“The beginning and end of Olte’s transformation,” commentsKlaus Latzel, “can be best illustrated by two letters from his corre-spondence home: ‘Oh I’d love to be out there with the soldiers,’ inMay 1940, and ‘When will this endless murdering be over?’ fromMay 1944.”17 Soldiers such as Albert Neuhaus and Hans Olte con-tinued to fight and to kill, mostly out of a sense of duty and a desireto protect Germany itself, but they no longer thought of themselvesas vanguards of National Socialism

In time of war and separation, the letters to andfrom soldiers serving on the front lines were precious signs of life.They were avowals of love and longings for home. They describedthe battlefield and conditions of military occupation and eventuallyprovided historians with crucial documents about popular attitudestoward the war and knowledge about the Holocaust.

Among the items most frequentlyconfiscated from German Jews as they boarded deportation trainswere blank postcards and postage stamps; authorities in Würzburgcollected 358 six-pfennig postcards, 142 six-pfennig stamps, and273 twelve-pfennig stamps before sending deportees on their wayon 24 March 1942

One Berliner “watched his fellow passengers as he trav-eled past the burning Fasenenstrasse synagogue between the S-Bahnstations Savignyplatz and Zoologischer Garten the next morning:‘only a few looked up to see out the window, shrugged their shoul-ders, and went back to their paper.

The cities are administeredby mayors and councilmen drawn from his movement. The govern-ments of the states and the state parliaments are in the hands ofparty members

apoliceman’s “perp book”: “a small selection” of photographs fea-tured photographs of the imprisoned physicians, lawyers, and otherprofessionals whose newly shaven heads created the “eternal sem-blances” by which Jews dissolved into criminals.1

“What am I going to do?” won-dered Richard Tesch, an owner of a bakery in Ballendstedt’s mar-ketplace: “Israel has been buying goods from me for a long time.Am I supposed to no longer sell to him? And if I do it anyway, thenI’ve lost the other customers.

s aresult, Victor Klemperer could repeatedly “run into” one of Hitler’sReichstag speeches. “I could not get away from it for an hour. Firstfrom an open shop, then in the bank, then from a shop again.”66Radio as well as film turned Nazism into spectacle.

Tacked onto the doorways of apartments, posters, labels, and badgesattested to the fact that nearly all residents belonged to the People’sWelfare or contributed to Winter Relief.

Young people don’t walk anymore; they march.” “Ev-erywhere friends are professing themselves for Hitler.” To livein Nazi Germany, Ebermayer wrote, was to “become ever morelonely.”

“Hei hatte sagt, wer non ganz un gar nichwolle, vor dän in Deutschland keine Raum”—“he said there is noroom in Germany for people who simply refuse to take part.”

Hermann Aue “(very Left),” thoughtthe Nazis would be gone within a year, so he was inclined to stickwith the Social Democrats. But several Communists who had re-portedly joined a local SA group suspected that the Nazis would bearound for some time.

In this case it was the Nuremberg Laws, which distinguished Ger-man citizens from Jewish noncitizens: “hunting down innocentpeople is expanded a thousand times,” he raged; “hate is sown amillionfold.”

The fact is that it is totally possible,” he carefully noted,“that the National Socialist state would use such a law to make it aduty for those without means and who are dependent on handoutsfrom the state to more or less ‘voluntarily’ take their lives.

“the police have theresponsibility to safeguard the organic unity of the German people,its vital energies, and its facilities from destruction and disintegra-tion.” This definition gave the police extremely wide latitude. Any-thing that did not fit the normative standards of the people’s com-munity or could be construed as an agent of social dissolutiontheoretically fell under the purview of the police.

We have to go with the times, even if thereare many, many things that we do not agree with. To swim againstthe current just makes matters worse.”

What was necessary, he insisted, was to“recognize yourself” (“Erkenne dich selbst”), which meant identi-fying with the idealized portraits of new Germans and following thetenets of hereditary biology to find a suitable partner for marriage,to marry only for love, and to provide the Volk with healthy chil-dren.

In November in Weimar, he promised that “if to-day there are still people in Germany who say: ‘We are not goingjoin your community, but stay just as we always have been,’ then Isay: ‘You will die off, but after you there will a young generationthat doesn’t know anything else!’”

