Cordon Sanitaire

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

Are some books so dangerous that they can only be published in annotated form?

[Primula Baggins]

This is in Germany. That book has been in print unannotated, in the United States at least, for decades. What's your point? (Your real point.)

[JewelSong]

I feel like I came into the middle of a conversation here. I have no idea what this thread is about. GbG, maybe you could expand/expound?

[nerdanel]

Exactly. I am happy to discuss, but GBG, you have to put forward a credible, thought-out argument of your own for people to consider and respond. In other words, you can't stand on the sidelines, toss a ball into the crowd, and expect us to all run around and start playing basketball while you stand on the sidelines and watch. Get in the game and make your own arguments, or not, but stop starting one-sentence question-based threads without any commentary of your own.

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

Exactly. I am happy to discuss, but GBG, you have to put forward a credible, thought-out argument of your own for people to consider and respond. In other words, you can't stand on the sidelines, toss a ball into the crowd, and expect us to all run around and start playing basketball while you stand on the sidelines and watch. Get in the game and make your own arguments, or not, but stop starting one-sentence question-based threads without any commentary of your own.

I must confess I am disappointed by this response. I thought there was ample meat for teeth to chew, and that there was no requirement for a "spoon-fed" argument. Knowing that there are a number of writers here, the concept of annotation would, I thought, intrigue those writers. And others...
I am, of course, aware that Mein Kampf is published without annotation, in many countries, and it was with that in mind that I felt this specific German response deserved analysis. Why do the words of Hitler carry such danger that they need a commentary? Are Germans particularly vulnerable to indoctrination? Should Ayn Rand be so annotated? Or Lenin? Marquis de Sade? Swift? Joseph Heller? Machiavelli? Who should be annotated, and who should annotate?
OK, a one line topic is unwelcome. A pity. I had hoped for spontaneity. Instead I received Prim's arch comment. Real point? I guess you should tell me...

[River]

Wouldn't most of those questions would be best directed at some actual Germans? It being their country and all?

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

Wouldn't most of those questions would be best directed at some actual Germans? It being their country and all?

Censorship, propaganda and indoctrination transcend national boundaries. Don't they?

[yovargas]

If you want to discuss "censorship, propaganda and indoctrination" that "transcends national boundaries", you should perhaps bring up some since this case doesn't seem to qualify much.

[River]

Yeah, but it's the Germans annotating their books. And, bluntly, annotations are a step up from bans or redactions. You can ignore or disagree with an annotation.

Social experiments performed since WWII have demonstrated that the darkness the Nazis tapped into in the Germans exists across mankind. It's also been shown that the best defense against propaganda is awareness of it. In light of this, I'm not sure what the Germans are so afraid of. It's for them to explain themselves.

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

If you want to discuss "censorship, propaganda and indoctrination" that "transcends national boundaries", you should perhaps bring up some since this case doesn't seem to qualify much.

Define "much"...
If there is no recourse to "censor", "propagandize" or "indoctrinate", why have recourse to annotation?

[Alatar]

I'm confused. Is the Annotated Hobbit censorship, propaganda or indoctrination?

[axordil]

Annotation is indoctrination, so the last.

Seriously, one can make an argument in that direction. Adding any sort of gloss is a step towards telling the reader what the "correct" interpretation of a text is. Only offering an annotated version is forcing a interpretation.

I'm strangely less upset about this happening to Mein Kampf than I would be The Hobbit.

[Pearly Di]

I'm confused. Is the Annotated Hobbit censorship, propaganda or indoctrination?

That question wins the thread, IMO.

I'm strangely less upset about this happening to Mein Kampf than I would be The Hobbit.

[JewelSong]

I'm confused, too (still) since I have absolutely no idea what GbG is talking about. Is "Cordon Sanitaire" the name of a book? A book that has been annotated? A German book? I don't even know what to look for in order to become more informed. I feel like I must have missed an explanatory post or something, because other people seem to know what this thread is about. If there is a news story about this (whatever it is) a link to the story would have been helpful to those of us (or maybe only me?) who haven't been informed.

A one line topic is unwelcome because it doesn't frame a discussion.

I had hoped for spontaneity.

Well, here's some spontaneity for you: WHAT THE H*** IS THIS THREAD ABOUT??

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

I'm confused, too (still) since I have absolutely no idea what GbG is talking about. Is "Cordon Sanitaire" the name of a book? A book that has been annotated? A German book? I don't even know what to look for in order to become more informed. I feel like I must have missed an explanatory post or something, because other people seem to know what this thread is about. If there is a news story about this (whatever it is) a link to the story would have been helpful to those of us (or maybe only me?) who haven't been informed.

