MovieChat Forums > The Reader (2009) Discussion > Auschwitz

Auschwitz

posted 9 years ago by 2jdv
4 replies | jump to latest

I'm supposed to feel sorry for her because she's wistful and illiterate? She wasn't at Auschwitz because she had to be there, she was in essence a volunteer--she describes it as a "job" that she applied for. She knew people were being murdered there and could have quit at any time. Is this supposed to make me feel empathy for "German Guilt?" It doesn't. Obeying an order to murder civilians in wartime, not in the prosecution of that war but simply for the sake of killing, is bad enough, but volunteering to take part in mass murder does not make me feel warm and winsome. Just how far you can manipulate an audience is evident in the reaction to this thing. As someone has put it, this is "cultural pornography" and I guess the director wanted to emphasize that with the trenchant and salacious nudity. Her suicide is apparently the result of his rejection of her, and not at all for her own monstrosity.

[–] Robideaux16 9 years ago

Never, ever forget this: A crucial part of the Nazi Germany machine was people "just doing their jobs".

I say that not as an excuse for Hanna nor for actual events, but as a warning. Exceedingly heinous things have happened in the past because of this factor, and it's looking like it could very well happen again if we don't keep our eyes and brains switched on. It already happens daily, on a much smaller scale.

It's easier than you think to end up on this path, and/or the related one of "It's *them* they're after, not me and mine. I'm not getting involved." And when you do, guess what? You're no better than the wistful illiterate Auschwitz guard. Go ahead and rationalize away the mere thought, demonize me for saying it out loud, or whatever other knee-jerk reaction comes up for you; it won't change the outcome.

[–] raderpat 8 years ago

I agree. I feel no pity for any of these people. "Following Orders" just doesn't cut it for me. They all deserved to go to jail for the rest of these lives, not just Hanna (although she certainly deserved it too).

I don't think that Michael had any moral obligation to help Hanna. She treated him like garbage during their affair.

[–] Saltpeter 8 years ago

I agree w/all of the above, but I don't think audiences were expected to feel sorry for her. I think the filmmakers (and the original novelist) were just putting her story out there so readers & audiences could make their own judgments.

While watching the film, I certainly didn't feel sorry for her. But I was mesmerized by Kate's powerful performance. (And David's too. Good thing, since he was really the protagonist)

[–] jayruth 8 years ago

Exactly. It is the easiest thing in the world to sit in a different country, in a different time with different opportunities and say 'I wouldn't have done that'. I don't condone what they did but I don't also possess the surety that I would have had the bravery to do different. Yes, she applied for the job. Yes, she knew what happened at the camp. Yes, she could have made other choices. Yes, there were consequences for her for making the choice she did and I personally don't feel sorry for her for those consequences.

However, she had been offered a promotion at her previous employers and remember what happened when the train company tried to promote her? In both cases she could not accept the promotion because it would reveal that she cannot read. She moved away when the train company tried to promote her. She applied for another job when Siemens did. For all we know, there was just one other job in town that could do without having to read, at that time... be a guard. It was a legitimate, government endorsed job. Plenty of people then and now allow their governments (and media) to guide the morality of their country and of their own opinions. Wherever the OP lives, there will be examples there as there are all over.

Does that make it ok? Nope. But it does reveal further why she took the job. She needed a job. The camp was hiring. The government of the day told her it was ok to do what she did.

I don't think the film tried to make us feel sorry for her. I think they tried to show us that people who do evil things are not always powerful or deliberate in their intent. They showed a different side to the atrocities than just a powerful Nazi party member with an adoration of the party's ideals. This is important because if we believe that people who do evil things are always one type of person, we leave ourselves unable to recognise it when 'normal' people do evil (included when we may do it ourselves). It is also important to the story which attempted to investigate how Germany's younger generations could learn and live with the actions of their elders... fathers, grandfather, aunts, uncles. People they loved as family and friends and somehow had to reconcile that love with what they did (or with what they failed to do).

She was weak, allowed herself to be a victim of her circumstances and was unwilling or unable to think for herself. The world is full of people like that.