The journalistSebastian Haffner noted that people in his circle in Berlin suddenlyfelt authorized to express an opinion on the “Jewish question,”speaking fluently about quotas on Jews, percentages of Jews, anddegrees of Jewish influence

During the war Klemperer, like so manyother Jews, was forced to move into the drastically smaller quartersof a “Jew house,” which meant that he had to dispose of books andpapers. “[I] am virtually ravaging my past,” he wrote in his di-ary on 21 May 1941. “The principal activity” of the next daywas “burning, burning, burning for hours on end: heaps of letters,manuscripts.

As a result, Germans could imagine one another infront of the radio listening to the same program: “Sunday isWunschkonzert,” wrote one soldier to his family back home; “youcertainly will be listening too.”

He believed Germans feltthat “it’s just us now” when they lived without Jews. “Just us” alsoexpressed the closed circle in which Germans could see and experi-ence “ourselves” as “we are” and as “we have become.”

but even then nothing made the “com-munity of fate” more compelling than “the conviction that therewill no longer be future for Germany after a lost war.”

“Ifonly the good old days would come back again, just one more time.Why do we have to have this dreadful war, which has disrupted ourpeaceful lives, broken our happiness, and dissolved all our big andlittle hopes for a new house into nothing?”

But when the German cheers wouldnot stop, “Hitler sensed a popular mood, a longing for peace andreconciliation.” This was also an indication of the general content-ment with things as they were.

heexplained in tears that her two sons had fallen in battle and the bal-lot had been their voice. 61The text precisely captures the way many people thought of Ger-many: as the tenacious underdog finally asserting its rights.

The dreamof the Volkswagen seemed to promise “a new, happier age” thatwould make “the German people rich and Germany beautiful,” asHitler put it. Indeed, the Volkswagen functioned as a symbol for thenewly won capacity to dream about the future: in this fundamentalsense, the Nazis appeared as “men of the future.”

he reports confirm that workers creditedHitler, in particular, for the restoration of economic stability.

the reports indicate that “workers not only wereunfree . . . but that most of them felt they were unfree, exploited,discriminated against and the victims of an unfair, class-ridden soci-ety.” Even during the boom years of 1937–39, “signs indicated thatNazism was further losing ground among workers.”

Ger-mans wore special badges to show they had donated their marks;the badges functioned so as to make citizens accountable to them-selves. “On Sundays,” Hauser remarked, “when collecting for theWinter-Relief Fund is going on in the streets no one would darewalk abroad without a badge pinned conspicuously to his coat.”

One-potmeals on the first Sunday of every month provided opportunitiesfor party representatives to go from door to door in the evening asthey collected the pfennigs that had been “saved,” and to snoop.

Evenbefore Hitler spoke (8:00 p.m.), the choreography of May Day hadfastened the links between workers and the nation, between ma-chinists and machine-age dreams, between technical mastery andnational prowess

“Something had to be done”—these were the simple, conclusive words voiced by a friend of KarlDürkefälden’s, jobless and a new convert to Nazism. His wordswere echoed by thousands of workers in the winter and springof 1933; though a socialist, Karl himself understood—“it’s truetoo,” he added parenthetically in his diary entry.

Dürkefälden wasalso able to describe something Elisabeth Gebensleben could not,namely, the story of how working-class conversions helped to cre-ate National Socialism.

When Karl pro-tested that local Nazis had arrested young workers in the neigh-borhood and seized a trade union building, his father retorted indialect, “Ordnung mot sein,” “You have to have order.”

“he doesn’t want to take part in any waragain,” Karl reported; “he has had enough.”

restricting their rep-resentation in the professions to their proportion in the population:“that is one percent.” Moreover, she explained, “Jews want to rule,not serve.” The proof: “have you ever heard of a Jewish maid or aJewish laundry woman?”

“I was overcomewith a burning desire to belong to these people for whom it was amatter of life and death.” Maschmann herself was drawn to the“socialist tendency” of the Nazi movement, the idea of the people’scommunity,

the officially organized boycott of Jewish businesses on 1April 1933 required a more considered answer. Elisabeth beganwith a concession, contrasting the “happiness” of the world-histor-ical events taking place in Germany with her “sympathy” for “thefate of the individual.”

ample, “is now a Nazi because of his job, but only for show.”Peine’s barber was in the SA, but Karl thought for “professionalreasons” only.

what he saw was an increas-ingly Nazified community in which neighbors now took notice ofKarl’s behavior and club members adjusted their own. What Karlwas resisting as he stood alongside his wife was the pressure to con-form, if only for the sake of appearances.

sincediscussions about Jewish suffering frequently switched to the sub-ject of German suffering: “Versailles” had taken the “opportunitiesfor life” away from Germans, who were now “completely under-standably” fighting back on behalf of their “own sons.”

