On the cover of Prose & Verse of the 04/12 British historian Ian Kershaw talks with Michael Earl on his biography of Adolf Hitler, the result of decades of research on the Nazi dictator. "Hitler", originally a work in two volumes with 2,122 pages, won in 2008 a condensed version of over a thousand pages here now published by Companhia das Letras (translated by Peter Lockwood) . In his review of the book, Arthur Ituassu says Kershaw hit by rejecting the notion of "historical greatness," even if negative, central to classical biography of the dictator made by German historian and journalist Joachim Fest, and achieve balance in their analysis of the spread of Nazism in action individual and context of the Hitler era.
Read the review of 'Hitler', the British historian Ian Kershaw
Hitler, Ian Kershaw. Translated by Barney Whiteoak. Companhia das Letras, 1160 pages. R $ 78 By Arthur Ituassu
The construction of the myth is a powerful weapon of modern times, say the French philosophers Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe and Jean-Luc Nancy. As befits the modern era, the political expression is not is in a politician, but what he represents mythologically. What are the limits of representation? The modernity of the Holocaust, the atomic bomb, starvation, wars and social violence, human degradation and ecological, has proved boundless. Can the political representation of mythological move the masses towards not only the mistake but what is most inhuman and absurd? It can, and Nazism is more graphic evidence that.
No wonder we continue to read and publish works on a certain company as a mythological figure politico-specific, in the absence of words, makes us ashamed of our existence. After all, as stated by Lacoue-Labarthe and Nancy, "The absolute can not be anything that stands out to me, it's the dream with which I can identify."
Ian Kershaw's book is more a library which adds to the tragedy. Not without merit. Climbed to their work British nobility, Sir Ian Kershaw fills the post left open since the publication in 1973 of the classic work on the same topic by the journalist and German historian Joachim Fest.
One of the virtues of Kershaw is to discard at the outset of the discussion about the Fest "historical greatness" of the biography. "In the unshakable certainty of expressing a deep line between spirit and tendency of the time, as well as the ability to make this clear trend, there is certainly a factor of historical greatness" , Fest wrote, influenced by the Swiss historian Jacob Burckhardt, whereby the definition of "historical greatness" is "a will that transcends the individual," a "mysterious coincidence between selfishness of the individual and collective will. "Now, can actually be some" greatness "in the deaths of 50 million people due to the conflicts of World War II? In the deliberate murder of 6 million Jews?
In a sense, Kershaw best deals Fest that with the fundamental dilemma of historiography of the subject, divided between construction and deconstruction of the myth of historical context. That is, does not assign the same role that the character Fest, but at the same time does not exempt the dogfish their responsibilities. Thus escapes the epistemological trap that surrounds the subject. On the one hand, by focusing too much on Beelzebub, the historian can contribute to the relief of society - an attitude common in postwar Germany. Second, by emphasizing the context, history tends to empty the responsibility Individual - "Hamlet without the prince."
this sense, the two main issues that the author raises are:
1) as an insecure guy, loser, liar, poor and socially repugnant can reach the top of political power in a complex society like Germany of the 1930s?;
and 2) how this same ignoble could exercise power for a little over a decade and bring the country a suicide campaign of expansion in Europe ?
On the first point, Ian Kershaw does not hesitate to point the finger to the elite of German nationalist and conservative era that catapulted Hitler to the trough for the foreign ministry, seeing in it an opportunity for power. With regard to the exercise of political, Kershaw introduces the concept of "working for the Fuehrer" without a formal hierarchical organization and a central command active in day to day affairs of state, with the exception of the war, the Nazi regime might run from authorities seeking autoatribuídas follow the guidelines established by the herald, often form most radical way, as a way of climbing positions.
But what is missing from the text remains in the Kershaw and Joachim Fest is the relationship between the arrival to power of Nazism and German political culture, in particular involving the notorious question of country's national identity. As stated Fest, the collapse of Nazism marks the end of the nineteenth century in Germany, the impossibility of building a political community "original", "own", amid the advance the ideologies "foreign" and internationalist liberalism and socialism, and the clearest representation of this constraint will be divided Germany after the war.
