Skip to main content

A Psychological Analysis of Hitler

 


I am looking at a paper presenting a psycho-historical view of Hitler and Nazism written by a woman of whom I know nothing at all -- by Amelia Clark, a student at the University of Mary Washington working on her Masters Degree. 

This is well-trodden ground. I'll just pick one nugget in Clark's discussion that seems of interest. There is no evidence, she writes, "that he had any anti-Semitic feelings before he left Linz or even that he had any during his first years in Vienna." 

Such references to Linz, an Austrian city straddling the Danube between Vienna and Salzburg. and the place where Hitler was a boy. Clark's phrase "before he left Linz" reminds me of Auden's poem, September 1, 1939. "Accurate scholarship can unearth the whole offense, from Luther until now, that has driven a culture mad, Find what occurred at Linz, what huge imago made...." 

Clark is saying (and Auden might well agree, if I understand his poem correctly) that nothing really germane to the outbreak of World War II actually occurred at Linz. Clark points us instead to Hitler's time in Vienna.  

In that great city, Hitler learned a perverse lesson from his failure as an artist. He failed in his efforts to be admitted to an art school, yet decided simply to ignore the fact of his failures and to continue his artistic "studies" rather than getting any bread-and-butter job. This made of him a street person and, in effect, a beggar. He seems to have learned: failures are best not admitted -- they can simply be denied and one can take that denial as truth. So he fancies himself art student, facts notwithstanding.

In later years, he would fancy that the central powers could not have lost the "Great War," though they plainly did. Hence the "stabbed in the back" theory, conspiratorial thinking with Jews at its heart. 

Not a bad theme, Ms Clark. 

When he failed to be admitted into the art school in Vienna, he left his more successfulfriend and lived in squalor on the Viennese streets. Even when he was desperate formoney, he failed to even make attempts at getting a job.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak