Hannah Arendt Reconsidered: On the Banal and the Evil in Her Holocaust Narrative

Author(s): Dan Diner and Rita Bashaw

Source: New German Critique, No. 71, Memories of Germany (Spring - Summer, 1997), pp.
177-190
Published by: New German Critique
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/488563 .
Accessed: 28/01/2015 06:44
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

New German Critique and Duke University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to New German Critique.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HannahArendtReconsidered:On theBanal
and theEvil inHer HolocaustNarrative
Dan Diner
Few workson the destruction
of EuropeanJewryhave elicitedas
muchcontroversial
discussionand fewhaveattracted
as muchattention
as HannahArendt'sEichmannin Jerusalem.Discussionof Hannah
Arendt'strialreporton the "banalityof evil" was so intensethatit
became a kind of icon in the discoursesurrounding
Auschwitzand
relatedcrimes.In short,theconceptof thebanalityof evil now constitutesa careerin itself,bothin therealmof publicdebateand in the
confinesof academicdisciplines.
It has becomea cipherforthehistorical and moralevaluationofNationalSocialistcrimesas well as forthe
inthemodemera.
ofsystematic
massmurder
possibility
is
not
withan empiricalexamination
The following
concerned
essay
of HannahArendt'stheseson NationalSocialismand the Holocaust.
aftertheappearanceof her
This examination
alreadytookplace shortly
At thattimeshewas faulted
forherirresponsible
of
trialreport.
handling
oftheevent.1
thefactsandforherslantedandpolarizing
interpretation
did notremainsimply
Discussionof Arendt'sEichmanninJerusalem
on a levelof polemicalrepartee.
Arendt'schallengeengendered
serious
1. Die Kontroverse.
HannahArendt,
Eichmann
inJerusalem
unddieJuden,ed. F.
A. Krummacher
workonHannahArendt,
see
(Munich:Nymphenburger,
1964).Forrecent
in Jerusalem,"
andJudging:
Eichmann
TheRelucSeylaBenhabib,"Thinking
Rereading
tantModernism
(ThousandOaks: Sage,1996) 173-84.Itshouldsuffice
ofHannahArendt
tonotejustoneofthemanyworksontheEichmann
book,JacobRobinson's1965treatise
withtheenigmatic
andstriking
titleAndtheCrookedShallBe MadeStraight,
whichis not
as wellas systematically
anyless polemicalin tone,thoughempirically
verysubstantial.
See JacobRobinson,
AndtheCrookedShallBe Made Straight:TheEichmannTrial,the
JewishCatastrophe,
andHannahArendt
's Narrative
(NewYork:Macmillan,1965).

177

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Hannah ArendtReconsidered

178

Herprovocative
and
researchand gaveriseto significant
investigations.
of Jewish
attacksagainstrepresentatives
in some respectsdefamatory
at thetimeof theHolocaust,her
and leadingJewishfigures
institutions
theJewish
rashaccusationsof Jewishcouncils- accusedof betraying
the
Nazis
led
not
to
with
and
of
collaborating
only an outcry
people
in Isabutalso culminated
withintheJewishcommunity
of indignation
of
the
Jewish
councils.2
iah Trunk'sground-breaking
Literature,
study
For instance,
too, tookup thisthemeof allegedJewishcollaboration.
Leslie EpsteinwrotethenovelKingoftheJewsand focusedon thefate
andits"oldestJew,"HaimRumkowski.
oftheLodz ghetto
HannahArendt'strialreporton thebanalityof evil scandalizedand
outand led to heatedconfrontations
polarizedtheJewishcommunity
whether
doubtful
Yet
it
remains
as
well.
Jewish
the
side
community
of AdolfEichtheses- suchas the characterization
herprovocative
ofJewofdeathandallegations
mannas a merelymediocrefunctionary
ish cooperationwiththe enemy- were enoughto unleashsuch an
consistedof
extremereactionon theirown. Clearly,thiscontroversy
morethanan agitateddebateoverfacts,historical
accuracy,and proper
on theEichmann
of
Arendt's
In
further
report
study
interpretation.fact,
text
thatit is an apocryphal
leads to theimpression
trialin Jerusalem
oftheJews.
whosescopegoesfarbeyondtheNationalSocialistmurder
and designof thistrialreporton thebanalityof
The entirestructure
This subtextharbors
evil suggesta subtextthatis highlyidiosyncratic.
and existential
withinit tracesof almostall relevant
questionsof postrendered
moreacute,of course,given
Jewishexistence,
emancipatory
Arendt's
the experienceof the Holocaust.Whenread in thismanner,
an everan encodedtextualbasisforwhatis in principle
workpresents
the
That
are
raised
Jewish
discourse.
is,
concerning
questions
recurring
within
and
and
universalism
between
Jewish
particularism
opposition
beyondJudaism,assimilationand Zionism,individualindependence
andcollectiveresponsibility.
trialreportcan be systematiThe underlying
issueof theEichmann
Eichmannin Jerusalem,
as follows:in the text-icon
cally formulated
- and,in effect,
of Jewish
dissimilar
altogether
opposing- narratives
are
articulated
and
and
Jewish
self-understanding
thereby
experience
2.

