I saw the film Hannah Arendt last August and recently rediscoved an email I wrote to a friend about my response to the film. Here it is:
The focus is on Arendt's analysis of the Eichmann trial, what became the book subtitled "The Banality of Evil," and the outrage her analysis triggered among those who saw her as defending Eichmann and/or blaming the victims. One source for the outrage was her criticism, in a small part of her analysis, of certain highly-placed Jews for their complicity in what happened. Beyond this, Arendt in fact extends the scope of responsibility for the holocaust to the entire technological world system.
I was interested in the portrayal of Arendt as a chain smoker with an almost film-noir style tough exterior and comportment. I found myself wondering what it might have been like had she been able to muster something different, i.e. without losing composure, to show tenderness and vulnerability in public.
There is something about the confident, hardened, arrogant intellectual that has become an unquestioned cliche, a model to emulate even — the brilliant defender of ideas, parrying all criticisms. For a woman intellectual in a world much more male-dominated than now, where respect must have been very hard-earned, emotional toughness and defensive alacrity were no doubt indispensable strengths. The dismissive stereotype of the emotional woman, culturally close at hand, was no doubt important to steer clear of. These norms no doubt made it nearly unthinkable for her to show publicly any grief or sadness in response to the rejection of her ideas, to the failure of her words, at least in some prominent quarters, to create connection and spontaneous transformation.
Yet I wanted to see her throw away her self-soothing cigarettes, drop her defenses and — while preserving all her conviction and rigor of thought — openly cry tears of sadness and speak her desire for a loving world.
Hannah Arendt (film) on Wikipedia
Review by J. Hoberman
Monday, May 5, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
