{"title":"In the Midst of Civilized Europe: The Pogroms of 1918–1921 and the Onset of the Holocaust by Jeffrey Veidlinger (review)","authors":"J. Kopstein","doi":"10.1353/ajs.2023.0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Christian prison chaplains, whom I studied in The Mark of Cain: Guilt and Denial in the Lives of Nazi Perpetrators, who were incapable of maintaining sufficient ideological and personal distance. Similarly, the Canadian Pentecostal minister William Hull, who ministered to Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem, and whose memoir Struggle for a Soul is examined in McGlothlin’s first chapter, failed spectacularly to “mindread” Eichmann in any meaningful way. Hull inscribed his own desire for a conversion narrative that would prove the truth of the Christian story of redemption. But Adolf Eichmann refused to show contrition, to confess any wrongdoing, or to be saved by faith in Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Confession narratives, McGlothlin shows, are one of two powerful plot lines that dominate perpetrator literature. The other one is the detective story. While the confession story follows a narrative arc from sin/crime to redemption/reconciliation, the detective plot begins in mystery and ends in the cathartic revelation of the truth. Both story lines suggest closure, which is not appropriate in the context of the Holocaust: neither epistemological closure nor moral closure do justice to victims or perpetrators of the Holocaust. McGlothlin correctly criticizes Gita Sereny for seeking “epistemological and ethical closure” in following these plot lines that show a Franz Stangl who comes to know the truth (detective story) and to disavow the wrongdoing (confession story) during his time as commander of Treblinka—just before he dies in prison. If this sounds too good to be true, it probably is, writes McGlothlin, because it does not capture “Stangl’s truth but rather her own desire for it” (174). Another famous confession narrative, which is not included in the book, provides a different ending. Simon Wiesenthal’s The Sunflower (1968), which could have been included in either part of the book as nonfictional “mindreading” autobiography, or as a fictional “imagination” account of a dying SSman who confesses his guilt, consciously denies the reader the pleasure of closure and ends with an open question. McGlothlin has written an important book for this transitional moment. From now on, all explorations of the mind of the Holocaust perpetrator will be fictional, as the last survivors, witnesses, and perpetrators die. Future authors will benefit from her incisive ethical analysis and literary expertise.","PeriodicalId":54106,"journal":{"name":"AJS Review-The Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies","volume":"118 1","pages":"219 - 221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJS Review-The Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ajs.2023.0026","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Christian prison chaplains, whom I studied in The Mark of Cain: Guilt and Denial in the Lives of Nazi Perpetrators, who were incapable of maintaining sufficient ideological and personal distance. Similarly, the Canadian Pentecostal minister William Hull, who ministered to Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem, and whose memoir Struggle for a Soul is examined in McGlothlin’s first chapter, failed spectacularly to “mindread” Eichmann in any meaningful way. Hull inscribed his own desire for a conversion narrative that would prove the truth of the Christian story of redemption. But Adolf Eichmann refused to show contrition, to confess any wrongdoing, or to be saved by faith in Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Confession narratives, McGlothlin shows, are one of two powerful plot lines that dominate perpetrator literature. The other one is the detective story. While the confession story follows a narrative arc from sin/crime to redemption/reconciliation, the detective plot begins in mystery and ends in the cathartic revelation of the truth. Both story lines suggest closure, which is not appropriate in the context of the Holocaust: neither epistemological closure nor moral closure do justice to victims or perpetrators of the Holocaust. McGlothlin correctly criticizes Gita Sereny for seeking “epistemological and ethical closure” in following these plot lines that show a Franz Stangl who comes to know the truth (detective story) and to disavow the wrongdoing (confession story) during his time as commander of Treblinka—just before he dies in prison. If this sounds too good to be true, it probably is, writes McGlothlin, because it does not capture “Stangl’s truth but rather her own desire for it” (174). Another famous confession narrative, which is not included in the book, provides a different ending. Simon Wiesenthal’s The Sunflower (1968), which could have been included in either part of the book as nonfictional “mindreading” autobiography, or as a fictional “imagination” account of a dying SSman who confesses his guilt, consciously denies the reader the pleasure of closure and ends with an open question. McGlothlin has written an important book for this transitional moment. From now on, all explorations of the mind of the Holocaust perpetrator will be fictional, as the last survivors, witnesses, and perpetrators die. Future authors will benefit from her incisive ethical analysis and literary expertise.
我在《该隐的印记:纳粹罪犯生活中的内疚和否认》一书中研究过的基督教监狱牧师,他们无法保持足够的意识形态和个人距离。同样,曾在耶路撒冷服侍阿道夫·艾希曼的加拿大五旬节派牧师威廉·赫尔(William Hull),他的回忆录《为灵魂而奋斗》(Struggle for a Soul)也在麦格洛特林的第一章中进行了考察,但令人惊讶的是,他没有以任何有意义的方式“想起”艾希曼。赫尔写下了他自己的愿望,希望通过一种转变的叙事来证明基督教救赎故事的真实性。但阿道夫·艾希曼拒绝表示悔悟,拒绝承认任何过错,也不愿因信仰基督的赎罪祭而得救。麦克格洛斯林认为,忏悔叙事是主导犯罪者文学的两条强有力的情节线之一。另一本是侦探小说。忏悔故事遵循着从罪恶/犯罪到救赎/和解的叙事弧线,而侦探情节则以神秘开始,以真相的宣泄结束。这两条故事线都暗示结束,这在大屠杀的背景下是不合适的:无论是认识论上的结束还是道德上的结束都不能公正地对待大屠杀的受害者或肇事者。McGlothlin正确地批评了Gita Sereny寻求“认识论和伦理上的终结”,在这些情节中,弗兰兹·斯坦格尔在担任特雷布林卡指挥官期间(就在他死于监狱之前)了解了真相(侦探故事),并否认了错误(忏悔故事)。如果这听起来好得令人难以置信,那么它很可能是真实的,McGlothlin写道,因为它没有捕捉到“斯坦格尔的真相,而是她自己对真相的渴望”(174)。书中没有收录的另一个著名的忏悔叙述提供了一个不同的结局。西蒙·维森塔尔(Simon Wiesenthal)的《向日葵》(The Sunflower, 1968)既可以作为非虚构的“读心术”自传,也可以作为一个虚构的“想象”叙述,讲述一个垂死的SSman承认自己的罪行,但它有意识地拒绝让读者享受结束的乐趣,并以一个开放性的问题结尾。McGlothlin为这一过渡时期写了一本重要的书。从现在起,随着最后的幸存者、目击者和肇事者死亡,所有对大屠杀肇事者思想的探索都将是虚构的。未来的作者将受益于她敏锐的伦理分析和文学专长。