Speer didn’t have anything to do with extermination, that’s right. But tenths of thousands of slave labors died working in projects under his supervision.
Maybe you should actually listen to the interview. She makes it clear that allthought Speer was not personally involved in the final solution.That in no way diminishes Speer's responsibilety for it.
FASCINATING. she "WAS" part of that era. analytical- dazzled- soaked throughout, but somehow also mind melting with a kind of distance sympathy . She herself is something of a Austrian proletariat- She understands that vortex time period in a way that is palpable: words are difficult to paint the surface to the depths. Albert Speer was a Master of Evil. she was Dazzled by his Omnipotent Black Glamour *( as in dark illusions) Still , she is fascinatingly and oddly confounding in her casualness of the intricacies of evildoers.
Sereny was an odd woman, and I think her chuckling was a nervous reaction more than anything. Yes, it's true, technically he didn't operate the camps, but his use of slave labour certainly did. Everyone who knew Speer well, from the Pastor that cared for him in Spandau, to his own children and even Sereny and countless other journalists all felt that Speer lied about not knowing about the Holocaust. And yet, none of them thought that he was 'evil'. Interestingly still, other than his children, to whom he was indifferent, all felt that he deserved to be hanged at Nuremberg. All of these nuances are the reason why Speer is so much more interesting than Himmler, Hess, Goering or Geobbells.
I find her to be refreshingly illuminating and EXTRAORDINARILY brilliant. with that said, i find her dichotomous bouts of senseless laughter and constant pontification of key characters, such as, Albert Speer, to be mindless and a true affront to the sensibility of people (ALL); chiefly, and to those impacted, whose families have been effected by this "preconceived and meticulous genocide". i find her behaviour to (unintentionally, maybe) scream... "insouciance" and "callousness". i find her motions and sporadic comments, to be vile. She spent the rest of the interview, in a calm and lucid tone, completely exculpating Hitler and many others from any wrongdoing. I wonder if she would've behaved as cavalierly as she was, had she lost any loved ones (maybe even children) to this "organized homocidal and genocidal barbarism"? i really DO wonder. While she is highly introspective and deeply analytical, her insight lacks a Human stain, altogether.
Please read her books before commenting on her character? She is an amazing author who interviewed men who played a major part in the history of this era. Unless you have read her works, you are in no position to comment!
@@jamesgeitz6719 I have read her books and found them extremely well written and with obvious intelligence. To absolve Albert Speer of any guilt is a bit difficult to swallow. That he was intelligent enough to " fool " the powers that be after the war is testament to his intelligence. I believe he certainly fooled her. She readily admitted he much more intelligent the she was. He was guilty, perhaps not of genocide, but he certainly knew about it. While I admire her work, which is brilliant, at times, I believe she was completely taken in by Speer. Everything Speer said from the day the war ended was done so to make him appear as duped as most Germans claimed to be. I am quite surprised that someone of her intelligence was so completely fooled by him.
I truly doubt that the reporter was ignorant of the facts. But he was giving this writer a full chance to explain her own reactions to Speer and the rest, by asking open ended questions. Not trying to trick her, or ask gotcha inquiries, like modern day journalists would. Her answers are far more telling than the questions! Good or bad. And she was Austrian, so there's that. A very mixed bag, but it speaks to trying to maintain some neutrality about some horrible facts. Very interesting, as the little Nazi on Laugh-In used to say...
We drown in the banal silliness of victor propaganda and distortions to self justify. She gets close to the reality of the times. We are taught from a young age to do anything but.
"You can get use to anything,I suppose killing is the same thing,you can get use to it" -😳
She was interested and said herself: "if people have no emotions, they have no moral compass. Speer came back from that," she stated.
Speer didn’t have anything to do with extermination, that’s right. But tenths of thousands of slave labors died working in projects under his supervision.
Maybe you should actually listen to the interview. She makes it clear that allthought Speer was not personally involved in the final solution.That in no way diminishes Speer's responsibilety for it.
