A close friend (Mr. Richard Urey, a Congressional Chief of Staff who brought this matter to my and others' attention) recently brought me up to date. He has been integral in efforts to rectify this ethical and moral injustice:
Mr. Urey had a crew shoot a video appeal, directly from Dina, which showed other amazing paintings from Auschwitz as well as Dina's statement into the lens. It was seen globally by a number of people in key positions. Unfortunately, the video effort fell mostly on blind eyes in Poland. Efforts to get the US Holocaust Museum on board to help retrieve at least some of the originals also was in vein.
On a positive note, an active operative dealing with the matter for the last 10 years showed Mr. Urey a portfolio containing state of the art digital reproductions of the whole set of seven watercolors. These were made under the direction of the chair of the International Auschwitz Museum Commission. They have since been given to Dina Babbit's daughter who in turn will present them to her Mom on Mother's day, May 9th. . . . tomorrow. The daughter is very much looking forward to the presentation.
As Mr. Urey told me: "There are a lot of politics here and though some are legitimate, I disagree with the absolute rationale for preserving all artifacts on location." He also said that, ". . .though to this point efforts have failed to resolve the situation in the fashion desired, the efforts at least have built a great legacy for Dina and her family. Also, we have incorporated language in new legislation to maintain US policy about the rightful ownership of these works. This updates the law that Congresswoman Shelley Berkley pushed thru some years back--so there is continuity to the Obama administration."
The effort does goes on. At 86 years of age, Dina is not in the greatest of health; however, I certainly will be thinking of her smiling face on Mother's day tomorrow when her daughter presents her with the reproductions. One celebrates what there is to celebrate.
A recent article in the New York Times outlines the story of a woman named Dina Gottliebova Babbitt who was forced to paint portraits of Gypsies at Auschwitz for Dr. Mengele. She did so under the condition that the lives of both her and her Mother would be spared, and they were. Seven of the paintings have resurfaced. For over 30 years the Auschwitz Museum has refused to allow the paintings to be claimed by the still living artist. This is wrong.
From an article in the New York Times:
". . .The Auschwitz museum, which considers the watercolors to be its property, has argued that they are rare artifacts and important evidence of the Nazi genocide, part of the cultural heritage of the world. Teresa Swiebocka, the museum's deputy director, wrote by e-mail that the portraits "serve important documentary and educational functions as a part of the permanent exhibition" about the murder of thousands of Gypsy, or Roma, victims. The portraits, she added, "are on permanent exhibition, although they have to be rotated to preserve them, since they are watercolors on paper.. . ."
She added that "we do not regard these as personal artistic creations but as documentary work done under direct orders from Dr. Mengele and carried out by the artist to ensure her survival." (The whole article can be read by clicking
". . .The Auschwitz museum, which considers the watercolors to be its property, has argued that they are rare artifacts and important evidence of the Nazi genocide, part of the cultural heritage of the world. Teresa Swiebocka, the museum's deputy director, wrote by e-mail that the portraits "serve important documentary and educational functions as a part of the permanent exhibition" about the murder of thousands of Gypsy, or Roma, victims. The portraits, she added, "are on permanent exhibition, although they have to be rotated to preserve them, since they are watercolors on paper.. . ."
She added that "we do not regard these as personal artistic creations but as documentary work done under direct orders from Dr. Mengele and carried out by the artist to ensure her survival." (The whole article can be read by clicking
Dear Ms. Swiebocka,
In the New York times article by Steve Friess, Published: August 30,2006 (link above) I read your opinion: ". . .We do not regard these as personal artistic creations but as documentary work done under direct orders from Dr. Mengele and carried out by the artist to ensure her survival."
How is it possible to conclude that works of art created in order to save one's life, and the life of their mother. . . are not personal. It is as "personal" as any effort can possibly be!! As a painter for over 30 years, each of my paintings is important to me; but, I have never been faced with certain death by some ghoulish prison Doctor if I didn't paint for him, with mine and my mother's life as payment. I don't know that I could. That Dina Gottliebova Babbitt could bring her talent to bear under such circumstances is more than amazing, it's heroic. She and her family deserve these medals of honor in "THEIR" legacy collection. This family would not even exist were it not for Dina's capabilities and strength.
