Movie Review: Hannah Arendt



MOVIE REVIEW: Hannah Arendt  Reviewed by Henry Solomon

[Archived from Objective Motifs, August/September 2013 with minor edits]

A new movie that deserves a wide audience is “Hannah Arendt”.  It’s an intellectual biography focusing on her reporting of the Eichmann trial in 1961.  According to Roger Berkowitz, Director of the Hannah Arendt Center, some of the scenes in the movie were fictionalized, but the portrayal of Arendt’s intellectual development is accurate, and it is the portrayal of this development and her famous conclusion about “the banality of evil” that makes the movie first rate.  A movie about serious ideas is very seldom made these days, and when the ideas are so relevant to the times we live in, it is like finding water in a desert.  The acting is superb, especially that of Barbara Sukowa who plays Hannah Arendt.  All of the actors portray serious people seriously concerned about ideas.  Ms. Sukowa’s portrayal of Arendt’s intransigence reminded me of Ayn Rand and her defense of her ideas in the face of vehement opposition.

What is tragic in Arendt’s analysis is how terribly wrong her ultimate conclusions were.  Fortunately, her conclusions, which I explain below, have not been included in the movie, and so do not undercut it.

In the Q&A I attended, at a second showing of the movie, Roger Berkowitz answered questions about her ideas and life.  As Eichmann had claimed,  he was merely following orders, he was a bureaucrat, who as Arendt identifies, had subverted his identity to the “higher cause” of Nazism, had lost his identity to Hitler, and was an obedient follower.  In Arendt’s words from the film: “He was a nobody.”  That is what she meant by “banality of evil.”  Eichmann was only one person in a population of nobodies in service to Hitler.   The tragic aspect of this is the implication Arendt draws from her conclusion about the Nazi followers.  It was her view that it is dangerous for people to be overly “zealous” about their ideas.  This view is terribly mistaken with regard to ideas that are true and deserve to be defended with the same intransigence that Arendt herself did.  One is left wondering whether Arendt believed that there is such a thing as absolute truth worthy of a “zealous” defense.  On visiting the Hannah Arendt website I was left with the distinct impression that she did not consider reality to be absolute.  Probably the most disheartening argument for this view is the fact of her ongoing lifelong friendship with Martin Heidegger.  It’s as though his ideas and his life had no moral implications, as though there was nothing in reality to identify a morality proper to man’s life.  The best analysis of Arendt’s ultimate conclusions is given by Leonard Peikoff in his book The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom in America (Penguin, Meridian, NY, July 1993, pp 2256-257).

“Hannah Arendt, the best and most philosophically inclined of the commentators, is also, in regard to her ultimate conclusions, the worst, i.e., the most perversely wrong-headed.  In a final warning, she singles out for special attack the attitude which she regards as a major source of the Nazis’ evil and of their success: an unswerving commitment to logic.  The Nazis, she says, and the masses attracted to them, were ‘too consistent’ in pursuing the implications of a basic premise (which she identifies as racism); they gave up the freedom of thought for ‘the straight jacket of logic’ or ‘tyranny of logicality'; they did not admit that complete consistency “exists nowhere in the realm of reality,’ which is pervaded instead by ‘fortuitousness’.”

“Like the other commentators, but even more so, Miss Arendt moves in the modern intellectual mainstream, accepting without challenge all its basic ideas, including the conventional derogation of logic.  Thus she can fail to see what her own book makes all but inescapable: that the essence of Hitler’s theories was not consistency, but unreason; that ‘fortuitousness’ is a property not of reality, but of Nazism; and that ‘logicality’ is not tyranny, but weapon against it.”

“It is a sin to study the agony of a continent of victims and end up offering as explanation the intellectual equivalent of a drugstore nostrum, or worse: end up preaching, as antidote, an essential tenet of the murderers.”

[Leonard Peikoff, The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom in America,  Penguin/Meridian, 1993, New York, pp 256-257.

Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (new ed, New York,  Harcourt Brace & World, 1966, pp 457, 470, 473, 471, 351, as cited in The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom in America by Leonard Peikoff, Penguin/Meridian, New York, 1993, pp 256-257. ]

     In summary, it is a great movie dramatizing important ideas that are relevant to the world we live in, but should be seen with the awareness that these ideas are not Arendt’s final conclusions about what makes it possible for people like Eichmann to exist.