A one line topic is unwelcome because it doesn't frame a discussion.

I had hoped for spontaneity.

Well, here's some spontaneity for you: WHAT THE H*** IS THIS THREAD ABOUT??

JS, there's a link in the first post, although I must admit, I find the hypertext highlight a touch difficult to see...

Mein Kampf has been banned in Germany for many years. It is now to be published there, but only in annotated form. This distinguishes it from the "Annotated Hobbit", which (as I'm sure people are aware) can also be bought in a non-annotated version. I do like Alatar's comment, though!

[axordil]

In answer to the original question, in some very few specific cases and contexts, yes. I can't think of a book in the American context I'd require this of, mind you. Our issues have not been quite so centered around a single historical figure or his oeuvre.

[JewelSong]

Well, Germany can do what it wants with the book.

And if, as was stated, the copyright expires in 3 years anyway, the issue will become moot.

[vison]

Whatever else it is, it's boring, badly written, largely incomprehensible to an English reader reading what could have been a crappy translation. Most of what I remember (read it many years ago) I recall as truly being the tedious ravings of a more or less loony guy. A mish mash of various kinds of crap.

I find it hard to imagine anyone being seduced by it. It is pretty dumb.

Dumb being a technical term for Stupid.

[Nin]

I think I am the only German on this board, so I also think that the call is on me. (corrected, Lhaewin is German too)

First, let me state, that I was perfectly alright with the fact of "Mein Kampf" being totally forbidden, at least in Germany. I rather struggle with the fact that it will be published, even with annotations. That book is an incitation to hatred and calls more or less directly for murder. It is dangerous - and it is also a very bad book - even in the original version.

For me, after becoming a teacher it would always have been possible to get a teacher's copy from the constitutional pedagogical service. I have read large parts, and did not feel like any need to read more of it. Also, for long years, there was the copy which my grand-parents had owned in my parent's library - so an real Nazi relique... I could have read that one.

Now, why do I think that it was good to forbide that book: first in the historical context. When the decision was taken, right after the war, most Germans still owned or could own a copy aof "Mein Kampf". There was one in almost every house, young couples got it at their weddings, children at school... In huge parts of Germany, there was no serious denazification. Often, people who had been party-members could keep their jobs. It was huge taboo - I have no longer lived that situation - but Matthias has. Third Reich was not in the school programs. You did not talk about it - that only changed after the student riots of 1968 all over Europe. If ever you decide to read "Mein Kampf" you have to consider the historical context: on the basis of the ideas written in that book, millions of innocent people were murdered. You cannot only read it like a book and forget about the victims. As long as the subject was a taboo, giving that book out without any historical explanation would have been like recalling for murder.

Now, once the subject was more openly discussed - sometimes to the point of being obsessive - Germany was still divided. The eastern part of the country never admitted the heritage of nazism and the responsibility. The consequences of that war were still every day present in German life at the very least until 1989. You could not act like Germany being a country like any other. I have already stated my belief in collective guilt -and for me also the later generations with that guilt comes collective responsability. This means that you cannot treat nazis like any other time in history when you are German. This also meant for me as a teenager for years that every person above a certain age had been a potential murderer.

Those words in that book were not only words. They explain why it is right and moral to kill millions of persons. In "Mein Kampf" Hitler speaks about he necessary elemination of the Jewish race - no, he does not give detailled plan for the camps and the holocaust. But, he legitimates those murders by his racial theory. I don't think those words can stand as such, without at least a mentionning that they are utterly without any scientific foundation, despite their claim.

I remember when I saw Schindler's List. (and I cried so hard, I missed a part of the movie). There is a scene when the women are counted (eins, zwei, drei...). I watched it and wondered: how can we still count in this language? How can we still use words which could send a person to death? I felt the same when I saw German words written in Auschwitz. There are words in German which you can no longer use like before. And all the words of "Mein Kampf" are among those. By all editions in the world, you cannot make it a simple book again. And maybe for others, those words did not become reasons to kill. But for the Germans, they did. On behalf of those ideas, those words, millions had to die. They have no value whatsoever, except to serve for memory. And for this, it is utterly unneccessary to read the book entirely. And it is a lot better, if already you have to read it, to get comments and explanations. In German schoolbooks, you have parts of "Mein Kampf". That is enough.

I try to reformulate some ideas on free speech later. I need some time for that.

I am sorry if my explanations are not very clear, it is a very difficult subject.

[Primula Baggins]

It is difficult, and thank you for tackling it. Your perspective is illuminating.