Categories
Health

A Holocaust Survivor Reflects on the Lasting Impact of Family Separation and Deportation


Last week, President Donald Trump reversed a practice that separated migrant children from their parents, a move that came after many American citizens expressed outrage over the humanitarian crisis.

Since May, more than 2,000 children have been separated from parents crossing the US border, with some kept in facilities like the enclosed tent camp in Tornillo, outside of El Paso, Texas. The children have no idea if or when they will ever see their families again. The issue has transcended partisanship: according to a Quinnipiac poll released last week, two-thirds of American voters oppose these separations, and the administration has scrambled to explain whether it will reunite thousands of families and house them at family detention centers.

“I don’t believe it,” says Ruth Pagirsky, a 92-year-old Holocaust survivor. “There is too much going on that is reminiscent to me of how it all started in Europe. But I was a kid and I didn’t know, I didn’t understand the whole extent of it.”

Pagirsky and her family were forced to leave Berlin for Poland in 1936, after Germany passed a series of laws between 1933 and 1935 that pushed Jews out of professional life. The aim was to establish a pure Aryan utopia. At the time, Pagirsky was almost 10, and says her family’s effective expulsion introduced her to the capacity of human cruelty.

“I had a favorite ring my aunt had given to me, she always gave me something like jewelry and the S.S. man who came saw the ring on my ring holder and he just picked it up and took it. I just couldn’t believe this! I looked at my mother and she just put her finger to her mouth. It was the most frightening thing. Soon after, we left Germany and we went to Poland.”

The family moved to Katowice, where they had relatives. For three years, they survived in relative quiet. “Then we stayed in Poland, and the horror began.”

PHOTO: Photographer: John J. Nicastro and B.A. Van Sise

Ruth Pagirsky

In 1939, the Nazis invaded Poland, and in Katowice, S.S. officers came to round up Jews to take to concentration camps like Auschwitz. In 1942, two of Pagirsky’s cousins were playing in front of the house and thrown onto a truck. Her aunt rushed outside with her son (Pagirsky’s cousin), Joshua. He was almost two.

“They were crying, and screaming, everyone was screaming, and the little boy was screaming, and my aunt was trying to calm them down,” Pagirsky remembers. Her aunt offered to go to the camp with the children to help calm them, but the S.S. officer headed her off.

“The children are going to a very beautiful camp and they’ll be taught and they’ll be fine,” he insisted.

Pagirsky’s aunt continued to plead while Joshua sobbed in her arms.

“He was laughing and little Joshua was still crying. He walked over, and he took him out of her arms. Grabbed him and pulled him out of her arms. He walked over to the building and started banging his head on the stone. Can you imagine this?”

Pagirsky, then 16, recalls that all she could think about was whether that S.S. soldier would go home that night to play with his own children.

Soon, Pagirsky was also separated from her family. Her brother was taken to Auschwitz. Her father was sent to another concentration camp. Holocaust scholars would later estimate that over one million people were murdered at Auschwitz, a number that includes Jews, Catholic Poles, Roma and Sinti people, members of the LGBTQ community, and anyone else who stood in the way of the Nazis. (Six million Jews were murdered between 1933 and 1945.)

“My father’s last words to me were, ‘You, my child will live. You will live to tell it all’,” says Pagirsky. He spoke those words and Pagirsky never saw her father again. “And that’s what pushed me to survive, the story. My father said I will live to tell it all, I had a purpose. There were years when I was separated from my mother and it was terrible. I was alone and scared. And I would think about what my father said—that I will live—and that helped me. It gave me that impetus to survive.”

Pagirsky and her mother hid in the forest. Eventually, Pagirsky obtained false identification papers that allowed her to work on a farm in Germany, where she remained until 1945 when the area was liberated by Americans.

In 1946, Pagirsky made it to New York. She met her husband, with whom she would spend 63 years. Despite the fact that she immigrated with just a fifth-grade education, because the Nazis had barred Jewish children from public schools, she earned her high school degree and later became a dental hygienist. She had three children, and now has several grandchildren and great grandchildren.

The rhetoric that the current administration has relied on—words like “infest,” “animals,” and “invade”—to defend its attitudes toward the undocumented reminds Pagirsky of tactics used in Nazi propaganda. And some supporters, like Fox News host Laura Ingraham, have tried to wave off horrific reports. On television, she referred to the tents and chain-link enclosures in which immigrant children have been held to as “essentially summer camps.” But the Texas Tribune and Reveal surfaced federal court documents which came to light as part of a class action lawsuit in which children and adolescents held at Shiloh Treatment Center outside of Houston, Texas, alleged that staff held them down and even injected them with psychotropic drugs without consent or proper medical evaluations. (In a legal response, Shiloh representatives said that Texas monitors the center for compliance with state laws and guidelines, according to CNN.)

