The tradition of historic and ethnographic museums evolved from the concept of the 17th and 18th century cabinets of curiosity (Benton, 2012, pp. 101), from which it inherited its focus on the display of objects to reconstruct the stories and habits of certain civilizations (Benton, 2012, pp. 101). A conventional display makes use of authentic objects accompanied by photographs, text, films and other contextualizing means. As these means are not objective and influence the view and opinion of the visitor, one could state that 'representation can be regarded as the active play between creating a fictional work and making reference to a real event' (Hornstein, Jacobowitz, 2003, pp. 3). This is what is considered problematic when it comes to commemorating the Shoah; where fiction comes into play there is not only the risk of anesthetization and mythologization, but also the fear not to do justice to the suffering of the victims.
For both practical and conceptual reasons another representational approach is embraced to commemorate the Shoah.
As the visitors of holocaust memorials are either descending from the side of the victims, or from the perpetrators (Benton, 2012, pp. 116), showing the concerning authentic objects might convoke too much emotion and cause controversy (Benton, pp.117). The second reason is rooted in Adorno's saying ' Nach Auschwitz ein Gedicht zu schreiben ist barbarisch' (Von Der Luhe, 2002-2003).
According to the idea that one can only represent what is possible to conceive, the Holocaust, an event of inconceivable brutality defies representation. (Hornstein, Jacobowitz, 2003, pp. 3) If one agrees that the Holocaust marks a break with civilization as it is often stated, Holocaust commemorating spaces are spaces for the ultimate mourning and need to be encountered with a conforming language: silent and emphasizing the void of the trauma. (Weissberg, 2001, pp.
