What do you think?
Rate this book
Critical Lives
زندگینامهی هانا آرنت
اندیشههای هانا آرنت در سالهای اخیر بسیار مورد استقبال خوانندگان ایرانی قرار گرفته است. ترجمههای مختلفی که از آثار او انجامشده، شاهدی بر صحت گفتهی ما است، اما کتاب زندگینامهی او ما را با زوایای دیگری از شخصیت آرنت روبهرو میکند و خاطرات و لحظات خصوصیاش را پیش چشممان نمایش میدهد. نویسندهی کتاب -که خود استاد اندیشهی سیاسی و معاون «مرکز علومانسانی هانا آرنت» در کالج بارد است- با جمعآوری اسنادی مهم، روایتی جذاب از زندگی پرفرازونشیب وی ارائه کرده است. حاشیههای زندگی آرنت، هم بهواسطهی از سر گذراندن تجربهی جنگ جهانی دوم و اخراجش از دانشگاه، و هم بهخاطر ارادتی که به استادش هایدگر داشت، همواره مورد بحث بوده است؛ اینبار اما همگی این تجربیات و چیزهایی بیشتر از این، اصل موضوع قرار گرفته است. اینبار قرار است با هانا آرنت شاعر ملاقاتی داشته باشیم، هانا آرنت عاشق. جذابیت چنین زندگینامههایی این است که میتوانیم به مدد آنها، اندیشههای یک متفکر را در بستر تاریخچهی زندگیاش و شرایط سیاسی، اجتماعی و تاریخیای که در آن زیسته است درک کنیم. اگرچه زندگی این فیلسوف سیاسی معاصر، ناگفتههای بسیاری دارد، اما با اینحال، کتاب به شکلی مختصر و موجز به اصلیترین عناوین خود پرداخته است. سامانتا رزهیل هنوز هم به تحقیقاتاش دربارهی زندگی و اندیشهی آرنت ادامه میهد و این خود حکایت از آن دارد که نباید زندگی و زمانهی چنین متفکری را دستکم گرفت
248 pages, Paperback
First published August 2, 2021
57 people are currently reading
603 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews
April 13, 2024
هانا آرنت ، اندیشمند ، متفکر و تاریخ نگار سرشناس آلمانی بود . او با آرا و اندیشههای عمیق خود، نقشی ماندگار در قرن بیستم ایفا کرد . میراث فکری او همچنان مورد بحث و کاوش قرار میگیرد .
آرنت که یهودی بوده، طعم تلخ دو جنگ جهانی، فشار نازیها بر یهودیان و وحشت اردوگاه را چشید و تجربه کرد . اما تسلیم نشد و با رهایی از چنگال نازی ها ، به آمریکا رفت و در آنجا با نوشتن کتاب هایی مانند عناصر و خاستگاه های حاکمیت توتالیتر ، انقلاب ، وضع بشر، آیشمن در اورشلیم و حیات ذهن به یکی از برجستهترین متفکران عصر خود تبدیل شد .
یکی از مهمترین نظریات آرنت که در کتاب آیشمن در اورشلیم مطرح شده مفهوم ابتذال شر است . او با دیدن ظاهر مبتذل و معمولی آیشمن این گونه استدلال میکند که آیشمن یک هیولا یا یک دیوانه نبود، بلکه یک فرد معمولی بود که به سادگی از دستورات اطاعت میکرد. او معتقد بود که آیشمن به دلیل فقدان تفکر انتقادی و فقدان همدلی، مرتکب جنایات هولناکی شده است. آرنت این نوع از شر را ابتذال شر نامید.
به عقیده آرنت، ابتذال شر زمانی رخ میدهد که افراد به طور آگاهانه از قوه عاقله خود دست بکشند و به دستورات یا هنجارهای اجتماعی، بدون توجه به عواقب اخلاقی آنها، اطاعت کنند. این افراد به جای اینکه به طور مستقل فکر کنند و وجدان خود را دنبال کنند، از دیگران تقلید میکنند و به دنبال تأیید دیگران هستند. آرنت ابتذال شر را خطری جدی برای جامعه می داند، زیرا میتواند منجر به ارتکاب جنایات هولناکی شود. او معتقد بود که برای جلوگیری از وقوع چنین جنایاتی، ضروری است که افراد به طور مستقل فکر کنند، وجدان خود را دنبال کنند و از اطاعت کورکورانه از دستورات یا هنجارهای اجتماعی خودداری کنند.