Anyway, the end, in addition to depression, a feeling which is reflected in another dilemma: while it is of utmost importance to keep the story alive, does not strive too much to explain the unexplainable? Karl Popper would say as well, not the nobility of History lies in the exhaustion of the topic, but the persistence of its inexhaustible nature. Only after 65 years of hell, hordes of tourists from all corners meet in Berlin today, the fate of the fashion world globalized liberal hype. The Jewish culture has blossomed again in Germany with the arrival of Jews from Eastern Europe. The wretched, however, is alive and hiding in the most unlikely places. Just look, for example, the list of best selling books in the country.
Arthur Ituassu is Professor of Communication and a doctorate in International Relations, PUC-Rio
Ian Kershaw discusses his biography of Adolf Hitler When he decided to learn German in 1969, the British historian Ian Kershaw was convinced that the language would be very useful in their studies the medieval German peasants. In a few years, however, his newly acquired knowledge of the intricate Teutonic inflections would be applied to topics less remote. By joining in the 1970s called the Bavaria Project, a research group on everyday life in Germany from 1933 to 1945 led by German historian Broszat Martin, Kershaw left behind formation of medievalist to devote himself to the most dramatic events of the twentieth century: the Nazi regime, World War II, the Holocaust. His reputation as one of the most brilliant researchers of the Third Reich began to be established with his first book on the subject, a 1980 study on the cult of Hitler, and has its high point in 2122 pages his biography of the German dictator. Published in two volumes in 1998 and 2000, "Hitler" in 2008 won a condensed version of over a thousand pages, here now published by Companhia das Letras translation of Peter Lockwood. By phone, Kershaw talked about the GLOBE project.
You say in your book that to understand Adolf Hitler is more important to understand that their power of his personality. Could you explain this observation?
IAN KERSHAW: Hitler had, of course, an extraordinary impact, not surpassed by any other figure of the twentieth century, but explain that only or primarily in terms of his personality is in some way misleading. What we must understand are the conditions that allowed this figure, whom nobody had heard of until 1919, acquiring so much power over a State as sophisticated as Germany. And then see the conditions, structures and mentalities that allowed this power was exercised in the next 12 years with a terrible effect on Germany, Europe and the world.
It is not difficult to think ascensãoeo Hitler's power without taking into account certain personal traits, such as rhetorical talent and charismatic appeal?
KERSHAW: Hitler was a remarkable orator, but we must remember that until 1928 this extraordinary orator had very little impact on German society. In the elections of 1928, only 2.6% voted for Hitler's party. In 1920 he was a powerful speaker, but said he was keen for a very small percentage of the population. Under the conditions of the Depression, from 1930 onwards, this changed. The crisis in German society, which was a real crisis of national identity, made the message attracts Hitler much broader sectors of the population, taking it from the suburbs to the center of contemporary political spectrum.
What were the key factors that led to Hitler came to power?
KERSHAW: First, we must remember that the Weimar Republic, the liberal republic established in 1919, had from the beginning its legitimacy questioned by sectors of society - growing industries not only German population, but more specifically the country's elite. They were people in the economy in the army the housing market, seeking an opportunity to get rid of this democracy that they hated so much. During the 1920s, they examined several possibilities. They had the first option as a dictatorship by Hitler. But in 1930, as one crisis follows another and the political system collapsed, they came to support Hitler and engineered his arrival to the post of chancellor in 1933. The conservative and nationalist elite of Germany was the most instrumental in Hitler came to power.
Among the ideas of Hitler, which had greater resonance in German society?
KERSHAW: The key ideas so he came to power were not limited to Hitler, but he had a particular way. The key was to put Germany up again after this existential crisis in the country. He said: "we can only make Germany strong again, restore their pride as a country." It was an extreme form of nationalism based on the power of the military. From the beginning Hitler formed an alliance with the military, saying it would give them everything they wanted, and with that he got tambémo support this vital sector of the state.
So in his evaluation, Hitler became so powerful because it was able to convince Germany that would make it powerful.
