Book Description
Operation Lucifer:
The Chase, Capture and Trial of Adolf Hitler
A Novel
A searing dissection of the Nazi psyche, this book uniquely combines historical facts with fiction.
Operation Lucifer: The Chase, Capture and Trial of Adolf Hitler skillfully integrates suspense and unfeigned history in a way that few other works on this subject have been able to achieve. It is a sweeping panorama of the post-World War II era with a cast of hundreds of characters, ranging from Hitler and his henchmen to Truman, Eisenhower, Churchill, J. Edgar Hoover, the Dulles brothers, Stalin, Eva Peron, Fulgencio Batista, Castro, the Mafia, the Kennedys and so on.
This novel is a compilation of two books. Book I deals with the chase and capture of Hitler and his minions. Although the action shifts back and forth between different locations such as Hamburg, Munich, Malmo, Washington, New York, Havana, Rome, Barcelona, Paris and Buenos Aires, we never lose the thread of the narrative as the hero, Barton Q. Milburn, relentlessly hunts down his quarry.
Book II covers the dramatic trial of Hitler. Holocaust survivors testify about their ordeals and the unspeakable atrocities they witnessed. Readers will be lifted into the charnel house of Adolf Hitler and the Germans who supported his mad dream of racial cleansing - a dream, as Mr. Charnay points out at the end of the novel, that is still alive in some demented minds today.
Operation Lucifer: The Chase, Capture and Trial of Adolf Hitler will appeal to every segment of society and all age groups throughout the world. This is an exciting retrospective of the most violent period in world history.
Customer Reviews:
Absolutely Amateurish and Devoid of Any Concept of Reality!.......2004-08-26
This is one of the worst examples of alternate history. First, it relys on false propaganda disguised as history, not the least of which is a "trial" based strictly upon circumstantial evidence, etc. and no fundamental basis in law (the Nuremburg "Trials"). Secondly, any notions that the witnesses in his trial actually would have seen anything to testify about that he claims they would be testifying about is absolutely preposterous!
OPERATION LUCIFER.......2002-02-25
Falling somewhere between William Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" and Leo Tolstoy's "War And Peace" sits David B. Charnay's "Operation Lucifer." This "biblical" novel, which twists on the premise that Hitler actually got away, follows through with the actual chase, capture and trial of the infamous dictator. In the process, the reader is either introduced to or reacquainted with the horrors of what is euphemistically referred to as World War II. Although fiction, Operation Lucifer is chucked of full real life players and places. The make believe characters, such as the US Governments number one Nazi hunter Barton Milburn, swim in an ocean populated by actual events and historic personalities. The sheer epic nature of this adventure --which spans from the darkest most horrific moment of the war to the triumph of justice in the 1950's --really does echo the themes of victory and defeat found in "War and Peace."
Although published just prior to the horrific event of September 11th, "Operation Lucifer" is remarkably prophetic with regards to this latest atrocity. Mr. Charnay's tale uncannily parallels many of the deeds which have transpired since the attacks on the World Trade Center, events which cast a shadow over every page of this book, making it, in many ways, as contemporary as today's newspaper.
There are grave warnings to be found here as it is clear that Mr. Chanay's Herculean literary effort is as much a moral imperative as it is lively entertainment. . The enormity of the Nazi calamity and the lessons that it teaches -- if people are willing to listen -- is essential for the survival of humanity. This message is too often lost in the popular culture and a kind of collective amnesia. I believe "OPERATION LUCIFER" deserves widespread exposure on that point alone. My hat goes off to David Charnay for making this great contribution to not only literature but also for speaking out on the moral indignation and dangers of a world gone mad.
Operation Lucifer, The Chase Capture and Trial of Adolf Hitl.......2001-11-29
I just finished reading this novel. I listened to Atty. General Ashcroft on Television last week (11/20) defending President Bush's edict to try the terrorists responisble for September 11th as war criminals. He points to the Supreme Court decision in Ex Parte Quirin. The author of this novel, David Charney ,hit exactly on the button by quoting Ex Parte Quirin in the trial of Hitler. This is not only an exciting, action-packed book, but it is filled with golden nuggets of history . This is a five star book that should be a best seller! The analogy of the psyche in Hitler and Bin Ladin is amazing.The only difference in their megalomania is the garb they wear. Both dissolute, irreligious men posed as messiahs and defiled religion. Charnay's book should be read by the CIA.
One man's alternative history.......2001-10-05
I read Operation Lucifer at the suggestion of a friend who knows of my long time interest in history, and before I read any customer reviews. I am familiar with most of the history and historical figures in Mr. Charnay's book, but I am aware that most people a half century later do not know much about the people and events he describes.
To me, he has produced a work of historical fiction, or rather alternative history, of the highest order. I found the story fascinating and an easy read. Mr. Charnay's writing style is distinctive, but easy to follow. I found myself wanting to know what happened next. I finished the 950+ pages in about a week, including several airline trips. I know I really like a book when I look up and my flight is about to land. That happened several times.
We don't know what Hitler and the other Nazis would have said if captured and put on trial, but Charnay's imagination is probably not far off. Most of us are not aware of the conduct of some prominent Americans and British figures who showed some pro-German sympathies, at least until the war turned against the Nazis. We will never know the true and complete story. This book is likely to be as close as many of us will ever get to some understanding of the possibilities. It even makes me want to go back into nonfiction and find out more.
I understand that not everyone will appreciate and enjoy the book, but since the microwave oven was invented in 1945 by a Raytheon scientist working on radar technology, and the patent was issued in 1950, the microwave oven, or Radar Range, as it was popularly known then, was available in 1953. The reviewer who threw down the book in disgust should find another reason.
Don't Waste Your time!.......2001-09-13
I purchased this book based on the reviews I read here. I'll never make that mistake again!
Don't waste your time and money on this book. I kept reading hoping it would get better. It didn't. The plot is juvenile, the dialogue is preposterous.
It's rare I don't finish a book, but when a character tells someone,in 1953,that their room has a microwave oven, I threw the book down in disgust!
Book Description
An illumination of one of the most explosive and publicized "holocaust trials" since that of Adolf Eichmann, by a leading historian who acted as chief adviser to the defense
In ruling against the controversial historian David Irving, whose libel suit against the American historian Deborah Lipstadt was tried in April 2000, the High Court in London labeled Irving a falsifier of history. No objective historian, declared the judge, would manipulate the documentary record in the way that Irving did. Richard J. Evans, a Cambridge historian and the chief adviser for the defense, uses this famous trial as a lens for exploring a range of difficult questions about the nature of the historian's enterprise.
Customer Reviews:
Forceful case against David Irving.......2007-09-22
As an American, I did not follow this libel trial when it was taking place in London. It was not widely covered here, and that is unfortunate. Had it been, many would learn just how prevalent Holocaust denial is worldwide.
I would have expanded the title if this book to include Irving's lies about the Holocaust in general, not just Hitler. After all, one of Mr. Irving's most shocking assertions is how not a single person died in a gas chamber in Auschwitz.
A Great Book.......2007-07-18
This is a fascinating book on the Irving v. Lipstadt trial in the U.K. Evans, then "only" a top-notch historian, was the chief expert for Lipstadt. He analyzed Irving's work. It is interesting that since the trial, Evans has moved up to the level of "super historian" with the publication of The Coming of the Third Reich and The Third Reich in Power (two great, great books). Even though this book only gives a general overview of the trial, as opposed to Lipstadt's day by day, blow by blow, in her book on the trial, I actually prefer Evan's discussion of the trial. I find Lipstadt, well, kind of boring as a writer. You definitely can't say that about Evans. In addition, Evans has a far greater respect and understanding of the field of military history than Lipstadt, who seems to have kept away from that field throughout her studies & career.
