Andre’s Reviews > Europa erfindet die Zigeuner: Eine Geschichte von Faszination und Verachtung > Status Update

This is a really good book. The author was honest enough to say that he has no clear solutions for the problem.
He did however speak about how the situation of many Romani in the East of Europe mirrors that of many other Europeans in the 19th century and currently he is at the gypsy depictions after 1945 and how because the deportations did not reach England, Spain and Sweden there was no incentive for change.

Now we are in the socialist Eastern European states and its still pretty interesting how it went up and down and what stayed the same. It was good to buy this book.

Well, we finally arrived in the time of the Nazis and the time afterwards. I just wish I would finally get an answer why in all those deportations there were still Sinti in the Wehrmacht at 1942. I know it happened but I get no explanation.

PS. It seems that Engelbert Wittich whose books I want to read doesn't seem to be such a great source after all.

cont.
Also when you think about it: Death penalties and general exclusion of unwanted elements in society was and is prevalent for a long time and is there really such a big leap from excluding people you don't like and consider your adversary by default from getting rid of them in the first place when you belief their absence makes your society better by default respectively protects it?

Reading this makes it clear how wrong it is that the Nazi politics were totally new. Both the USA and Sweden had mass forced sterilisation before that, also Austria and Switzerland as well as the USA and most European countries had similar racist attitudes long before that in the 19th century. The only difference is that in Germany there was the power to convince enough people of those justifications for it.
cont.

Wow this book is big.
Also you really have to keep in mind what "gypsy" refers to here, since the author usually uses it in reference to actually romani people. This can get confusing.
In addition what I found so far about the images created about them makes me consider "gypsies" rather mythical beings than actual ethnicities.
I think this would make a vgood entry to my review.

Well he talks of Central and Northern Eruope so I have some guess as to what Western Europe refers to here.

As expected, we did get to Esmeralda from the Hunchback of Notre Dame and I find it weird that while the author did mention that Esmeralda wasn't "born a gypsy" but Quasimodo was he doesn't mention his deformities and doesn't really dwell on Esmerlda's ancestry, unlike in other cases.
Also he soke of the "criminal realm" in Western Europe... but what constitutes "Western Europe" here?

So that was the 18th century, now gets to the 19th.
I also have to ask: What exactly should have been done? Because for the most part it sounds as though it was all predetermined and "gypsies" would be vagabunds no matter what.

I think I finally came across an instance where the curve of the ball could have broken differently like the author had claimed at the start. Since "gypsies" were found out to be most likely of Indian origin they would have been one of the many groups that have come to Europe and thereby as distant relatives their place in the hierarchy of "people."