Abstract
The opening of the Nuremberg Trial was widely reported in Finland, as in other countries examined here. Like the reportage from the liberated concentration camps, the Finnish press was not represented on the spot although it had a quota for one journalist. However, the trial was a much-awaited event in Finland. The Belsen Trial (the trial of Josef Kramer and 44 others), which had ended on 17 November 1945, was duly reported in Finland, and in part indicated that the interest in Nazi criminality was running high.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Jukka Tarkka, 13. Artikla: Suomen sotasyyllisyyskysymys ja liittoutuneiden sotarikospolitiikka vuosina 1944–1946 (Helsinki: WSOY, 1977), passim; also J. K. Paasikivi’s diary, Yrjö Blomstedt and Matti Klinge (eds), Paasikiven Päiväkirjat, 1944–1956, I Osa 28.6.1944–24.4.1949 (Helsinki: WSOY, 1985), pp. 248–9. Entries for 22 and 24 November 1945.
Veikko Huttunen, Talvisodasta turvakokoukseen (Porvoo: WSOY, 1974), p. 273; Salminen, Aselevosta kaappaushankkeeseen, p. 119.
For example, John Hershey, The Wall (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1950) and Leon Uris, Mila 18 (London: Heinemann, 1961).
For a good recent analysis on the difficulty of resistance, see Rachel L. Einwohner, ‘Opportunity, Honour, and Action in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1943’, American Journal of Sociology, 109: 3 (2003), pp. 650–75.
Sigmund Freud, ‘Screen Memories’ (1899), Standard Edition of The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. 2, ed. and trans. James Strachey (London: Hogarth Press, 1962), pp. 303–22.
Ibid., p. 306.
Patrick H. Hutton, ‘Sigmund Freud and Maurice Halbwachs: The Problem of Memory in Historical Psychology’, The History Teacher, 27: 2 (1994), pp. 147–8.
For example, see Silvennoinen, Salaiset aseveljet; Henrik Meinander, Suomi 1944. Sota, yhteiskunta, tunnemaisema (Helsinki: Siltala, 2009). Jokisipilä, ‘Suomalainen historiallinen myytti’, Tieteessä tapahtuu, 2 (2006), pp. 16–22.
For the most recent synthesis of Finland and the Holocaust, see Antero Holmila, Holokausti. Tapahtumat ja tulkinnat (Jyväskylä: Atena, 2010), Chapter 7. See also Antero Holmila, ‘A Different Story Altogether? Finland and the Holocaust: A book review of Hannu Rautkallio’s Holokaustilta Pelastetut’, Patterns of Prejudice, 40: 2 (2006), pp. 186–8.
Tom Söderman, ‘Förintelsen — hur stor är vår skuld?’ Nya Argus, 8 (2003). For a more in-depth investigation of Finland’s collective memory of the Holocaust and the Second World War, see Holmila, ‘Varieties of Silence: Collective Memory of the Holocaust in Finland’, in Tiina Kinnunen and Ville Kivimäki (eds), Finland in World War Two: History, Memory, Interpretations (Brill, forthcoming); and Oula Silvennoinen, ‘Still Under Examination: Coming to Terms with Finland’s Alliance with Nazi Germany’, Yad Vashem Studies, 37: 2 (2009), pp. 67–92.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2011 Antero Holmila
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Holmila, A. (2011). The Nuremberg Trial in the Finnish Press Discourse. In: Reporting the Holocaust in the British, Swedish and Finnish Press, 1945–50. The Holocaust and its Contexts. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230305861_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230305861_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-31106-4
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-30586-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)