آرنت عضو برجسته ای ازحلقه فیلسوفان و نویسندگانی مانند هایدگر ، کارل یاسپرس ، مری مککارتی ، ریچارد کان و والتر بنیامین بود که هم از آنها تاثیر پذیرفت و البته بیشتر بر آنها تاثیر گذاشت . آرنت از طریق بحثها و تعاملات خود با این فیلسوفان و نویسندگان برجسته، به چالش کشیده شد و افکارش شکل گرفت. او از ایدههای آنها الهام گرفت و در عین حال، مسیر فکری خود را نیز دنبال کرد . آرنت در حالی که از ایدهها و تجربیات آنها آموخت، اما در نهایت دیدگاهها و نظرات خاص خود را در مورد فلسفه، سیاست و شرایط انسانی ارائه کرد .
کتاب زندگینامهی هانا آرنت نوشته سامانتا رز هیل را می توان شرحی جامع و عمیق از زندگی و اندیشههای آرنت دانست . هیل در این کتاب، خواننده را به سفری در مهمترین مقاطع زندگی آرنت میبرد، از دوران کودکی او در آلمان تا فرار از رژیم نازی و سپس مهاجرت به ایالات متحده و تبدیل شدن به یکی از تاثیرگذارترین متفکران سیاسی عصر خود.
نویسنده با ظرافت و دقت، پیچیدگیهای زندگی آرنت را به تصویر میکشد و تلاش میکند تا تناقضات و چالشهایی را که او با آنها روبرو بوده، به وضوح نشان دهد. هیل همچنین به بررسی عمیق اندیشههای فلسفی و سیاسی آرنت پرداخته و مفاهیم کلیدی در فلسفه او مانند توتالیتاریسم، شر و ابتذال شر، ، آزادی، عدالت و مسئولیت را مورد تحلیل قرار میدهد.
هیل کوشیده با استفاده از نامهها، خاطرات، دستنوشتهها و سایر اسناد ، تصویری جامع و دقیق از این فیلسوف برجسته ارائه دهد. اوبه ارائه تصویری کلی از آرنت اکتفا نکرده . هنر او شناساندن آرنت در متن زندگی خود به خواننده در متن تجربه زیسته اش است ، تا شاید این گونه خواننده ارتباط میان دوره های مختلف زندگی آرنت را با آثار و اندیشه های او بهتر درک کند .
تعریف آرنت
رزهیل زمان زیادی صرف کرده تا بتواند واژه مناسبی برای توصیف آرنت پیدا کند ، توصیف او سرانجام مجموعه ای از کلمات ناموزون است :
چرا هم اکنون باید هانا آرنت خواند ؟
نویسنده به این پرسش ، به روشنی پاسخ داده . او اعتراف می کند که قرن حاضر ، قرن آرنت نیست و موضوعاتی مانند توتالیتریسم ، شر و عدالت مطابق با زمانه باز تعریف شده و مفهوم نسبتا جدیدی پیدا کرده اند . این جاست که آرنت اهمیت خود را نشان می دهد ، او انسان را به اندیشیدن و تفکر از نو و از نو در مورد دنیا دعوت می کند . آرنت با بسط مفهوم تفکر تاملی کانت ، انسان را به تفکر بر روی درک عمیقتر جهان و جایگاه ما در آن فرا خوانده و تفکر تأملی را برای پرسشهای فلسفی، اخلاقی و سیاسی حیاتی می داند . این گونه تفکر تأملی به ما امکان میدهد تا زندگی خود را معنا ببخشیم و در مورد نقش خود در جامعه تأمل بیشتری کنیم.
