W HEN I saw Hanna again, it was in a courtroom.
It wasn’t the first trial dealing1 with the camps, nor was it one of the major ones. Our professor, one of the few at that time who were working on the Nazi2 past and the related trials, made it the subject of a seminar, in the hope of being able to follow the entire trial with the help of his students, and evaluate it. I can no longer remember what it was he wanted to examine, confirm, or disprove. I do remember that we argued the prohibition3 of retroactive justice in the seminar. Was it sufficient that the ordinances4 under which the camp guards and enforcers were convicted were already on the statute5 books at the time they committed their crimes? Or was it a question of how the laws were actually interpreted and enforced at the time they committed their crimes, and that they were not applied6 to them? What is law? Is it what is on the books, or what is actually enacted7 and obeyed in a society? Or is law what must be enacted and obeyed, whether or not it is on the books, if things are to go right? The professor, an old gentleman who had returned from exile but remained an outsider among German legal scholars, participated in these debates with all the force of his scholarship, and yet at the same time with a detachment that no longer relied on pure scholarship to provide the solution to a problem. “Look at the defendants—you won’t find a single one who really believes he had the dispensation to murder back then.”
The seminar began in winter, the trial in spring. It lasted for weeks. The court was in session Mondays through Thursdays, and the professor assigned a group of students to keep a word-for-word record for each day. The seminar was held on Fridays, and explored the data gathered during the preceding week.
Exploration! Exploring the past! We students in the seminar considered ourselves radical8 explorers. We tore open the windows and let in the air, the wind that finally whirled away the dust that society had permitted to settle over the horrors of the past. We made sure people could breathe and see. And we placed no reliance on legal scholarship. It was evident to us that there had to be convictions. It was just as evident that conviction of this or that camp guard or enforcer was only the prelude9. The generation that had been served by the guards and enforcers, or had done nothing to stop them, or had not banished10 them from its midst as it could have done after 1945, was in the dock, and we explored it, subjected it to trial by daylight, and condemned11 it to shame.
Our parents had played a variety of roles in the Third Reich. Several among our fathers had been in the war, two or three of them as officers of the Wehrmacht and one as an officer of the Waffen SS. Some of them had held positions in the judiciary or local government. Our parents also included teachers and doctors, and one of us had an uncle who had been a high official in the Ministry12 of the Interior. I am sure that to the extent that we asked and to the extent that they answered us, they had very different stories to tell. My father did not want to talk about himself, but I knew that he had lost his job as lecturer in philosophy for scheduling a lecture on Spinoza, and had got himself and us through the war as an editor for a house that published hiking maps and books. How did I decide that he too was under sentence of shame? But I did. We all condemned our parents to shame, even if the only charge we could bring was that after 1945 they had tolerated the perpetrators in their midst.
We students in the seminar developed a strong group identity. We were the students of the camps—that’s how the other students described us, and how we soon came to call ourselves. What we were doing didn’t interest the others; it alienated13 many of them, literally14 repelled15 some. When I think about it now, I think that our eagerness to assimilate the horrors and our desire to make everyone else aware of them was in fact repulsive16. The more horrible the events about which we read and heard, the more certain we became of our responsibility to enlighten and accuse. Even when the facts took our breath away, we held them up triumphantly17. Look at this!
I had enrolled18 in the seminar out of sheer curiosity. It was finally something new, not contracts and not property, torts or criminal law or legal method. I brought to the seminar my arrogant19, superior airs. But as the winter went on, I found it harder and harder to withdraw—either from the events we read and heard about, or from the zeal20 that seized the students in the seminar. At first, I pretended to myself that I only wanted to participate in the scholarly debate, or its political and moral fervor21. But I wanted more; I wanted to share in the general passion. The others may have found me distant and arrogant; for my part, I had the good feeling all that winter that I belonged, and that I was at peace with myself about what I was doing and the people with whom I was doing it.