toHannahArendt's
Forscholars'reactions
councils,
chargesagainsttheJewish

see Isaiah Trunk,Judenrat:TheJewishCouncils in Eastern Europe UnderNazi Occupa-

tion(Lincoln:U ofNebraskaP, 1972).See also LucyS. Dawidowicz,TheHolocaustand

Harvard
theHistorians
UP, 1981)138.
(Cambridge:

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dan Diner

179

of
come intoconflictwitheach other.The concernis withnarratives
that
are
in
in thetwentieth
cloaked
theJewishcatastrophe
piccentury
andinterpretations.
tures,symbols,
metaphors,
in HanA systematic
look at thefundamental
problematic
presented
the supposition
of a dichotomous
nah Arendt'strialreportconfirms
in Arendt'sinterof thediscourse.This can be seen initially
structure
Nazis.
Is
the
trialreportconthe
crimes
committed
of
the
by
pretation
that
to theIsraelibill of indictment,
cernedwiththesecrimespursuant
it
matter
or
is
with
the
Jewish
concerned
the
crimes
is,
people,
against
the
HannahArendtadvocatesbroadening
of crimesagainsthumanity?
Nazi
of
of
fact.
Her
universalist
criminalstatement
interpretation
crimes,includingthoseagainstJews,reachesso farthatshe seeks to
thatalreadyencomand expandtheconceptof humanity
universalize
the
reference
to
Jewish
a
than
more
people.She reaches
specific
passes
shouldbe deliveredforcrimesagainst
theconclusionthatpunishment
notagainsthumanity
thehumanrace[Menschheit],
[Menschlichkeit].
crimes
as crimesagainstthehumanrace allows
Nazi
Characterizing
as
Arendt'suniversalist
critiqueto encompassthatwhichis procedural
far
law
court
of
is
an
believesthat international
Arendt
well.Although
by
Nazi
themannerof punishing
themoreappropriate
powerto determine
themechacrimes,she nevertheless
through
acceptsJewish
jurisdiction
reasons
moreforpractical
nismoftheIsraelicourt.She doesso, however,
Arendt's
universalist
to
Hannah
of principle.
thanas a matter
According
courtof law
of an international
and jurisdiction
outlook,the authority
of
the
crime.
with
the
nature
in
more
wouldhavebeenmuch
keeping
of Arendt'scan be adducedfromthisuniversalist
Further
arguments
the
suchas, forinstance,
deedsand perpetrators,
regarding
perspective
remarkthatwhilethecrimeshad indeedbeen committed
by Germans,
acts.The generalizsimilarcriminal
otherswerecapableof perpetrating
a crimiconstitutes
the
of
what
notion
in
involved
expanding
inggesture
as muchas itdoes to
to Arendt'sconceptoftotalitarianism
nal actrefers
thatevaluatespast occurrences
an historicalperspective
by situating
becomepossiblein the
themin such a way thatcertainconstellations
in thetrialreportto
This also appliesto herrepeatedtendency
future.
differences
betweenvictimsandperpetrators,
blurtheexistential
thereby
Arendt
withthe perpetrators.
drawingthe victimsintoa collaboration
councilsandJewish
notonlytheJewish
policebut,rather
groreproached
unitsinsidethedeathcamps.
commando
also thespecialJewish
tesquely,