The news has made Pagirsky wonder whether America has learned from Europe’s mistakes. “I watch it on television and I am so upset with that! I see it, I lived through this! It is so cruel, never forget that.” And efforts to dehumanize those in detention centers or who want to come to America from other countries are causes of particular concern: “I tell people not to fall into the trap where you think it is okay and that [these people must] deserve it. We are not the judge to say who deserves what.”

“We cannot be apathetic,” Pagirsky concludes. “We have to be aware and cannot be afraid to speak up. In Europe people were afraid to speak up. This is what we can do here, we can speak up. And we have to speak up. If we stand by and do nothing, we are guilty.”

Related Stories:

All Your Questions About Trump’s Executive Order on Family Separation, Answered

At the Border, Parents Seeking Asylum Are Willing to Risk Separation Rather Than Go Back to Danger



Source link

Categories
Health

How the ‘Meghan Markle Effect’ Could Leave a Lasting Imprint on the Wedding Industry


The wedding of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry was watched by an estimated 47 million in the U.S. and U.K. alone. Her gown has already been dissected by every major newspaper and website the world over. And the wedding filled up Twitter and Facebook’s trending bars all day on May 19, the day of the wedding. It’s the kind of publicity you just can’t buy.

And yet, the impact on Givenchy and Stella McCartney, the two design houses responsible for the Duchess of Sussex’s gowns that day, is likely to be felt for years to come. Same goes for the silhouettes Markle chose to wear, which could more generally affect the bridal market as a whole. One need only look at the “Meghan”-inspired wedding gowns that were announced within hours of the wedding, with the intention to ship in a matter of weeks. The Royal Wedding fury isn’t about to die down any time soon.

PHOTO: BRIAN LAWLESS

Markle leaving her wedding ceremony at Windsor Castle’s St. George’s Chapel, wearing custom Givenchy Haute Couture.

Ever since she and Prince Harry went public with their relationship, Markle has had an effect on retail. Dubbed the “Meghan Effect” (or the “Markle Sparkle”), brands can’t keep the items she wears in stock—whether it’s a Strathberry handbag or a coat from Line The Label. Still, all estimates say that this phenomenon will only be kicked into overdrive with all things wedding related: Ahead of the Royal Wedding, consultancy firm Brand Finance estimated that Markle’s fashion choices for the big day would generate about $212 million in retail and apparel sales.

It’s a staggering number, but one that the data from the big day supports.

Search terms like “Meghan Markle First Wedding Dress” and “Meghan Markle Second Dress” saw huge spikes in Google on May 19; so did the two brands Markle wore for the occasion, Givenchy and Stella McCartney, along with the name of the first gown’s designer, Clare Waight Keller.

Royal Wedding Dress Designer And Hairdresser Give Interviews

PHOTO: WPA Pool

Clare Waight Keller, creative director of Givenchy, who designed Markle’s first wedding dress.

According to InfluencerDB, an influencer marketing software, @givenchyofficial got 3002 mentions and generated 12,234,710 likes on Instagram; @stellamccartney, meanwhile, got 1840 mentions and racked up 9,605,198 likes; @clarewaightkeller, 827 times mentions and 8,907,933 likes. By these metrics, the company estimates that Givenchy has earned $2.9 million while Stella McCartney has garnered $2 million just from its coverage on this one social platform.

Prince Harry Marries Ms. Meghan Markle - Windsor Castle

PHOTO: WPA Pool

Markle in her second wedding dress, designed by Stella McCartney.

In data supplied to Glamour, eBay reported that searches for items related to Meghan Markle rose 146% on May 19 in the U.S. and U.K. (The impact was particularly felt stateside, where U.S.-based shoppers searched for Meghan Markle related items nearly five times more than those across the pond.) On that day, Givenchy was the most searched-for brand on eBay; other fashion labels associated with the Royal Wedding, including Oscar de la Renta (worn by Markle’s mother, Doria Ragland) and Vivienne Westwood (worn by Priyanka Chopra), rounded out the top five.

Royal Wedding Dress Designer And Hairdresser Give Interviews

PHOTO: WPA Pool

A sample of the lace on Markle’s custom Givenchy Haute Couture veil.

Per e-commerce aggregator Lyst, traffic to Stella McCartney dresses increased by 3,000% on May 19, compared to the previous day.

Not only does the data suggest just how fascinated people were with the wedding itself, but also how in-tune they were to its details, taking into account things like who the creative director of Givenchy is, who’s responsible for the mother-of-the-bride look, and even what the protocol was around the bride wearing two dresses to the royal wedding.

Prince Harry Marries Ms. Meghan Markle - Windsor Castle

PHOTO: WPA Pool

Markle and Prince Harry leaving St. George’s Chapel after their wedding.