As Chris brains Jeremy with abocce ball, the deer’s head is prominent in the background of the shot. Wewould hypothesize that the deer is a reminder not only of his mother (viahis earlier experience with the dying doe), but also of his ancestors moregenerally. African rhythms begin to pulse as Chris takes down Jeremy, andas Chris’s eyes flick to the buck’s head, lyrics are whispered in Swahili, thesame as the opening credits, translating to “Something bad is coming, listento your ancestors, run.” Through this non-diegetic song, with its whisperedmessage from the ancestors, the deer effectively speaks. It then aids Chris inhis escape when the buck’s horns serve as a weapon to kill Dean Armitage

He is tied up in the game room, facingan old television set, above which is the taxidermied head of a large buck.Its appearance of life-in-death not only foreshadows Chris’s future state ifthe Armitages’ plot is carried off successfully, as a Black body occupied bywhite consciousness, but it also reverberates with characterizations of thehistorical devaluation of Black lives in Atlantic slavery, as socially deadnon-subjects

plainly legible as having a connection to his nefariousconquest of Black lives, which he considers unworthy of being lived

eacts in a strangely unsympathetic way. “Well, you know what I say?”he responds. “I say, one down, a couple hundred thousand to go. No, I don’tmean to get on my high horse, but I’m telling you, I do not like the deer.I’m sick of it. They’re taking over. They’re like rats. They’re destroying theecosystem. I see a dead deer on the side of the road, I think to myself, ‘That’sa start.’

Testament of Pietrobono Burzelli

Letter from Pietrobon

A better description is in the specification itself. Why read secondary remarks when the source is written so good?

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf

The Viet Nam era draft card is also known by its legal description, the status card. The draft card was an aspect of the Selective Service Act, the federal legislation that legalized the conscription of eligible males into the American armed services during the Viet Nam war (1962–1973).

In Wall-E and the Toy Storytrilogy, the pleasure is of the suspen-sion of knowledge—the pleasure of notknowing.

One of the distinct pleasures in Pixar’s films is the pleasure of seeing the deepest of human struggles, timeless philosophical questions projected in and through remote forms of representation.

in an effort to engineer Buzz “getting lost” behind the desk so that Andy will take Woody on his expedition to Pizza Planet, Woody ends up accidentally pushing Buzz out the window

Stanley Cavell, in dis-cussing Frank Capra’s It Happened One Night (1934), hints at how internaliza-tion of censorship can lead to a flouting of censorship’s very purposes through parody

(Wall-E and the Toy Story trilogy [1995, 1999, 2010]) expand the limitations that have traditionally bound “family enter-tainment” under the G-rating by em-ploying a postmodern adaptation of the “principle of deniability,” a producer-designed multivalence that flourished in Hollywood from 1930–1968 under the Production Code (Vasey 104–13).

Pixar’s Toy Story (Dir. John Lasseter, 1995) and WALL-E (Dir. Andrew Stanton, 2008) are “innocent” animated film about ob-jects, their value as cinema lies in their ability to complexly address human—and sometimes wholly adult—fears about meaninglessness, apocalypse, and oblivion.

riveting mounds of metal dramatically revealed through the birds-eye shots that rival the buildings in height—are actually mile-high piles of trash.

In WALL-E, the humans have converted themselves into floating objects—mounds of flesh laden with too many conveniences to move for them-selves.

Toy Story 3 (2010) be-gins with Andy’s toys playing pretend. The setting is the Old West. Sheriff Woody fights the Potato Heads-cum-bandits to rescue a moving train full of orphan trolls. The Potato Heads escape the train in Barbie’s dream car. But the train is headed toward the precipice at the end of a dynamited trestle. Despite Woody’s efforts, the train plunges off the edge. We hear it thud below and see smoke rise from the chasm. Cow-girl Jessie’s jaw drops in utter disbelief and disappointment. For several long seconds as the energy of the action se-quence diffuses, we believe that Woody has failed. Then Buzz lifts the train out of the hole. But the threat is not, as we had imagined, contained but is instead reanimated and escalated. The toys are assailed by a mushroom cloud of “death by monkeys” and finally an unnamed threat behind a red button in Evil Dr. Porkchop’s dirigible.

Stinky Pete even asks Buzz if Andy “broke” him,