Copyright © Henry Solomon, 2013

Romanticism in Music

Romanticism in Music by Anna Franco

[Revised from a post originally posted on Nov. 12, 2009 on a previous blog, Ledger Line Notes.]
I once said about Brahms that he portrays a certain sense of life: that life is neither trivial (as is sometimes expressed in Mozart’s music), nor impossible (as is sometimes expressed in Beethoven’s music). This is not to say that everything by Mozart expresses only triviality — or that everything by Beethoven expresses the impossibility of life; but I do detect a tendency towards those two poles in their music.
The essence of Romanticism is far more complex than just the unusual in music, although this is a factor in characterizing the style; a more full explanation is needed.  There are relationships between music (and art in general) and cognition. For more on this subject, including on music as an imitation of the cognitive process, see Ayn Rand’s The Romantic Manifesto.
I think that Romantic music is structured in such a way to also imitate the direct pursuit of values, without accepting structural conventions that interfere with this goal.  I think it does so through a variety of ways that can be observed in the music, including chromaticism and acceleration. The result is the unusual, just as following principles leads one to conclusions that might seem unusual in comparison to those of traditional rules. What might be unusual can actually sound “right” to me, if it follows a principle, though it may still be unexpected or rarely heard.
Further, I don’t think the essence of Romanticism is that it “breaks the rules”. In general, Romanticism does “break *with* the rules,” which is different, and still not necessarily its essence.  The atonalists broke with something as well: with the *principle* of tonality, and Serialists came up with their set of arbitrary rules.  The great Romanticists have a set of musical ideas of their own.  The essence of their style may depend more on what the Romanticist does accept rather than what he breaks with.
Some close relationship between reason or rationality, and the principle of tonality might be at the center of Romanticism, although earlier musical styles (such as Baroque music), adhere to the principle of tonality as well and also rely on rational compositional techniques.   Musicians’  reasoning about music must have progressed in some way. Perhaps this shows up in a degree of higher complexity in the material and again, some tie to pursuit of values, some goal-orientation that is expressed in the music through the tensions created by the intervals.
On the question of whether Beethoven is a Romantic: Beethoven retained a classical style, though he made changes.  His way of expressing things, I think, much closer to Mozart’s style than to those of Mendelssohn or Schubert.  If there were a transitional period, he could be at the center of it, but it still would not make him a Romanticist.  He inspired some Romanticists, and to be sure, they attribute much to him. Some musicians may want to claim Beethoven as a Romantic, but I am not convinced. Others want to claim that he had some important role in bringing the movement about. That is different, and there may be a case for that, but it should still be shown. In the meantime, to those concerned, I can only suggest that they listen to many different Romanticists and then to Beethoven, Haydn, Mozart, and Clementi. The similarities between Beethoven and the latter three should be more pronounced then any similarities between Beethoven and Romanticists such as Chopin, Rachmaninoff, Brahms, Verdi, Schumann, or even with the earlier Romanticists such as Karl Maria von Weber.
Copyright © Anna Franco, 2009, 2015

New Book Releases

LIGHT MOTIFS, November 2014–New Book Releases, posted by Anna Franco

Two new books are being released this week.

1. Hummingbirds in Winter by Anna Franco was released November 12, 2014, and is available on CreateSpace [] and on [Update 03/18/15:  The first edition of this book is currently unavailable, but the 2nd edition has recently been released.]

2. The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels by Alex Epstein is being released on November 13, 2014.  The hardcover is now an  best seller: #1 for two categories and #2 for a third category. [Update 11/14/14: today, it was listed #1 for all three categories.]     The Kindle e-book is also doing very well.

For now, here is a brief synopsis of each; I may also write more about them later.

Hummingbirds in Winter is a work of fiction about a composer, Ben Solansky, who travels with his family to find safety, as the Nazis take over Europe, The story starts in 1938, continues through the Second World War, and into its aftermath.  Solansky composes musical works that give him strength to continue, as he tries to establish a new life for himself.

The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels by Alex Epstein is a work of nonfiction.  It is a defense of fossil fuels from the many attacks by environmentalists.  Alex Epstein shows how our use of fossil fuels has improved our lives in many ways, making our lives longer, cleaner, and safer.  He also shows what is wrong with the environmentalists’ positions.  At this time, the hardcover is listed on as #1 in the category: Engineering & Transportation/Engineering/Energy Production & Extraction/Fossil Fuels and the category: Business & Money/Industries/Energy & Mining/Natural Resource Extraction.  It is #2 in the category Engineering & Transportation/Engineering/Civil & Environmental/Environmental.  [Update 11/14/14: today, it was listed #1 for all three categories.]

Measure Our Advances, Not Our Footprints

This piece was revised from a post from May 2011 on an earlier (currently inactive) blog of mine, the earlier post itself was revised from an original version, written in February 2010.