@@ss667qxb She says - 'It couldn't have existed in a world that he hadn't created'
That's true. Hitler ordered it. But was not heavily involved in it. It was Himmler's job. No question about it.
FASCINATING. she "WAS" part of that era. analytical- dazzled- soaked throughout, but somehow also mind melting with a kind of distance sympathy . She herself is something of a Austrian proletariat- She understands that vortex time period in a way that is palpable: words are difficult to paint the surface to the depths. Albert Speer was a Master of Evil. she was Dazzled by his Omnipotent Black Glamour *( as in dark illusions) Still , she is fascinatingly and oddly confounding in her casualness of the intricacies of evildoers.
What a child like note. You seem to comprehend nothing much.
I agree. Her biography is good but flawed. How she can separate Speer and the Holocaust is beyond me.
Sereny was an odd woman, and I think her chuckling was a nervous reaction more than anything. Yes, it's true, technically he didn't operate the camps, but his use of slave labour certainly did. Everyone who knew Speer well, from the Pastor that cared for him in Spandau, to his own children and even Sereny and countless other journalists all felt that Speer lied about not knowing about the Holocaust. And yet, none of them thought that he was 'evil'. Interestingly still, other than his children, to whom he was indifferent, all felt that he deserved to be hanged at Nuremberg. All of these nuances are the reason why Speer is so much more interesting than Himmler, Hess, Goering or Geobbells.
If the people who operated and made use of the Nazi camps weren’t evil, then who was?
I find her to be refreshingly illuminating and EXTRAORDINARILY brilliant. with that said, i find her dichotomous bouts of senseless laughter and constant pontification of key characters, such as, Albert Speer, to be mindless and a true affront to the sensibility of people (ALL); chiefly, and to those impacted, whose families have been effected by this "preconceived and meticulous genocide". i find her behaviour to (unintentionally, maybe) scream... "insouciance" and "callousness". i find her motions and sporadic comments, to be vile.
She spent the rest of the interview, in a calm and lucid tone, completely exculpating Hitler and many others from any wrongdoing.
I wonder if she would've behaved as cavalierly as she was, had she lost any loved ones (maybe even children) to this "organized homocidal and genocidal barbarism"? i really DO wonder.
While she is highly introspective and deeply analytical, her insight lacks a Human stain, altogether.
I think she a pompous snob always making references to her purported intellect and high class.
Please read her books before commenting on her character? She is an amazing author who interviewed men who played a major part in the history of this era. Unless you have read her works, you are in no position to comment!
@@jamesgeitz6719 I have read her books and found them extremely well written and with obvious intelligence. To absolve Albert Speer of any guilt is a bit difficult to swallow. That he was intelligent enough to " fool " the powers that be after the war is testament to his intelligence. I believe he certainly fooled her. She readily admitted he much more intelligent the she was. He was guilty, perhaps not of genocide, but he certainly knew about it. While I admire her work, which is brilliant, at times, I believe she was completely taken in by Speer. Everything Speer said from the day the war ended was done so to make him appear as duped as most Germans claimed to be. I am quite surprised that someone of her intelligence was so completely fooled by him.
@@gingermiller4046She doesn't really absolve him of guilt, though. It's more nuanced.
They did some bad things? SOME BAD THINGS?!?!? She is crazy!
These questions are terrible, The interviewer is ignorant of the subject matter....
Regardless Gitta provides many insights.
I truly doubt that the reporter was ignorant of the facts. But he was giving this writer a full chance to explain her own reactions to Speer and the rest, by asking open ended questions. Not trying to trick her, or ask gotcha inquiries, like modern day journalists would. Her answers are far more telling than the questions! Good or bad. And she was Austrian, so there's that. A very mixed bag, but it speaks to trying to maintain some neutrality about some horrible facts. Very interesting, as the little Nazi on Laugh-In used to say...
We drown in the banal silliness of victor propaganda and distortions to self justify. She gets close to the reality of the times. We are taught from a young age to do anything but.
wtfff