"For my generation the past is still very present... " states Bernhard Schlink, internationally known primarily for his novel THE READER, in the second of his six thought-provoking essays on "Guilt about the past". A highly respected jurist and law professor (emeritus) in Germany, he presents a number of philosophical arguments intended to advance the important debate on guilt about the past and its profound influence on all who follow, whether individuals, institutions or states and, whether directly associated with the perpetrators or the victims. Conscious of the criticism he received for his novel, his last essay, "Stories about the Past", touches on literature and other media. In the broader context he acknowledges that "his fiction and much of German literature has guilt about the past as a strong leitmotiv." Throughout his essays, Schlink introduces a number of fundamental concepts that have characterized the debate about past guilt, especially since the end of the Third Reich and the Holocaust. Central for the first post-war generation and those since, are the concepts of 'collective guilt', 'mastering the past' (which is the author's translation for the German term "Vergangenheitsbewältigung" that has no equivalent term or phrase in English or in French), and 'reconciliation'. He explains these concepts in their context, aiming at a broad-based understanding of their application. For understandable reasons, his illustrations are taken from his own personal experience and professional background. The concept of collective guilt is defined within this context and Germany after the Third Reich stands as a clear example for it. This analysis, he admits, has not necessarily been accepted readily by Germans of his generation. Nonetheless, especially Germans living outside their home country have been confronted with the notion of Germans' collective guilt for Nazi atrocities that their parents or grandparents may, or may not, have committed during that time. His arguments on the varied ways by which Germans have been implicated over several generations in the crimes of their parents are profound and convincing. They do not allow to take the easy route that many had preferred and embarked on following the collapse of the regime in 1945. We are, as Schlink contends "the generation [for whom:] the past is still very present..."His central essay, "Forgiveness and Reconciliation" addresses the future relationships between descendants of perpetrators and those of victims over the next generation(s). It deserves to be read and absorbed slowly and deeply. He discusses such issues as the transference of guilt to another generation, the "political ritual" that often accompanies forgiveness of actions in the past, committed by a previous generation, the need and potential for reconciliation, whether in the private or public spheres. "The perpetrator's children cannot ask for forgiveness [...:] neither can the victim's children grant it. They are not each other's victim or perpetrators." However, he contends, they can reconcile. "Reconciliation means that further attempts to coexist should no longer fail on account of guilt and recrimination." Especially of importance to me is Schlink's analysis of the notion underlying the term "mastering the past" (Vergangenheitsbewältigung). His contention implies an active process that has to be worked through, yet that, with effort, will end in a satisfactory conclusion, where the past has in fact been "mastered". Such a process will "bring the past into such a state of order that its remembrance no longer BURDENS [my emphasis:] the present." In this context, Schlink very persuasively argues the difference between remembering as opposed to forgetting or repressing. While he, understandably, relates his arguments to the Holocaust and the Third Reich, his positions are far reaching and much more widely applicable. Based on a lecture series held at Oxford University in 2008, Schlink's six essays provide insights and arguments for an deeper assessment of own positions and behaviours when we ask ourselves how we and societies as a whole can learn from the events and mistakes of the past not to repeat them. He provides challenging ideas on how the past can be reflected in our thinking for better coexistence between individuals, communities and nations and, last not least, how this thinking can influence our literature and other fictional media.
