Talk:Emilie Schenkl

[Untitled]

Now as the reports of Mukherjee Commision has been revealed.........it is suspected that The Govt. of India has kept many Files hidden which may prove that many gossips such as "Emilie Schenkl" being the Wife of Bose are only gossips and has no relevance with reality..........

---

True. Very True. DebashisM^Talk 20:33, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't get this at all. Emily was Bose's wife. He had infact written a letter to his brother Sarat Bose before leaving for Japan that he had married her and had a daughter and that in his absence the family should take care of them. The letter is in Bengali and pretty much available as prints in books. There is an entire volume of the Completed works of Netaji devoted to letters written by him to Emilie Schenkl. They were in a relationship from the time Bose went abroad in 1937. It is no way a gossip by any standards. After the war Sarat Bose and his family have been in regular touch with Emily and Anita. Also, although this is besides the point, one has to take a cursory look at Anita to know that she is Subhas's daughter- they just look so similar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.21.126.78 (talk) 03:41, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Notability

Anyone have any evidence this person is notable? If she's "notable" only as the wife of a notable person, she shouldn't have her own article. At this point, I don't even see any verification that she existed and was the person's spouse. If all we can do is verify that she existed and was parried to Bose, then this article should be merged into that one; if we can't even establish that, it should just be deleted. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:49, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Nazi collaboration

See the main article on Bose. He clearly did spend some considerable time in Nazi run Germany, broadcasting propaganda and raising an "Indian Legion" of 4,500 men to fight with the Axis powers. Hayes (2011) reinforces the Metcalf & Metcalf quote with "His alliance with the most genocidal regime in history poses serious dilemmas precisely because of his popularity and his having made a lifelong career of fighting the 'good cause'". Whether he was a true supporter or merely ignored unpleasant issues in line with "my enemy's enemy is my friend" is unclear; but what is clear that he did collaborate with the regime. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:26, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes he did but is it enough to justify labelling him as one I wonder. WP:LABEL. The main article elaborates on what he did and why in the intro statement, but I feel just a single such labelling here when introducing him crosses the line; can we go about everywhere introducing him as a Indian nationalist and Nazi collaborator? Since WP:TERTIARY says these sources are good for seeing DUE weight, If it makes any difference, our arch rival doesn't introduce him as one. I'm convinced he's known more than a nationalist than a collaborator; not equally as both. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:53, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I take due cognisance of WP:LABEL, and would be worried by terms like "supporter", but "collaborator" has a precise meaning which I think Bose fulfilled. When considering WP:LABEL I feel we need to be careful to distinguish between an imported value and an exported one. In the present case the term is precise and accurate, any moral value is exported from the term since many people consider the very acts he performed to be suspect. It is relevant in considering Schenkl, since to do otherwise would be to ignore the context in which he met and married(?) her. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

On this issue, Emile schenkl's biography article has scant to do with Bose's political views, so one would wonder if the point of your edit is to promote the WP:LABEL that Bose was a Nazi sympathiser. There are many historians who have touched upon this, this label is a very "British" label on Bose (irrelevant to Schenkl), and I will direct you to the views that differ between British historians and the wider world. Moreover on Bose, he also sought help from Soviet Russia before going to Germany and his stated political views were leftist, I dont see you mentioning that. Your edits (in good faith) are very one sided. Metcalf's version of that period is reviewed in the journal citation I am directing you to. It maybe useful to review what historians think of that. rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 10:27, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

First, please think before writing edit summaries that read as an ad hominem attack: rv unconstructive and PoV edit. Please discuss in talk page how this is a constructive edit in anyway. Your citation does not support what you have written and this is discussed in detail in many pages re:Bose. I shall leave the first sentence for others to consider. If you glance upwards you might notice that this has been brought to the talk page. In fact I started this thread at the same time that the edit was made precisely because it had been proving contentious. See the previous edit history between IP:209.6.129.87, user:3primetime3 and user:Ugog Nizdast. A quotation that includes "Bose chose to embrace the fascist powers as allies" would seem to support the little that I wrote. I am aware of the page on Bose, having actually done quite a lot of WikiGnome work there to sort out the citations.

Next, Bose's politics, and indeed why he was in Germany at that time, is relevant to a biography of the woman he married. During the whole of the time of his relationship with Schenkl he was actively collaborating. This was over an extended period: April 1941 to 1943. Quoting a Wiki policy without supporting evidence is ineffectual - any more than calling someone's work "tripe" makes it so. It is an interesting question as to whether pejoratively attaching WP:LABEL to a statement is in fact a contravention of WP:LABEL! (By the way, have a look at WP:WEASEL just below WP:LABEL, in particular "many scholars state".)

