Quotation
Last reviewed:
“The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal.”
Hannah Arendt · Political philosophy · Modern · 1963
What does it mean?
The trouble with Eichmann was that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, but terribly and terrifyingly normal. Normality is not reassuring in this sentence. It is the frightening part. A rival reading says she excused him by calling him normal, or that she denied the antisemitism that was not normal at all. The sentence says the crime was carried by people who did not need to be monsters of the imagination. It does not say the crime was normal. Another reading wants a medical verdict.
Did Hannah Arendt really say this?
The library’s label is Well attested. Arendt's English in Eichmann in Jerusalem, in the discussion of his normality. Confirm the page in the edition. 'Terribly and terrifyingly normal' is her phrase. It belongs with the banality sentence and is not a softer substitute for it.
Where it comes from
Eichmann in Jerusalem
Approximate date: 1963.
How to use it
A review into a harm in a British institution finds no sadist and relaxes. Her sentence is the warning against that relaxation. It is not a finding that the institution is a totalitarian state. It is a finding about what not to require, a perverted inner life, before you see how ordinary people carry a procedure. The procedure can still be judged. The normality is not the judgement. It is the trouble.
A mindset reading
Read this with the banality phrase, not instead of it. One is about the lesson of the last minutes. This one is about the number of people like him. Together they block both 'he was a demon' and 'he was just a cog, so no one was at fault'.
Understand the philosophy
Eichmann in Jerusalem is the report. This sentence is part of why the report offended. The offence is not a reason to misquote her into excusing him. The book asks for the death penalty. The normality is not a plea for leniency.
- ethics
- society
- mind
FAQ
What does it mean?
The trouble with Eichmann was that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, but terribly and terrifyingly normal. Normality is not reassuring in this sentence. It is the frightening part. A rival reading says she excused him by calling him normal, or that she denied the antisemitism that was not normal at all. The sentence says the crime was carried by people who did not need to be monsters of the imagination. It does not say the crime was normal. Another reading wants a medical verdict.
Did Hannah Arendt really say this?
Well attested. Arendt's English in Eichmann in Jerusalem, in the discussion of his normality. Confirm the page in the edition. 'Terribly and terrifyingly normal' is her phrase. It belongs with the banality sentence and is not a softer substitute for it.
Which work is it in?
Eichmann in Jerusalem Approximate date: 1963.