Why so controversial? Peering through a historical microscope at Wojciech Smarzowski’s film “Wołyń”
Polish filmmakers have always taken delight in making historical films. Most directors used to choose stories describing the power and glory of the Polish nation, which unfortunately is now a part of the past. Uncomfortable and difficult topics have been subtly omitted, but it appears that there are directors not afraid to broach sensitive subjects, and one of them is Wojciech Smarzowski. He has created a brutal picture that has become one of the most important Polish films of the recent years.
Barrage of criticism “Wołyń” has been widely criticised; it was being criticised long before it was created, and now is criticised even by people who have not watched it. Yurii Andrukhovych (a writer, poet and essayist) responded to the film, although he had not seen it. The writer was ironic about Smarzowski – who was given the nickname “Polish Tarantino” – calling him a “late Mikhalkov”, i.e. a pro-Kremlin propagandist. “The absurdity of the situation and connotation of totalitarian thinking are obvious,” writes Maciej Pieczyński for DoRzeczy.
Political tensions and cancellations of the film premiere Wołyń appeared at a moment when political tensions between Poland and Ukraine heightened, as conservative attitudes of the politicians become more intense in both countries. While war criminals such as Bandera are considered ‘heroes of Ukraine’, with the OUN-B and UPA being rehabilitated, the Polish authorities are doing the same in relation to ‘cursed soldiers’ who were accused of crimes against non-Polish and pro-Soviet Polish citizens. Moreover, Smarzowski’s film aroused such controversy that the premiere screenings in Kiev were cancelled by request of the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as announced by Andrii Deshchytsia, Ambassador of Ukraine in Poland. He pointed out that “Ukrainian milieux which do not agree with the director’s vision of the history presented in the film could organise protests”. The ambassador also reiterated that he, himself, had seen the film and it is very “emotional, anti-nationalist, anti-radical, and not fully anti-Ukrainian”. Deshchytsia added that the picture can be a motivation for the Ukrainian society and historians to analyse the facts in detail once again.
The book and the film The film is based on a collection of narrative stories entitled Hatred (Nienawiść), by Stanisław Srokowski, which deals with traumatic events in Polish-Ukrainian history. “Wołyń” touches on an episode which, under the Stalinist regime (1945-1989) in Poland, it was forbidden to talk about, as the occurrences concerned disputed territories located between Poland and Ukraine, which was a part of the USSR at that time. “Wołyń” presents the story of a young Polish girl, Zosia, inhabiting a Volhynian village settled by Ukrainians, Poles and Jews. The story begins shortly before the outbreak of World War II with the marriage of Zosia's sister to a Ukrainian. “The wedding is attended by Poles and Ukrainians; vodka is bought from a Jew running a tavern; but, in ‘Wołyń’, we do not see an idealised picture of the ‘multicultural Borderlands’. The communal feast and revelry bring out resentment, grudges and incidents that divide the two communities. The Ukrainians talk about Polish colonists pocketing the best land, pulling down Orthodox churches, policies of forced polonisation. During the wedding, young men fight each other for fun with flails; the first blood – a portent of future events – is shed,” writes Jakub Majmurek in his review for Krytyka Polityczna.
Extremities of historic cinema While Wołyń was waiting for its premiere in Poland, a historical mini-series had its debut on Ukrainian TV. “Jacob’s Centenary” (Stulecie Jakuba), based on Volodymyr Lis’ novel, presents the story of the private life of 100-year-old Jacob, and his involvement in great politics as well. “The language of the pictures [both Wołyń and Jake’s Centenary], is tightly rooted in their aesthetics, which leads to further reflexion: what is the memory about the historical events based on, and what place does that memory take in both societies?” writes Małgorzata Tukało for Kultura Liberalna. “While Wołyń is full of blood and human body parts, the Ukrainian picture trivialises many strands, presenting a black-and-white world, but does not claim the right to be a memorial.” Thus, there are two extremities: trivialisation and a historic film stylised as a slasher. Nevertheless, both productions have some things in common, e.g. they present a stereotypical image of the Jew. Consequently, representatives of their own national group are multi-dimensional, while other ”outsiders” are flat. As Tukało notes, neither the film nor the series are not tools of historic politics directly, although there have appeared opinions that Wołyń is strongly politicised, and that Jake’s Centenary is a “sovdep” (sovietskij deputat), i.e. a coarse Soviet-like production.
