Reading the first chapter of Ian Kershaw's "Hitler", I was constantly fascinated by the great impact of chance and fortune in a human's life. In this essay, I will challenge the idea in how far circumstances shape humans (or humans shape their circumstances). Especially in the case of Adolf Hitler, whose experiences during his childhood and adolescents seems to have been of great importance to his character development later in life and to his "Weltanschuung" as the "Fuehrer". The question of chance and fate seems to be at hand. However, analyzing this, is similar to finding an answer to the saying, "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" Thus, instead of simply listing up, I will pick a few circumstances that stroke me the most throughout the reading and divide them into two groups: inner/personal and exterior circumstances.
One can start with the inner/personal circumstances - family circumstances - that shaped Hitler as a person. Hitler's father, Alois Schicklgruber, changed his name to "Hitler" thirteen years before Adolf was born (p.3). As Adolf "Schicklgruber", it would have been quiet difficult to be taken seriously and to enthuse millions of people. Thus, Kershaw stresses in how far this act leads to Adolf being able to use this name, in order to create the figure of the "Fuehrer". In this case, circumstance (= Alois changing his name) seems to have shaped Hitler's life indirectly. Alois Hitler's very strict and old-fashioned, abusive, patriarchal parenting skills was one dominant element that shaped Adolf Hitler drastically as a person. Adolf detested his father, who thought of him as an artist to be a complete failure. How did this influence his life later on? On one hand, his bad relationship with his father made it impossible for Adolf to ever form deep personal relationships with anybody else but his mother. On the other hand, Alois has put a great amount of pressure on his son to succeed in life. Alois himself was able to climb up the social letter. Even though Hitler hated his father, this concept of success and domination was something Hitler saw as admirable goals for himself: "He claimed he set out to overcome the obstacles, inspired by the example of his own father's rise through his own efforts from poverty to the position of a government official." (p.25) Furthermore, Adolf developed a very close relationship with his mother - almost to the extent that speculations have been going on about an oedipus complex. His mother was weak and submissive towards her husband. One could argue that this lead to Adolf's patronizing concept for the submissiveness of women (p.13) throughout his life. These family circumstances have had great impact on Hitler.
The were also exterior circumstances - time, social and economic circumstances - that lead Hitler shape his "world-view". Hitler's birthplace was of great importance for the dictator later on in his life: Braunau am Inn is at the direct boarder between the German Empire and the Austrian Empire of that time (p.11). Kershaw implies this fact shapes Hitler's political identity: One of Hitler's most important goals throughout his life was to unite Germany and Austria - reunite the German speaking population. Hitler was born into an Austria that just recently was defeated by the Prussian army and, thus, left out of the German Empire - a nationwide trauma. Many German-speaking Austrians were unhappy with this current situation and, thus, seeking to be reunited with the German Empire. Again, circumstance preceded and thus shaped Adolf's political orientation. Later in his life, when he was a poor young artist living in Vienna, Kershaw mentions that a certain circumstance might have lead to his hatred for Jews; since he did not earn any money, Hitler lived in the worst and poorest part of the town. Speculations have been raised that many orthodox Jews lived in this part of the city, which then lead Hitler to become an obsessive antisemite. The circumstance of him living in a very poor area of Vienna in his early years of frustration and failure may have let to hatred against Jews.
Reading the biography, I felt like there were several events and family circumstances that might have shaped Adolf greatly as a person. However, it is drastically important to mention that even though those inner and exterior circumstances existed, it must have been his exceptional, obsessive character that lead him to become one of the most brutal and destructive dictators of all-times. Inner and outer circumstances - fate and fortune - is simply not enough of an answer...
Continuing on Samantha’s train of thought, it is undoubtedly true that both internal and external events shaped Adolf Hitler and the atrocities that occurred after World War I, but it is more than just social influences. Circumstances shape the way every person lives, and who is to say there weren’t other poor, suffering artists living in the same time period as Hitler? What made this particular man the most destructive and hateful dictator of all time?
ReplyDeleteSamantha mentioned that Alois’s abusive treatment towards Adolf’s mother shaped Adolf’s perspective towards women and sex. I extend that to say that this physical awkwardness helped cement his belief of what his ideal society would be like, which would be without the disabled, prostitutes, or diseased. The fact that Hitler’s prudishness went beyond just refraining from physical contact meant that he had deep problems connecting to a human being at an intimate level. He feared women and held empty relationships with people. “He was repelled by homosexuality. He refrained from masturbation. Prostitution horrified, but fascinated him. He associated it with venereal disease, which petrified him” (45). It is clear that Hitler had an obsession, a neurotic obsession of purity and cleanliness. Tenderness, passion, and lust (all things natural in humans) were rejected by Hitler; he was frightened of such things. Moreover, he lived in a world of moral and economic deterioration. This influenced his thoughts of an Aryan world where only the purist would be allowed to live (the eugenics movement pushed this thinking even further).
