Jump to content

Talk:Josef Mengele

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 50.111.52.253 (talk) at 18:06, 6 June 2021 (→obtained his birth cert-expanded?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:53, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Supervised the crematorium?

I have removed the assertion that he supervised the crematorium at Auschwitz from the lead. Medical doctors supervised the administration of gas in the gas chambers, but there would be no reason for a medical doctor to be involved in the disposal of the bodies. Gas chambers were attached to Crematoria II, III, IV, and V in Auschwitz II, and he was one of the doctors who administered the gas. I added a bit to the lead regarding this in lieu of the statement that he "supervised the crematorium" because I am pretty sure he did not do that, or I would have seen it already in other sources when preparing this article and the Auschwitz concentration camp article for GA.— Diannaa (talk) 00:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Survived removal of kidney without anaesthitic? Really...

The article states:

Yitzhak Ganon, another survivor, reported in 2009 how Mengele removed his kidney without anesthesia. He was forced to return to work without painkillers.[58]

The reference, [58], is to a Spiegel International article which contains this:

Ganon had to lie down on a table and was tied down. Without any anesthetics, Mengele cut him open and removed his kidney. "I saw the kidney pulsing in his hand and cried like a crazy man," Ganon says. "I screamed the 'Shema Yisrael.' I begged for death, to stop the suffering."
After the "operation," he had to work in the Auschwitz sewing room without painkillers. Among other things, he had to clean bloody medical instruments. Once, he had to spend the whole night in a bath of ice-cold water because Mengele wanted to "test" his lung function. Altogether, Ganon spent six and a half months in the concentration camp's hospital.

Is this for real? How can a kidney be extracted withouth anasthetic, given an open renal artery needing suturing and a 'screaming' and presumably writhing patient, who then survives. Why would Mengele have bothered with such a -for him- uninteresting individual?

Highly dubious, especially when it comes out in 2009 - 65 years later - and no compensation claim had been made to the German government. 92.28.23.198 (talk) 21:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Debt movie association

The term surgeon is used in the movie The Debt to describe the character named Dr. Dieter Vogel, who is based on the real-life Dr. Josef Mengele. Dr. Mengele allegedly did surgery for the purpose of torturing the prisoners at Birkenau. For example, he allegedly sewed two children together, back to back, to create Siamese twins. Source: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2011/09/01/was-the-surgeon-of-birkenau-really-a-surgeon/

Movies:

- The Debt (2007) - The Debt (2010) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenorb (talk • contribs) 19:13, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The incident about sewing two twins together is already present in the article.— Diannaa (talk) 19:46, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are references in novels & films to the Mengele affair "pop trivia"?