History The massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia was an anti-Polish ethnic-cleansing operation carried out by Ukrainian nationalists. The extermination began on 11th July 1943, and lasted until 1944. In their own documents, the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army described the slaughter as “an anti-Polish action”.
Course of events According to Polish historians, the “anti-Polish action” began with the first group murder which took place on 9th February 1943 in Parośla I (called the Parośla I massacre). At least 155 Polish residents of the village were murdered on orders of a UPA member, Hryhorij Perehijniak. On 11th July 1943, another mass attack was conducted; nearly 100 Polish towns and villages were invaded (nationalists struck circa 530 settlements by the end of the month).
When attacking bigger Polish settlements, the UPA often used the element of surprise; they struck at night, at dawn, or whenever bigger groups of people were gathered in one place. “A village was surrounded by armed members of the UPA, who were supposed to shoot at the people running away. The rest of the aggressors (members of the Ukrainian self-defence squads collaborating with the UPA) – armed with axes, knives, pitchforks, scythes, and other farmer’s tools – murdered the inhabitants of a settlement, often torturing the victims, who were not only Poles of different sex and age, but also Ukrainians helping Polish people, or those Ukrainians who had converted from the Eastern Orthodox Church to Catholicism. The area of a settlement was carefully searched, and any escapees were hunted down in nearby fields and forests. A common characteristic for all the attacks was immeasurable cruelty put together with depredation of possessions and burning down the households,” we read on nawolyniu.pl.
Volhynian massacre as a matter of a historic dispute The attitudes of Polish and Ukrainian historians toward the massacres in Volhynia differ, with terminology as the first example. While many Ukrainian researchers prefer to describe the events as the “Volhynian tragedy”, most Polish researchers use such terms as “genocidal ethnic cleansing”, “massacre”, or “Volhynian slaughter”. Some specialists use the controversial term ‘genocidum atrox’ (atrocious genocide), thereby recognising the crimes of Banderites as more cruel than the genocide committed by the Nazis and Stalinists.
Other matters that are the source of controversy concerning Polish and Ukrainian views on the Volhynian massacres are the differences in the toll of victims and an attempt to depreciate the suffering of Ukrainians. According to Ukrainian historiography, the number of Ukrainians killed by Poles was higher than the number estimated by the Polish side, and Polish losses were lowered.
Opinions on Smarzowski’s film “Wołyń” has become a cause of extremely distinct opinions in media. The majority of reviewers eulogise the film, others approach the topic with reserve. Among those who criticised Smarzowski’s work, there are people considering it a “historical fraud”. The director himself said in the interview with the Polish Radio “Jedynka” that “Wołyń is not aimed at Ukrainians, but at extreme nationalism”. He claimed that it is “a story about love independent of divisions, but also about what a man is capable of, if equipped with certain ideology and a permission to kill”. Smarzowski added that he was not interested in black-and-white stories that present events in one way. He wanted to present two points of view, both Polish and Ukrainian, but he was sure that the Ukrainians would be disappointed, as he did not present enough Ukrainian perspectives. Nevertheless, Smarzowski defends his film saying that he never attempted to “create a history textbook, but a film about love in human times, because it is people who cause wars…I hope that the interest in the film will result in the fact that, after having left the cinema, people will give their children a hug and look at the reality from a different perspective, will open one of those books [about Volhynian history], or will search on the Internet to find out more”.
Many critics seem to understand Smarzowski’s idea, which is reflected in their reviews. Almost every opinion found on film.org.pl is a positive commentary. But, compared to commentaries written by historians, their authors seem to treat “Wołyń” as the ultimate version of the truth. Jakub Piwoński writes: “The film seems to hit the bull’s eye of the needs of a viewer not aware of historical facts. We have longed for this truth, and we finally got it.” Filip Jalowski adds: “It tells the truth at a time when we must seek historical truth.” Rafał Oświeciński claims that, in his work, Smarzowski avoids putting the events against “vast historical and political background”.
On Fronda we read Igor Janke’s opinion: “We needed a film like this. A passionate and painful discussion with Ukrainians is needed, in order to let us build a good neighbourhood, friendship, or even brotherhood (...). If we want to support each other, defend and protect against Putin, and build our common future, we have to talk about Volhynia as well.” He claims that “Wołyń” touches this part of history that almost remained unsaid, as the mainstream avoided it. But “we will not build anything solid on avoidance of troublesome topics”.