Evans takes Irving apart. Reading this book is like watching a masterful boxer who round by round picks apart his opponent until the other boxer is helpless, bleeding, and thoroughly beaten. Best of all, I get the impression that Evans entered into his role as Lipstadt's expert sort of leaning towards Irving, or at least respecting Irving as a military historian. To read how Evans, piece by piece analyzes and destroys the veracity & reliability of Irving's work is a first class attention grabber. Trust me, this guy can write! Of course so can Irving, which is why a book like this is so important.
Evans really brings out how disappointed we (military history buffs) all should be with Keegan, Erickson and Watt. I mean, these guys are giants in their fields- Keegan even got knighted for his work as a military historian. How men of their stature can basiclaly believe that Irving is a good historian except for one teensy, little eccentricity (he does not believe the Holocaust really happened in the sense of any significant numbers & does not believe Hitler had any knowledge of the planned killing of Jews that did take place) is beyond me. Shame on these guys. How can I ever read John Keegan again? And how can I respect Erickson's seeming mastery of the war in the East when Erickson gives creedence to Irving as a military historian? Watt is just a fatuous, old fool, but as a dean of diplomatic history the guy has no excuse for going soft on Irving. My thought is that historians of their age studied in their formative academic years a WWII where the full extent of the Holocaust had not yet become apparent, but maybe I'm just making excuses for them. Also, I get the impression that each of these "giants" of history seem to have a low regard for Professor Lipstadt, which is just plain stupid (and I'm not saying that just cause I went to college & studied history at Emory, where Lipstadt teaches). I doubt as a student I would have liked Professor Lipstadt's brand of social history, but come on gentlemen, academically this woman is far beyond Irving (who was not trained via graduate school).
So Professor Evans tells it like it is, in clear, precise and extremely readable prose. Look, I've read some of Irving's work (Hitler's War, his books on Goering and Goebbels) and enjoyed them, but after reading this book it is clear that nothing Irving has ever put to paper can be taken as being truthful on its face. For a historian, this is a great crime. I am also disgusted with some of the other reviews on this site, which don't seem to get that Irving was suing Lipstadt to try and shut her up, and some of the reviews, frankly, engage in classic anti-semetism, as opposed to actually analyzing the book. Even after almost 6 million Jews were "liquidated" (i.e., murdered) in the Holocaust, there seem to be many people who either can't accept that fact, or don't believe it, or think that Hitler's efforts were merely a "good start".
Watse of Time.......2006-12-13
This is just one more Hilter book that quotes the lies of earlier Hitler books. Hitler was no prince and the Nazis were not the boy scouts, but if you take a balanced look at history, they were not "the worst of the worst" and Hitler as not "evil incarnate". Irving's books contain detailed footnotes. He got to know people the other historians wouldn't seek out, he found documents that others ignored and, he came to conclusions, based on his research, that others didn't want to hear. If you just read the introduction to "Hitler's War" you can see that Irving is not whitewashing Hitler or the Nazis. The idea of discrediting the messenger in order to discredit the message explains exactly what it happening to Irving and others like him who are attempting to correct the historical record. History is written by the victors and you can go back 2,000 years or more and find that "official" stories are often biased or outright lies. If you want to reread the lies, read Evans; if you want the truth, read Irving.
A Well-thought out and researched novel.......2006-05-03
In response to the review from 'Eric Rachut "Government doc"', I think that it is very important to point out that while people do need to read both sides of any story and decide for themselves, it is also important to be sure that both sides are based on historical fact, not historical imaginings. Free speech is important, of course, but Evans has every right to expose the lies for what they are.
A historian has an obligation to his or her sources and readers. No information can be repressed, and each source has to be thoroughly vetted.This book is painstakingly well-researched and shows how Irving subtely mistranslated documents and trusted with no reservations baised sources. Doing this is not a crime, but one must remember that it was David Irving himself who sued Deborah Lipstadt for libel and thus allowed Evans the opportunity and material to expose him for what he was, a pseudo-historian.
This book is painstakingly researched and well-written. I recommend that everyone read it as the perfect case-study which shows how NOT to do history, and also shows that readers today must be critical and suspicious of every author whether or not you agree with them.
This book is a pack of lies!!!.......2006-04-26
David Irving, for those who read his books and read the Trial Transcripts, makes it quite clear that
1. The Jews were killed by the Nazis
2. Hitler as Head of State is ultimately responsible.
3. How this happened is not as clear cut as made out to be and at any time things could have turned out differently and that everyone shares responsibility for these atrocities and no one came out of this war with clean hands.
This is why he is hated.
Book Description
On November 12, 1988, a group of Portland, Oregon, skinheads known as East Side White Pride encountered three Ethiopians in a street fight, resulting in the brutal death of Mulugeta Seraw.For award-winning journalist Elinor Langer, the Seraw case is the launchpad for a thorough investigation of the Nazi-inspired racist movement in the United States. She vividly reconstructs the world of the skinheads: their origins in the punk scene, their basement shrines to Nazi power, their moments of glory on Oprah and Geraldo. She examines the long-standing radical groups that encouraged the movement, tracking the progress of such powerful figures as White Aryan Resistance leader Tom Metzger through key bastions of the Far Right. In gripping detail, she follows civil-rights lawyer Morris Dees's efforts to prove Metzger responsible for the Portland killing-a sensational campaign to curb the growth of neo-Nazism.Compelling, disturbing, and important, A Hundred Little Hitlers is both an epic account of racism and justice and a close examination of social forces that loom ever more dangerously today.
Customer Reviews:
The author needs to take a writing course!.......2007-02-20
This is undoubtably the most poorly-written book I have read in years. Paragraphs go on for pages, sentences are so long they lose their point, and punctuation has very little to do with standard English. I made myself finish this book because I wanted to understand the events, but I had to force myself through the writing itself. In addition, the author seems to blame everyone for this crime except for the ones who committed it. Perhaps she is trying to defend her hometown, or--as another reviewer speculated--she fell under the spell of the skinhead propaganda. In any case, I would never recommend this book to anyone. If you want to know what happened in Portland, look up old newspaper articles. It would be easier and more enjoyable reading.
Stockholm Syndrome?.......2007-02-03
While I'm sure that Angela Langer was not kidnapped by the skinheads of Portland, Oregon, some conclusions she offers in her book A HUNDRED LITTLE HITLERS seem to show the influence of this syndrome. Certainly, her title choice of LITTLE Hitlers gives away her point of view immediately that these dangerous skinheads and racists are "little" and therefore not dangerous.
For some reason, she has taken the side of the skinheads in the trial of the beating death of Ethiopian Mulegeta Seraw. Perhaps she spent too much time with the racists. Perhaps she was too enamored with racist propagandist Tom Metzger. Maybe she didn't like the SPLC's Morris Dees because he had been married four times before he brought charges against Metzger's American Nazi diatribes.
Who knows for sure? We do find out soon, however, that we are left with the flavor of Langer's sympathy for the racists who would, and did, attack any person of color, any immigrant, any Jew, at any time. She argues that these racists were not programmed by Tom Metzger and his propaganda, and that Dees was wrong and possibly evil in bringing Metzger to court.
Her anger is misdirected against the victim, the courts, the police, the legal system and the concerned citizens of Portland who combined to bring justice in this case.
Perhaps she now needs to be de-programmed.
by Larry Rochelle, author of HOME SCHOOLED
A Disturbing Book.......2006-02-08
This is an interesting and disturbing book that is well worth the reading time. The book is disturbing on many levels, for the story it tells and, at times, for the author's own attitudes.