“For a design house to create a gown for a royal wedding of this magnitude, it has a phenomenal effect on the brand,” royal wedding expert and British bridal designer Caroline Castigliano tells Glamour. “Look at Alexander McQueen after the marriage of Kate Middleton to Prince William…the gown elevated then little known Sarah Burton [the creative director of Alexander McQueen]…and the brand has gone from strength to strength across the world since.” This type of exposure could have a similar impact on Waight Keller, who, until know, has been little known outside of the fashion world: “While Givenchy is a successful and very famous design house, the creative director [is putting her] stamp on the brand quickly [because of this],” per Castigliano. “LVMH, which owns Givenchy, must be thrilled.”

It’s not just the brands associated with the wedding that will likely see a boost—don’t be surprised if you see bridal trends reminiscent of both of Markle’s wedding dress styles and choice of tiara. (eBay, for instance, saw a 72% increase in searches for tiaras on May 19, compared to a day earlier.)

“When you look back in history at royal weddings, you can see that in the eighties, when Princess Diana married Prince Charles, full dresses with leg-o-mutton sleeves, became very fashionable,” Castigliano shares. Same goes with Princess Margaret’s gown from her 1960 nuptials: “Princess Margaret married in a stunning gown by Norman Hartnell. While a ball gown shape, the gown was classic in styling with a long sleeve and high neckline with a fitted bodice…her gown was iconic and has influenced bridal design for years.”

Princess Margaret and Antony Jones

PHOTO: Bettmann

Princess Margaret wearing Norman Hartnell to marry Antony Armstrong-Jones.

Then, of course, there’s Middleton’s Alexander McQueen wedding dress, which had a huge impact on the bridal trends (and is still inspiring dress styles in 2018)—though, it didn’t happen overnight.

“Kate Middleton’s long sleeve, v-neck and lace wedding gown shook the bridal gown retail business where the strapless gown had been the number one seller,” Susan Ashbrook, celebrity product placement guru and author of Will Work for Shoes: The Business Behind Red Carpet Product Placement, tells Glamour.

Royal Wedding - Carriage Procession To Buckingham Palace And Departures

PHOTO: Chris Jackson

Kate Middleton on her wedding day, wearing custom Alexander McQueen by Sarah Burton.

“We found that trends spotted at Duchess Kate’s wedding, such as long lace sleeves and high-necked bridesmaids dresses, like Pippa’s gown, took a few months to gain popularity,” Lori Conley, Senior Vice President for Merchandising, Design, and Product Development for David’s Bridal, tells Glamour. “Consider the time it takes to plan a wedding. Most brides purchase dresses nine to ten months before the wedding, so newly engaged brides may purchase royal-inspired gowns, however, we may not see the trend showing up at weddings for many months.” It might’ve taken a bit, but Middleton’s dress did have staying power: “Seven years after that wedding we continue to see dominance of several trends evoked by her gown, for example the neckline, deep V, and structured lace.”

The Duchess of Cambridge’s wedding gown also killed the strapless wedding dress trend: Before the 2011 Royal Wedding, 75 percent of the dresses David’s Bridal sold were strapless; nowadays, 65 percent of brides opt for a more covered-up style, whether that’s tank straps or full sleeves… like Kate’s. The bridal retailer is using these learnings to shape its response to this Royal Wedding: “[We] are not replicate Meghan’s dress…[but] we will look to be inspired her gown and create our own interpretations,” says Conley.

Some bridal brands, though, have already doubled down. Morilee, which is designed by Madeline Gardner, started working on its riff on Markle’s wedding dress soon after the wedding, with plans to put it up for sale in the weeks following.

Direct-to-consumer wedding brand Floravere also just released its own Meghan-inspired gown, available to shoppers for $1,475.

“Members of our team were up at 5 a.m. on the West Coast waiting to see what she wore, mimosas may or may not have been involved,” Denise Jin, its co-founder, tells Glamour. “Since then…our collective of designers and artisans have been working around the clock to craft something really beautiful and one-of-a-kind that still captures the best qualities of her dress.”

Floravere isn’t a brand that regularly looks to celebrities for inspiration, but Markle and her dress felt like a unique opportunity, according to Jin.

PHOTO: Komanphotography/Floravere

Floravere’s M Markle dress and veil.

“In a lot of ways, Meghan really stole our hearts because she’s not just a celebrity bride, she’s a trailblazer,” she shared. “We were really inspired by their love story and the way she infused her own identity into the wedding. That ethos and independent spirit is exactly what we love about modern brides and ultimately, those are the women who inspire us and who we design for.”

What drew Floravere to Markle might just get at why this Royal Wedding will be such a retail juggernaut—because of what it and Markle represent.

BRITAIN-US-ROYALS-WEDDING-CEREMONY

PHOTO: DOMINIC LIPINSKI

Markle and Prince Harry during their wedding ceremony.

The Duchess of Sussex is very much a new kind of royal: biracial, a self-proclaimed feminist, an activist, a past successful career (in Hollywood, no less)… Because of that and more, she stands for an inclusivity that might make her one of the biggest style influencers in history. “Her subtle taste in all facets of her role as Duchess of Sussex will influence a new generation,” says Ashbrook.

The numbers seem to agree.



Source link