In his article for Polska Times, Paweł Siennicki quotes Smarzowski’s words that “reconciliation does not lead to oblivion”. Siennicki claims that “Wołyń” perfectly reflects the historical truth and that it is “a study of evil”. For that reason, Smarzowski seems to be a “modern Dostoyevsky of cinematography”.
In a review written for film.org.pl, Dawid Myśliwiec notes that “the didactic function of the film is excessively visible, what is more, it is deeply desired”. “Wołyń will not increase attendance of schools in cinemas. This topic is too difficult and controversial to be analysed by immature minds,” he says. Myśliwiec points out that there are no purely good or completely bad characters in the film, but every person has sins to be ashamed of. He concludes that Smarzowski’s work is “piercing” but also prepared “earnestly”.
Jakub Majmurek, writing for Krytyka Polityczna, shares Siennicki’s view on “Wołyń’s” didactic function. He sees it as "warning against what nationalist mobilisation and national chauvinism can lead to”. Majmurek claims that the film perfectly depicts the destructive power of politics built on the anger of a society, “resentment which was caused by decades of oppression”.
Additionally, in an article written for OKO.press, Majmurek reports that the conservative Law and Justice party wants to “appropriate” “Wołyń”. He explains that the film “fulfills the party’s dream about grand historical cinema”, as it “reflects the Polish point of view” and “creates new remembrance of the history of the 20th century, which is supposed to be focused on such events as post-war resistance of the anti-communist underground, heroism during World War II, and the Volhynian massacre itself”. Majmurek points out that the conservatives demand a sort of apology from the Ukrainian side, but – with “Wołyń” displaying the worst stereotypes – there is no hope for reconciliation of both nations.
In an interview for Krytyka Polityczna, Olga Linkiewicz and Piotr Tyma (historians interviewed by Manuel Ferreras-Tascón) believe that Smarzowski has created an “inaccurate” and “simplified” picture of Volhynia. They claim that the director treated the reasons of the conflict too residually, and that the reality of the Second Polish Republic was worse than he presented. Tyma refers to a review written by a Ukrainian journalist, in which he writes that Smarzowski’s film is dominated by a one-sided narrative, and that the film “shows the suffering of the Poles, but, in the first place, it refers to the perpetuated stereotype of the Ukrainian”. Linkiewicz notes that in today’s discussion, which is supposed to help both nations finally deal with the past, “Wołyń” is not a peaceful “conversation”, but a “scream”.
The most critical opinion on Smarzowski’s “Wołyń” was published by Adam Balcer in Dziennik - Gazeta Prawna. He claims that the film is “a wasted chance for real reconciliation with the Ukrainians” and that Smarzowski approached the historical truth selectively. Moreover, “Wołyń” confirms the stereotypical images of the Ukrainians, and that it is “based on a certain subtle half-truth”. Balcer indicates that “the UPA treated the war with the Germans, Soviets and Poles as a one battle front (...) and accused Polish people of collaboration with the Third Reich and USSR”. “But, Smarzowski’s film treats Polish collaboration euphemistically, reducing it to one person who joins the German Police in response to the UPA’s crimes (...). Instead, the film shows not only Ukrainian, but also Jewish collaboration with the Soviets,” reports Balcer.
The journalist also criticises Srokowski’s book, accusing him of “equating the UPA with Hitler, overstating at least twofold the number of Polish victims, and not considering Ukrainian victims”. Balcer points out that the author of “Hatred” sees “a real threat for Poland in Ukrainian fascism nowadays”.
Conclusion Smarzowski’s “Wołyń” is still the subject of a heated debate in the media. It is difficult to make one final conclusion about the film, as, first, one has to decide whether to discuss it as a piece of cinematographic work (ignoring the historical facts), or to criticise it as a documentary on the Volhynian massacres. The director himself emphasizes that he does not want his work to become a political tool, but a lesson on ideological extremities that one can learn. But, if one is willing to treat the film as a conciliatory tool, it has to be remembered that “fascination with ‘Wołyń’ – as a work reflecting the truth – shows that we are not ready for an authentic dialogue with the Ukrainians. We believe that any correction of our interpretation of those events is unnecessary, and that unconditional acceptance of our truth by the Ukrainians should be the effect of the ‘dialogue’.” (Dziennik - Gazeta Prawna)