Hitler’s devastating actions have affected and will go on to shape the world that we live in. Excluding snide comments from John Galliano (fired from designer house Christian Dior) and Lars von Trier (Cannes Film Festival this past summer), there are people in the world today who have ideas similar to Hitler’s, although we do not live in the same era. Exhibit A: Earlier in the year, Norway was rated the happiest country according to Forbes.com. Fast forward five months, Anders Behring Breivik was responsible for the bombing of government buildings and a mass shooting at a youth camp in Norway this past July. Living in a country with a very high GDP, great standard of living, freedom to choose your own way of life all sound perfect. What went wrong?
Breivik’s father was a civil economist, the very same way Hitler’s father was a civil worker. Breivik claimed his mother was a feminist and did not approve of his parents upbringing, stating his parents were super-liberal and lacked discipline. Breivik claimed he supported cultural conservatism (Hitler wanted a unified, Germany speaking land), anti-feminism (Hitler wasn’t very fond of the ladies either), white nationalism (Hitler’s strive for a blue-eyed, blonde haired race), and instead of anti-Semitism, Breivik was Islamophobic.
We can say that Norway is not facing hardship, misery, hunger or poverty like Hitler was in Vienna. External forces aside, why do injustices continue to happen in the world today?
The case can certainly be made that Hitler had immense luck on his side to make up for the leadership qualities that he lacked. But Kershaw is careful to point out that, “It is as well to avoid the trap, which most of his contemporaries fell into, of grossly underestimating his abilities” (p. xxv). Two of these abilities are passion towards his interests and most importantly political intellect.
ReplyDeleteHitler’s passion is shown in defying his father. As a young boy he stood up to his stern father, by showing that he had no interest in going into civil service. Hitler also opposed his pro-Austria political views. Hitler’s passion for his own interests are evident by his independent youth.
Secondly, Hitler’s time with Gustl shows his constant love of art, especially of Wagner’s opera which he attended often. Gustl points out how Hitler’s passion got him to follow Hitler to all of their adventures. “Not just what his friend [Hitler] had to say, but how he said it, was what he found attractive” (p.21) If this is not foreshadowing to the audiences he would be captivating during his rule, I don’t know what is.
Hitler also showed a clear intellectual ability to pin point the successes and failures of certain movements. Although Hitler agreed with the majority of Schonerer’s political statements, he was aware that he neglected to take advantage of the masses. Lueger did the reverse. Hitler did not agree with his political statements, yet was smart enough to recognize Luegers ability to use propaganda to “command the masses.” Lastly, Hitler despised the ideas of the Social Democrats, yet he was open minded enough to realize how intimidation and intolerance affected the minds of the masses. This political awareness is certainly a great quality for a leader
Kershaw highlights that Hitler lacked many intellectual gifts, yet I argue that the opportunity to lead a nation would not have been possible without his passion and political intellect.
In her comment above, I feel that Sheri raises what I feel is probably the most interesting, as well as pressing, question of why atrocities such as the Third Reich, or Breivik’s shooting in Norway happen. To try to understand why the Third Reich occurred, it is clearly necessary to analyze Adolf Hitler. And to me, the most compelling examination of Hitler is the psychological impact of his early years. Consider the situation he experienced in Vienna while struggling as a painter. It is often argued that this is in this very setting that his anti-Semitism developed. And while this setting may explain his anti-Semitism, I feel it fails to explain his ability for such extreme hatred. Clearly, many others have been put in similar situations and yet failed to become mass murders. In my mind, the Hitler of the 1930s must have been developed much earlier during his childhood and early teenage years.
ReplyDeleteIt is often said a son’s father gives a son his idea of what it means to be a “man.” Therefore, I don’t think we can overemphasize the effect Alois had on the man Adolf became. Adolf didn’t love Alois, rather feared the man who gave him a “sound thrashing every day” (13). In terms of other relationships, Kershaw notes that during secondary school, Adolf “had no close friends at school; nor did he seek any” (16). And then finally, when his mother dies, Adolf loses the “one person for whom he had ever felt close affection and warmth” (24). These three factors—absence of a positive father figure, lack of close relationships with his peers, and passing of his one true source of affect in another human being—seem so important because they start to reveal Adolf, as a person. From his father, he learns violence; without close friendships with his peers (he also moved frequently as a child) he becomes socially isolated; from his mother’s death he experiences tremendous emotional pain (indeed, the doctor who cared for Adolf’s mother recalled that he “had never seen anyone so prostrate with grief as Adolf Hitler”) (24).
I am not trying to argue that Adolf’s upbringing is in anyway unusual, or that a lonely son who is abused by his father is alone the causation of the atrocities that Adolf later committed. However, I what puzzles me more than anything, is that it was a person, with emotions and desires and dreams, who led the Third Reich. This same question of how a human could be so evil, for lack of a better word, arises with any such atrocities against humanity, such as in Breivik’s case in Norway. In my mind, this is a statement more about more direct effects on the personal level more than the overall circumstances in Germany or Norway.