Movie Review: Downfall (German: Der Untergang)

A lot have been said and have been written about how innocent and naive the Germans were and how the the Nazis took this to their best advantage. A lot have been said about the 'good germans' and how evil the Nazis were. To be honest, if I were living in those troubled times, there is every possibility that I would have been a willing collaborator of the Nazis. when I say this, I don't mean that I support anti-antisemitism, the violent pan Germanism and the ludicrous racial theories.

The Weimar republic Post Gustav Stresemann was morally corrupt and was defeatist in attitude. In those troubled times, the Nazis were the only ones who inspired hope and had a plan for the revival of Germany. The guilt of the Germans were not in their collaboration with the Nazis but as Albert Seer rightly points out in his memoirs written while spending his 20 year term in Spandau (I will write detailed reviews of his works "Inside the Third Reich" and "Spandau - The secret diaries" on a later date) was in not putting to see the truth, not taking the effort to know about the violent and cruel nature of the Nazi Germany. This "Faustian deal" is the eternal shame of Germany. Oliver Hirschbiegel re-iterates this point thought the recorded words of real life Traudl Junge, which is the the crescendo of his film.

"Of course, the terrible things I heard from the Nuremberg Trials, about the six million Jews and the people from other races who were killed, were facts that shocked me deeply. But I wasn't able to see the connection with my own past. I was satisfied that I wasn't personally to blame and that I hadn't known about those things. I wasn't aware of the extent. But one day I went past the memorial plaque which had been put up for Sophie Scholl in Franz Josef Strasse, and I saw that she was born the same year as me,and she was executed the same year I started working for Hitler. And at that moment I actually sensed that it was no excuse to be young, and that it would have been possible to find things out."
- Traudl Junge

History is the best teacher but sadly human beings are the worst students! The experience of Germans is an eye opener for us Indians who off late have been experimenting with extreme rightist views.

Downfall depicts the final 6 days in the life of Adolf Hitler in Führerbunker (The bunker was the 13th and last of Hitler's Führerhauptquartiere or Führer Headquarters) and the death throes of Nazi Germany. Written by Bernd Eichinger and directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel, it was based on the book "Inside Hitler's Bunker" by Joachim Fest, Albert Speer's memoirs, and the memoirs of Traudl Junge, secretary of Adolf Hitler.

The film begins with an interview with the real-life Traudl Junge, who regrets not recognizing the Nazi horrors and her remorse at her younger self for not realizing what kind of a monster she was dealing with. The Swiss-German actor Bruno Ganz gives a great performance as Adolf Hitler in this film, which details the last ten days of the Third Reich. Hitler and his cronies are holed in the Führerbunker underneath the Reich Chancellery in Berlin as they are surrounded by the Red army. Despite the pleading from all, Hitler refuses to budge and refuses to evacuate. His iron will, which saw Nazi Germany through a lot of Military campaigns is not enough against the waves of Red army invading Germany. Hitler is shown as a human being whose beliefs are failing right infort of his eyes.

Treatment of the Third Reich is still a sensitive subject among Germans even 60 years after World War II's end and the film broke one of the last remaining taboos by its depiction of Adolf Hitler in a central role by a German speaking actor. Hilter's failing health and his sorry end is an irony and is true analogy, describing the fate of "12 year of Third Reich" which was supposed to last a thousand years. Director Oliver Hirschbiegel said that his purpose was to give Hitler a three-dimensional personality. "We know from all accounts that he was a very charming man —a man who managed to seduce a whole people into barbarism."

The film was widely criticised for humanizing Hitler. Germany's tabloid newspaper Bild asked during the time of its release - "Are we allowed to show the monster as a human being?" It was also criticized for presenting characters like a SS-Brigadeführer Wilhelm Mohnke and SS doctor Ernst-Günther Schenck into honorable human beings. Despite all misgivings, all critics and historians accept the fact that it was the most authentic portrayal of the last days of Hitler and Third Reich!