آن چه کتاب زندگی نامه ی هانا آرنت را خواندنی تر و جذاب تر کرده ، ترجمه فاخر ، دقیق و روان علی معظمی است. ترجمه معظمی، به ویژه در انتقال مفاهیم فلسفی پیچیده و اصطلاحات تخصصی فلسفه سیاسی، تبحر و ظرافت قابل توجهی از خود نشان داده . او با انتخاب معادلهای دقیق و گویا برای واژگان، به خواننده کمک کرده تا به درکی عمیقتر از اندیشههای آرنت دست یابد .
آرنت که یهودی بوده، طعم تلخ دو جنگ جهانی، فشار نازیها بر یهودیان و وحشت اردوگاه را چشید و تجربه کرد . اما تسلیم نشد و با رهایی از چنگال نازی ها ، به آمریکا رفت و در آنجا با نوشتن کتاب هایی مانند عناصر و خاستگاه های حاکمیت توتالیتر ، انقلاب ، وضع بشر، آیشمن در اورشلیم و حیات ذهن به یکی از برجستهترین متفکران عصر خود تبدیل شد .
یکی از مهمترین نظریات آرنت که در کتاب آیشمن در اورشلیم مطرح شده مفهوم ابتذال شر است . او با دیدن ظاهر مبتذل و معمولی آیشمن این گونه استدلال میکند که آیشمن یک هیولا یا یک دیوانه نبود، بلکه یک فرد معمولی بود که به سادگی از دستورات اطاعت میکرد. او معتقد بود که آیشمن به دلیل فقدان تفکر انتقادی و فقدان همدلی، مرتکب جنایات هولناکی شده است. آرنت این نوع از شر را ابتذال شر نامید.
به عقیده آرنت، ابتذال شر زمانی رخ میدهد که افراد به طور آگاهانه از قوه عاقله خود دست بکشند و به دستورات یا هنجارهای اجتماعی، بدون توجه به عواقب اخلاقی آنها، اطاعت کنند. این افراد به جای اینکه به طور مستقل فکر کنند و وجدان خود را دنبال کنند، از دیگران تقلید میکنند و به دنبال تأیید دیگران هستند. آرنت ابتذال شر را خطری جدی برای جامعه می داند، زیرا میتواند منجر به ارتکاب جنایات هولناکی شود. او معتقد بود که برای جلوگیری از وقوع چنین جنایاتی، ضروری است که افراد به طور مستقل فکر کنند، وجدان خود را دنبال کنند و از اطاعت کورکورانه از دستورات یا هنجارهای اجتماعی خودداری کنند.
آرنت عضو برجسته ای ازحلقه فیلسوفان و نویسندگانی مانند هایدگر ، کارل یاسپرس ، مری مککارتی ، ریچارد کان و والتر بنیامین بود که هم از آنها تاثیر پذیرفت و البته بیشتر بر آنها تاثیر گذاشت . آرنت از طریق بحثها و تعاملات خود با این فیلسوفان و نویسندگان برجسته، به چالش کشیده شد و افکارش شکل گرفت. او از ایدههای آنها الهام گرفت و در عین حال، مسیر فکری خود را نیز دنبال کرد . آرنت در حالی که از ایدهها و تجربیات آنها آموخت، اما در نهایت دیدگاهها و نظرات خاص خود را در مورد فلسفه، سیاست و شرایط انسانی ارائه کرد .
کتاب زندگینامهی هانا آرنت نوشته سامانتا رز هیل را می توان شرحی جامع و عمیق از زندگی و اندیشههای آرنت دانست . هیل در این کتاب، خواننده را به سفری در مهمترین مقاطع زندگی آرنت میبرد، از دوران کودکی او در آلمان تا فرار از رژیم نازی و سپس مهاجرت به ایالات متحده و تبدیل شدن به یکی از تاثیرگذارترین متفکران سیاسی عصر خود.
نویسنده با ظرافت و دقت، پیچیدگیهای زندگی آرنت را به تصویر میکشد و تلاش میکند تا تناقضات و چالشهایی را که او با آنها روبرو بوده، به وضوح نشان دهد. هیل همچنین به بررسی عمیق اندیشههای فلسفی و سیاسی آرنت پرداخته و مفاهیم کلیدی در فلسفه او مانند توتالیتاریسم، شر و ابتذال شر، ، آزادی، عدالت و مسئولیت را مورد تحلیل قرار میدهد.
