4 Introduction

Jewish, Polish, Czech, and German prisoners in various settings reveals the
diversity of experiences that could exist within the same ghetto or camp, and
the markedly diVerent ways in which people viewed their experiences.
The ghettos and camps in the Nazi system housed a wide array of
prisoners, representing national, political, and religious aYliations from
across the European continent. Acknowledging this diversity is important
for several reasons, the Wrst being a simple one of historical accuracy. For
the most part, portrayals of musical activity have relied on assumptions
about the uniformity of prisoners experiences. In the process, the experi-
ences of certain groups have been marginalized or ignored. Considering the
preoccupation in Western society with the memory of Nazism, the question
of why certain aspects of experience have not been given equal attention is
an important one. An emphasis on diversity helps to redress some of the
simpliWcations of memory, laying the path for more complex historical
representations.
As we shall see, music operated not in homogeneous communities, but in
communities divided on the basis of power, wealth, class, language, and other
factors. It was not only a medium for the discussion and documentation of
social disparity, but also a place where disparity was played out. Individual
initiative was signiWcant only until a certain point where inmates participa-
tion in musical activity was concerned: beyond this, they relied for their
opportunities on externally imposed factors, such as social standing and
connections, support of prisoners higher up in the camp hierarchies, or the
permission of the SS. Music was also mobilized for explicitly political ends.
Inmate groups with active agendasparticularly those involved in resistance
activity, like partisans in the ghettos and political prisoners in the camps
used songs to promote narratives of optimism and solidarity, and to encour-
age people to join in the opposition struggle. Ghetto authorities, especially in
Vilna and odz, used cultural life for their own, somewhat diVerent purposes:
in order to calm and reassure their populations, as a forum for promoting
policies such as the importance of work, and subtly to discourage involve-
ment with resistance movements.
The focus on diversity also allows us to recognize the multi-faceted nature
of human behaviour rather than reducing it to assimilable stereotypes. Under
extreme conditions, where the struggle for individual survival was para-
mount, people responded in diVerent ways. Some withdrew into themselves;
some provided support to those around them; some bribed, stole, or
informed in order to improve their situation. As well as encountering pockets
of solidarity and protection, inmates experienced widespread antagonism,