Today is the 70th anniversary of the German book-burning in 1933. It was described in the Süddeutshe Zeitung today so I thought I’d give you a little summary of what happened.
The book burning was a climax in political events after the Nationalsozialisten assumed power in January 1933. It was organized not by the government but by the German Student Body with much dedication and organizational skill, which is why it can be seen as an action that came from below rather than from above.
It began with the plundering of libraries throughout Germany starting in the middle of April, and the hanging up of posters that contained the „12 theses against the ungerman spirit“. On the evening of May 10th in the centers of university cities throughout Germany (earlier or later in some locations), the thousands of books that had been confiscated or brought forward by citizens who had been encouraged to deliver „un-German“ material were thrown into the flames, often accompanied by „Fire sayings“, in which individual authors were named and the reason why their work was being burned was stated. In Berlin alone, some 30000 books were destroyed. Some of the more famous authors were Karl Marx, Heinrich Heine, Sigmund Freud, Thomas Mann, Heinrich Mann, Erich Maria Remarque, Bertolt Brecht, Erich Kästner, Kurt Tucholsky, Carl von Ossietzky und Alfred Kerr.
One aspect of the action was the blacklisting of books and authors (after one year, the black lists held over 3000 forbidden books) and the printing in the daily press of the names of authors that were banned. Around the same time, Jewish university instructors were fired, terror was mounted against worker parties and unions, the artists and authors were banned from the Prussian Academy of the Arts. The action was generally met with indifference by the German people. Many authors went into exile or were exiled.
The American Library Association has a page on which it has collected examples of book burning or destruction for ideological reasons in the last centuries, the earliest example being 213 B.C. during the Qin dynasty in China, the latest being in this century.
I suppose all participants of this forum are lover of words and assume therefore you are all lovers of books too. With that in mind, it is not a great detective feat that you all detest burnings of books. However (of course there in an "however", otherwise this would be pointless), I have heard, but I have not been able to verify it, that the China comes from the name Qin. Annother reason emperor Shi started the book burning was that he wanted history shoul start from his reign and in a manner of speaking, he succeeded.
Please note that the Chinese call their own country the Middle Kingdoom or the Midland or the Mid-country or something meaning that their country is in the center of earth and all the others outbacks. A kind of egocentric manifestation, don´t you think?
I’m sure you’re right, Iterman. What I personally regard as worse than the actual burning of paper is the very thought that ideas can be killed by force.
Events in Germany from 1933-1945 should teach us the vicious nature of all forms of intolerance and the dire consequences of looking the other way.
I lived in Germany for a few years in the early 70s and met many people who were at that time in their 50s and older. Strangely, not one single Nazi. They’d all been busy doing other things, I suppose.
Returning to our own era, there are several disturbing tendencies to be observed around the world, both among those in power and among those who merely observe.
I suppose the point is, when you see something awful happening, or smell burning paper, at least holler.
- PW
who believes people are gradually getting uglier
I watch Farenheit 451 whenever it’s rerun on TV. It always makes me feel the same thing: an intense desire to become a book, just in case. The conundrum is, what book would I be? There are so many I consider to have fundamentally changed my viewpoint, interests, life. "Magister Ludi" by Hesse? "On the Road" by Kerouac? "The Rainbow" by Lawrence?
If you all had to become a book to save it, what would you choose, or could you choose?
[quote author=stickler link=board=omni;num=1052603199;start=0#5 date=05/12/03 at 16:07:07]If you all had to become a book to save it, what would you choose, or could you choose?
Rushdie wrote this slim volume as a response to the fatwa issued against him when he published The Satanic Verses. Presented as a children’s book, it’s a clever and beautifully written allegory about the importance of freedom of expression.
[quote author=stickler link=board=omni;num=1052603199;start=0#5 date=05/12/03 at 16:07:07]I watch Farenheit 451 whenever it’s rerun on TV.
AAAAAACK! That is an adaptation up with which I shall not put. I loved the book so much, but the movie… took liberties. Often movie adaptations seem to be like a form of book burning…
By coincidence, I would be the book of Ecclesiastes. Good stuff. Really, what more can be said than what’s already been said? It’s the sort of wisdom where I completely believe both it and its direct opposite at different times and equally as much.
[quote author=KatyBr link=board=omni;num=1052603199;start=0#8 date=05/12/03 at 21:50:53]I like Ecclesiastes also, but probably for different reasons, imagine That being made into a movie? Were you by any chance referring to SOS, instead?
*Runs and screams like madman, at the thought of a movie adaptation of the Teacher’s words*
No, Ecclesiastes, there is nothing new under the sun. At least, I HOPE there isn’t a new Ecclesiastes: The Movie.
This could very easily become a thread of its own. In general, I loathe movies made from books. It’s an entirely different medium, similar to 30-second TV spots made from great poetry. Surely there are scriptwriters enough to keep the movie industry in material. So WHY do we have to suffer through awful movies such as (to pick a couple at random) Slaughterhouse 5 or One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest? Shame.
[Special note to Hollywood producers who might visit this Agora: stop it, please.]
And don’t get me started on the subject of Winnie the Pooh. Disney ought to be dug up and shot.
[quote author=Silver Han link=board=omni;num=1052603199;start=0#7 date=05/12/03 at 18:01:45]
AAAAAACK! That is an adaptation up with which I shall not put.
Well, I didn’t say it was high art; just good fun. I regard it as having nothing to do with the work on which it’s based and watch it like Logan’s Run for kitsch value. :)
I do agree that movie adaptations are seldom pleasing to those who love the books. "The Sheltering Sky" comes to mind as another egregious example.
[quote author=stickler link=board=omni;num=1052603199;start=0#5 date=05/12/03 at 16:07:07] . . .
If you all had to become a book to save it, what would you choose, or could you choose?
Oooooh! Hard choice! Too many good candidates!
The Oxford English Dictionary? One of the Mayan books destroyed by the Spanish missionaries? Newton’s Principia? Morrison and Boyd’s Organic Chemistry? Any one of a number of science fiction anthologies?
What books did Wells’ time traveller take with him?
[quote author=Palewriter link=board=omni;num=1052603199;start=0#10 date=05/12/03 at 23:24:12]This could very easily become a thread of its own. In general, I loathe movies made from books. It’s an entirely different medium, similar to 30-second TV spots made from great poetry. Surely there are scriptwriters enough to keep the movie industry in material. So WHY do we have to suffer through awful movies such as (to pick a couple at random) Slaughterhouse 5 or One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest? Shame.
Generally speaking, I agree with PW—I was very disappointed, e g, by the film version of Günther Grass’ amazing «Die Blechtrommel »—but Grass himself was said to be very pleased ! However, like most Swedes, I loved the film «One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest» (which played in Swedish cinemas for over a decade), but then, I’ve never had the opportunity to read the book. And one film version that I preferred to the original book was «Sophie’s Choice», which may have been partly due to the fact that I saw the film long before reading the book and that the former therefore had become for me the canonical version.
I also agree about Disney, who has distorted and destroyed so many wonderful children’s tales («Beauty and the Beast» being one I especially remember, in which Disney egregiously introduces a young fool of a rival to the Beast for Beauty’s hand, thereby obfuscating the whole point of the story). But I must admit, whenever I hear «Le sacre du printemps», I see Stockowski on the podium, Mickey trying to control the run-away broom, and the hippopotami dancing. As the twig is bent….
But I must admit, whenever I hear «Le sacre du printemps», I see Stockowski on the podium, Mickey trying to control the run-away broom, and the hippopotami dancing.
Many of us got our first exposure to serious music in cartoons. Wagner’s Ring always brings images of Bugs and Elmer to me.