هیل کوشیده با استفاده از نامهها، خاطرات، دستنوشتهها و سایر اسناد ، تصویری جامع و دقیق از این فیلسوف برجسته ارائه دهد. اوبه ارائه تصویری کلی از آرنت اکتفا نکرده . هنر او شناساندن آرنت در متن زندگی خود به خواننده در متن تجربه زیسته اش است ، تا شاید این گونه خواننده ارتباط میان دوره های مختلف زندگی آرنت را با آثار و اندیشه های او بهتر درک کند .
تعریف آرنت
رزهیل زمان زیادی صرف کرده تا بتواند واژه مناسبی برای توصیف آرنت پیدا کند ، توصیف او سرانجام مجموعه ای از کلمات ناموزون است :
هانا آرنت متفکری شاعر مسلک بود ولی شاعر نبود ، گرچه شعر هم سروده بود . آرنت فیلسوف نبود ، اما به کار فلسفی مشغول بود . هانا آرنت زندگی نامه نویس نبود ، گرچه برای فهم شرایط بشری متن های زندگی نامه ای فراوانی نوشت . هانا آرنت روزنامه نگار ، منتقد ، جستارنویس ، منتقد کتاب ، ویراستار یا فعال سیاسی نبود ، گرچه هرکدام از این فعالیت ها که در مسیر زندگی اش قرار گرفت بخشی از عمرش را صرفشان کرد . شاید اگر بخواهیم ادعایی ایجابی راجع به او بکنیم باید هم زبان با مری مک کارتی بگوییم که هانا آرنت در مقام اندیشمندی تمام عیار به صف سقراط و یاسپرس پیوست .
چرا هم اکنون باید هانا آرنت خواند ؟
نویسنده به این پرسش ، به روشنی پاسخ داده . او اعتراف می کند که قرن حاضر ، قرن آرنت نیست و موضوعاتی مانند توتالیتریسم ، شر و عدالت مطابق با زمانه باز تعریف شده و مفهوم نسبتا جدیدی پیدا کرده اند . این جاست که آرنت اهمیت خود را نشان می دهد ، او انسان را به اندیشیدن و تفکر از نو و از نو در مورد دنیا دعوت می کند . آرنت با بسط مفهوم تفکر تاملی کانت ، انسان را به تفکر بر روی درک عمیقتر جهان و جایگاه ما در آن فرا خوانده و تفکر تأملی را برای پرسشهای فلسفی، اخلاقی و سیاسی حیاتی می داند . این گونه تفکر تأملی به ما امکان میدهد تا زندگی خود را معنا ببخشیم و در مورد نقش خود در جامعه تأمل بیشتری کنیم.
آن چه کتاب زندگی نامه ی هانا آرنت را خواندنی تر و جذاب تر کرده ، ترجمه فاخر ، دقیق و روان علی معظمی است. ترجمه معظمی، به ویژه در انتقال مفاهیم فلسفی پیچیده و اصطلاحات تخصصی فلسفه سیاسی، تبحر و ظرافت قابل توجهی از خود نشان داده . او با انتخاب معادلهای دقیق و گویا برای واژگان، به خواننده کمک کرده تا به درکی عمیقتر از اندیشههای آرنت دست یابد .
August 30, 2021
Writer and political thinker Hannah Arendt has been gaining in popularity in recent years. Part of this renewed interest links to her work on totalitarianism. An interest fuelled in no small part by the rise of political figures like Trump and Putin, who seem to fit with her notion of the emergence of a strongman telling a story that appears to account for people’s anxieties and suffering. And this year there’s concrete indication of her growing status with the publication of not one but two new biographies. Samantha Rose Hill’s compressed account combines an introduction to Arendt’s thought with details of her personal life. So, Hill follows Arendt from her early years, her time as a philosophy student in Germany, and her, now notorious, affair with eminent philosopher Heidegger, who later became a Nazi supporter. Hill charts Arendt’s repudiation of traditional philosophy with its closed-off approaches to thinking about the world, which she believed contributed to the rise of National Socialism or – at least – led to a catastrophic failure to recognise its implications or challenge its actions and belief system. Hill then shifts to discussing how Arendt, who placed herself out of standard academic circles, produced her own conceptualisation of the political shifts and conditions that paved the way for world war and the Holocaust.
