Showing posts with label Hitler. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hitler. Show all posts

Thursday, May 5, 2011

A Mad Man's Dreams, Doused

One of Many Things That Osama bin Laden Did Not Like
 
I had just jumped in the car on Sunday evening, at MacArthur BART in Oakland, when Elizabeth told me that she’d heard over the radio that President Obama was about to announce that Osama bin Laden was dead.

As we watched the president, his voice thick with an uncharacteristic case of nerves, make his announcement, I raised a cold beer and enjoyed a sweet swell of triumph.  No, I am by no means a pacifist and even support the death penalty under stringent and extraordinary circumstances. Still,
the swell quickly sank away as I considered, along with pundits and people everywhere, what unintended crooks in the
river might await us.  Evil’s always there, never sleeps, eyes wide for its next chance.

Since September 11, 2001, Osama bin Laden has been called, and likened to, many things, some of them too rude for even this microdot of cyberspace. Among the favorite comparisons have been the monsters of the last century: Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Tojo, Pol Pot, and others. Let’s call them the Hitlers. It
makes for a convenient family unit.

For a short stretch, this comparison is apt. Like those monsters, bin Laden was a visionary, his mind blazing with its own special and spectral light. Like the Hitlers, it was all about him and no one else. That would make him a perfect sociopath. Not clinically insane, but morally insane, a
pitiless romantic nihilist, uncaring of the consequences of his actions on anyone but his Great Me. Like a vampire, he fed on the neediness, emptiness and violent tendencies of his mostly young followers.

Like the Hitlers his vision—and that of his band of misery-makers, al-Qaeda and their Taliban collaborators--was whole: It encompassed everyone and left no room for nuances or wrinkles, exceptions or surprises.

What an awful world he wanted, like all idealized worlds. A world where women would be wrapped in chadors, locked behind doors. driven from the world into a foul musty darkness; a world without music and constant prayer, as oppressive as anything cooked up by Stalin’s bureaucracy and as
murderously paranoid and gray. 


(And those beards . . . Lord, my face breaks out when I think about having to grow one.) 

I have little doubt bin Laden identified with the Hitlers, more so than the Allah whose principles he so glibly stated and easily betrayed.

Yet, in important ways, next to those twentieth-century visionaries, bin Laden was really a midget. The Hitlers managed to entrap whole societies under their hypnotic stare. Geniuses of organization, masters of imagery, they played virtuoso riffs on the keyboards of power. 


They fielded gigantic armies to heedlessly hurl themselves against friend and neighbor. They manufactured death on a massive industrial scale, employed hundreds, thousands, even millions of allies by poisoned carrot and by bloody stick. Put together, their regimes likely killed close to a hundred million people, without shedding a tear, only rivers of blood.

Osama bin Laden never even got within a muezzin’s call to prayer. By structuring al-Qaeda the way he did—a network of independent, mostly isolated, cells--he made himself and his “army” small targets that would be absolutely impossible to ever entirely defeat in the way we’re conditioned to think
of. His program of asymmetric warfare helped him win a few battles, in the way that outlaws like Jesse James pulled off a few raids.


 Someone Much Nicer to Know

But he lost his war. Cells of his kind don’t make a conquering army. Despite the cold cape of fear he dragged across the globe, he made no progress toward his goals, except maybe make our societies more oppressive, persuade us to sacrifice more of our freedoms than need be. He awakened the universal tyrant that lies within.

Without a whole nation, without its people and resources, under his command, a few spectacular bloody raids was all bin Laden was ever going to pull off. He was never going to raise the old Caliphate from the ash heap of history or get his bony fingers on Saudi oil or those nukes he always said he was hustling real hard for. Maybe he thought his mass army would raise itself, or the Hand of Allah would wave it into existence, a fundamentalist child’s notion of God, much too popular and
inefficient at best.

His biggest, fiercest dreams never came true. To me, Osama bin Laden may have been no more than a serial killer with a unique delusion of grandeur that he hid behind a great and ancient faith.

Meanwhile, a different kind of revolt seems to be sweeping the Arab and Muslim World, one not borne out of reactionism or nihilism, but maybe, just maybe, borne of decent hope and generous spirit, the Face of God that we want to see. The neo-Cons whine about how America is not controlling events in
the Middle East like we’re supposed to, but what is so much better about this is that al-Qaeda is having no say in it at all. 


(And I love it when bastards like al-Qaeda get their precious little visions smashed to bits, don’t you? Especially one that made an utter loathing of life into its central tenet.)

My last point in comparing bin Laden and the Hitlers is that his passing could mean that species of visionary world-striding tyrant may be devolving out of existence. Our populations have become too huge, too multitudinous and too individualized to rule as a mass. New technology creates more of this individuation, making the goal of swaying the masses even more remote. We’re all little atoms now. There is so much more to do on a Saturday night nowadays than to listen to Hitler shplutter over the radio or watch bin Laden drone from his . . . mansion. People can better make their own worlds now and while this leads to its own kind of trouble—say gathering a quorum to tackle climate change and other emergencies—it may, in the long run, be for the best. 


I hope we can put the Hitler nightmares to rest. There are bigger, more urgent ones, coming our way.