With “Guilt about the Past” Bernhard Schlink presents a collection of six essays to explore the question how the past can still loom over future generations, causing feelings of individual and collective guilt. As a German citizen of the younger generation, this is a topic very close to my heart and I was very curious to see how Schlink would develop his arguments for thoughts that I would have considerable difficulties to articulate.The German experience, especially from the time of the Third Reich and the Holocaust, is at the centre of the debate. It is where Schlink’s experience lies. But collective guilt can be found all over the world, in this century and in history. The British have India to think about, the Americans slavery, and the Canadians their First Nations – and the list goes on. These essays use German examples but parallels to other situations can easily be drawn. And this makes this book an important one for anybody to read.Schlink develops the debate carefully, step by step. This makes it easy to follow even for readers with little legal or historic background. A few passages might be a bit too much legalese but overall this book is very readable. I loved Bernhard Schlink’s concise and precise writing style in his novels and mysteries, it’s equally as good in these essays.The first essay defines individual and collective guilt and gives us a historical perspective. He then explains why “the past is still very present”, not just for a few but for many of us. I especially appreciated his essay on the concept of “Vergangenheitsbewältigung”, a word that has no equivalent in other languages. Bernhard Schlink describes it as the efforts of “mastering the past”. It’s a process that requires commitment and work but should also result in a tangible end. But there is no end in sight.While Schlink explains how forgiveness and reconciliation can help over time he also makes clear that it will take several generations for the lingering effects of the guilt about the past to fade. The limitations are strong, within the legal realm as much as within the capability of individuals and collectives. Still, it leaves me with hope and a much better understanding of a complex issue that has been in my thoughts for many years and has now found a way to articulate itself.“Guilt about the Past” is a thin book with just over a hundred pages. But there is more than enough food for thought in it to keep the reader engaged well beyond the last page. It’s one of the few books I wouldn’t mind buying even after I’ve read a borrowed copy. It provides a good reference, something to go back to in order to check on some thought provoking quotes, to continue my own reflections.
What do You think about Guilt About The Past (2015)?
SCHLINK, Bernhard: „Vergangenheitsschuld. Beiträge zu einem deutschen Thema“, Zürich 2007Wer sich einen seiner spannnenden Romane erwartet wird enttäuscht. Dieses Buch ist mer ein wissenschaftliches, ein juridisches Werk. Hier tritt Schlink nicht als Dichter, sondern als Jurist, als Universitätsprofessor auf. Es geht um die Schuld der Deutschen im Zweiten Weltkrieg.Es geht um die Anwendung des Rechts. Kann man Leute, die während des Krieges nach geltendem Gesetz gehandelt haben nach dem Krieg mit dem neuen Gesetz verurteilen? Sind die Kinder der Täter des Krieges schuldig? Gibt es eine Sippenhaftung? Manche Schuld kann nicht ein Gericht, sondern nur der Psychiater behandeln. Die Deutschen haben einen speziellen Zugang zur Vergangenheitsbewältigung. Die Amerikaner haben nach dem Südstaatenkrieg Niemanden verurteilt. Fast alle Ostblockstaaten sind gegen ehemalige Kommunisten rechtlich nicht vorgegangen. Deutschland gegenüber so manchen DDR Bürgern sehr wohl. Sie sind gründlicher. Sowohl im Schlechten bei der Vernichtung der Juden, als auch in der Aufarbeitung der Schuld. Schlink meint, dass das Recht „nicht das vergangene, sondern nur das gegenwärtige und zukünftige Leben gestalten und in Ordnung bringen Kann“ (Seite 81)Mit einer Geschichte aus seiner Kindheit erklärt er den Sinn des „Vergebens“ und „Versöhnens“. Seine Großmutter sagte, wenn man sich bei der Person, bei der man sich verschuldigt hat nicht entschuldigt hat, kann man Gott auch nicht um Vergebung bitten. „Eine Versöhnung braucht mindestens zwei Beteiligte.“ (Seite 179)
—Johann Guenther
"The world is full of guilt that has never been forgiven and which can now no longer be forgiven - unless by God" (74).It took me forever to read this because, although understandable and short, I had to be in the right mood for the weightiness of thought it required. Only at the end of the book did I feel his argument start to wane. I enjoy Schlink's ideas of guilt and forgiveness but as his point it to discuss collective guilt, it misses the individual level of forgiving self for injuries done to self. His ideas of forgiveness from God make me lean more toward believing God as a necessary (to most) myth. "The grace of God consists of removing the burden of guilt by forgiving it when we cannot attain forgiveness from those whom we have hurt. For that we need God; that is what He is there for. Or, those who do not believe might point out, mockingly or enviously, that is why those who believe in God invented him. If a person does not believe in a forgiving God, then they have to live with their guilt when they can no longer obtain forgiveness from the person they injured" (68-69).
—Angela
