44 pages • 1 hour read
Hannah ArendtEichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1963A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Symbols & Motifs
Conscience
Eichmann’s conscience is on trial as much as the man himself. Rather than entering the proceedings with the assumption that any person who participated in the Holocaust must not have a conscience, Arendt traces and analyzes any evidence that speaks to Eichmann’s conscience, to both its existence and its quality. After having been transferred to an undesirable location as a salesman, Eichmann soon joins the Nazi Party, more, Arendt suggests, out of boredom than any particular motivation. Eichmann, at the point of joining the Party, had not even read Mein Kampf, the central text delineating the Party’s beliefs, which shows Eichmann sought out a job rather than an ideology. As he rises through the ranks, Eichmann claims that his conscience could only have been bad had he not performed his duties well. His one break with his definition of conscience occurs with his first mass expulsion assignment, when Eichmann sends Jews to a camp not yet prepared for executions rather than to one that is prepared. Arendt argues this is the first and last time Eichmann’s conscience ever aligned with any goodness.
Also, under Arendt’s scrutiny is the conscience of the masses. She spends ample time detailing how other countries participated either directly or indirectly in the events of the Holocaust, whose devastating willingness or caustic silence cost millions of Jews their lives.
Intent
Closely aligned with the debate about Eichmann’s conscience is his intent. Did he hate Jews? Is he a murderous monster, blood-thirsty and conniving? How could he commit these crimes without malice in his heart? Arendt criticizes the court, and all legal systems, for placing so much importance on such an improbable factor such as intent. Eichmann claims he did not hate Jews, he had Jews in his family, and he was no murderer as he could not even keep his composure in front of a gaping wound. No malice motivated Eichmann to organize the transportation of the Jews to the death camps; those were simply his orders, so he followed them. Arendt believes Eichmann’s claim that his intent was deeply rooted in his obedience, and adds that had his obedience been directed elsewhere, rather than as a member of the Nazi Party, perhaps lives could have been saved.
Omission
Arendt continuously provides additional information for readers that had not been presented in the court proceedings. Thus, she aims to complete the picture for her readers, leaving no stone unturned, so that they might have all they need to make their own judgments, both on Eichmann and the events of the war. Arendt ends her Epilogue with an address from the judges that was never part of the trial as it is completely a figment of Arendt’s imagination. She makes up what she needs to hear, what was never said in the original court proceedings, so that her inclusion of what is omitted not only provides information but perhaps a modicum of healing as well.
Related Titles
By Hannah Arendt
