On Auschwitz: Whether we should obey or resist when faced with evil laws is a question of to be or not to be. But the premise is that everyone has been brainwashed. At that time, everyone did not think that the system was bad. Maybe they were really fans of the authorities and parties involved. So everyone was still actively and enthusiastically supporting it and was later called by later generations. For the bad law stuff. However, later generations set a new set of standards for sin and innocence when they were judged, and re-established the universal value of human nature. The professor in the movie says we can't judge old things with new laws. That is to say, we should put ourselves in the shoes of the ancients.
For us as ordinary people, the system itself cannot be surpassed. "I" is not a "superman" and cannot escape the netless net of the system. Just like Hanna's point of view in the film: if it were you, you would do the same. You also want to kill people, see death without help. There is no moral imperative.
What is the bottom line of ethics and morality, it is not clear. Herodotus said that customs are the greatest force, and customs vary from history to region. But what is clear is the order instilled in us as institutions, they are angular and require little thought, and even all transcendent enlightenment may violate this order.
Continue the bullshit: political and moral double standards. As Chairman Mao said, the primary problem of the revolution is to distinguish between the enemy and the enemy. We are always just, and the enemy is always evil. Justice is the interest of the strong. The more common morality is benevolence, non-offensive, shielding the weak, doing what one does not want, not doing to others, repaying virtue with virtue, repaying grievance with directness, and no hatred. Politically, Hannah is innocent, and morally, she is criticized by future generations.
About lust. When people criticize the incestuous love at the beginning of the film, they will also find that it is precisely this incestuous love, and these large erotic scenes pave the way for the later tragic. As classmate Zhai said, Lust and Caution can't be without those XX dramas, this is the same. Mr. Li Meng said that romantic love is often special, even contrary to justice. If it were all replaced with love in the form of firewood, rice, oil and salt, love in a running account, or love between a prince and a princess, it would not be this movie, but a golden wedding, a fairy tale. Of course, this special love also inevitably reflects the side of human nature. After all, this is a movie about one person, and the content of the narrative is based on history, showing the theme of common people, not science fiction.
Hannah used to work at Siemens, and then took the initiative to jump to the party's security office. This transformation reflects her passion for public life, politics, and pursuit of honor, as well as the Nazis' huge charisma to the people, which makes us continue to think about the collective unconscious behind the collective worship brought about by the Nazis. Looking at Hannah in uniform, how can it not be reminiscent of the Red Guards who don't like red clothes and love to be armed. In the face of this kind of politics, love becomes insignificant, let alone morality. However, to all the collective unconscious people involved in this event, are they really innocent?
Fool about names: Hannah Schmidt, a German name that reminds me of two people: Hannah Arendt and Karl Schmidt. For Auschwitz, the former strongly criticized totalitarian rule, while the latter had an affair with the Nazis. The design of such a name may be doomed to the divisive character of the heroine: the observance of the Nazi Party's order, the pursuit of the glory of working for the party, and the confession of the killing of the Jews afterwards. So we see him holding on in court, and crying in church. This cry cried out the brilliance of human nature, and conscience finally triumphed over the evil of politics. The religious ceremony of the choir friends is the opportunity for Hannah to vent and purify her heart. In the end, her conscience led her to destruction.
Modern films are often used as critical texts, which are a transcendence of the possibility of traditional ethics. I think such films may not be suitable for families to watch in theaters, or even for lovers to watch together. These modern aesthetics of survival Touching the ethical bottom line of this society: incest taboos and sensitive topics related to politics are far from our current good life. Every time I watch a movie, I worry about what the SARFT needs to do, and silently classify it: B is for families, A is not suitable for families.
View more about The Reader reviews