Hill has been teaching and writing about Arendt for some time so has a more than decent grounding in her subject. But reading this it’s hard not to wonder if that closeness to Arendt is as much a problem as it’s a benefit. This is because of the way in which Hill tends to gloss over key foundational aspects of Arendt’s thought or seems to takes for granted an audience already familiar with much of the territory she covers. She discusses, for example, Arendt’s attitude to her Jewish identity and to Zionism but doesn’t explain how this differed from other forms of Zionism then in circulation. She clarifies the ways of thinking most alien to Arendt but doesn’t cover in any detail significant influences such as Greek philosophers like Socrates and Plato. She also has a tendency to throw in highly specific terms without any concession to readers who might not recognise them and does this throughout: so, we get casual references to branches of philosophy like ontology, and a host of similar academic frameworks, along with important concepts like “loss of the commons.” She hurries past crucial stages of Arendt’s developing thought but then takes her time over the details of Walter Benjamin’s death in flight from the Nazis – another touchstone for Arendt - but seems to take it for granted that readers will know who Benjamin was and what he stood for. This made it hard to work out who Hill’s addressing here, or what she’s aiming to achieve with this brief overview.
I’ve dipped in and out of Arendt but I’ve never taken the time to reflect on her background, her concepts or her intellectual underpinnings in any rigorous sense, so I thought reading this might be a useful way of fitting disparate pieces together. Although to be honest, part of that choice was because I’m too lazy to plough through Elizabeth Young-Bruehl’s massive biography. But I often found this as frustrating as it was enlightening. I think, to be fair to Hill, this is partly because she’s trying to cover a life and body of work in a little over 200 pages, which is a pretty challenging brief, especially for Arendt someone who's impossible to fully grasp outside of her political, cultural and historical contexts. I imagine Hill found it very difficult to edit down and edit out a great deal of the material she’s undoubtedly amassed on her subject, but the end result is, I think, quite compromised. It’s too vague for people totally new to Arendt and too basic for anyone with a reasonable idea of what Arendt represents. It doesn’t help that Hill includes very few examples or analogies that might give readers a sense of the implications of Arendt’s theories about the world. It’s also a pity that the publisher’s format doesn’t allow for additions such as a timeline, glossary, and suggestions for further reading.
Hill has been teaching and writing about Arendt for some time so has a more than decent grounding in her subject. But reading this it’s hard not to wonder if that closeness to Arendt is as much a problem as it’s a benefit. This is because of the way in which Hill tends to gloss over key foundational aspects of Arendt’s thought or seems to takes for granted an audience already familiar with much of the territory she covers. She discusses, for example, Arendt’s attitude to her Jewish identity and to Zionism but doesn’t explain how this differed from other forms of Zionism then in circulation. She clarifies the ways of thinking most alien to Arendt but doesn’t cover in any detail significant influences such as Greek philosophers like Socrates and Plato. She also has a tendency to throw in highly specific terms without any concession to readers who might not recognise them and does this throughout: so, we get casual references to branches of philosophy like ontology, and a host of similar academic frameworks, along with important concepts like “loss of the commons.” She hurries past crucial stages of Arendt’s developing thought but then takes her time over the details of Walter Benjamin’s death in flight from the Nazis – another touchstone for Arendt - but seems to take it for granted that readers will know who Benjamin was and what he stood for. This made it hard to work out who Hill’s addressing here, or what she’s aiming to achieve with this brief overview.
I’ve dipped in and out of Arendt but I’ve never taken the time to reflect on her background, her concepts or her intellectual underpinnings in any rigorous sense, so I thought reading this might be a useful way of fitting disparate pieces together. Although to be honest, part of that choice was because I’m too lazy to plough through Elizabeth Young-Bruehl’s massive biography. But I often found this as frustrating as it was enlightening. I think, to be fair to Hill, this is partly because she’s trying to cover a life and body of work in a little over 200 pages, which is a pretty challenging brief, especially for Arendt someone who's impossible to fully grasp outside of her political, cultural and historical contexts. I imagine Hill found it very difficult to edit down and edit out a great deal of the material she’s undoubtedly amassed on her subject, but the end result is, I think, quite compromised. It’s too vague for people totally new to Arendt and too basic for anyone with a reasonable idea of what Arendt represents. It doesn’t help that Hill includes very few examples or analogies that might give readers a sense of the implications of Arendt’s theories about the world. It’s also a pity that the publisher’s format doesn’t allow for additions such as a timeline, glossary, and suggestions for further reading.