The initial story is a simple one, albeit the author is sometimes very insightful in her telling of it. Racists skinheads, egged on by their equally racist girl friends, have a chance encounter with not entirely sober Ethiopian immigrants, beat the heck out of some of them and kill another. This ultimately results in the usual round of plea bargains in which the defendant skinheads receive sentences that are probably lighter than what they were due, but in which justice is nominally served. These crimes also eventually result in what was probably a mostly politically motivated trial in which the Southern Poverty Law Center [acting on behalf of a relative of the murdered victim] squares off against two of America's leading propagandists for racism, Tom Metzger and son, and obtains a financially ruinous civil judgment against the Metzgers.
The author spends a reasonable amount of time giving us some background on the victims of this crime - people who were or are remarkably like most of our forbearers of several generations back. She also spends what is, IMHO, an excessive amount of time on the backgrounds of the perpetrators of the crime and their close associates. The theme in the latter set of minibiographies is how most of these thugs have had deprived childhoods resulting in total social disorientation.
The objectives of the book are three fold: (1) the author wants to illustrate for us the racist background of a part of the Western United States and how that historical background lapped over into the recent late 20th century; (2) she wants to illustrate how quickly neoNazism can take hold of a given subculture; and (2) she wants to deplore the civil trial against the Metzgers as a travesty of justice and an abuse of the judicial system. She is successful in making out a case for her first objective. She wholly fails in her second objective. And she is, unfortunately, partially successful in her third objective, while contradicting herself at numerous points along the way.
The author's concerns over the threat of neoNazism springs from a confusion of symbols with reality and, consequently, misses what should be a real concern. The skinheads in her story were unquestionably racists and clearly immersed themselves in Nazi and American racist [Klan] symbols and slogans. The point of that immersion was, however, to simply give their disgustingly violent and drug laden lives some magic signs to hang onto and to throw in the face of the world. They could have easily, and with the same degree of understanding and commitment, latched onto Satanists or Revolutionary Maoists or whatever other in-your-face symbolisms came their way. The real Nazis, the ideological Nazis, whose objective were well focused and executed were the Metzgers and their ilk. Yet it is exactly those people with whom the author seems most sympathetic.
The more critical error in this volume is the author's love hate relationship with the American justice system. On the one hand she seems to have some vague and sporadic understanding that justice is not a simple thing and that the procedures that in fact protect rights have grown up through trial and error [no pun intended] over centuries. The justice system is a tool well suited to its purpose. But just as a wrench can be correctly used to accurately tighten a screw, it can also be misused as a club when that is the goal of the participants in the process. In the instant case of the civil trial of the Metzgers by the SPLC the goals of all parties, not just the SPLC, were focused on something other than obtaining justice.
The author makes out a convincing case that the goal of the SPLC was to use the court as a political tool to crush those whose views it was ideologically opposed and to raise donations to its own treasury. Yet, one is left with the impression that the author thinks that the general objective of fighting racism is a good one, but that to utilize available tools in that fight is somehow slimy. Further, one should, apparently, never materially benefit from successfully waging such a struggle. There is a certain odor about this argument that reminds one of the "reasoning" of those tracts which denounce "International Jewish Bankers" as sometimes useful, but basically deplorable and dangerous.
While the author mentions, more or less in passing, that the Metzgers also came to their trial as a political stage, and that they elected to run their own case and "defend" themselves largely for that reason, she then seems to entirely miss the boat on the necessary implications of that kind of "I don't want justice, I want publicity" orientation by a defendant. Despite sentences and paragraphs to the contrary, one gets the impression that the author really believes that the case against the Metzer's for conspiracy to commit tort damages should have been transformed, at the initiative of the Court, into a constitutional case principally concerned with free speech. The author apparently feels, without very clear articulation, that defendants, who she herself illustrates to have made a career out of inciting violence, should have been exonerated from paying damage to a victim of such violence, despite their own utter failure to show that such incitements were usually general and nonspecific and were not directed to actually result in any particular violence at a particular time and place. IMHO it is one thing to maintain that the Metzgers case was winnable, had they stuck to and developed the facts illustrating that they had no direct connection to the subject murder. It is entirely a different thing to maintain the naively silly position that the Metzgers should not have been found to be guilty when they ran their case as a political campaign rather than a lawsuit. I am, however, left with the firm impression that the author believes they should have been found "not guilty" on some vague principal of abstract justice, regardless of how, or for what purposes, they conducted their defense.
This is an interesting book, well worth reading, for the factual descriptions it gives of those who pass through its pages. We get a real feel for what the lives of young street punks from the American nihilist underbelly are really like. We get some insights [not insights that many naive "idealists" well welcome, but insights nonetheless] into what ideological political struggle is really like. We get a fairly good, if somewhat too sketchy, look at the "radical right" racists subculture in this society. The strengths of this book are many, it is just the author's conclusions that need some work.
Author seemed too sympathetic to the skins .......2005-12-21
In my opinion, that is. I found it a bit hard to read because Mrs. Langer's prose wasn't flowing easily, but she did engage my interest and once I finished it, I was grateful to God--not just because I'd managed to read the entire book in less than 2 days but because I don't live in that part of the country!
(It's difficult enough living where I do, in the dirty South. I cannot imagine at all trying to eke out a living in the Pacific Northwest, which is as notorious for racism as is this area of the USA known far and wide as the Confederacy.)
Other than finding Mrs. Langer's prose stumbling at times, my only other problem is her seeming sympathy towards these racists,
in particular Tom Metzger. The man lost nearly everything and I cannot say that I feel sorry for him; he deserved it, I guess,
even though those skinheads clearly acted on their own initiative.
They saw a black man, knocked him to the street, kicked him when he was down--as all cowards do--and beat him to death with that bat.
The act itself doesn't surprise me--at the time it did but I didn't know so much about the pitiful history of lynching in this
so-fair land of ours--but having read all I could on the subject of racism, racist murders, and hate crimes, now nothing surprises
or shocks me in America.
May God have mercy on their souls!
Compelling and frightening read.......2004-09-05
Murder happens all the time in this country. A brutal murder that's movitated simply by racism and committed by a Nazi skinhead in the United States, though, is quite another matter. In 1988 a Nazi skinhead by the name of Kenneth Mieske beat the head in of a Ethiopian immigrant by the name of Mulugeta Seraw over a minor disagreement that gets out of hand. Elinor Langer's fine book provides the background, the pathology if you like, of this disease that allows violence against people of other races to continue in our country.
Langer begins with the murder and then traces the roots of the movement in Portland that gave rise to the neo-Nazi skinhead movement in her state. She also looks at the poverty, submerged anger, drug use and philosphy that feeds the anger that leads to events like this. In many respects, Langer's book (which began as a series of ongoing articles about the case) provides a glimpse into America's darker side. We discover how the movement began, how it spreads and how it takes root in communities outside her own as well.
While it isn't necessarily the easiest book to read, it's compelling and thoughtful. It's not lite reading for the beach but it's the type of book for those interested in how society makes a wrong turn as it grows and matures. Her coverage of the trial, the evidence and the feelings of those involved gives a borad perspective into what fans the flames of monsterous acts in our world. A Hundred Little Hitlers frightens me worse than any Stephen King novel or the latest "Resident Evil" movie could because it's about the world around us.
Amazon.com
Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's Hitler's Willing Executioners was one of the most acclaimed nonfiction books of 1996 ... in the mainstream press, that is. Some historians who specialize in World War II-era Germany and the Holocaust have had considerably less kind things to say about Goldhagen's hypothesis that, rather than an aberrant anomaly perpetrated by Nazi archvillains, the Holocaust was an atrocity in which ordinary Germans at all levels of society, motivated by underlying anti-Semitic cultural assumptions, willingly took part. A Nation on Trial is a reprinting and expansion of two scholarly articles published in 1997 which directly challenged Goldhagen's thesis and research techniques.