Measure Our Advances, Not Our Footprints
by Anna Franco

We are continually told by the environmentalists and their supporters that we should measure our carbon emissions, cap our energy use, and limit our use of certain technologies for fear that we might cause destruction by raising the earth’s temperature by a degree or two. As people learn of the actual disasters faced on earth, they need to question these claims.

In the last several years, numerous earthquakes struck the world. The earthquake which brought such misery to Haiti was devastating, yet earthquakes are not new: they have been documented across history since ancient times. They are not set off by our footprints, carbon or actual, large or small.   An earthquake-tsunami pair that causes high death toll and damage is not caused by climate change, but by underground pressures.  The giant tsunami that hit Southeast Asia in 2004 was terrifying, yet a tsunami wave is no stranger to coastal cities; they have been documented across the globe. They are set off by earthquakes and are known for their destructive potential.

The actual disasters, which naturally happen over and over again, can kill hundreds to hundreds of thousands of people within a short period of time. These known dangers are the killers, not the hypothesized man-made global warming. The world needs to prepare itself for those disasters which can and will strike again. It needs to do that with energy-using technologies that have saved lives before and will continue to do so, as long as we do not stop relying on them.

Science has given us the means to prevent terrible destruction; technology has made it possible to create buildings that withstand the shocks of the earthquakes, and early warning systems which alert people of the oncoming earthquake. The world can either can follow the path of reason, science, and technology, which makes life possible and safer, or it can follow the road of environmentalism, a road of endless attacks against mankind and its use of energy. This road has nothing to offer Japan and Haiti, while reason, science, and technology have much to offer the world, now and in the future.

Copyright © Anna L. Franco, 2010, 2011, 2014

Support Oil Platforms, Not Environmentalist Platforms

This piece was revised from a piece originally written in August 2008 and posted on my earlier (currently inactive) blog (FinalCausation) in May 2011.

Support Oil Platforms, not Environmentalist Platforms

by Anna Franco

Environmentalism places the value of the Earth above man’s own life. The movement has harmed the oil industry’s productivity by convincing people that the selfish pursuit of earthly resources is morally wrong.  Selfishness is a human virtue, as explained by philosopher Ayn Rand. In her novel Atlas Shrugged, her character Ellis Wyatt was a dramatic hero whose brilliance was matched by the flame burning at his oil refinery. If that flame goes out, so does a good part of civilization.

Today, in the name of the environment, the flames of future oil refineries are at risk. These flames represent great efforts and achievements: the ability to take part of the Earth and create energy to improve all aspects of our lives. People should be proud of this ability because it allows them to go beyond their physical efforts at work and rely on their minds, giving them the energy, time, and wealth to live as humans, not as self-made slaves.

Fuel is vital to our happiness and to the functioning of this country. Three important sources of unrecovered oil in the US are: offshore, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and the huge Green River Basin oil shale bed in Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana, which by itself, if recovered, could make the US a major supplier of shale oil.

Lifting drilling bans would be is a major step towards a freer energy economy; however, to resolve the longer term issue, Americans need to recognize and assert their moral right to use the earth for their own purposes. Safety procedures are always an important consideration, as they are in our own best interests, but environmentalism and the resulting legislation that puts the environment on a higher plane than our lives is itself a dangerous policy.

Copyright © Anna L. Franco, 2008, 2014.

At the Stossel Show on FOX Business

by Anna Franco

I was in the audience of a Stossel Show on FOX Business.  The show aired on Thursday, October 2, 2014, at 9PM:  It’s a Mean, Mean World?   John Stossel discussed the crime rates, gun laws, and even Hollywood celebrities. Here is a link to John Stossel’s related blog entry:

Here are two clips from the show, and I also updated this post with the full episode after the clips.  In the first clip, which really takes place towards the end of the program, John Stossel and guests on the show take questions from the audience.  I ask a question (around 1:02 seconds in the clip), and it was answered by John Lott.

Clip:  Stossel: It’s a Mean, Mean World,

Clip: Stossel: It’s a Mean, Mean World:

(Updated post)

Stossel: It’s a Mean, Mean World?:

Standing Up for Industry

In view of the People’s Climate March that took place in NYC on Sunday, September 21, 2014, I have decided to link below to some related past posts.  I do not agree with the rally’s theme, and I think that these past posts should shed some light on why.  The first is my post on Adventures of the Light Brigade. of March 2013, posted November 2013.  The second is The I Love Fossil Fuels Campaign, from June/July 2013, posted in November 2013.