Such examples make it clear thatquestionsof Jewishself-understanding

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

180

Hannah ArendtReconsidered

theserealorputative
arealwaysatworkwithin
empirical
problems.
is nottheonlybasis fromwhichHannah
This extreme
universalism
witha
Arendtargueshertrialreporton Eichmann.It is supplemented
notto mention
nationalism.
no less radicalJewishparticularism,
What
is peculiarhereis thatArendt'snationalism
sometimes
intersects
with
more extremestancesof Zionism,withoutbecomingidenticalwith
them.WhenassessingJewishactionsin lightof NationalSocialism,
Arendtassumes,in a way similarto Raul Hilberg,theexistenceof a
Jewishcollective,a Jewishpeople.Here,"Jewishpeofullylegitimate
problematic
categoryinsofaras it prople" refersto an onlyslightly
vides a non-binding
descriptionof various intensereligiousand
and affiliations.
culturalmemberships
However,whenthesubjectitself
is theJewishpeople,whenthethemeat handis one of collectivepolitior evenmilitary
of resistance
cal transactions,
action,thenthiscategory
For thisnecessarilysupposesthe existbecomeshighlyproblematic.
ence of a community
which,in lightof the
[Solidargemeinschaft],
of the different
Jewish
and culturalcomposition
national,linguistic,
relevant
in
as
an
insinuation
to
action.
Europe,
appears
directly
groups
of a
Duringthe war,HannahArendtadvocatedthe establishment
if onlyfora short
Jewisharmy.In theUnitedStatesshe cooperated,
Jewishgroupsthatwereevenat thatpointaccustime,withright-wing
of betrayal.
WhentheKastnerAffair
Jewish
and
Zionist
leadership
ing
in
in
stirredup emotions Israel the 1950s,HannahArendtarticulated
positionsthatcoincidedwiththoseof theextremeright.In hercovertheheroicqualitiesoftheJewtrial,shecelebrated
age oftheEichmann
ish resistancewithoutcriticaldistance,despitethe factthatshe had
question,"Why did you not
correctlydismissedthe presumptuous
revolt?"- withwhichchiefIsraeliprosecutor
GideonHausnerchalJewish
witnesses
the
trial
as
"cruel
andsilly."
lenged
during
HannahArendt'sassessment
of theHolocaustrevealsa deep schism.
On the one hand,she indulgesin an almostboundlessuniversalism,
and on the other,her arguments
are, to a large degree,markedby
nationalism.
How are we to understand
thistypeof contradiction?
The
answeris as simpleas it is complex:HannahArendt'sHolocaustnarrativecontainsa mostdisturbing
message,one in whichnationaland universalistradicalelementsmutually
reinforce
each other.The resultis
an apparentlysynthetic
of
Jewish
comconcept
self-understanding

prised,on the one hand,of the experienceof GermanJewryand the patternsof Jewishemancipationin the West, withthe individualas citizen

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dan Diner

181

of a community
in thecenter,
and,on theother,of a collective
standing
ofJewishexistence.
The issue,therefore,
is thatofa selfunderstanding
whichHannahArendtmade her own certainly
definition,
duringthe
war and thenevenmoreemphatically
in lightof theHolocaust.To be
of the"Jewish
sure,hersis nota fullydevelopedZionistunderstanding
it
still
influenced
but
is
and
informed
Zionism,
people,"
by
by aspects
of a Jewishconceptionof selfthatrelyprincipally
upon the experiandeastern
encesofJewsincentral
Europe.
It is HannahArendt'spessimism
aboveall whichis to blameforthe
easternEuropeanJewishself-understanding
adoptionof a specifically
and nationalnarrative,
a pessimismthatbearsuponherreflections
on
the promisesof universal,and consequently
humanrights.3
abstract,
Markedbytheexperience
ofpersecution
andtheHolocaust,Arendtreconciles herselfwitha Jewishpoliticalsubjectivity
throughconcepts
influenced
witha German-Jewby Zionism.This politicalphilosopher
ish background
acceptsthe idea of the existenceof a Jewishnation,
and the Jewishrightto a homeland.Upon closer examination,
her
important
speech,"Rightto have Rights,"becomes a universalistencodedmeditation
Arendtcan be
upontheJewishfate.In thisrespect,
identified
as a "Zionistby Reason"[ Vernunftszionistin],
a play on the
Reason"
createddurphrase,"Republicanby
[ Vernunftsrepublikaner],
in
Weimar
But
of
the
all
to the
Republic.
spite
ing
acknowledgments
"Zionism
Jewishpeople, this
relies
by reason"[Vernunftszionismus]
and therefore
institutional,
universalist,
republicanvalupon abstract,
or politythusappear,whichare
ues. The principlesof a community
based upondemosand notuponethnos.If one takesthebasis of Jewto be the distinction
betweendemos and ethnos,
ish self-conception
thenHannahArendt
facesseriousdifficulties
indeed.
thefactthatthewestern
Difficulties
arisethrough
conceptof an instidiffers
from
the
moreethnicselftutional,
polity
republican
significantly
image of the majorityof easternEuropeanJews.For east European
was to a largeextentnationally
markeddue to a
Jews,self-perception
collectivememory.
AftertheHolocaust,theeastEuropean
homogenous,
Jewishexperiencebecamethe virtualequivalentof an obligatory
and
Jewishnarrative.
This is also thepointof the
homogenizing
generalist
convertto
highlycryptic
messageGershomScholem,a German-Jewish
3. See thepowerfulsubchapter
in parttwo of Elementeund Urspriinge
totaler
"Die AporienderMenschenrechte,"
452f.
Heerschaft,