Norman Finkelstein considers Goldhagen's book "a monument to question-begging" that is "worthless as scholarship." He attacks what he describes as Goldhagen's overemphasis on "eliminationist antisemitism," which raises every anti-Semitic sentiment in German history to murderous intent. "How many white Americans do not harbor any negative stereotypes about black people?" Finkelstein asks rhetorically. "If Goldhagen is correct, we are all closet racial psychopaths." To debunk that notion, Finkelstein analyzes at length Goldhagen's consideration of the pre-Holocaust social segregation of the Jews, which Goldhagen identifies as "the maximum feasible eliminationist option possible given the existing opportunities and constraints," ultimately concluding that it "barely differed from the Jim Crow system in the American South." Although this is clearly intended to undermine Goldhagen's argument about the intensity of Germany's desire to kill the Jews in its midst, it is not exactly reassuring. One can easily flip the idea around so that "the Jim Crow system barely differed from pre-Holocaust Germany's treatment of the Jews," and while that might not make America precisely a nation of "closet racial psychopaths," it certainly does not--and should not--provide any comfort for American readers.
Ruth Bettina Birn pronounces an equally harsh verdict: "His treatment of these matters is naïve and does not meet accepted scholarly standards." At one point, she even accuses him of deploying irony in a sarcastic manner "wholly undignified" in an academic work. Like Finkelstein, she raises important questions about the methods by which Goldhagen selected the source material from which he extrapolated his conclusions, and about the risk Hitler's Willing Executioners runs of succumbing to the pornography of violence to drive home its theoretical points. And Birn shares Finkelstein's conclusion that "Goldhagen wants to graft an ahistorical and monocausal thesis onto a body of historical and multicausal scholarship."
One of the most important questions A Nation on Trial must address is why Hitler's Willing Executioners was able to capture so much attention. Birn is content to credit the "professional American marketing strategy" behind the book for its public success. Finkelstein jumps into a much more dangerous minefield by delineating a distinction between "holocaust scholarship" and "Holocaust literature," identifying the latter as "in effect the Zionist account of the Nazi holocaust," a genre of writing that positions the Holocaust as a historically unique incident in which only the suffering of the Nazi's Jewish victims merits substantial consideration. In making this categorization, he essentially labels Goldhagen's work an act of propaganda, "touted as the ultimate testament to the Nazi Holocaust... [which] fundamentally diminishes its moral significance."
Goldhagen does have a tendency toward the hyperbolic, as indicated in statements such as, "The extent and virulence of the verbal violence assaulting the Jews from their own countrymen have no parallel in modern history," a point which African Americans, Pakistanis in England, and a host of others might care to debate. But while he argues that "Germans' antisemitic beliefs about Jews were the central causal agent of the Holocaust," he also freely admits, in the introduction to the German edition, that "[n]o adequate explanation for the Holocaust can be monocausal," and that anti-Semitism accounts only for the motivation of "the will to kill Jews." And while both authors accuse Goldhagen of blaming the entire German nation for the Holocaust, Goldhagen (again, in the German edition) explicitly rejects collective guilt, stating that "we must recognize that individual Germans were not will-less cogs in a machine, were not automatons, but were responsible actors, were capable of making choices, and were ultimately the authors of their own actions." The debate certainly does not end with this book; both Goldhagen and Finkelstein have created Web sites to which they routinely post responses to the ongoing criticism of their work. If you want to understand the controversy surrounding Hitler's Willing Executioners, however, A Nation on Trial is a necessary point of reference. --Ron Hogan
Book Description
No recent work of history has generated as much interest as Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's Hitler's Willing Executioners. Purporting to solve the mystery of the Nazi holocaust, Goldhagen maintains that ordinary Germans were driven by fanatical anti-Semitism to murder the Jews. An immediate national best-seller, the book went on to create an international sensation.
Now, in A Nation on Trial, two leading critics challenge Goldhagen's findings and show that his work is not scholarship at all. With compelling cumulative effect, Norman G. Finkelstein meticulously documents Goldhagen's distortions of secondary literature and the internal contradictions of his argument. In a complementary essay, Ruth Bettina Birn juxtaposes Goldhagen's text against the German archives he consulted. The foremost international authority on these archives, Birn conclusively demonstrates that Goldhagen systematically misrepresented their contents.
The definitive statement on the Goldhagen phenomenon, this volume is also a cautionary tale on the corruption of scholarship by ideological zealotry.
Customer Reviews:
Great book, about this subject........2006-03-07
Norman G. Finkelstein (a jew)made this great book.This book is an antidote, against the ridiculous book by (another jew) Goldhagen.
To exemple, had Jim Crow's laws, be good for colored amaricans?
No.Then, why to demonize germans?
Germany exterminated some millions of jews, but what the soviet jews made massive genocides to ucranians, russians,etc.
Do somebody calls the jews, as devils?No.
The US's governement wiped out millions of indians in US's territory.Are the americans devils because of this?No.
This book is great, about this subject.
Highly Misleading.......2004-11-23
Daniel Goldhagen's best-seller "Hitler's Willing Executioners" claimed that the Holocaust was the culmination of extreme popular prejudice which permeated German society. The thesis is certainly open to dispute and has been rejected by some prominent historians. This book, however, makes absolutely no contribution to the debate and seems to be motivated by ideology rather than the search for historical truth.
Ruth Bettina Birn - chief historian at the Canadian Justice Department's war crimes unit - offers a doctored version of an earlier essay (Historical Journal, 40:1, 1997), which Goldhagen demolished at length ("The Fictions of Ruth Bettina Birn," German Politics and Society, 15:3, Fall 1997, online). In a typical example, Birn had accused Goldhagen of arguing that the German is generally "brutal and murderous in the use of other peoples" as well as being a member of "an extraordinary, lethal political culture" whose cruelties stand out in the "long annals of human barbarism." Turning to Goldhagen's book, the original quotes are as follows. Discussing Nazi Germany's cruelty towards Jewish and non-Jewish slaves, he wrote that "Germans WERE [emphasis added] generally brutal and murderous in the use of other peoples" (HWE, p315). Discussing the atmosphere in the Third Reich, he wrote that being ordinary in "the Germany that gave itself to Nazism" was to have been "a member of an extraordinary, lethal political culture" (HWE, p456). Discussing the barbarism of Nazi Germany, he wrote that in the "long annals of human barbarism," the cruelties inflicted "by Germans upon Jews during the Nazi period" stand out (HWE, p386). In each case, Birn has misquoted Goldhagen, pretending that he is stereotyping Germans in general when in fact he is only referring to the Nazi period. Since this is a representative sample of the essay's method - Goldhagen provides over a dozen pages of similar cases - I will waste no more space on it.
Norman G. Finkelstein's contribution is based on a conspiracy theory. In his original essay, this was clearly stated, but here it has been suppressed, for obvious reasons. According to Finkelstein, the field of Holocaust studies is "mainly a propaganda enterprise," so that "'The Holocaust' is in effect the Zionist account of the Nazi holocaust" (New Left Review, July/August, 1997, pp83-4). Moreover: "The only relationship Holocaust studies bears to serious scholarly inquiry is inverse" (Frankfurter Rundschau, August 22, 1997). Academic research into the Final Solution is a "Holocaust studies industry," which amounts to a "circus" (The Observer, January 18, 1998). No doubt these discoveries will be welcomed by neo-Nazis everywhere.
Many readers will be unaware that Finkelstein, far from being an academic historian, is a teacher of political theory who cannot speak or read German. Nor will readers be familiar with Goldhagen's devastating reply, exposing distortions, misrepresentations, selective quotations and outright inventions (Goldhagen, "The New Discourse of Avoidance," online).
