Vanessa Gera of the Associated Press has written an update about the latest moves in the ongoing debate over the fate of the so-called “white building” at 6 Twarda St. in downtown Warsaw that is the headquarters of the Jewish community and seat of many Jewish organizations and activities.
(See the report we ran on JHE in December 2011).
The building, one of the few surviving remnants of the infamous Warsaw Ghetto, is in poor condition. It is next to the Nozyk synagogue, the only synagogue to survive WW2, and nearby one block of Prozna street, one of the few remaining streets that survived. It is also near Warsaw’s Jewish Theatre.
Gera writes that the White Building
could be torn down to make way for a multistory tower that would fit seamlessly into a modern city skyline.
The building’s fate will soon be determined by the Culture Ministry, which has been asked by advocates of historic preservation to declare it a historical monument, a classification that would ban its destruction. It’s not yet clear how officials will decide, though previous rulings by other state offices had declared the building not worth saving. Now those for and against destroying the old building are anxiously awaiting a verdict.
What is perhaps unexpected in this case is who is fighting for what: Warsaw’s Jewish community, which owns the dilapidated three-story building, is making the case for its destruction. The community leaders argue that a bigger building is needed to accommodate a Jewish community that is re-emerging in the young Polish democracy after the Holocaust and decades of communist repression.
1 comment on “Warsaw: Update on debate over fate of Twarda 6 “White Building””
As you and any responsible public official with a sense of fiduciary duty might ask: should the decision to destroy an historic structure with a storied heritage and erect a commercial building be left in the hands some who may personally or professionally benefit from its destruction rather than those who have no business or professional reason to encourage possible commercial benefits?
Which buildings would they NOT destroy given a chance to liquidate them, sell them or turn over to developers their sites?
Who are the trustees of such heritage sites? Who are the heirs? A small group?
One is reminded of the destruction of the historic wooden synagogues of Poland. The destruction in 1960 of the unique treasure of the round synagogue in Praga, and countless more Jewish heritage sites throughout Poland, First by the Germans. Then by the Communists. And now? By some people who claim to represent “the Jews”?
Let the Jews of the world have a voice. This property hardly “belongs” to those who would dare to destroy it.
Michael Traison
—– Original Message —–
From: Traison, Michael H.
Subject: Re: WARSAW, Poland: Activists try to save old Warsaw ghetto building
An after thought:
This week is the 100th anniversary of Grand Central Terminal which is a temple of transportation and a meaningful important and vital part of the history of NY and the USA. 40 years ago there was a loud chorus of civil leaders echoing almost the same thoughts as are being ascribed to those who would destroy twarda 6. Thankfully Jackie Kennedy led a campaign of preservation then. Who will lead the campaign today?
Michael
—– Original Message —–
From: Traison, Michael H.
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 03:15 PM
.com>
Subject: RE: WARSAW, Poland: Activists try to save old Warsaw ghetto building
Please read my response to your question:
The generic question here has been faced by many cities over the last century and probably before that. Some cities have chosen to plow under their historic treasures and have lived to regret it very much, like Detroit which allowed important historic sites to be obliterated to build parking garages. Other cities have found ways to preserve their historic heritage.
There is always the dialogue which first should devote itself to distinguishing between true heritage or historic value and sentimentality and then engages in the balances historic or sentimental considerations and economic considerations.
I will tell you nothing new when I say that the Jewish heritage in Poland does not belong to a small group of people acting unilaterally who are not authorized or engaged or given the power of attorney to act on behalf of either those who built those buildings nor on behalf of the Jewish people generally, since for the most part the builders were murdered by the Germans.
The white building is one which should be analyzed by qualified professional historians from the polish and Jewish sides who can evaluate exactly what historic value it has. Just cause its old doesn’t make it valuable of course.
Warsaw’s mayor should be consulted and encouraged to ignore pressures driven by economic gain.
And then, in addition to what historians have to say one must turn to competent Jewish heritage experts. People like Sam Gruber and people from the Israeli universities and government.
Finally, as with all these situations, hopefully a way can be found to address all considerations somehow.
But to let a small group of people who want to build another office tower destroy this building without all the above at least is a horrible thought. This is not a question for lawyers, although there are legal questions. This is not a question for rabbis, although there are religious questions. This is not a question for business people although there are business issues.
The issue reminds one of the sale and destruction of synagogue properties when certain people where granted power. It reminds one of how some otherwise wise civic leaders are intimidated by concerns over seeming to be anti Jewish if they stop such destruction when its at the behest of the local Jews.
I’ve been in that building many times. I have seen, as have you, the Yiddish on the walls reading x-ray room. I remember when Michael found under the floor boards the papers from the ghetto which were being used for insulation or were a hidden treasure trove of documentation.
What was done in front of the nozyk by building the tall building there was bad enough.
Don’t let the joint be silent. Don’t let this be destroyed by a few people who have no right
Michael H. Traison | Attorney and Counselor at Law