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

182

Hannah ArendtReconsidered

in a publicletter,
Zionism,deliveredwhenhe chargedHannahArendt,
of
In so doing,
witha lack ofAhavatIsrael,thatis, love Jewishness.4
he wishedto expressthatshe did notfeelobligatedto theJewishethnos, an assertionwithwhichArendtdid notdisagree.In herreplyto
herloyalty
to thevalueof indiScholem,Arendtrepeatedly
emphasized
and
and individual
vidualindependence
judgment rejectedall collective
Years before,KurtBlumenfeld,
her
claimsthatrelieduponancestry.5
In
had
such
matters
with
her.
Zionist
friend, alreadydisputed
paternal
which
treatisecriticizing
view of her definitive
Zionism,
appearedin
hadalso madeclearhowdistheMenorahJournalin 1946,Blumenfeld
he was thatHannahArendtdid not share
appointedand disillusioned
of German
thisleadingrepresentative
his nationalloyalties.In addition,
to
himselfforhavinginfluenced
Zionismreproached
Arendt,contrary
in thedirection
of a nationalJewishpositionand
herown inclinations,
as he and otherslike him disparagingly
away from"assimilation,"
individual
termed
emancipation.6
ofJewofthevarioushistorical
What,then,aretheeffects
presumptions
trialreport
on
ofHannahArendt's
fortherepresentation
ishemancipation
and
what
of historical
of evil?Whatnarrative
thebanality
emancipation
tell
arebrought
to bearhere?How doesArendt
structure
typeofnarrative
her
and
what
are
What
is
oftheJewish
thehistory
catastrophe?
standpoint
more
what
of perception?
herpatterns
Or,expressed
metaphorically, are
Hannah
Arendt's
of
andmemories
thatinform
thepositions
interpretation
Arendt's
notionofbanality,
whichwas met
of theHolocaust?
thehistory
within
theJewish
revealsa peroutbreaks
withsuchhysterical
community,
spectivethatcomesquiteclose to thatof thecollectiveGermanexperience. At firstglance, this is a highlyproblematicclaim. Some
inorder
arenecessary
tomakeitplausible.
considerations
methodological
that
historical
from
the
Proceeding
explanations,
interpreassumption
at understanding
are notto be regarded
as objective
tations,and efforts
sensebutshouldrather
be viewedwithout
approachesin thescientific
as
a
narrative
structure
meant
to
a collective
biased
exception
interpret
thiscategory
of collectivememory
thenholdsepistemological
memory,
4. Scholemand Arendt,"'Eichmannin Jerusalem'.
Ein Briefwechsel
zwischen
ScholemundHannahArendt,"
Encounter
Gershom
(Jan.1964):51-56.
5. ScholemandArendt,
55.
letter
6. KurtBlumenfeld
to MartinRosenbliith,
from17 Jan.1946,Im Kampfum
denZionismus,
eds.MiriamSambursky
andJochanan
Ginat,
BriefeausfinfJahrzehnten,
DeutscheVerlags-Anstalt,
1976) 197f.
(Stuttgart:

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dan Diner

183

It therefore
followsthathistory
and memmeaningforhistoriography.
instancesof narrated
memory.
"History"becomes
oryare notcontrary
reflexive
thatis, an arranged,
directedconstruction,
a methodologically
of
collective
memory.
expression
of theNationalSocialistera and
thepresentation
Whenconsidering
is conconnected
withit,thehistorian
the
mass
annihilation
particularly
theexperiences
In Germanmemory,
witha vexingphenomenon.
fronted
themeventsassociatedwithitmanifest
ofthiseraandtheincriminating
in a way that
To be moreprecise,theyreverberate
selves differently.
conflictswithJewishmemory.The historical
realityof the periodin
question becomes -

so it seems -

a matterof dissimilarperception,

in oppositedirections.
The
thatis, therespective
positionsare oriented
methsituated
mustkeepin mindsuchcomplexandobjectively
historian
theeventsintheirentirety.
whenreconstructing
odsofunderstanding
A certainphenomenon
becomeshighlyevidentwhenone considers
theconception
of eventsdisperses
of theperpetrators:
theperspective
to the
intomanifold
separateprocesses.Thiscan plausiblybe attributed
of policies of mass
associatedwiththe implementation
practicalities
If one disregards
themass killingsimmediately
carried
extermination.
of European
outduringtheHolocaust'sfirstphase,thenthedestruction
theresultoftheorganizedand imperbecomes,to a largeextent,
Jewry
Without
and industrial
of
a
bureaucratic
division
sonal
labor,
procedure.
entailsthatthoseactivelyinvolvedin
a doubt,thistypeof massmurder
in whichtheoverallpicture
itsimplementation
possessa consciousness
awarenessof specificindividual
of eventsas well as a corresponding
The awarenessof personal
guiltbecome disjointedand neutralized.
all
theconsequencesforlater
dissolved
with
and
is
responsibility guilt
of
the
crimes
and
by criminallaw thatthis
prosecution punishment
thattheindividso
disconnected
the
events
appear
implies.Furthermore,
in
the crime its totalitynecessarilyappear
ual pieces thatconstitute
as alienatedfromthecrime
of theperpetrator
banal.This phenomenon
is whatHannahArendthas in mindwhenshe statesthatthe horrors
and crimesexecutedby theNazis werebeyondguilt,thatNazi offenses
Nazi actionswere
had lost theircriminaland penal significance.7
the
and
the
effectiveness
of
both
validity
justicesystems.8
beyond
7. HannahArendt
andKarlJaspers,
(Munich:Piper,1993)90.
Briefwechsel
8. See Herbert
untertotalitarer
StudienzurnationJager,Verbrechen
Herrschaft:
Gewaltkriminalitdt
alsozialistischen
(Frankfurt/Main:
Suhrkamp,
1967).