Perhaps the most revealing insight into the essay's method is the subtle shift in argument which occurs whenever its falsifications are identified. Consider the treatment of Goldhagen's discussion of the 19th century Bavarian petition against civil rights for Jews. Finkelstein originally wrote that in order to document the extent of German antisemitism, Goldhagen "recalls a 'spontaneous, extremely broad-based, and genuine' petition campaign" in Bavaria, while hiding evidence to the contrary in his footnote (NLR, p48). But as Goldhagen pointed out, Finkelstein is attributing to him words which were in fact quoted from another historian, allowing Finkelstein to present the footnote qualifying the historian's words as a case of self-contradiction. So in this book the passage has been doctored as follows: "Quoting a scholarly study, Goldhagen recalls a 'spontaneous, extremely broad-based, and genuine' petition campaign" in Bavaria, while hiding evidence to the contrary in his footnote (ANOT, p21). Now that Goldhagen has exposed this sleight of hand, Finkelstein reverts to his original distortion, stating that Goldhagen's evidence "disputing HIS [emphasis added] textual claim" was buried in the book's back pages (Finkelstein, "Response to Goldhagen," online). Finkelstein defends the doctoring of his own text with the remark that Goldhagen must be unaware of the "normal scholarly practice" of "revising" a journal article for publication in a book.
Could any magician surpass these tricks?
Anything to make a buck.......2004-01-14
This ad hominum book is an attempt to white wash the German people who had the virus to murder these Jews and did it. Others, Poles, Ukrainians etc. contracted the disease, if you will, and the Holocaust was under way. It is of course very complicated and Goldhagen makes his arguments complicated, as they should be. To cite sources is allowable in historical writing I believe, but to conclude from these and many other sources is not what Goldhagen does; he leaves many doors open for exploration, exploration within the thesis that he supports with very firm evidence. This atrocity is no ordinary instance of mass murder; it has far reaching, ancient roots, links to powerful organized religions, pseudo- Western and Eastern cultures,socio- economics,philosophies of the most celebrated, Heidegger e.g., and an ideas of Christ that stem from the writings of the early Fathers of Christianity, and their interpretation of the Jews in the New Testament. This long problem of the Jews, this so-called evil people with their choseness gets superb, generous treatment by Professor Goldhagen. His discussion goes beyond sources, beyond the splitting of hairs over methods of interpretation according to the academy, which for decades has avoided and skimmed over and denied the Holocaust its place in any branch of life and practice.This crticism preens itself in front of Goldhagen's work as if this were a cocktail party debate in the faculty lounge. There is not a shred of compassion or an instance of reference to any suffering of these Jews in this book, with its artless center of whining and posing and avoiding the whole idea of evil. It is spirtiually and morally deadening. It repells with its insistance on winning. One reads these books all the time about the Holocaust now...disputing methodology and credibility. Daniel Goldhagen is not on trial here or his book; he knows what he is about in it and these authros do not know this, blinded by a desire for fame in the coprridors of their institutions.
Goldhagen has dared to call attention to it all, and in doing so draws out the low vibration people like Finkelstein who wouldn't have anyone to hear him if it weren't for Goldhagen's book. Finkelstein wouldn't have dared to attempt a piece on the Holocaust himself; he could not contain it , even a part of it in his angry head; Finkelstein is too shaken to deal with this subject as it is; he is maybe too horrified at the truth that his academy, his world,could be at heart insane.This book and its authors..lost balls in the high grass.
Bravo, Professor Goldhagen
The "Goldhagen Thesis" Refuted........2003-11-15
Among the academically politically correct, a particularly noxious notion has been revised in the work of Daniel Goldhagen in his book _Hitler's Willing Executioners_. This is the racist idea of the "barbaric Hun", popular among the British and Allied forces in the "Great War". Like such precursors as Theodor Kaufman, writer of the notorious tract _Germany Must Perish!_, Goldhagen has revised the idea that the entire German nation was to blame for Hitler, all Germans being possessed of a crazed anti-Semitism. According to Goldhagen, it is the ordinary Germans who were the most bestial in their brutality towards the Jews (and of course Goldhagen focuses conveniently only on the Jews, arguing that the Holocaust of the Jews was a unique historical event without precedent, indeed outside of time). But, then according to Goldhagen, this mass madness was magically to disappear with the end of the war and the defeat of Hitler; indeed, the modern Germans are the very champions of liberty courtesy of the reconstitution of their nation with the help of the Allied forces. Fortunately, many of those who are not blinded by political correctness can see through the absurdity of this farce presented as historical thesis. In this book, two essays are presented which attempt to refute Goldhagen's thesis. The first is by Norman Finkelstein, himself a Jew and descended from survivors of the Holocaust. The second is by Ruth Bittina Birn, another expert on the historical tragedy which subsisted in the Third Reich. Both essays attempt to show through actually examining the historical record the house of cards which the Goldhagen thesis proves to be. Upon closer examination it becomes apparent that many of the German officers were not possessed by madness but indeed looked upon their activities as part of a disgusting, albeit necessary, part of the war bureaucracy. In addition, like most who focus on the Holocaust, the role of other social groups persecuted by Hitler and later by the communists who were to seize control of half of Germany after the war is totally ignored by Goldhagen. Finkelstein brings out some interesting points in comparing various historical tragedies including many which exist in modern America and within the modern world with those that occurred during World War II. Indeed, so much has been made of the horrendous events which occurred during this war that it has become difficult to discern the truth, from the haze. Goldhagen represents an unfortunate turn in revisionist scholarship, attempting to swamp the American public with yet more horrendous tales of Holocaust attrocities. Yet, while this occurs the attrocities of the communists (particularly under Stalin, far greater than those of Hitler and his regime) are entirely ignored by academic scholarship (if not outright denied). Why is this? Perhaps it is just a further indication of the kind of rabid political correctness that exists among the revisionist left which holds such sway in academia. While both Norman Finkelstein and Ruth Bittina Birn are both leftists of a different sort, their essays do make some valuable points about the need for historical truth. Unfortunately, they both seem to be under the spell that Hitler's Reich was a "right wing regime", even though such a regime did contain many leftist/collectivist elements. This is unfortunate; however, it remains a minor criticism in an otherwise well written refutation.
Excellent.......2003-07-19
Arguing that much of the Holocaust literature contains gross misinformation and sheer lies, Finkelstein provides an important insight into Goldhagen's insidious attempt to distort historical facts. According to Finkelstein, Goldhagen's book is characterized by numerous contradictions, exaggerations and serious misrepresentation of the facts. For example, Goldhagen asserts in his book that all Germans were belligerent anti-semitists who when given the chance tortured every Jew they could come across. This of course is a gross overgeneralization given that the majority of serious historians agree that many Germans did not commit any enormities against Jewish people. Having said that, Finkelstein does not claim that they were not anti-semitists. On the contrary, many Germans were anti-semitists but they still chose not to take part in the extermination of Jews. Goldhagen however asserts that being a passive observer automatically makes you a perpetrator who is as guilty as the person committing the actual atrocities. If this is the case, then most people are perpetrators because we all sometimes witness heinous crimes and gross injustices not being able to stop them. Goldhagen further holds that the Holocaust was a unique event. Note that a unique event must contain unique victims. Thus, according to Goldhagen, Jews were unique victims. What about the gypsies who were murdered during the Holocaust? Why aren't they the unique victims? Why aren't they included in the history books? Distorting the history in this cynical way as Goldhagen does is morally reprehensible. Not all Germans actively participated in the Holocaust. Blaiming the entire nation is preposterous and indicative of spurious scholarship.
Average customer rating:
- The Triumph of Historical Facts
- EVANS HAS MORE QUESTIONS TO ANSWER THAN IRVING..