Re-edited 5/7/11; 5/9/11

Photos by author

Copyright 2011 by Thomas Burchfield

Thomas Burchfield can also be friended on Facebook, tweeted at on Twitter and e-mailed at tbdeluxe [at] sbcglobal [dot] net.
 

Sunday, June 3, 2007

Old Media Department: Mailer and His Demon


As a genre fiction enthusiast and sometime World War II buff, I couldn’t help but be intrigued to find that yet another highbrow mainstream author has swum through the dark pool of the horror genre. This time, from these deeps, rises an interesting hybrid of historical novel and Gothic tale, this one excavating the childhood of Adolf Hitler. That book is The Castle in the Forest. The author is Norman Mailer.

Before you litterateurs wince, here’s a plain fact: Practically every major literary writer (except maybe Hemingway) has at least one horror tale lurking in their oeuvre. Young Tennessee Williams wrote for Weird Tales. Truman Capote spun several contributions to the genre. No less a novelist than John Updike, in The New Yorker awhile back, picked James Joyce’s The Dead as the finest ghost story ever. (We may disagree, but we won’t argue.) One of my favorite gothic horror novels is Bellefleur by Joyce Carol Oates: a perennial Pulitzer and Nobel Prize nominee and winner of the National Book Award and the Bram Stoker Award.

If you know Mailer’s work or reputation (I’ve only read The Naked and the Dead, An American Dream, and his very useful book on writing, The Spooky Art) it might be as one of the most ultra-macho of American writers. Mailer has gone to extremes few would dare, often at serious costs to his reputation (Supporting Jack Henry Abbott. Stabbing his wife. Head-butting Gore Vidal. Mailer has never seemed to need a full moon to become a werewolf in his long public career.)

The Castle in the Forest is told by a wandering demon who occupies the body of one Dieter, an S.S. man under the stick of Heinrich Himmler. But the Demon’s true Fuehrer is a certain “Maestro” who may—or may not—be Satan Himself.

Hitler’s roots have always been mysterious, even to Hitler. Fearful that “Jewish blood” might swirl through his veins (likely not, per the best evidence), he orders “Heini” Himmler to investigate. Himmler is passionately curious about the origins of his beloved “Superman” (and is one of the best pointers for the theory that Nazism was primarily a religious movement.)

It so happens that, once upon a time, Little Dolfie was a “client” of the Demon’s who was given this job by the Maestro. It is this Demon who sweeps us back to misty nineteenth century rural Hapsburg Austria and into the brutal humble life of Hitler’s father: one Alois Schicklgruber (and don’t we all wish he’d kept that name!? Say it out loud: “Heil Schicklgruber!” O, for the want of a nail!)

Through his Demon, Mailer points the finger of blame, not at Alois’ parenting skills (which, while often harsh in the manner of his time, appear mostly inconsistent and fumbling), but at his marriage to Anna Ploezl, Adolf’s mother. History has documented this kind, naïve and devout woman as Alois’ blood niece, but, claims the Demon, the couple was actually much much closer than that. He concludes that it was their incest that created the monster who stirs our nightmares still.

This theory of the origins of Hitler's evil is as plausible as others. (The sole source for the myth that it was all Hitler’s Daddy’s Fault is Hitler: like we can believe him!) But once this revelation passes, Mailer’s narrative seems to lose traction, though it’s always interesting and superbly written. It’s full of interesting ruminations: swipes at “popular writers;” a long treatise on apiculture; an eventful side-trip to the chaotic coronation of Tsar Nicholas II; and Satan’s love for all fundamentalists, religious and secular.

I like how Mailer handles the supernatural elements: Demonic power is purely psychic. Demons prefer to worm their way into the troughs dug by dreams where they plant their nefarious notions. (Since he’s a sociopath born of incest, little Dolfie has the richest soil.) Mailer conjures many disturbing and chilling moments. He’s a little less successful with the setting: much of the best horror writing is deeply evocative of place, and landscapes like this—the ground of Grimm’s Fairy Tales—beg for more vivid treatment.

Much of the narrative follows Alois’ and Anna’s hard struggle to make a life together; how the taboo they share remains buried in their subconscious, while shaping their lives as they innocently shelter the child of evil they have borne together. It makes for a story of strong pathos, but its true horror can only be found beyond this tale’s end. Stirring traditional horror into real history is a difficult recipe to pull off, but Mailer comes closer than most.


Copyright 2015 by Thomas Burchfield


Thomas Burchfield’s latest (yet to be published) novel is Butchertown, a ripping, 1920s gangster shoot-‘em-up. He is also the author of the contemporary Dracula novel Dragon's Ark, winner of the IPPY, NIEA, and Halloween Book festival awards for horror in 2012. He’s also author of the original screenplays Whackers and The Uglies (e-book editions only). Published by Ambler House Publishing, those three are available at Amazon in various editions. You can also find his work at Barnes and Noble,  Powell's Books, and Scribed. He also “friends” on Facebook, tweets on Twitter, reads at Goodreads and drinks at various bars around the East Bay. You can also join his e-mail list via tbdeluxe [at] sbcglobal [dot] net. He lives in Northern California with his wife, Elizabeth.