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

184

Hannah ArendtReconsidered

All of thisis as convincing

as it is simple.However,theseviewsdo
of Nazi victims.On thecontrary,
notcoincidewiththeexperiences
the
- suchas thosecarriedoutby specialcomvictimsof directmassacres
ofadministrative
mandounits- as wellas thevictims
andindustrial
killthe
as
and
of
violent
as
a
cruel,
ingexperienced process dying
physically
For them,evil was not
experienced
realitythatcriesout foratonement.
themereresultof an administratively
structured
of banaliaccumulation
a psychologically
andphysically
ties,butrather
experienced
monstrosity.
Boththephenomena
of an implementation
thatdispersesintobanalities - accompaniedas it is by a seemingly
equallytrivialloss of an
- and thevicawarenessofwrongdoing
on thepartoftheperpetrators
tims' experience
of theexecutionof theseactionsas monstrous
represent conceptionsof historyand consequently
give rise to opposing
in thepresentation
of the"FinalSolution."The overarchperspectives
of
intoa dualism
appearsto have disintegrated
ing conception history
Bothtendencies
of perceptions,
intobanalityand monstrosity.
of perand
therefore
of
are
true
insofar
as
can
each
they
ception,
perspective,
refer
backtopureexperience.
traditions
The established
thehistoriography
oftheHoloconstituting
thisrivalry
betweenfunctionalists
and intentionalists.
Ulticaustreflect
effectsof bureaucratic
mately,the one emphasizesthe depersonalized
mechanismsand the consequentannulment
of individualguilt and
while
the
other
builds
a
more
or less ideologically
responsibility
upon
oriented
on a will to actionand thuson a thoroughly
readiness,
guilty,
criminalbehavior.The structure
of theseopposinghistoriographical
conceptionsbecomesevident.They followa juridicaldiscourse.The
one -

the functional-

pleads criminalnegligence,while the other-

- pleadsguilty.
theintentionalist
In his introduction
to thenew editionof HannahArendt'sreporton
the Eichmanntrial,Hans Mommsenelevatedthe discursiveconstruct
foran entiredirection
of
"banalityof evil" to a conceptualframework
- or as it is also called,the functional
research.9
The structural
of mass
school,Mommsensays,in theend refersto theunderstanding
extermination
thatArendt'sphraserepresents.
to
According him,Hannah Arendt'strialreporttherefore
of a milestone
represents
something
9. Mommsen'sprefaceto thenew Germaneditionof Arendt'sbook is entitled,
"HannahArendt
undderProzefgegenEichmann."
See Mommsen,
Eichmann
in
preface,

Jerusalem: ein Berichtvon der Banalitdtder Bosen, by Hannah Arendt(Munich: Piper,

1986) i-xxxvii.

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dan Diner

185

in the transition
froma perspectivethat has its historicalobject
and guiltto one that
anchoredin therealmof individual
responsibility
structures.
on depersonalized
concentrates
of a functionary
Withoutdoubt,AdolfEichmannwas theprototype
role in his
of death.His ideologicalconvictions
playeda subordinate
was also based onlyto a limiteddegreeon
actions.His anti-Semitism
Arendtsuccessfully
drawsa deeplyconvincing
innerconviction.
portraitof Eichmann- as a social engineer,as a meretechnicianof
forextermination.
deportation
of the accused,HannahArendtstroveto
Withthischaracterization
undo the depictionthatIsraeli chiefprosecutorHausnersoughtto
of Jewish
of thenarrative
Hausner'sframing
sketchforJewishhistory.
Hausner
since
as
but
to
Arendt
propaganda,
nothing
appeared
history
that
she
of
adheredto a nationalistic
rejected.The
interpretationhistory
for
Eichmanntrialwas to makethisinterpretation
obligatory Jews,but
Jewishhisevenmoreso fortheIsraelination.Thisnarrative
presented
of
and
and
an
unbroken
series
as
suffering persecution, set the
tory
of
Holocaustas its negativeapotheosis.For Hausner,thisexplanation
untilthemomentof thefoundathenegativecourseof Jewishhistory
tionof thestateof Israelseemedto requirethepersonof AdolfEichofevil.
mannas theembodiment
a highly
HannahArendtbelievedthatHausner'snarrative
presented
setherowninterpreand shetherefore
viewofJewishhistory,
distorted
is fragmented,
it is no less a
tationagainstit. WhileArendt'snarrative
narrative
thanthatoffered
by Hausner,
pointedand polemicalhistorical
Arendtsetsa typeof radicaluniversalism
heradversary.
againstHausone whichdeviatesfromhistoricalrealityjust as
ner's nationalism,
wouldhavebeenposAuschwitz
to Arendt'sversion,
much.According
The teneventhoughit was realizedonlyin Germany.
sible anywhere
at
with
a
universal
historical
to
contrast
possibility
reality
past
dency
the expenseof thepast underliesHannahArendt'sseemingly
enlightwhichdemandsthatthe evidenceof a
This tendency,
ened argument.
hurtsthe feelings
deconstructed,
necessarily
past realitybe repeatedly
conin thislight,one can reachthehistorical
ofthevictims.Considered
has morein commonwith
clusionthatArendt'sline of argumentation
thanit does withtheviewoftheperpetrators
theperspective
justifying
ofthevictims.
bysuffering,
point,marked
shouldnotgive
The abovereference
to Arendt'schoiceofperspective
linesofthe
to
the
old
front
theimpression
thatthepresent
adheres
essay