- A triumph
- Clouded by hatred of Irving
- Fundamental
|
Telling Lies About Hitler: The Holocaust, History and the David Irving Trial
Richard J. Evans
Manufacturer: Verso
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 Reference
| Historical Study
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Holocaust
| Jewish
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| World War II
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Germany
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Courts & Procedures
| English Law
| Law
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 1859844170 |
Customer Reviews:
The Triumph of Historical Facts.......2006-02-22
This is an excellent read. As a historian myself, I know how difficult it is to sort historical fact from fictional bias. Evans' presentation of the evidence is well thought out and structured, making a very difficult, complicated, and emotional subject easier to understand and appreciated. For anyone interested in WWII history, the pitfalls of historical interpretation, or simply in the presentation of historical facts in a legal context, this book is a 'must'.
EVANS HAS MORE QUESTIONS TO ANSWER THAN IRVING.........2005-12-19
Richard Evans got paid $140, 000 to testify at this trial. If that doesn't seem sinister to you, then there's more.
Lipstadt had millions of dollars of external funding (from the likes of Steven Spielberg), and a team of dozens of lawyers & historians to fight one man.
Yes, Irving brought the trial. Why? Well, what Lipstadt accused him of (holding different views on certain aspects of WW2, e.g. the holocaust), could have led to his future arrest. In fact, he has been arrested recently for looking to lecture in Austria. He has also suffered legal harassment in Australia and Canada, amongst numerous other places.
Ernst Zundel, a writer who also has alternative views on the holocaust, rots in solitary confinement on dubious charges, and is being deported from Canada to Germany to face trial.
If Irving hadn't challenged Lipstadt, he too could have ended up in jail. (and recenty has!). Evans and his team (given rock star like payment to conduct his research, he could afford an entourage of his own...) dissected Irving's work and found some statistical discrepancies.
That's history for you- it evolves, and as new facts and dats come to light, any half decent historian revises his work. Every historian also makes mistakes, if not, every brach of history would only need one text book, by a historian who could every single fact correct. (obviously, these texts have never and will never exist).
The variation in, say, Irving's figures on Dresden fatalities, fluctuate much less then the official figures of Auschwitz victims over the years. (once claimed at 6 million, now 1 million).
One of the greatest works on WW2 in recent years, Alan Bullock's "Hitler and Stalin, parallel lives.." actually accepted, verbatim, the East German works on Hitler's autopsy, universally aacepted as erroneous. Does that detract from the majesty of Bullock's work? No, it does not.
Almost every historical work on the ww2 era will have a large number of Irving's works in its bibliography. He has contributed more data, and from the most diverse and unique sources, than pretty much any other historian in the world today.
As his views on certain elements of this era differ from the projected norms, he has been suffered dicrimination across the world, now his liberty is jeopardised. Evans was paid thousands of pounds to join the witch hunt, and his objectivity is thus fundamentally flawed.
A triumph.......2005-05-31
This excellent book succeeds on a number of levels:
Firstly, it's a fascinating detective story. Evans' lively descriptions of how he and his researchers dug into Irving's footnotes and compared his sources (or the lack thereof) against the actual historical evidence make for great reading, with the result that the book is a real page turner.
Secondly, this is probably the most accessible book currently availble on how historians ply their trade. By comparing Irving's methodologies to those used by professional historians Evans' clearly describes how historians should best conduct their research and justify the conclusions they reach. The clear examples he provides are both realistic and highly instructive.
Thirdly, the passion with which Evans writes and the clarity of his arguments are highly refreshing. After having utterly discredited Irving during the court case, Evans' quite rightly has no time for those journalists and historians who continue to accept Irving as being a professional historian, and the arguments they put forward are subjected to the same blowtorch of logic he applied to Irving.
In short, this book succeeds as both an entertaining read and as an introduction for non-historians into the world of professional historians, and I'd highly recommend it.
Clouded by hatred of Irving.......2005-02-17
Professor Evans's broadside against David Irving just will not fly. Not that Irving is completely right on each and every point he has made over the years. But Evans is not really a historian to match Irving's indefatigable researching and presentation skills. He commits numerous errors, makes statements that were long ago discarded by more modern historians of the Holocaust. Yes, Irving lost his (in)famous--and perhaps unwise---defamation suit against Deborah Lipstadt; but the verdict was a Pyrrhic victory of sorts. True, Irving's books soon "disappeared" from various libraries and bookstores, but his essential worth as a historian of the World War II period remains significant, even if it is not acknowledged as frequently as before "the trial." Like Sir John Keegan and Professor Gordon Craig, if you are going to study that period seriously, you MUST study Irving. Not so Evan....
Fundamental.......2003-03-11
Professor Evans recounts the events of the Irving trial, with the accuracy that is typical of his historical work. With a good amount of detail, obviously not as complete as the trial transcripts (which would take thousands of pages), Evans takes us through some of the evidence that helped prove beyond any reasonable doubt what Lipstadt had said in her book: Irving is not a historian, he regularly lies, and distorts facts for the benefit of his anti-semite, right wing agenda. A great book for all those who are interested in dismantling the Holocaust denial lies, and for those who took interest in the Irving trial in 2000.
Customer Reviews:
"Steiner's Frankenstein".......2005-12-15
I first read "The Portage" completely unaware of the great controversy which had surrounded the book during its initial publication, learning of it only after finishing the book and reading the author's afterword detailing the controversy that arose upon the book's original publication in 1970/71. Steiner has described the book as a philosophical text written in the guise of a work of pulp fiction; I'm not so sure of that.
Most of the work does follows the standard drama of your typical thriller: the book opens with an Israeli Nazi-hunter team finding Hitler deep up the heart of the Amazonian backwater, with flashbacks used to let the reader in on the events leading them to him. The central part of the book is the struggle referred to by the book's title: the Israeli plan is to abduct Hitler from these backwaters in Brazil to the Venezuelan city of San Cristobal, where an Israeli plane awaits to take him to trial in Jerusalem. During this time, we are given glimpses of how the rest of the world reacts to the rumors that Hitler still lives and has been found. The drama throughout most of the book comes from two sources: firstly, will the team get Hitler, now in his eighties (the novel takes place around 1970), through the malaria-infested swamps and rainforests alive? Secondly, even if they do, will they get him back to Israel before the rest of the world learns of his existence and intercept him for their own trials?
I don't wish to spoil this drama, so I will skip to the ending. What makes the book more than a simple work of alternative history, and what has made the book quite controversial, is its ending: Hitler is on trial, and the man put in charge of Hitler rises to give his opening remarks. But Hitler, who until now has been mute, almost catatonic, will have none of it. After shouting his lawyer into silence, Hitler launches into a sweeping, ten page list of arguments that ends the book. The book essentially ends with this speech, a fact that seems to have created much of the controversy, inasmuch that many critics seem to believe that such an ending serves as an implicit approval of Hitler's arguments (that is, because no one is allowed to refute Hitler, the book de facto supports him). It is an unfair criticism, in my opinion, as texts should be allowed to show disturbing characters and ideas, if only to let them fail on their own merit, or to let the reader decide for him or herself.
I won't spoil the ending by detailing the arguments Hitler makes, other than to say that Hitler takes the concept of "blaming the victim" to new heights of rhetoric and imagery. He doesn't deny the Holocaust, but (attempts to) justify it in ways you have likely never come across before. Forget the usual theories regarding Hitler - that he feared he was part-Jew, that he got syphilis from a Jewish prostitute: by the end, Hitler is not only blaming the victim, but creates an argument bordering on blasphemy and full-on disturbing (and disturbed).
Steiner's work outraged many, who felt that Steiner should have, ironically, listened to the advice the Israeli team's handler gives them early on in the novel: under no circumstances should Hitler be allowed to speak, because his evil rests in his mastery of language, his charismatic ability to seduce the listener with his arguments and appeals.