A relevant update to the I Love Fossil Fuels efforts: Alex Epstein and others attended the People’s Climate March carrying a poster that read: “I Love Fossil Fuels”.  Alex Epstein can be seen here on Twitter:
Houston has The Energy Corridor, but, for one day, NYC had…an energy toreador?

Here are links to two pieces I have on PJMedia on energy.  (Note: I have worked in the oil industry.)

“The Dark Future of Energy Exploration” by Anna Franco.  PJMedia, September 15, 2013.  

“Green Appeasement: Oil, Gas Industry Wasting Billions on ‘Alternatives'” by Anna Franco.  PJMedia, July 7, 2013:

Notes on recent release: Courage With a Cure

Notes on Courage With a Cure, by Anna Franco

Courage With a Cure is my play, released in August 2014.  I started writing the play around the time that I was researching medical innovation for a talk that I gave in 2012.  The play is about a patient who needs medication that is not available in the US.


Courage With a Cure is about a woman, Ginnie Searlyse, who discovers that she has a neurological disorder that prevents her from playing the piano, typing, writing, or doing other things that use fine motor skills with her hands.  She has ataxia/dysmetria, a disorder that prevents her from accurately judging distance, which causes her to have trouble striking the right keys on a piano or keyboard.

Ginnie seeks medical help and is referred to a hospital in Taiwan, where she can be treated with a drug that is not available in the US.  Cerebesil (a made-up drug for the story) has a strange side effect.   As she progresses through her treatment, Ginnie learns that the side effect of this drug has attracted the attention of some who are neither doctors nor their patients.

Is Ginnie affected by the side effect?

Unity of Purpose

This play does not uphold the unity of time and space, although it does have an integrated plot idea.  It takes place over several months and spans two continents.  This was necessary for the plot, as the main character is being treated with medication over this time period, and the medicine is only available on the other side of the world.  I had to show Ginnie over several months, and I had to have her travel from the US to Taiwan for the treatment to happen.

I was not bothered by this fact about the play; it still remained logical.  Unity of time and place are classical ideas in drama.  One of my favorite plays, Cyrano de Bergerac by Rostand also does not hold to the unity of time and place.  Cyrano travels to the Spanish border, and the play concludes many years later, after the main action has taken place.  Still, the play upholds a integrated purpose and plot.

I tried to uphold an integrated purpose in the plot and action of Courage With a Cure, as the main action centered around Ginnie getting her medicine, despite whatever obstacles come her way.


Two of the biggest challenges I faced when writing Courage With a Cure were (1) having the doctor and the biochemist explain the drug’s side effect, and (2) working through a scene with bad guys.

Challenge #1.  Explaining the side effect of the drug was difficult because the human mind is complex.   I did not want the message to be that the drug can substitute for character, or that virtue comes in a pill, but I did want the effect of the drug to be significant in the plot and in the character’s lives.  I also wanted to show a separation between reason and emotion.  To bring these theoretical ideas into a plot was challenging.

There were so many opportunities for the characters to misunderstand or misinterpret the side effects, and in fact, that is what I was counting on with the criminal characters.  Even the good characters had valid concerns and questions. Ginnie understandably worries that the side effect of the drug, with its behavior altering ability, could defeat the overall purpose of the drug, which is to give her more control over her fingers’ actions.  Mr. Isaki questions whether the drug makes a person more moral, or whether it just effects their emotional experience.

Although I think the length of the play was appropriate for that story, I realize that the drug’s side effect could be explored in far more depth (perhaps this is the basis for a sequel).

Challenge #2.  Creating evil characters is a challenge, at least it is for me.  There is a tendency on my part to distance myself from them, yet I do not want them to be cardboard characters.  In Courage With a Cure, the two criminal characters do not even have names, apart from Man #1 and Man #2.  This is not unique to the bad guys, though; even the guards have names Guard #1, 2 and 3.  Still, it is a sign that I could not consider the villains beyond their necessary place in the plot.   I do show that as criminals, they are also cowards, aptly so in a book about courage.  They are short-range characters with no appreciation for the independent human mind, unlike the heroes of the play, the doctors, biochemist, and some of the patients.


Courage With a Cure was not initially meant to be humorous.  In fact, it covers very serious subjects (illness, crime).  For the most part, the play is serious, but elements of humor do crop up,   Still, the fact that people are trying so hard to get on with their lives, despite their medical condition, shows that the subject truly is serious (although this is not incompatible with the humorous elements).


Courage With a Cure is available on and CreateSpace e-store.