Downfall was nominated for the 2005 Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film in the 77th Academy Awards but lost to "Sea Inside" (I shall write a detailed review on the same on a later date) . The film also won the BBC's 2005 BBC 4 World Cinema award and currently holds a strong position in the Internet Movie Database's Top 250 Movies list.


Verdict: 8.5/10. A must watch and watch it three to four times, if you are interested in periodic films/making periodic films.

Book Review: India After Gandhi -The History of the World's Largest Democracy

I need to confess something before I attempt to review this book. I am one of those who have benefited professionally from this book. I guess you need to hear it as it is a hilarious story. Landmark s in Bangalore had organized a 'book reading' by Guha at the time of the release of this book and he started his session asking the audience to guess the number of languages in which the figure '500' was written in a five hundred rupee currency note. You would be surprised by the answer - "It is 15 (That too excluding the ubiquitous English man's tongue)!"

Now back to our story- A week later, I was trying to convince a European (A Belgian) the feasibility of outsourcing services to India. As expected, we dodged all questions on language, timings and was about to conclude the discussion when he came up with a 'Muralidharan doosra' - "You folks are used to outsourcing from US" he paused for a minute and continued "Continental Europe is much different than a US or a GB. Here we have multiple cultures and it is difficult to appreciate such subtle variations!"

Thankfully, I remembered the 500 Rupee story and after the whole story telling session, he was convinced that for an Indian, anything less than 10 different versions (be it language/culture/food habits) is abnormal. So I might become biased in my review (which is unintentional) which I promise that I will try my best to avoid.

Ramachandra Guha has done a great service to people like me, the Gen Y (Once upon a time I used to feel great, calling self Gen Y. Now a days the Gen AA calls me 'uncle' instead of a lovable 'chetta' or elder brother) - the beneficiaries of a system set up by Nehruvian politicians, who has no qualms in calling him various names like 'Charlatan, political scoundrel, pretender to the throne et al.' Three parts out of this six parts cover the formation of our nation and the foundation of its base.Before reading history of our nation, before knowing the kind of difficulties faced by our founding fathers, I used to hold them responsible for all the illness that India faced. Now when I juxtaposition their decisions with the times they lived, looking the superstructure they have created - the Indian constitution, its three arms and the machinery that enforces the actions of the arms, I cant stop admiring the vision and the foresightedness of our forefathers. All these happened in the late 1940s when India was reeling under the pressure of partition, world's bloodiest exodus, riots, famine and what not. Guha aptly summed up the formation of our constitution by saying "Fundamental rights were to be framed amidst the carnage of fundamental wrongs"

Ramachandra Guha does a fantastic job of telling the story of formation, but I was disappointed in him for not having dealt with where we started as a nation in 1947. A lot of us still believes in the theories of Seal/Gallagher/Namier - in the benevolence of the Imperial Raj. In fact recently I was shocked when a survey listed that a good amount of current generation believed that India would have been better off in the hands of Englishmen. (Then again I cant vouch for the veracity of their claims. As somebody rightly said "There are three kinds of lies...Lies, damned lies and then you have statistics"). India after Independence: 1947-2000 by Bipin Chandra, Mridula Mukherjee and Aditya Mukherjee does a better job of that. For those who believes that Indian rule took us to misery a simple statistics from that book. In 1940s we had 10 medical colleges in India, churning out 700 graduates and 7 Engineering colleges with 2217 graduates annually! An impartial analysis by Guha (with his background - MA in Economics from Delhi School of Economics) of the much maligned 'Nehru-Mahalanobis' era would have given us a better understanding on where we started, what we achieved and where we went wrong. Then again, I can't say if that is the job of a sociologist-historian or that of an economist. Let us hope that some day, some one like Amartya Sen with a unique knowledge of Economics and history would write a book on that.

