A movie in which two cousins visit a Nazi concentration camp; a graphic novel in which the artist recounts firsthand tales of Holocaust survival; a film in which a father and daughter journey to Auschwitz: Three works, all released in the last six months, grapple with the legacy of the Holocaust.

Dark tourism refers to visiting places where "incidences of death, disaster and atrocity" are still "within living memory," according to the term's coiners, John Lennon and Malcolm Foley. Sometimes, it's Hiroshima or Chernobyl. Lately, it's Dachau and Auschwitz-Birkenau.

'How trauma cascades'
"A Real Pain" is a new film directed by Jesse Eisenberg (pictured above) and starring him and Kieran Culkin as cousins who travel to Poland to honor their late grandmother's Jewish heritage. It's about "how trauma cascades down generations," said The Free Press. The cousins struggle to understand the atrocities of their people's extermination. 

Ari Richter, the author of "Never Again Will I Visit Auschwitz," a graphic memoir from 2024 that wrestles with the ripples of Richter's own family's Holocaust experiences, said to The Jerusalem Post that "'A Real Pain' expertly captures the contradictions felt by second and third-generation Jewish visitors" on pilgrimages to a "grim Jewish past."

In "Treasure," a movie released in 2024, Lena Dunham and Stephen Fry play a daughter and father who return to Auschwitz, where Fry's character survived and his family members did not. Dunham's character, Eisenberg's character and Richter all "share an intense self-consciousness," said the Post, that focuses less on the "experiences of the Holocaust victims and survivors" than on the "interiors of the young protagonists." 

No 'hardening your heart'
Tanya Gold, in an essay at Harper's about her trips to Auschwitz, said, "I wonder if memorialization is a mirror in which you see only your own reflection so that you do not have to look into the past at all." Still, the protagonists of the aforementioned works reflect even as they memorialize — often with humor.

Richter clings to the words of his grandfather: "I am ultimately an optimist — I have to be. Because the haters have won if they succeed in hardening your heart."

The Tesla and X owner has started a war on Wikipedia after the outlet made reference to his arm salute at President Donald Trump's inauguration, which many have compared to the Nazi salute. While Wikipedia did not directly accuse Elon Musk of doing the Nazi salute, he still flagged the organization for being far-left, previously calling it Wokepedia.

What's the conflict about?
Musk has had minor conflicts with Wikipedia for months, but the tension has ramped up since Trump took office. After Musk's recent call to defund the website, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales said on X that the description on the website of Musk's actions was not inaccurate and that Musk is "unhappy that Wikipedia is not for sale." 

While Wikipedia is "certainly not immune to bad information, disagreement or political warfare," its "openness and transparency rules have made it a remarkably reliable platform in a decidedly unreliable age," said The Atlantic. "Evidence that it's an outright propaganda arm of the left, or of any political party, is thin."

Is there a larger problem at play?
Musk has been "increasingly critical" of legacy media organizations, which he claims "misrepresent his beliefs and actions," said Newsweek. The pushback from Wikipedia is a "break from other tech companies," which have become "increasingly friendly toward Trump and his officials in the wake of his election victory." But Wikipedia does not operate like other media organizations. 

Wikipedia has a nonprofit model, and the people who are "constantly writing and rewriting Wikipedia entries are disaggregated volunteers, rather than bendable to one man's ideological views," said The Atlantic. Instead, Musk's actions, some say, represent an attack on free speech. 

Musk is "highly tolerant of inaccuracy, misinformation, criticism, even hate," Seth Stern, the director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said to The Independent. "But when the subject of the speech is himself or his agenda, his objectives and his companies, it's quite the opposite."