Greetings, all. Diannaa removed this addition to the article, concerning the fictionalization of the Mengele affair in best-selling novels and films. The reasoning provided is that any such reference violates WP:MILPOP. As the contributor who added the section "In popular culture," I object to the notion that such references go against the suggestions expressed in the aforesaid essay. On the contrary, I believe that the article should certainly offer a reference to the impact of its subject on modern culture. Opinions? -The Gnome (talk) 07:21, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree that a reference to popular culture is appropriate, and I agree that Dianaa's deletion was correct. What is needed is a brief report of a reliable source that studies Mengele's influence on modern culture, not an editors' selection of books and films from the very large number available. Zerotalk 07:53, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. We typically have "In popular culture" sections in biographical articles, where the choice for inclusion of material is unavoidably shaped by the collective, cumulative work of editors, especially when the cultural references are of a "very large number." But let's make this a step towards improving further the encyclopaedic value of the article: It can contain the (few, actually) fictional creations that were directly inspired or influenced by the Mengele affair, adding also, as you suggest, references to reliable sources that critically study the influence. -The Gnome (talk) 08:46, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That consensus, in my humble opinion, confuses reporting with glorifying. This is evident even by the use of the word "inappropriate." In what sense would references to cinema and literary fiction be "inappropriate" in a biography, when these references are about something real and extant? "See also" sections, per MOS:SEEALSO, contain internal links to related Wikipedia articles but this is about works directly inspired by the Mengele affair. We'd be neither trivializing the horrors committed by Mengele, nor disrespecting his victims in any way. These are works that have not just been "notable" but marked the 1970s (a decade that was probably the tail end of the post-war Nazi hunts), besides being significant commercial hits. Not all culture that happens to be popular is "pop trivia"; and these works are certainly not trivial. My proposal to include both the works and their critical appraisal to be included stands. -The Gnome (talk)
  • The MILHIST wikiproject manual of style specifies not to include a popular culture section "unless the subject has had a well-cited and notable impact on popular culture". In my opinion including a list of film portrayals of notorious Nazi war criminals trivializes their acts and it not appropriate for this particular article as Mengele has not actually had a big impact on western culture in spite of being the subject or inspiration for some films.— Diannaa (talk) 11:00, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings, Diannaa. The proposed inclusion is in full accordance to the MILHISTO Manual of Style since we do have a "notable impact on popular culture" of the Mengele affair, "well cited" of course. First of all, we need to understand that the cultural impact concerns his escape from justice, his hiding, and the failed attempts to bring Mengele to justice. That is what is denoted by the term the Mengele affair. (None of the works of art was about his crimes as such; there was little to argue or even show about the monstrosities of his crimes.) And we have at least three works of art about the affair that have been both critically notable and commercial hits. (Sources plentifully availably.) That should retire the argument whether or not the affair had an impact or not. (There was a time, remembered by both people who were alive in the 1970s/80s and historians, that the hunt for Nazi criminals was always on the news. We have not forgotten neither those who were brought to justice, nor those who weren't.)
Now, as to your opinion that including these works in the pertinent biography article "trivializes [Mengele's] acts and it not appropriate for this particular article": One would need something more to show cause here, I'm afraid. We have biographical article upon article not just on Nazi criminals (possibly a tautology, that) but on all notable mass criminals - and references to them in popular culture is, rightly, par for the course. This is an encyclopaedia, after all, and we should not be afraid of truths & facts. Wikipedia's article about Adolf Hitler in popular culture contains the most notable works of art concerning or inspired by Hitler and hitlerism and critical references to them! It is an excellent precedent, and it's structured exactly per my revised suggestion for a similar section here. -The Gnome (talk) 07:27, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
I find a clear consensus against including an "in popular culture" section. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:12, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Should the article have an "In popular culture" section?— Diannaa (talk) 13:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