If you read the discussion above you will see that I clearly wished to avoid labelling him a supporter, and "sympathiser" would be as bad. Perhaps you might care to notice where I said "Whether he was a true supporter or merely ignored unpleasant issues in line with "my enemy's enemy is my friend" is unclear" above. The quote from Hayes (also above) supports this. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:48, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

First, you must have seen my subsequent edit where I clarified I presumed good faith. Second, you have gone around inserting something or the other to do with swearing oath to Hitler and/or linking to fascism/Nazism in many articles linked to Bose. I leave the interpretation of "he was actively collaborating" to the reader. Third, you have interpreted a sentence from Metcalf's history of India to insist "Bose was a collaborator". Here collaborator is an emotionally loaded word, hence the focus on WP:LABEL. I have provided you with referenced opinion of named historians published in peer reviewed journals (WP:CITE) which discuss the flaws of Metcalf's book and specifically the opinion on Bose. Then, I have given you more references by renowkned historians ?(Indian and otherwise) which discusses this specific view that Bose was a "collaborator". Therefore, there is nothing WP:Weasel here (ie, I have provided you with good scholarly opinion, providing exactly who the "many scholars are"). I will leave that there. I fail to see how and why the political views of Bose have any influence on Schenkl's biography. Moreover, same as we do not call the entire German population Nazi collaborator, we dont call Gandhi a British collaborator for supporting the Boer war, nor we call Kariappa a British collaborator for fighting against the INA and Japan, we dont call Churchill a perpetrator of Genocide for the Bengal famine, I hope you see the point. The bottomline is what you are saying has a place in a section called "Political views" in Subhas Bose article, which I hope will discuss among other things the fact that his view was actually a leftist authoritarian system. I am struggling to see the link between Bose seeking German help (note the choice of words) and stating in Schenkl's biography that she was married to "Nazi collaborator", regardless of what some old master of a cambridge college would like us to think because his brother was Japan's slave labourer in the Death Railway.rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 12:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Shall we get a few facts straight before considering the linguistics? I have not "gone around inserting something or the other to do with swearing oath to Hitler and/or linking to fascism/Nazism in many articles linked to Bose". I spent a lot of time sorting out the format of the Bose and Schenkl pages, and reinserted two words with a citation where one had been requested. There does not appear to be any dispute that Bose sought assistance from the Germans, broadcast for them and was instrumental in raising a legion of 4,500 men who fought with them for whatever reasons. Metcalf is not the only one to describe these facts.

Now turning to the linguistics. A quick perusal of the OED reveals that collaborate comes from Latin: col-laborare, that is to work together. The word has been in use since the nineteenth century and is still in common use; "to collaborate on a project" is a common expression in offices. It does not convey a sense of sympathy or shared idealism beyond that required to perform the work. I would agree that trying to determine Bose's beliefs and sympathies is a matter for a "political views" section, but collaboration is not a view but an act or acts. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Here's a sort-of compromise. I'm a bit convinced that this is relevant here but we can avoid just the mentioning only "nazi collaborator" in the intro statement since it's not that simple. Already this:

"Emilie Schenkl (26 December 1910 – March 1996) was the wife or companion of Subhas Chandra Bose—a major leader of Indian nationalism, collaborator with the Nazi regime[3][b] — and the mother of his daughter, Anita Bose Pfaff (born 29 November 1942)"

is way too cluttered. The extra can removed, making the intro statement more in terms with WP:BEGIN. We would mention maybe in the next statement that what was he doing in Germany, how and when did he try to collaborate. More importantly, the article body doesn't yet mention it too. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

No problem, I'm happy to go along with consensus. I only got involved when you asked IP:209.6.129.87 to "Provide a source and calls him so and that he was well known as one". You'll note I've not sought to revert Rueben's edits, only to protest at his intemperate attack. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Martin, I was not attacking you, merely pointing out that Metcalf does not use the OED word collaborator, and that that term may be considered as specific to a point of view (note PoV is also an English word) that originates from Rajist historians and quite diametrically opposite to the views of millions of Indians (historians as well as lay people) who consider him a staunch nationalist and far better than an enemy agent who worked with the enemy against national interest (this is also one of the OED definitions, and I have come accross this linguistic OED argument before, from a now blocked editor). Instead of mentioning in the article "why and when he was trying to collaborate" (the OED thereby making a villain out of him), you could say in the main body of the Subhas Bose article why and when he was trying to further the Indian nationalist cause against the British Raj. Therefore, you can actually state the facts, state the controversies that do exist around his work, and then leave the reader to interpret the facts and scholarly opinion instead of using perfect english word from the OED that in the context many reader will interpret as suggesting he was a Nazi sympathiser and villain, which is diametrically opposite. So I was not intemperately attacking you, but highlighting that your reference does not linguistically support your edit, and further your edits inserted a loaded word that many reader will consider (per the Indian historian T.R. Sareen) supportive a particular point of view. Forgive me but I presumed IP:209.6.129.87 was yourself since the edits were very similar in structure and theme, hence my statement "you have gone around inserting something or the other to do with swearing oath to Hitler and/or linking to fascism/Nazism in many articles linked to Bose". Another user (User:3primetime3 also found these edits unconstructive, although he does not explain why. I hope you see what I was saying.rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 09:25, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

pronunciation

@Fowler&fowler Do you or anybody have any idea about how Schenkl is pronounced? Appu (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Not the most reliable, but this version has 1.8K views. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:15, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Emilie sankel death cause

R 2401:4900:3E99:6CC:0:0:633:22ED (talk) 11:41, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

The short answer is, "I don't know from what little I have read about her." The long answer is: She died at the age of 86. At that age, even doctors are sometimes hard-pressed to offer a specific cause (say, other than age-related complications). It was different for Bose, who died young from third-degree burns in a plane crash on August 18, 1945. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:37, 8 October 2022 (UTC)