Categorizing Gottliebova Babbitt's original paintings as part of "cultural heritage" and "documentary work", only gives credibility to Mengele's "direct orders" and support to his objectives. . .even after his death. It hardly seems an appropriate goal. Refusal to return the paintings to the one place in the world where they belong does dishonor not only to Gottliebova Babbitt as a survivor, but also the Auschwitz Museum as an organization which should certainly have learned respect for Auschwitz inmates by now. It seems nothing less than one more slap in the face to inmate Dina Gottliebova Babbitt.
We have amazing technology. Reproductions look exactly like the originals, even single reproductions are easy to do. Being of sturdier stuff, they would in fact be much more appropriate for the museum than the originals. You know as well as I that whatever "documentary" and "educational" function you believe they provide would be just as effectively provided by exact copies.
Mrs. Babbitt is still alive at 83. I'm sure she would even be happy to sign the reproductions if you so desired. Create a pamphlet explaining to the visitors of Auschwitz that Dina Gottliebova Babbitt and her family are the only rightful owners of the original artworks. Talk about the present family, alive and well . . .EXISTING. .because of her. A creative presentation would benefit the Museum in the eyes of any sympathetic and understanding visitor. Or. . .say nothing at all regarding reproductions. Questions regarding such things are usually not even considered unless attention is brought to them.
There is enough in the way of "documents"as "evidence" of the Nazi genocide. After all these decades, what is finally in order from Auschwitz is a common sense compassion for its inmates. . .while there is still some time. (Joseph Holbrook ©2006
In the New York times article by Steve Friess, Published: August 30,2006 (link above) I read your opinion: ". . .We do not regard these as personal artistic creations but as documentary work done under direct orders from Dr. Mengele and carried out by the artist to ensure her survival."
How is it possible to conclude that works of art created in order to save one's life, and the life of their mother. . . are not personal. It is as "personal" as any effort can possibly be!! As a painter for over 30 years, each of my paintings is important to me; but, I have never been faced with certain death by some ghoulish prison Doctor if I didn't paint for him, with mine and my mother's life as payment. I don't know that I could. That Dina Gottliebova Babbitt could bring her talent to bear under such circumstances is more than amazing, it's heroic. She and her family deserve these medals of honor in "THEIR" legacy collection. This family would not even exist were it not for Dina's capabilities and strength.
Categorizing Gottliebova Babbitt's original paintings as part of "cultural heritage" and "documentary work", only gives credibility to Mengele's "direct orders" and support to his objectives. . .even after his death. It hardly seems an appropriate goal. Refusal to return the paintings to the one place in the world where they belong does dishonor not only to Gottliebova Babbitt as a survivor, but also the Auschwitz Museum as an organization which should certainly have learned respect for Auschwitz inmates by now. It seems nothing less than one more slap in the face to inmate Dina Gottliebova Babbitt.
We have amazing technology. Reproductions look exactly like the originals, even single reproductions are easy to do. Being of sturdier stuff, they would in fact be much more appropriate for the museum than the originals. You know as well as I that whatever "documentary" and "educational" function you believe they provide would be just as effectively provided by exact copies.
Mrs. Babbitt is still alive at 83. I'm sure she would even be happy to sign the reproductions if you so desired. Create a pamphlet explaining to the visitors of Auschwitz that Dina Gottliebova Babbitt and her family are the only rightful owners of the original artworks. Talk about the present family, alive and well . . .EXISTING. .because of her. A creative presentation would benefit the Museum in the eyes of any sympathetic and understanding visitor. Or. . .say nothing at all regarding reproductions. Questions regarding such things are usually not even considered unless attention is brought to them.
There is enough in the way of "documents"as "evidence" of the Nazi genocide. After all these decades, what is finally in order from Auschwitz is a common sense compassion for its inmates. . .while there is still some time. (Joseph Holbrook ©2006
All of Joseph Holbrook's images and commentary, "quotesmefile"© etc., within this web site, are copyrighted. Written permission is required for any use.
My email to Auschwitz Museum 8/30/06:
UPDATE 5/08/09
Dina Babbit Passed away on July 29, 2009, aged 86. (1923-2009)
Articles about her on her passing
Joseph Holbrook Journal: AUSCHWITZ MUSEUM TRAVESTY
JOSEPH HOLBROOK