我又见到汉娜是在法庭上。
那不是第一次对集中营罪犯的开庭审判，也不是规模很大的一次。有位教授就这次审判开了一门课，他希望借助学生们的帮助对整个审判过程进行追踪并对此加以分析。他是当时为数不多的对纳粹历史及有关的审判程序进行研究的人士之一。我已记不得了他要考查、证明或者驳斥什么。我记得在课堂上我们就禁止追加惩罚进行过讨论。根据他们犯罪时就业已存在的刑法的有关条款来审判那些集中营看守和刽子手就足够了吗？或者视其犯罪之时人们如何理解运用这些刑法条款，并要看这些条款是否也涉及到他们？什么是法？是法律条文的规定还是在社会上真正被实施和遵守的东西？或者，法就是在正常情况下必须加以实施和遵守的东西，不管它们是否已被写进法律条文？那位教授是一位流亡国外后归来的老先生，但在德国法学界仍是一位局外人。他以他的渊博学识，但同时又保持一定距离地参加了关于一些问题的讨论，不过，那些问题都是些不能靠学问解决的问题。"仔细观察一下那些被告人，您将找不出任何一个真的认为他当时可以杀人的人。"
我们上的那门课在冬季学期开始，法庭的审判在年初，审判持续了很长时间。从星期一到星期四法庭开庭审判。教授每天都指派了一组学生做文字记录。星期五大家坐下来讨论，把一周来的审判情况清理出来。
清理！清理过去！我们参加这门课的学生把自己看做是清理的先锋。在过去的可怕历史上已经积满了一层尘埃，我们用力地把窗户打开，让最终能卷起这种尘埃的风进来。但是我们还要为人们的呼吸、人们的视觉而负责。同样，我们也不完全依赖我们的法律知识。必须要进行审判，这对我们来说是确定无疑的。到目前为止，对这个或那个集中营的看守或刽子手的审判流于肤浅，这我们来说同样是确定无疑的。那些利用看守和刽子手的人，那些没有阻止他们的人，或者至少在一九四五年该揭发检举他们而没有这样做的人现在被送上了法庭。我们在清理工作中对他们进行审判，谴责他们的可耻行为。
我们这些人的父母在第三帝国时期扮演的角色也完全不同。有些人的父亲参加了战争，其中有两位或三位是德国国防军的军官，有一位是纳粹党卫军兵器部的军官，有几位在司法、行政机构发迹升迁。我们的父母中也有教师和医生，其中一位同学的叔叔是和帝国内政部长共事的高级官员。我敢肯定，只要我们问起他们而他们又给我们答复的话，他们所要告诉我们的会是五花八门。我的父亲不想讲他自己，但是我知道，他哲学讲师的位子是因为预告要开一门关于斯宾诺莎的深而丢掉的。做为一家出版旅游图和导游手册的出版社的编辑，他带领我们全家度过了那场战争。我怎么能谴责他是可耻的呢？但是我还是这样做了。我们都谴责我们的父母是可耻的，如果可能的话，我们还起诉他们，因为一九四五年之后他们容忍了他们周围的罪犯。
参加我们这门课的学生形成了一个拥有自己的明显特征的小组。起初其他学生称我们为集中营问题研究班，不久之后我们自己也如此称呼起来。对我们的所作所为，一些人不感兴趣，更多的人感到惊讶，另一些人感到反感。现在我想，我们在了解这段可怕的历史并在试图让其他人也了解这段可怕历史的过程中所表现出的热情，的确令人反感。我们读到、听到的事实真相越可怕，控诉和清理的任务也就越明确。即使是令我们窒息的事实真相，我们也要胜利地高举着它们。瞧这！
我报名参加这个研讨班完全是出于好奇，因为这样就可以换点其他内容了，否则一味是买卖法、犯罪和参与犯罪、德国中世纪法典或古代法律哲学。我把已经养成的傲慢自大、目空一切的习惯也带到了班上。不过，在那个冬季里，我越来越不能自拔，不是不能从我们所读、所看到的事实真相中自拔，也不是不能从研究班的学生们所表现出的热情中自拔。起初，我只想分担一点同学们的科学、政治或伦理道德方面的热情，但是，这不过是自欺而已。我越来越想更多地参与，想与他们分担全部热情。其他人可能还是觉得我仍！日与他们保持着距离，认为我高傲自大。可我在那个冬季的几个月里自我感觉不错，觉得已属于那个研究班了，觉得我了解了自己、自己所做的事和与我共事的同学。
收听单词发音 |
1
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
Nazi
|
|
| n.纳粹分子，adj.纳粹党的，纳粹的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
prohibition
|
|
| n.禁止；禁令，禁律 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
ordinances
|
|
| n.条例，法令( ordinance的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
statute
|
|
| n.成文法，法令，法规；章程，规则，条例 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
enacted
|
|
| 制定（法律），通过（法案）( enact的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
radical
|
|
| n.激进份子，原子团，根号；adj.根本的，激进的，彻底的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
prelude
|
|
| n.序言，前兆，序曲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
banished
|
|
| v.放逐，驱逐( banish的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
ministry
|
|
| n.(政府的)部；牧师 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
alienated
|
|
| adj.感到孤独的，不合群的v.使疏远( alienate的过去式和过去分词 )；使不友好；转让；让渡（财产等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
literally
|
|
| adv.照字面意义，逐字地；确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
repelled
|
|
| v.击退( repel的过去式和过去分词 )；使厌恶；排斥；推开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
repulsive
|
|
| adj.排斥的，使人反感的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
triumphantly
|
|
| ad.得意洋洋地；得胜地；成功地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
enrolled
|
|
| adj.入学登记了的v.[亦作enrol]( enroll的过去式和过去分词 )；登记，招收，使入伍（或入会、入学等），参加，成为成员；记入名册；卷起，包起 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
arrogant
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，自大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
zeal
|
|
| n.热心，热情，热忱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
fervor
|
|
| n.热诚；热心；炽热 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |