In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:
itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/9879
Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.
Close
Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
hmkaufmann 02/20/2009 10:06 PM Report
As many, I am sure, I was troubled leaving the movie house, and I am still troubled, maybe even more so, after this discussion. My poblem is with the question: Why did Hannah's (former?) friend, sitting at the trial and in discussion with his professor, not come forth revealing Hannah's illiteracy? To protect her from embarrassment? Hard to believe. How about the ethical issue of letting the other female perpetrators getting away with the mild sentence by blaming Hannah for having written and signed the extermination order, when there was absolutely no way that she could have done so. Were not the pen and note pad, lying untouched in front of Hannah, clear indication that something crucial was missing? The more I think about it, the more I am troubled by having yet another injustice still being committed and tolerated. As the Romans would have asked "cui bono?"
benandres1 02/03/2009 05:17 PM Report
In the novel of the movie, some of the suggested reading is Hannah Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem. Now that I learn about that philosophy and criticism work, the entire movie seems based on the exact same circumstances. In the book Arendt critiques Eichmann, who also is hired to choose which people must die, and demonstrated who anyone is capable of making those decisions mindlessly. 'The banality of evil,' she says. It seems ironic then that Winslet's character shares the same name, as if the writer Schlink says that, if evil is so everyday, even Hannah the philosopher could have done the same things.
doodahdaze 12/31/2008 11:11 AM Report
Am I the first to notice?
That the name, "Professor Schlink", rymes with,
"Coronal Klink"?...
Perhaps there is some connection here?.
Yes. Perhaps we'll have the gestapo take a closer look at this. Yes.
mabraham 12/31/2008 07:01 AM Report
REMant, your understanding of Prof Schlink's novel and of this conversation is so superficial that it is embarrassing to even read you.
You didn't even get that the topic is the struggle, for the post war German generation, to cope with what the generation of their parents did, or let happen, during the IIIrd Reich.
He doesn't try to justify, even less pardon, but tries to understand and in the process had realized that he may have behaved the same way.
In other wards, your comment is completely besides the point.
fgrod 12/26/2008 09:42 PM Report
Amazing choice of character for someone like Kate with her range of emotional fireworks she can throw out as an actress. So much is left up to the viewer as far yet another view of why of the halocaust. She seemed without remorse, a shell of a human after the war, the kid reconnected her with the living, maybe with the guilt, with the terror of the past. Who knows but it was yet a brilliant and unselfish performance by Kate. The movie was rushed by the producers I had heard. Kate never ceases to amaze - a director's dream girl.
kneegrowsrus 12/26/2008 04:44 AM Report
Look what these hollywood whores have done to the poor kid. He could have been a lawyer or doctor. Instead they have turned him into a toy in their relentless pursuit of liberal indoctrination. A similar statement can probably be made with regards to what they have done to with their Holocaust movies ad nauseum. Apparently, they've created a society of Germans who suffer a post-Nazi guilt complex, by having been brainwashed to 'never forget' what their grandparents might have had something to do with. The saddest part is, the more these Reds try to 'change' things for the better, the more of a disaster they create. No need to pass judgement on my word just yet. 4 years time will reveal the truth.
kneegrowsrus 12/26/2008 04:44 AM Report
Look what these hollywood whores have done to the poor kid. He could have been a lawyer or doctor. Instead they have turned him into a toy in their relentless pursuit of liberal indoctrination. A similar statement can probably be made with regards to what they have done to with their Holocaust movies ad nauseum. Apparently, they've created a society of Germans who suffer a post-Nazi guilt complex, by having been brainwashed to 'never forget' what their grandparents might have had something to do with. The saddest part is, the more these Reds try to 'change' things for the better, the more of a disaster they create. No need to pass judgement on my word just yet. 4 years time will reveal the truth.
mabraham 12/25/2008 12:28 PM Report
Interesting, but I would have preferred an hour of Bernhard Schlink and 25 minutes about the movie than the other way around.