Did someone mention “Downfall”? Good opportunity to talk about why that movie is interesting – but problematic (and it’s not because of how Hitler is portrayed).

A few thoughts on “Downfall” and the context of Germany’s culture of remembrance in which it should be seen. 1/ https://twitter.com/whstancil/status/1278177912533905409

The movie is interesting as it’s very much emblematic of broader tendencies in post-Reunification Germany to emphasize German victimhood and suffering from the violence of the Second World War, de-contextualizing and detaching it from questions of guilt and complicity. 2/

“Downfall” is, at its core, an apologetic tale in which Hitler and a small clique of Nazi leaders around him are the bad guys while everyone else – even Albert Speer! – is depicted as either heroically resisting or simply being a victim of the regime. 3/

That’s not surprising, considering that the movie was inspired by a book by Joachim Fest –Inside Hitler's Bunker (in German: Der Untergang) – who was himself one of the most successful apologists for the German people and their role during the Third Reich. 4/

Fest’s tale of Hitler’s final days in the bunker was heavily influenced by his extensive conversations with Albert Speer – one of the leading figures of the regime and one of the major Nazi war criminals. But you wouldn’t get that impression from the movie, of course. 5/

Here’s a scene from “Downfall” in which Speer implores Hitler to “spare the people,” even confessing that he’s been sabotaging Hitler’s orders for months in order to safe civilians. Again, this is one of the major NS war criminals we’re looking at. 6/

The movie thus propagates the myth of an apolitical architect who happened to fall for the genius demagogue but was never involved in the mass-murder, and even actively worked to prevent further atrocities. That’s pure fiction – invented by Speer, popularized by Fest. 7/

And again, this goes well beyond Speer. While Speer’s depiction is easily identifiable as bogus, the overall message is more insidious: The poor German people, terrorized by a few evil men, victims of Nazism and total war. 8/

The apologetic message is partly what explained the film’s success in Germany – even among people who thought themselves immune to such tendencies. History teachers, for instance. When “Downfall” came out in 2004 I debated it with a group of high school teachers. 9/

I was studying history at university at the time and regularly met with a group of high school teachers to discuss new trends in historiography regarding the Third Reich – most of these teachers had studied in the 70s and wanted to keep up with the latest scholarship. 10/

All of them were fans of the movie, gushing about how they had arranged for their history classes to watch it in the theater, excited that the students had “learned so much” and that “Downfall” had made them care about history. 11/

They were quite taken aback, even offended, when I reacted less then enthused – after all, what’s wrong with getting these teenagers to care about German history? They all loved it! They were all moved by it! 12/

What moved them though, I asked? What did they learn? “They learned how evil Hitler was, condemning his own people to such a horrible fate.” Well, exactly. That’s the message, foregrounding German victimhood while sparing the audience any tough questions. 13/

Anyway, depicting Hitler as a human being instead of a metaphysical evil is not the problem. And as evidence of a longing for an interpretation of the Second World War in which “we were all victims,” the movie is really interesting. But good history it is not. /end