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

186

Hannah ArendtReconsidered

in orderto supportopponentsof the philosopher.

Eichmanncontroversy
This is by no means the case. Rather,these reflectionsare intendedto
even foundahistoricize,froman appropriatedistance,this significant,
with the mass crimes of
tional documentof a public coming-to-terms
National Socialism againstthe EuropeanJews.Especially today,such a
of the polemical intervention
Eichmannin Jerusalemhas
historicization
much to offer,and not only because of the advanced state of current
Holocaust research.The presentessay attemptsto contributeto the currentand increasingreadinessof the disciplineto investigatehistoryon
the basis of its underlying
narrativesthatpresenta conception
narratives,
the
historian's
inclinations
of historyinformed
and biases.
by
If all the above is applied to an examinationof Hannah Arendt's
polemical treatise,then the following picture arises. Arendt's trial
reporton the banalityof evil is the resultof an unusual intellectual
stance in the period afterthe Holocaust. Having emergedfromthe rich
soil of the values of the German-Jewish
emancipationexperience,Hannah Arendt's position is torn by innerconflictsbetween, on the one
hand, the demands for a reconciliation- bearingthe distincttraitsof
- with a completely new reality, and, on the
Vernunftszionismus
other,the high standardsof an idealistic,overdrawn,and strangelydogmaticJewishuniversalism.
Beyond the conflictof these two world views and self-conceptions
- the
which can be renderedcompatibleonly with greatdifficulty
textualanalysis.Two idiosyncratic
followingis made evidentby further
conditionsthatare situatedrelativelyindependentof one anotherreinforce each otherin the work of Arendt;they are pre-rationaland are
consistentwith her unusual stance regardingJews and the Holocaust.
One element is her German-Jewishbackgroundand its concomitant
storyof emancipation.Connectedto this is her instinctiverejectionof
the east European Jewishexperienceand its narrative,as well as the
rash acceptance withwhich Arendtadopted the differently
situatedand
idiosyncraticstances of personswho were close to her and who had a
different
storyto tell based on theirbackgroundsand memories.Arendt
seemed hardlycapable of extricating
herselffromthisattraction.l0
10.

ErnestGellnerdiscussesthisproblematic
in his reviewof ElisabethYoung-

Bruehl's biographyof Arendt,Hannah Arendt:For the Love of the World(New Haven

and London:Yale UP, 1982).See Gellner,"FromKbnigsberg

to Manhattan
(or Hannah,
orThyNeighbor's
andPolCulture,
Rahel,MartinandElfriede
Gemeinschaft),"
Identity,
itics(NewYork:Cambridge
UP, 1987)75-90.

