'Vita Activa: The Spirit of Hannah Arendt' presents naysayers and supporters of the philosopher

( Unrated ) ( Monitor Movie Guide )

The documentary centers on the alternately celebrated and reviled German-born philosopher who gave us the phrase 'banality of evil.' 

Courtesy of The Hannah Arendt Private Archive
Still photo of Hannah Arendt - from the documentary film Vita Activa: The Spirit of Hannah Arendt

“Vita Activa: The Spirit of Hannah Arendt” is a documentary about the alternately celebrated and reviled German-born philosopher who gave us the catchphrase “the banality of evil.” She was referring to Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, chief enabler of the Holocaust, whose 1961 trial she wrote up in a series of New Yorker magazine articles that became the book “Eichmann in Jerusalem.” The film, directed by Ada Ushpiz, mostly focuses on Arendt’s take on the trial and its aftermath, and it features extensive footage of her, mostly from a 1964 German TV interview.

Ushpiz is careful to include naysayers along with supporters of Arendt, but the core of her contention – that Eichmann was essentially a cog in a totalitarian regime and therefore, in a sense, ghoulishly insignificant – is still a flashpoint for controversy. I have always found Arendt’s attempts to intellectualize horror insufficiently empathetic, and this film does nothing to alter my view, best expressed by Cynthia Ozick in her essay “Love and Levity at Auschwitz,” where she writes: “Arendt, so proudly sealed in intellect that nothing could penetrate the armor of her synthesis, ended less in condemnation than mitigation – her neutered Eichmann is a weak-kneed pharaoh, scarcely worth all those plagues. History as comedy has a parallel effect: it trivializes the unconscionable. The blood the clown spills is always ketchup.” Grade: B (Unrated.)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.