October 22, 2022
“ Não há pensamentos perigosos .
Pensar em si mesmo é que é perigoso “
H A
Está biografia não é o que eu esperava da grande pensadora que foi HA, por demasiado simplista
Como obra de divulgação para quem pretende uma introdução à obra de HA, cumpre o objectivo
Pensar em si mesmo é que é perigoso “
H A
Está biografia não é o que eu esperava da grande pensadora que foi HA, por demasiado simplista
Como obra de divulgação para quem pretende uma introdução à obra de HA, cumpre o objectivo
December 4, 2025
هرآنچه که میتونستم از یه زندگینامه انتظار داشته باشم رو به کمال داشت. خیلی از این کتاب آموختم. بهاندازهی یکپنجم کل صفحاتش یادداشت برداشتم. اگر بخوام ازش بگم، حداقل بیستصفحه مینویسم. نمیتونم خلاصه کنم.
November 2, 2021
How appropriate that Samantha Rose Hill's biography "Hannah Arendt (Critical Lives)" arrived at a time when I was listening to the audiobook "The Human Condition" by Hannah Arendt. That way I had Hannah's own words during my morning walks and read her life story in the evening.
Hannah Arendt is one of my favorite thinkers albeit some of her work is just at the limits of my personal intellectual comprehension. I love her directness and straightforwardness in thinking. Hannah Arendt's work challenges me to question my own believes and to revisit old assumptions and life philosophies regularly.
I saw Samantha Hill in a podium discussion of some Brazilian readers. I could tell that she too was a huge fan of Hannah Arendt. It is reflected in her biography of Arendt. She writes with sympathy about Arendt's struggles under the Nazis, but also with herself and her own, unapologetic personality. It is refreshing that Arendt's relationship with Heidegger, often the center point of interests and discussions, received its rightful place in Arendt's life story as told by the author. He was a lover, friend, and mentor. But he was one among many. I am in awe that Arendt could distinguish within her friends between the personalities she loved and the opinions or actions that she did not supported and therefore openly criticized.
I would have loved to know more about Arendt's friendship with Walter Benjamin and Paul Tillich. Arendt crossed paths with so many important thinkers and writers. I would also have liked some more of Arendt own poems to further show the soft side of Hannah Arendt.
I especially appreciated that Hill put major works of Hannah Arendt into her biographical context while summarizing the main aspects and goals of each work. That Hannah Arendt loved thinking and that her writing was her way of thinking is clear from any of her works. However, Samantha Hill made Arendt personable to the point that I would have loved to have a conversation with Arendt. I would have loved to hear Hannah Arendt's thought on Donald Trump, Hilary Clinton, Putin, and our current time of information pollution. She probably would have reminded me that history is not a collection of human knowledge but human events. One has to form one's own time period.
I will continue my quest of reading Hannah Arendt's works. Samantha Rose Hill introduced me to the person behind the intellectual. What a beautiful gift. Thank you!
Hannah Arendt is one of my favorite thinkers albeit some of her work is just at the limits of my personal intellectual comprehension. I love her directness and straightforwardness in thinking. Hannah Arendt's work challenges me to question my own believes and to revisit old assumptions and life philosophies regularly.
I saw Samantha Hill in a podium discussion of some Brazilian readers. I could tell that she too was a huge fan of Hannah Arendt. It is reflected in her biography of Arendt. She writes with sympathy about Arendt's struggles under the Nazis, but also with herself and her own, unapologetic personality. It is refreshing that Arendt's relationship with Heidegger, often the center point of interests and discussions, received its rightful place in Arendt's life story as told by the author. He was a lover, friend, and mentor. But he was one among many. I am in awe that Arendt could distinguish within her friends between the personalities she loved and the opinions or actions that she did not supported and therefore openly criticized.