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dan Diner

187

This lastargument
in particular
mustbe conducted
withutmostcaua
tion,to greatextentbecause the scandalousdepictionof Hannah
to MartinHeideggerhas lead to readingsthatmay
Arendt'srelationship
serveinappropriate
based uponthe claimof an intellectual
arguments
Thatis to say,allegations
based on HannahArendt's
electiveaffinity.
love-lifewill notbe pursuedhere.All themorereasonto pointto the
of Hannah Arendt,who, given her background,
her
circumstances
of
and
the
self
unusual
history,
complexconception
necessarily
highly
of various
has been made into a representative
tied to this history,
be calledherown.
viewsandopinionsthatcannotunequivocally
or evenhair-splitting,
It maystrikeone as overlyargumentative
but
in some places tracesof an outsideinfluenceon Hannah Arendt
somewhat
to thedevelopbecomenoticeablethatmayhavecontributed
Karl Jaspersbeginsa
mentof thebanalityof evil thesis.For instance,
letterdated13 December1963,by remarking
thata New York friend
of the Bliichershad told himthatthe termbanalityof evil could be
tracedback to her husband,Heinrich,who was consumedwithselfreproachbecause his wifenow had to face the consequencesforthe
finemesshe hadgotten
herinto.11
The extentof Bliicher'sinfluence
on HannahArendtshouldnotbe
and certainly
research.Evidenceof his
underestimated
requiresfurther
in Arendt'swork.This is
is striking
and personalinfluence
intellectual
structure
and interpretive
contentdeviespeciallytruewherenarrative
manner
fromtheusual Arendtian
of presentation,
that
ate significantly
breaksoccur.
is,whereobvioussystematic
of herwork,the
The mostcogentand,in termsof thesystematicity
influenceof Arendt'shusband,HeinrichBlticher,
mostconsequential
can be seen in the thirdpart of Elementsand Origins of Totalitarian-

on how muchshe owes to

ism.HannahArendtherselfhas commented
in thisportionof the book.
discussionswithherhusbandspecifically
on thebasisofconversabe understood
Thisinfluence
cannot,however,
and his
tionsonly.Rather,theimpactof HeinrichBliicher'sbiography
and influpoliticalexperiencereachdeeplyintothe work'sstructure
onthethemeoftotalitarian
enceArendt'sfundamental
statements
rule.
WhereasHannahArendtshowedan understanding
of thebasic differencebetweenconcentration
and deathcampsin herground-breaking
11. Jaspers
continues:
"I thinkitan excellent
idea,andhitsthemarkas a booktitle.
Forthistypeofevilis banal,notevilitself."
See Arendt
andJaspers,
578.
Briefwivechsel

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

188

Hannah ArendtReconsidered

and independently
authored
essay,"Social ScienceTechniquesand the
of
Concentration
to the
Camps,"12she blurredthisdistinction
Study
a
of
in
of
lack
differentiation
Elements.Whatever
the
systematic
point
discussionson questionsof NationalSocialismand Stalinismin the
as a
Bliichers'homemayhavebeen,therenegadestancethatBlticher,
held to in all likelihoodwas verydifferent
Germanex-Communist,
fromtheone generally
takenby a GermanJewsuchas Arendtwithan
that
outlook
was agnosticat best and who came froma
ideological
inclinedfamilybackground.
social democratically
For if one follows
it becomesapparenthow
the outlineof thethirdsectionof Elements,
of similarities
the conceptualization
and systematization
betweenthe
of Nazismand Stalinism
adhereto a real typeparticularly
phenomena
of Stalinism.
well suitedto thecharacteristics
However,its applicabilwith
to
is
limited
both
forms
of rule.The Nazi realrespect
ity equally
for
for
ethnic
Germans
far
less of a totalitarian
was,
instance,
ity
thanStalinismwas forSovietcitizens.On theotherhand,a
structure
existsin theNazis' nakedmurderof
significant
qualitativedifference
ofcamps.
personsvisa vistheSovietsystem
in Arendt'sEichTracesof theinfluence
are,at anyrate,apparent
mannbook.Even BlUcher'sstancetowardJewsqua Jewswas notfree
of resentment.
HannahArendt,
whowas quitereticent
whenit came to
herhusband'sremarks
on herorigins,mentioned
to Jaspersin a letter,
fullof respectand disguisedirony,thatBlticher's"opinionof theJewishpeopleis notalwaysthewayonewouldwishittobe."13
KarlJasper'sinfluence
on HannahArendt'sstancein hertrialreport
on thebanalityof evil is also palpable.More thana few of Arendt's
and interpretations
ofjusticeand moralprinciples
visa vis
explanations
themass crimesof NationalSocialismcan be tracedback to cautious
indications
to thecorrespondence,
it
by herteacher,
Jaspers.
According
was Karl Jasperswho repeatedly
the opinion- against
represented
- thatwhileIsraelmay
Arendt'sargumentatively
delayingresistance
holdEichmannin custody,
a courtofjusticewouldfinallysubordinate
theconcernoverEichmann
to a concernwiththejurisdiction
of human
to
in
the
end
Eichmann
did
he did
what
For,according Jaspers,
rights.
notagainsttheJews,"butratheragainsttheessenceof humanity."
An
Israeliexecution
of Eichmann
would"practically
trivialize"
Eichmann's
12.
13.

JewishSocial Studies(12 Jan.1950):49-65.