  • No it should not. The MILHIST wikiproject manual of style specifies not to include a popular culture section "unless the subject has had a well-cited and notable impact on popular culture". In my opinion including a list of film portrayals of notorious Nazi war criminals trivializes their acts and it not appropriate for this particular article as Mengele has not actually had a big impact on western culture in spite of being the subject or inspiration for some films.— Diannaa (talk) 13:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not on the basis of what I have seen. If Mengele has had a significant influence on modern culture, it should be possible to find reliable sources that explore that influence in a scholarly fashion. Where are they? I don't think the fact we can locate a few books or movies that use Mengele as a character is good enough. Zerotalk 13:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, per Zero. A separate article on this topic could be a runner though. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:02, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, unless there are WP:SECONDARY on which a sensible discussion of the topic can be based akin to Waffen-SS in popular culture. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, per WP:MILPOP. Kierzek (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, as per the above. Sea Ane (talk) 03:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, as per WP:MILPOP and previous comments by Diannaa and others. Mengele has had little influence on popular culture even though he was part of a dark period of history. Zero0000 also brings up an important point and my research could find little support of Mengele's influence on popular culture. The only long lasting influence I found support for is Mengele's influence on the ethics of medical research, but this does not rise to the level justifying the inclusion of what is being requested. Jurisdicta (talk) 08:00, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • These "in popular culture" lists should be nuked on sight. That said, prose discussions of cultural depictions based on secondary, reliable sources can be included although probably under a different title, such as "Legacy" or "cultural depictions". Mengele's place in popular imagination of the Holocaust is worth mentioning in a more encyclopedic way. For example New York Times states: If anyone embodies the archetype of the evil that was Auschwitz, it is surely Josef Mengele... Popular culture has perpetuated the demonic legend. Rolf Hochhuth’s 1963 play, “The Deputy,” featured a Mengele character with the stature of “absolute evil”; Ira Levin’s 1976 novel (and later film), “The Boys From Brazil,” portrayed the fiendish geneticist cloning Hitler; and none other than Charlton Heston played Mengele meeting his confused and ambivalent son, Rolf, in the 2003 film “My Father, Rua Alguem 5555.”[1] (t · c) buidhe 08:38, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, per Zero.BristolTreeHouse (talk) 11:09, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, unless there is a strong argument that the person in question had a significant impact on popular culture with a very carefully written and reliably sourced commentary. A random list of items that make a passing reference to the person can only be classed as inappropriate trivia for this type of article. You may as well create a new article called Impact of Nazi war criminals on popular culture and see how long it takes to end up at WP:AFD. Rodney Baggins (talk) 14:05, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No - There are very clear rules regarding the addition of Popular Culture sections. Unless there's enough references establishing the importance of the subject to popular culture, we shouldn't include it. Purely on anecdotical level, I can think of several fictional characters that have probably been inspired by the historical Mengele, but unless some quality sources discussing the relationship between Mengele and these characters are present, we shouldn't add them to the page. PraiseVivec (talk) 21:07, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, per WP:MILPOP - Idealigic (talk) 23:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No but … , if the Mengele character's role in The Boys from Brazil is as important as that article claims (I don't know the book or film, other than by name) then brief mention is warranted here, somewhere. I sympathise and share the general disdain for these kinds of sections - which frequently become collections of trivia, or sometimes of tasteless 'in-jokes', but there has to be a threshold whereby Mary Stuart or Richard II are mentioned in the articles of the historical persons who they are ostensibly based on. Pedantically, I would point out that Adolf Hitler -simply as an example- has had zero impact on popular culture but Chaplin and the hosts of others who have represented AH in various ways, have had very considerable impact both in terms of the number of representations and the cultural significance of such representations. Being a central character in a major book and film with their own articles would seem to me to pass the threshold where a mention was justified here. I agree with almost everything said by Buidhe above, including his suggested blueprint for a text. Pincrete (talk) 18:56, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No,- not someone who is popularly portrayed, not sure of the cultural worth. Deathlibrarian (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No per above. ~ HAL333 21:18, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Adding an additional comment, though Zero0000 has also made the same point in the survey section. The content I removed is simply a list of three of the films that were inspired by Mengele's life and offers no explanation of what lasting impact these films have had on the culture, so I think the list is not a good addition to this article.— Diannaa (talk) 13:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I can see how the initial reaction to "In popular culture" with this particular person may seem in poor taste, and comments such as: "...including a list of film portrayals of notorious Nazi war criminals trivializes their acts", seems to confirm that. Even if I don't necessarily agree with it, I understand that reaction. But I think the issue is with the title, as opposed to the content. If there are notable books and films based on Mengele, then that is content that should be included. It's encyclopedic, we don't censor, and trying to hide that those works exist doesn't change the fact they do, nor serve the reader. Adolf Hitler in popular culture is actually it's own page. While I'm not looking to debate that, perhaps in this case, a different title would be a better way to go? Something like "In books and film"...? - wolf 14:12, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The same issues apply to this particular article regardless of the section title: unless we've got some sources that demonstrate Mengele has had a significant impact on popular culture, we shouldn't have a list of pop culture appearances. In addition to the list of films, books, and the like, Adolf Hitler in popular culture has 1549 words of sourced analysis on Hitler's impact on the culture. We at present don't have anything comparable for Mengele.— Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but it seems we've come back to the title. If we remove the idea a "pop culture" connection, and simply list notable works that are based on this person, would that help ameliorate this issue? - wolf 16:13, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the wording of the section header that I object to; it's the inclusion of such a section, regardless of what it's called. I've already stated why.— Diannaa (talk) 16:51, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, I can see Diannaa's pov on this (an editor/admin I respect a great deal btw), but find it hard to exclude, say... The Boys from Brazil (film), an triple-Oscar nominated film, directed by Franklin J. Schaffner, starring Gregory Peck as Mengele, with Laurence Olivier and James Mason, as well as the book. Content like this is directly related to the article's subject, it's relevant, sourced and arguably encyclopedic. But, I'm not gonna !vote either way. I was basically just playing devil's advocate, looking for a middle ground. Thanks for the replies. Cheers - wolf 18:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: As the contributor who added the removed content, I will only add this to my already delineated opinion: The typical, default title itself for such sections, i.e. In popular culture, is an extremely unfortunate choice because (a) it perforce bundles together very disparate cultural elements, and (b) brings to mind "pop trivia," more than anything. (It is telling that Diannaa used those very words to decribe the removed content in the edit summary.) But a reference in mass/popular culture does not necessarily mean a bubble-gum hit or a superhero movie. And I hope one does not have to argue here against the equation of popularity with triviality! In sum, the attribute of triviality when associated with Nazi war crimes provokes understandable revulsion. -The Gnome (talk) 07:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

obtained his birth cert-expanded?

I think it would be of interest to flesh-out how this happened in the article, with his name being on 'wanted' lists of the West German gov't, I'm assuming? 50.111.52.253 (talk) 18:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Josef_Mengele&oldid=1027205068"