I had always taken articles on Indira and emergency with a pinch of salt as I felt those as either hymns in worship of Indira or it would be those of Indira baiters who ascribe every evil in the world to her. Part 4 of the book does a detailed analysis on the rise of Indira and the circumstances that led to emergency. While not absolving Indira of the crime of assuming a dictatorship, Guha also gives some insight into the actions of JP and other veterans who forced Indira. As Guha rightly points out, while Indira adopted extra constitutional methods to retain her power, JP and co was preaching the very same to keep her out of power, which led to the confrontation. Guha rightly sums up the excess through the words of New York Times' correspondent in India A M Rosenthal "Had Nehru lived while Indira reigned, she would have been in PM's house and Jawaharlal would have been back to writing letters to her from jail!"

A singular feature of this book which makes it different from others covering the history of post independent is that an attempt was made to cover the stories of regional satraps. Since I am a novice with little or no knowledge on Indian history, I can't comment on other leaders,but being from Kerala, I can talk about EMS Namboothiripad. Guha terms Nehru's dismissal of democratically elected communist government as one of his main failures as a just leader. While it is true that the opposition led by congress went into an alliance with communal church and upper caste Hindu NSS, a student of Kerala history would have known about the excesses committed during the communist rule which made it unpopular. Post reading this book, I decided to talk to some of those who lived in that era to get a better picture. Since my family has a congress leaning, I decided to do an informal poll amongst the parents of my known neutral friends (which is a rarity in Kerala). All of them talked about the "Cell rule" (Communist Party's local cells) that made life difficult in Kerala in those times. Even today, each time the CPM comes to power, the state matters are decided by the party's local leaders. To me it is a subversion of our constitution and our system. May be that is one of the reasons why Keralites keep on alternating the parties. It's the greatest shame of my state that leaders of one party (congress) are corrupt and the other party is systemically corrupt! How else can you classify a party that owns some 4 channels, 1 newspaper, 1 magazine, couple of industries and a whole lot of real estate and that too they claim that they made through 'Bucket pirivu' (Party volunteers collecting donations from farm hands in a bucket!) It's better not talking about the recent scandals involving 'donations' in the order of crores from an absconding crook!

N.S Rajaram in his review of the book in The week dated 27 May, said "The author's relative success with recent history in contrast to his weak coverage of earlier period may be due to his approach as a social anthropologist than a research historian" Guha exonerating BJP from the condemnation as a fascist party might have prompted Rajaram to term Guha's coverage of recent history as a success but I feel it was the weakest of the lot in this book. Guha has nothing but contempt for Rajiv Gandhi. In fact it showed during the book reading when he claimed that Rajiv's only legacy was flying a cesna non stop from X to Y. (I forgot his exact words). For all his defects, and for all his shortcomings (which is in multiude like the sikh riots/Shah Bhano case/Opening of Ayodhya etc etc), Rajiv was a symbol of hope for India. For that matter, today's telecom revolution owes a lot to his so called 'immature ideas' about technology and his much maligned 'computer boys'. To draw a parallel, I hope Guha wont say that Kennedy's only legacy was bedding Marlyn Monroe! I also can't understand why according to Guha the credit to a Mizo accord or a Bodo accord shouldn't go to Rajiv (as it was made possible by seasoned diplomats). Is there any accord anywhere in the world which wasn't done by diplomats? The very little I know, a leader gets the credit for making the climate for an accord, which is then well sewed up by his diplomats.

For all the disagreements, this is a scholarly work by is a good starting point to understand post Independent India. To be fair on Guha, it is impossible to cover in depth about India's 60 years simply because, India is too huge to cover. My only disappointment about this book (despite the 775 pages) was that it got over so soon. I heard a lot of people saying this is Ramachandra Guha's magnum opus. I hope it isn't and his magnum opus is yet to come for this book has really created a hunger in me to know more about India's journey in the last 60 years.

Verdict: 7/10. A must have in your book shelf

PS: I had already bought a copy when I went for the book reading, but meeting the writer I admire a lot, couldn't help not buying a second signed copy. :-) So anyone planning to buy this book, please get in touch with me.