Arendt
andJaspers,
547.
Briefivechsel

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dan Diner

189

actions"inthemindsofthepeople"andwouldnotallowthemtobe propon the

As fortheidiosyncratic
inner-Jewish
animosities
erlyunderstood.14
in
of
no
inhibitions
Hannah
Arendt,
Jaspers
displayed
allowinghimpart
selfto be sweptalongby them.WhenArendtexpressedto Jaspersher
judgeson theone hand,and herown
highpraisefortheGerman-born
distastefor east EuropeanJewson the other(thesechiefly
resentful
GideonHausner,whomArendt
directedagainstIsraelichiefprosecutor
"one of thosewho does not
labeleda "typicalGalicianJew,"probably
was artificial,
The
hyperlegalistic
speakanylanguages. closingargument
crude
with
mistakes,disruptedby emotions"15),
Jaspersresponded
German
Jewswillwin."16
thethree
Hopefully
"Oppressive.
promptly:
on culturally
These and a numberof otherremarks
specificidiosyndo notin theleastlessentheintellectual
crasiesand resentments
quality,the sagacity,and the impressivejudgmentof Hannah Arendt.
it is disturbing
and to someextentopportunistic
when,in
Nevertheless,
on the Jewishand Israelistateof affairs,she
her letterscommenting
afterthe posttakes on a criticallanguagethatis clearlypatterned
to explain
NationalSocialistGermandiscourse.Thus,in herintention
her
on
of
Jews
in
the
theses
Eichmann
and
the
conduct
Holocaust
why
unleashedsuch a furorin theJewishpublic,ArendtstatesthateveryJewishcouncilors[Judenritler]
where"and above all in Israel,former
The factthatthedecisions
[occupied]highand top-levelpositions."17
Kastnersuitedherviewsmaystillbe
madeby Israelijudgesregarding
of thekindthatimpliedBen Gurionkidunderstandable.
Withremarks
the reparations
Eichmann
"because
paymentsto Israel
only
napped
for
on Germany
to
renewed
one
wished
exert
wereendingand
pressure
in Germanythat
Arendtechoed sentiments
continuedpayments,"18
withthebiography
of the
be reconciled
couldonlywithgreatdifficulty
authorofthe"AporiaofHumanRights."
docutrialis an important
HannahArendt'sreporton theEichmann
a
is
docuIn
it
Auschwitz.
mentof Jewishself-reflection
addition,
upon
mentof deep ambivalence.Throughan analysisof the personand
an entire
of GermanJewry,
of Eichmannin the destruction
function
that
a
of
Jewish
cosmos
opensup
conception is torn
self-conception
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

Arendt
andJaspers,
457f.
Briefwechsel
472.
Arendt
andJaspers,
Briefwiechsel
Arendt
andJaspers,
473.
Briefwechsel
Arendt
andJaspers,
546.
Briefwechsel
Arendt
andJaspers,
Briefwechsel
621f.

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

190

Hannah ArendtReconsidered

humanistic
horizonon theone hand,and
betweena radicaluniversalist,
the
both
resistances
on
of whichare validatedas
other,
particularist
the
The
well as intensified
by
catastrophe. questionsrelatedto these
Did theJewsbecomevictimsof theNazis qua
issues keep recurring:
Jews or qua humanbeings?Were the crimesof mass annihilation
crimesagainstthe Jewishpeople or were theyexecutedas crimes
as such?Was theexistential
difference
betweenperagainsthumankind
and victimsso blurredby Nazi deedsthatthecurrent
moral
petrators
linesofdemarcation
andcriminological
losetheirvalidity?
Whenconfronted
withstatements
thattookheruniversalism
literally
of hertrialreporton
and in so doingreliedupona literalinterpretation
as if by reflexto the argumentum
ad
Eichmann,Arendtwithdrew
a
that
to
based
on
the
determination
nationem, is,
position
particularist
is documented
in her 1964 corresponThis withdrawal
of narratives.
When Enzensberger's
book
dence withHans MagnusEnzensberger.
to
Politics and Crimeappeared,he wantedthe reveredphilosopher
reviewit withinthepages of theMerkur.HannahArendtdeclinedto
betweenthetworegarding
Arendt's
do so. The ensuingcorrespondence
inthatjournal.
refusalwas thenpublished
Hannah Arendthad takenparticularoffenseat one of Enzenswhichwould,in turn,becomecharacteristic
foran
berger'ssentences,
towardtheNationalSocialistpast:"Fascism
attitude
entiregeneration's
is notterrible
becausetheGermanspracticed
it,butbecauseit is possiIn reply,Arendtwroteto Enzensberger:
"If everyone
ble everywhere."
is againlostin thedisoris guilty,
thenno one is guilty.The particular
whenstatedby a Gerderof thegeneral.This is farmoreproblematic
man.Forthenit means:notourparents
butrather
causedthis
humanity
is
This
not
true."19
catastrophe.
simply
TranslatedbyRita Bashaw

19. Correspondence
betweenHannahArendtand Hans Magnus Enzensberger,
Merkur
(Apr.1965):80-85.

This content downloaded from 193.205.136.30 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:44:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions