I am currently writing my PhD thesis at the Department of History in Lund. My dissertation deals with modern genocide "denialism" in general, and with the denial of the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide in particular.
"Cultures of Denial. Comparing Holocaust and Armenian Genocide Denial" aims to discuss the notion of "denying history" on both an abstract and a concrete level. One the one hand, I hope to emphasize the theoretical challenges inherent in interpreting denial as the antithesis of "proper" historical writing. Hence, one of the central issues highlights the fact that many historians have been quick to point out a historical "lie", while still being unsure about what a historical "truth" looks like. On the other hand, the study also deals with "denialism" as a specific way of approaching the past. How is it done? Which are the recurring structures and patterns of denial?