The book is shocking, but I'm not sure if that shock manages to sustain itself into any deep or meaningful insight. I would recommend that those who read this check out two relevant books, if they can. One is "The World Hitler Never Made," by Gavriel D. Rosenfeld; the other is "Explaining Hitler" by Ron Rosenbaum. Rosenfeld's book deals with the growing number of alternative history works (in literature, film, and television) that reference Hitler and/or Nazism, from Robert Harris' book "Fatherland" to the Star Trek episode "The City on the Edge of Forever." Rosenbaum's is just what the title indicates: an examination of the various theories and explanations given as to how and why Hitler became Hitler.
Both books feature sections on Steiner's novel; Rosenbaum's book also features what I can only frankly describe as a bizarre interview with the author himself. Rosenfeld makes the case that Steiner's work represented a growing Cold War disillusionment with the notion that in defeating Hitler, humanity had defeated its greatest evil. The discoveries of the evils committed by the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol-Pot (amongst many) seemed to only confirm that humanity remained as evil as ever, if not more so, and that, ironically, the Holocaust-related notion that "we must never forget" not only didn't stop evil, it may in fact help fuel it (by keeping alive the seductive allure of Hitler's words and imagery). Steiner's Hitler, then, is meant to be seductive and persuasive, because Steiner is showing the irony of what Holocaust studies and Shoah memorials are doing: by keeping the image and voice of Hitler alive, they also keep his most diabolical assets - force of personality, the rhetoric, the seductive power of evil - alive as well. It's as if, one might say, a work like Spielberg's "Schindler's List" creates as much evil as it hopes to prevent, and as such it would be better to indeed forget, to just forget and move on, rid of the allure and temptation that evil possesses.
For Rosenbaum, the character "Hitler" of "The Portage" is unforgivable: he calls him "Steiner's Frankenstein", the created monster that the creator cannot control. While this gives him a bias against Steiner, his interview nonetheless begins with him giving the author several attempts to take the easy way out. Steiner doesn't, and in fact turns the book on its head. The novel, he states, isn't meant to show the fallacies of Hitler's arguments (which some defenders of the work have claimed occurs), but to actually put forward the argument that the Jews might indeed be responsible for their own Holocaust, and that the world might actually be better off if they'd never existed. Steiner, in this interview, seems obsessed with the idea of breaking the boundary of what is taboo, especially (what I take to be) the sensitive taboos and other undiscussable topics within Jewish communities (Steiner himself is Jewish). I found the interview interesting because it changes how you view the book, so you may want to refrain from reading it until once you're finished with the novel itself.
I apologize for giving so much space to discussing works other than the one I'm ostensibly reviewing, but I think a work like this, given the nature of its ending, is really helped by doing some outside reading. Using Rosenfeld, it is interesting to see how "The Portage" works in relation to a number of other 'Nazi alternate history' works that came out at the same time. Rosenbaum too is quite useful for context, although quite honestly Steiner comes across as somewhat unhinged by the time his interview in that book comes to a close.
So, overall, why the three stars? It is a decently entertaining book, readable in an evening as other reviewers have mentioned (this brevity being a good or bad thing, I don't know), and I disagree that it drags in the middle sections - some of the international settings, such as those that deal with a retired Red Army doctor and another with East and West German lawyers are quite interesting capsule stories in their own right (it should be said, though, that the book was written during the Cold War and all the international intrigue in the plot falls completely within that now somewhat dated framework). Hitler's words at the end are shocking and, so to speak, "novel" enough to make them seem much more explosive or thought-provoking than I suspect they really are.
Ultimately, however, especially if you read it in conjunction with some additional reading as I've described, the book does become an interesting study of the question of how artists approach dangerous subjects. How do you invoke Hitler without invoking the charismatic who seduced millions into evil? Can works be considered critically apart from their authors? (Steiner was often labelled a "self-hating Jew" by critics of the book; his resultant bitterness from this is quite apparent in the Rosenbaum interview)
It raises some interesting questions, but ultimately it is not the philosophical novel Steiner seems to have envisioned it being. It is really more a pulp work that makes dangerous use of a real-life villain. Not a bad read, but not quite the challenging or provoking work it might have been had the overall plot and story been fleshed out.
A Good Read -- But That's All.......2004-07-07
This strange novella feels padded even though it's less than 200 pages long and can be read over a weekend. The story is simple: Israeli Nazi-hunters capture Adolf Hitler in the depths of the Amazon rain forest. Their radio broadcasts to Israel are intercepted and decoded by various governments, which deliberate about how to respond before the news leaks out. Meanwhile, the Nazi-hunters, weakened by their ordeal in the jungle, decide to put their captive on trial. Hitler defends himself in a longish speech that has given solace to anti-Semitic readers (such as one Amazon reviewer below). Then the book ends. That's it. Really.
Some of the writing is powerful, such as the radio broadcast from Israel reminding the Nazi-hunters of the horrors of the Holocaust. Other parts of the book are at least entertainingly bizarre, such as Hitler's super-intellectual defense of his decision to destroy European Jewry (since the Jews invented monotheism and guilt, they had to be wiped out). But at other times, the book is painfully cliche'd, as in its endless descriptions of the muck and leeches of Amazonia, or its quotes from the diary of a French diplomat (he's wily! he has a mistress! he is acutely self-aware!), or its rendering of the ponderous metaphysical/historical musings of a legal advisor to the German foreign ministry.
Most readers will close the book scratching their heads and wondering what it was all about -- but at least it's short and holds one's attention.
Bluebeard's Castle revisited........2002-10-22
In this novel, Adolf H. did not commit suicide at the end of World War II, but escaped to South-America. After he is captured, he can defend himself for his crimes. His defence contains the same items as these developed in another book of the author 'In Bluebeard's Castle'. Adolf H. took revenge by organizing the holocaust because mankind was blackmailed three times in an absolute manner: by one terrifying almighty God, by the limitless love of his son Christ and by Rabbi-Marx, who wanted to create heaven on earth.
I found the first part of the novel 'the chase of Adolf H.' rather average.
The second part 'The defence of Adolf H.' is a powerful text, but I prefer the treatment of the same themes in his book 'In Bluebeard's Castle': a bold and compelling conjecture about the subconscious motives of the holocaust.
Nazism - theory, causality, failure.......2001-10-31
This book describes the causality of Nazism (cultural), the theory, and why it failed.
A provocative look at the legacy of A.H........2000-11-05
At it most pedestrian moments, George Steiner's novel "The Portage to San Cristobal of A.H." is a "what if" story in which young Israeli Nazihunters find Hitler in the Amazonian jungle thirty years after the end of the Second World War. The genesis for the story comes from the historical disappearance of Hitler's body after his suicide as well as the apprehension, trial and execution of Adolf Eichmann. Now we know that Stalin had Hitler's remains brought to the Soviet Union to prove that the madman was indeed dead, but the idea of holding Hitler accountable for his sins is certainly compelling. While this book does not provide a formal trial, it does raise some fascinating questions.
There are a pair of chapters in Steiner's book that stand out from the mere mechanics of capturing Hitler. In the first the question on the table is what would you do with Hitler once you had him in custody? Here is a man responsible for the deaths of millions, who remains in our minds the greatest mass murderer of the past century no matter what truths come to us about Stalih's purges. How do you extract judgment? Without access to the hellish inferno of Dante's imagination, what punishment could ever hope to provide closure? The fact that a satisfactory answer cannot be found does not detract from the merit of the line of inquiry.