KERSHAW: Exactly. The ideas most important to him, on the Jews and the expansion of the eastern frontiers were secondary in popularity and rise of Nazism. People knew he was a fervent anti-Semite, but this was not the main reason the supporters.
His book says that the process of formation of Hitler's personality is an enigma for historians. Why?
IAN KERSHAW: There are few records of Hitler's life before he became a politician, at 30 years old in 1919. Early development has to be reconstituted from inadequate sources, with more speculation than facts. When he enters politics, we see an individual in psychological terms is more or less formed, but the origins of personality do remain to some extent an enigma.
You write that even when used in a negative sense, as in studies of Hitler, the notion of greatness eventually has an effect laudatory. How to escape the high tone that seems almost inevitable when talking about someone who had the historical significance of Hitler?
KERSHAW: It is obvious that Hitler was a very important individual, but the term "greatness" does have implications apologetic, even if you speak in a negative magnitude. He puts aside the others, seems to suggest that they did what they did because it was impossible to resist him. I wanted to find rational explanations for seemingly irrational things that people did. Try to look beyond the individual to think as the role of this individual was possible to find explanations for the social and political power of that person in many ways was a mediocrity, although their talents, certainly his demagogic rhetorical talent. In circumstances other than those of Germany at that time nobody had heard of Hitler.
There is something in the role of Hitler as Fuehrer distinct from other authoritarian leadership positions in the century XX?
KERSHAW: There are similarities, but nothing that comes close. One can think of Mussolini in Italy, Franco in Spain, in Stalin's Russia. In all three cases, the leader was crucial, but none of them had exercised the power so customized as Hitler. In Nazi Germany there was a senate, a cabinet, council of any political body that could only consider the views of Hitler.
You make a speculative exercise in the book, discussing what would have happened if Hitler had not otherwise come to leadership of Germany. Could you talk about that?
KERSHAW: As you say, is just a speculation but I think we can make three plausible hypotheses. If another nationalist leader who had not Hitler come to power in 1933 would result in the complete disintegration of the state alemãoe its conversion into a state police agency? Almost certainly not. Second, there would have been the Holocaust? Discrimination undoubtedly legislation also against Jews, but the Holocaust is almost certainly not. And finally, there was a general European war in 1939? The tensions were obvious on the continent, and any German government would have tried to get rid of the Versailles treaty, but here the answer is no. Just remember that in late 1930 even Goering, right arm and Hitler's designated successor, wanted to retreat from the expansionist foreign policy, and that the army had fears that the country is headed for a big conflagraç ; will.
How much the average German, if you can make this abstraction, was involved with the worldview of Hitler?
KERSHAW: It's hard to talk in those terms about a population of 60 million people. At the risk of generalization, we can say that foreign policy successes in the 1930s, as the remilitarization regiãoa west of the Rhine and the Anschluss with Austria [anexaçã the Austrian Nazi Germany] were very popular. The people defended the expansion, but did not want a war. When the military campaign began, there was much enthusiasm from the successes, but the support has plummeted as they began the setbacks. The anti-Semitic policies, in turn, have had growing support of the German population. There was increasing support for the idea of expelling the Jews from Germany, which is different from supporting the killing - is not talked about it in Germany at the time. Of course, in practice it led directly to the extermination of 6 million people. In all these cases, however, we must remember that this was a terrorist dictatorship. We feel very indirect and partial support and opposition to the regime, because people can not freely express their opinions.
Although you do not consider the essential fact that anti-Semitism in Hitler's popularity, says he was the center of their worldview. You can tell how anti-Semitism of Hitler formed?
KERSHAW: We know very little about anti-Semitism of Hitler before the start of her political party in 1919. He lived in Vienna in the early twentieth century and almost certainly it was anti-Semitic at that time, but probably not to a degree different from other city residents. Nobody who knew him before 1919 cites anti-Semitism as a fundamental trait of his personality. Thereafter, however, he is always present. When Hitler wrote "Mein Kampf" ("My Struggle") in mid- 1920, this anti-Semitism is now the center of a worldview that takes the Jews as the basis for all the problems of Germany, and that does not change until his death in 1945.
0 comments:
Post a Comment