This book examines German and Polish cultural policies in Upper Silesia—one of many European “borderlands,” created by the Versailles Peace Treaty and the Allied victory in World War II. Although Peter Polak-Springer carries his analysis forward to the postcommunist era, his main focus is the period of 1922–1953, when Upper Silesia changed hands several times, and the Polish and German governments attempted to redefine the demographic and socioeconomic profile of this multicultural region. Despite polar objectives, the methods employed by the two sides were strikingly similar in that they used irredentist culture to impose political homogeneity upon Silesia and to forge its residents into “Poles” or “Germans” (3).

To this end, the Polish interwar government, the Nazi administration, and its communist successor organized folkloric festivals, erected memorial sites, used linguistic policies, and staged plebiscites and patriotic rallies that emphasized the imminent threat across the border and the “intrinsically” national—whether German or Polish—character of the region. New media technologies such as radio and cinema were deployed to the same end, reflecting official policies and slanting the other side of violating the rights of ethnic minorities (70–71). The two governments also tried to outdo each other in erecting monumental buildings, which emphasized German or Polish cultural and economic accomplishments.

Following the 1926 coup of Jóseph Piłsudski, the new governor of Silesia Michał Grażyński deployed paramilitary groups to intimidate potential political opponents; removed ethnic Germans from managerial and executive positions in Silesian industries; and encouraged Jewish emigration, all in tune with Roman Dmowski’s vision of Poland’s perpetual struggle against Germandom (42, 45–46). Conversely, in the German part of Silesia, irredentist unions and associations agitated for the return of the region to its “rightful” owner (47).

During World War II, the Nazi administration of Silesia launched the “re-Germanization” campaign, which included categorizing locals in accordance with nationality, deportations of Jews and Poles, and confiscation or appropriation of Polish industrial, cultural, and educational institutions (157–59). In turn, the communist-dominated Polish government launched a wide-scale “re-Polonization” campaign, which entailed the banning of the German language, the introduction of courses in Polish history, language, and culture, and the celebration of national heroes and memorial sites as symbols of national memory. The Catholic Church supported or at least condoned the government’s ethnic policies (199, 214).

The strength of the book lays in its well-defined thesis, a coherent methodological framework, and rich factual narrative. Written in clear language and bereft of jargon, it is easy to follow and therefore, would inspire interest not only among academics, but also among lay readers. Polak-Springer persuasively shows that attempts to impose cultural uniformity eventually failed, partially for practical reasons. Thus, since the economic situation on the German side of the border was in general better, many Poles were critical of the Polish government for not being able to do the same in Upper Silesia and were skeptical towards the “Polonization” campaign. During World War II, contrary to the wishes of the Nazi leadership, many Poles, especially those engaged in agriculture and skilled laborers, were exempted from deportations. Some German functionaries also considered the deportations of Polish professionals such as the employees of the court system as impractical. After the war, the communist government initiated the expulsions of 200,000 Germans from Silesia, but exempted as many as 800,000, who were classified as “Poles.” Such relatively mild treatment emanated from a dire need for a skilled labor force in the war-ravaged land (189).

Crucially, the book shows that despite state efforts to distinguish and separate the Germans, Poles, and Silesians, most locals continued speaking in dialect rather than “high-German” or “high-Polish” (166). Moreover, contrary to all intents and expectations of Berlin and Warsaw, their policies effectively fueled the regional particularisms. In the context of frequently changing borders and under pressure to become Germans or Poles, the locals increasingly relied on native cultures and traditions, which offered them some modicum of stability. Instead of weakening local culture, the official propaganda, museum exhibitions, and folkloric performances reinforced the local national identities and regional culture. Silesianism, therefore, withstood state pressure, remaining a symbol of the region’s multicultural fabric and rich cultural heritage.

Based on an impressive array of primary and secondary sources, Recovered Territory shows the benefits of a cultural approach to political history, analyzing the interaction between official policies and popular mindsets.