion (heimlicher Schlußstrich) of the Vergangenheitsbewältigung. While, according Naumann, after 1871 the leading class in the German Empire manifested their historical views in raising retrospective monuments like the Hermannsdenkmal and Völkerschlachtdenkmal and joined in a controversial debate abaout the planned reconstruction of Heidelberg Castle, the Berlin Republic would use the debates around the Holocaustmahnmal and the reconstruction of Berliner Stadtschloss for a similar purpose with Lea Rosh being a leading figure in both cases.

According Claus Leggewie, beyond a 'selbsttherapeutisches Lebenswerk' (lit. 'self-therapeutic life's work') Roshs monumental work resulted in a symbol of national identity of her generation as well the Berlin capital. Instead of reflection and insecureness in the face of (especially around Berlin) decaying authentic memorial sites, Roshs initiative initiated a higher self consciousness and pride of the World Masters of Remembering('Gedenkweltmeister') involved. Roshs attempts however result in a possibly exclusive stance against Germans with a migration background which do not share the same history.