The second important chapter is the last, where Hitler is allowed to speak. The value of this chapter is that it gets beyond the memory of history to the heart of the evil. There is a fatal tendency in the modern world to equate Fascism with Hitler and the Nazis, which means anti-semitism and the Holocaust. The common folk on the street today would point to skinheads as being fascists. But Fascism is a dynamic built upon the Struggle for Order, a world in which the ends justify means that a democratic populace should scorn. Ultimately Steiner speaks to the ironic level on which Hitler achieved a victory of sorts, having cast the world in the image of his own ideology. Certainly the Cold War, which was still in bloom when Steiner wrote this book, is an example of the fascist ideology, where the demands of "national security" becomes a justification for blind obedience.
Reading these two chapters is well worth reading the entire volume, which is but an evening's read. Certainly you can give over one evening of your life to consider the issues raised by "The Portage to San Cristobal of A.H." and come to terms with them on your own. Hitler has become a caricature and while it is difficult to see him for what he truly was, this book definitely looks in the right direction.
Product Description
The re-writing of history is as old as history itself.
In 1946, it was a "proven fact" that Nazis made human soap.
This "fact" has since become, apparently, mere "rumor".
The forensically untested "rumor", of Soviet origin, was for many years in the Peace Palace of The Hague. Peace Palace officials eagerly showed it to trustfull visitors for many years telling them it was authentic; but never apparently answered letters from inquisitive persons asking if it was ever tested. This "human soap" has since been quietly removed from the story line.
In 1943, it was "rumor" that Nazis were steaming, frying, poaching, parbroiling, electrocuting, vacuuming, and gassing Jews. By 1946, the "gassings had become "fact", while the steaming, frying, poaching, parbroiling, electrocutions and vacuumings remained mere "rumor", in spite of the fact that Pohl was covicted of "steamings" (and hung) in the Fourth Nuremberg Trial.
The "evidence" that Nazis "gassed" Jews is qualitatively no better than the "evidence" that they steamed, fried, poached, parbroiled, electrocuted, or vacuumed them. Thus, it is legitimate to call this "evidence" into question.
This book contains, not a re-writing of history, but a simple guide to historical material which has been forgotten. The 312,000 notarized defense affidavits presented at the First Nuremberg Trial have been forgotten, while the 8 or 9 prosecution affidavits which "rebutted" them are remembered.
This book contains a great many references to page numbers. They are not there to confuse, impress, or intimidate the reader, or to prove the truth of the matter stated, but to help interested people find things.
Whether the statements of the defense are more credible than the human soap, socks and hamburgers of the prosecution, is for the reader to decide.
Average customer rating:
- Not As Good As I Expected
- Whatever happened to the old Iron Eagle?
- Hitler is alive and is on trial before the entire world!
|
The Trial of Adolf Hitler
Philippe Van Rjndt
Manufacturer: Summit Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
ASIN: 0671400282 |
Customer Reviews:
Not As Good As I Expected.......2003-04-30
The 'Trial of Adolph Hitler' sounds like a fascinating concept for a novel, and that's why I bought it. Although the writing was fair, I feel the story could have been researched & written much more thorough. It seemed to me the novel was written in spurts, because some parts seemed very suspenseful and fluid, yet others seemed like they were added to fill gaps. I got the impression the author tried to hurry and finish the story. It could have been a much better novel had the author spent more time on developing the character of the 80 year-old Hitler. For the most part, the character seemed like the stereotyped, one-dimensional dictator you see in 1940s cartoons; but a few short times, his persona seemed to take over. I would like to have seen more of that character. The first part of the novel seemed more detailed and well written; then there was a short trial, and then it ended. No big surprises. I was hoping Hitler's defense would bring up Stalin's atrocities, the US support of Castro and the Vietnam "Conflict"; I kept hoping for a 'message' but there was none. Still, a fair read. I learned a few things about Germany I didn't know. However, the trial seemed phony & the defense would have objected to the prosecutor selecting the judges. Just didn't seem realistic.
Whatever happened to the old Iron Eagle?.......2000-05-26
This book is good for just about anybody, it came through as an ideal ending for one of the most popular world war two "what if's?" in history, "What if Hitler survived, and turned himself in?" you won't be able to put it aside, the ending will boggle you completely. So, what really DID happen in the bunker?
Hitler is alive and is on trial before the entire world!.......1999-12-21
Adolf Hitler survived the war and stays in hiding for years. He quietly builds the foundation for the fourth Reich, his final act? To appear before the world and stand trial for his actions. The novel was very realistic, and with the same thoughtful insight that went into stories such as "Inherit the Wind". The Fuehrer's defense was very intelligently presented. This book really makes you approach the events of the Nazi era with a different perspective.
Average customer rating:
|
Hitler's Soldier in the U.S. Army: An Unlikely Memoir of World War II (Alabama Fire Ant)
Werner H. Von Rosenstiel
Manufacturer: Fire Ant Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Military & Spies
| Professionals & Academics
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Military
| Leaders & Notable People
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| United States
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| World War II
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Personal Narratives
| World War II
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Home Front
| World War II
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Germany
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0817352880 |
Customer Reviews:
Impressions of top Nazis.......2003-04-04
This book was written by a US army doctor who was at the Nuremberg Trials and consequently came into contact with the Nazis there who awaited justice. His book proports to give away secrets of these infamous men but for the most part it only gives impressions that the author and other staff had. He does make a compelling case that Hitler had Parkinson's Disease but his claim that this is what caused Hitler's infamous blunders of WWII (such as invading the USSR) is highly debatable at best. The book's true value (and the reason I gave it 3 stars) lies in the photos of the massive collection of Nazi artifacts the author gathered. From Hitler's darned socks to Ribbentrop's medals, any WWII buff or collector will be impressed with Mr. Lattimer's collection.
In conclusion, if you want to see photos of items that once belonged to top Nazis like napkins Hitler used, then pick up this book. If you want an in-depth analysis of the infamous Nazi leadership and the secrets they had, this isn't the book for you.
Dr Lattimers wishful thinking.......1999-12-26
This book, supposedly adding something to our knowledge of the leaders of Nazi Germany, in fact adds nothing at all. The information on Hitlers Parkinsons Disease is already well known to historians. Dr Lattimer also maintains that Hitler was informed that he was suffering from this disease at about the time of the fall of Dunkirk and that it thus precipipated his decision not to invade England and to invade Russia instead because he had been told that he had only five years to live. This is pure conjecture. No evidence is offered for this view. Even more fanciful arguments are offered by Dr. Lattimer about Goering's possible role as a successor to Hitler and the outcome of that eventuality. He also offers, in appendix one, an account of Lindberghs examination of German air an missile technology before an after the war. This entirely gratuitous appendix is simply a vehicle for Dr. Lattimer to let us know that he knew Lindbergh. In fact the whole book is simply a collection of "I was there" recollections and highly speculative pronouncements on the possible course of the war without any historical merit whatsover.
Books:
- Outrageous Misconduct
- Outrageous Misconduct
- Patent Strategy: For Researchers and Research Managers
- Patents, Copyrights & Trademarks for Dummies
- Practical Real Estate Law (The West Legal Studies Series)
- Professional Practice for Interior Designers, 3rd Edition
- Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool
- Public Administration: Understanding Management, Politics, and Law in the Public Sector
- Public School Law: Teacher's and Student's Rights, Fifth Edition
- Quicken Willmaker Plus 2007 Edition: Estate Planning Essentials (Book with CD-ROM)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- History: Fiction or Science
- Exile's Return
- A Functional Biology of Nematodes
- Art in China
- Botanical Illustration Course: With the Eden Project
- Cocktails In Tahiti
- BEGINNER'S GUIDE TO GERMAN SHEPHERDS
- Photography: A Critical Introduction
- Architecture of Zaha Hadid in Photographs by Helene Binet
- A Short History of the Wolf in Britain
Death Is Lighter Than a Feather
MacArthur's War: A Novel of the Invasion of Japan
Final Impact (The Axis of Time Trilogy, Book 3)
The Big One
In at the Death (Settling Accounts, Book 4)