I would have loved to know more about Arendt's friendship with Walter Benjamin and Paul Tillich. Arendt crossed paths with so many important thinkers and writers. I would also have liked some more of Arendt own poems to further show the soft side of Hannah Arendt.
I especially appreciated that Hill put major works of Hannah Arendt into her biographical context while summarizing the main aspects and goals of each work. That Hannah Arendt loved thinking and that her writing was her way of thinking is clear from any of her works. However, Samantha Hill made Arendt personable to the point that I would have loved to have a conversation with Arendt. I would have loved to hear Hannah Arendt's thought on Donald Trump, Hilary Clinton, Putin, and our current time of information pollution. She probably would have reminded me that history is not a collection of human knowledge but human events. One has to form one's own time period.
I will continue my quest of reading Hannah Arendt's works. Samantha Rose Hill introduced me to the person behind the intellectual. What a beautiful gift. Thank you!
April 30, 2024
من خیلی وقت بود که میخواستم اثار ارنت رو بخونم اما نیاز داشتم از زندگی،سبک نوشتار،عقاید،نقاط تاریک و روشن افکار و خیلی چیزهای دیگهی ارنت اطلاعات نسبی داشته باشم و این کتاب همین کارو برای من کرد.نه اونقدر حجیم که خسته کننده باشه نه اونقدر جسته و گریخته که هیچی نفهمی و صرفا ورق زده باشی..
بنظرم برای شروع اشنایی با هانا ارنت پیشنهاد خوبی میتونه باشه.
بنظرم برای شروع اشنایی با هانا ارنت پیشنهاد خوبی میتونه باشه.
April 23, 2022
It is a rarity for a person to be acknowledged as an expert in a particular field, especially when the individual in question lends an impression of staying removed by a few degrees from the very sphere that has accorded her such an exalted status. Hannah Arendt was one such individual. Universally acknowledged as one of the most famous critical thinkers of our times, Arendt brought an “outside in” perspective to her cutting edge thinking. She was an expert and an outsider, the advocate as well as the skeptic. In her own words, thinking was a dialogic process – a “two in one” approach. To facilitate the activity of thinking, one ought to retreat from the remorseless glare of the public in order to experience the silent dialogue of thought. “When one experiences the silent dialogue of thought, the thinking ego splits in two, and when one reappears in the world, the ego repairs itself into one.”
Samantha Rose Hill, in “Hannah Arendt” has produced an aperçus of Arendt that is an unmistakable trigger for curiosity. This slim biography is neither a vivisection of the pedagogy of Arendt’s philosophy nor a dissection of her eventful and intellectual life. Instead it is a benevolent door that is slightly held ajar for any inquisitive soul to venture deep into the dazzlingly profound world of Hannah Arendt. Hill certainly possesses the requisite credentials – and more – to undertake this formidable endeavour. She is an assistant director of the Hannah Arendt Center for Politics and Humanities at Bard College. Bard College, incidentally, preserves Arendt’s humongous personal library.
Born in Hannover, Germany in 1906, Arendt’s family moved to Königsberg, when she was still a toddler. Losing her father to syphilis and attendant complications, and being targeted for her Jewish pedigree, birthed in Arendt not only a sense of introversion but also an unshakeable degree of determination and righteousness. A chance opportunity to see Rosa Luxemburg in the flesh at a feisty Spartacist rally further exacerbated Arendt’s independence and fueled a passion that would thread through her entire life. Arendt was dispatched by her mother to Berlin, where she studied philosophy and theology under Romano Guardini.
Arendt’s life took a tumultuous turn when she landed at the University of Marburg after being goaded into doing so by her childhood friend, Ernst Grumach, who was deeply influenced by the teaching of Martin Heidegger. Arendt not only took Heidegger’s classes on Plato and Aristotle, but also started a turbulent affair with Heidegger, reverberations of which would be felt for decades. The University of Leipzig followed Marburg where Arendt wrote her dissertation on love and Saint Augustine under the tutelage of Edumund Husserl, Heidegger’s professor. However Arendt’s greatest influence would be the inimitable existentialist philosopher and psychologist, Karl Jaspers. Jaspers ‘ thinking was premised on the worldly, and the concept of constituting the world in common can be seen permeating the works of Arendt.
Arendt soon married Günther Anders and began working on her habilitation, Rahel Vahnhagen: the Life of a Jewish woman. Hannah Arendt’s life took on a decisive colour of defiance and morality after the infamous burning of the Reichstag. Talking about the event, she said, ‘I couldn’t be a bystander.” She fled Hitler’s Berlin in 1933, to Paris without papers and a smattering of French. This period characterised a ferment of intellectual thinking. An astounding gang of ‘intellectuals in exile’ such as Jean Paul Sartre, Bataille, Lacan, Breton, Merleu-Ponty and Arendt formed an eclectic band of heterogenous thinkers. A brief and horrific spell at the Gurs internment camp preceded a fortuitous escape to the United States, when Arendt and her second husband Heinrich Blücher were the lucky recipients of 2 of the 238 visas granted by the United States to Jews escaping the Nazis.
It was in the United States, in 1951, that Arendt published her 600-odd page magnum opus, The Origins of Totalitarianism. Origins contended that there was a clear distinction between the features of authoritarianism, tyranny fascism, and totalitarianism. The perfidy of totalitarianism rested on the bulwark of a radical atomization of the individual, elimination of spontaneity and political freedom. Thus according to Arendt, the basic construct of totalitarianism was the instrumentalization of terror and construction of concentration camps. According to Arendt, ‘The real horror of the concentration and extermination camps, lies in the fact that the inmates, even if they happen to keep alive, are more effectively cut off from the world of the living than if they had died, because terror enforces oblivion.’
Arendt was offered a lectureship at Princeton University, thereby becoming the first woman to be offered such a position at Princeton. She also assumed teaching duties at University of Chicago, University of California Berkeley, and at Williams College. The Origins was followed by The Human Condition in 1958. Samantha Rose Hill describes this book as one ‘which demonstrates the activity of thinking itself’. The Human Condition is a searing examination of the life of action from the perspective of human experience and activity in the world.
Arendt covered herself in controversy with her work Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Covering the Eichmann trial in Israel, Arendt was disillusioned with the proceedings which she termed a ‘circus’. The notorious Eichmann, according to Arendt was a clown. This was not because of any element of hilarity, but because of an element of irrationality and a lack of expansive thinking. Arendt took refuge in a line from the poet Bertolt Brecht, who contemplates ‘The great political criminals must be exposed and exposed especially to laughter’. Arendt was eviscerated by the Jewish community for reducing an evil of untold proportions to the trivia of banality. Affected people alleged that Arendt was claiming anybody could have done what Eichmann did.
Arendt was vociferous and convinced in whatever stance she took. Maybe this iron clad self-belief was what attracted a bevy of intellectuals to her. After the demise of Blücher, both W.H. Auden and Hans Morgenthau made platonic proposals to her which were understandably turned down. On December 4th, 1975, Hannah Arendt entertained Salo and Jeanette Baron for dinner. Post dinner, she was taken up by a brief coughing spell, which made her sink into her chair and lose consciousness. A doctor who was summoned pronounced her dead. Arendt had suffered a massive heart attack.
The legacy of Hannah Arendt’s work is rich not just in quantum but in content. She always exhorted her readers to ‘think without a banister’. According to her, thinking was equivalent to traipsing up and down a staircase with absolutely nothing to hold on to. But even with nothing to hold onto, the thinker might have everything in his arsenal to bank on.
‘Hannah Arendt‘ – a biography of contemplation.
Samantha Rose Hill, in “Hannah Arendt” has produced an aperçus of Arendt that is an unmistakable trigger for curiosity. This slim biography is neither a vivisection of the pedagogy of Arendt’s philosophy nor a dissection of her eventful and intellectual life. Instead it is a benevolent door that is slightly held ajar for any inquisitive soul to venture deep into the dazzlingly profound world of Hannah Arendt. Hill certainly possesses the requisite credentials – and more – to undertake this formidable endeavour. She is an assistant director of the Hannah Arendt Center for Politics and Humanities at Bard College. Bard College, incidentally, preserves Arendt’s humongous personal library.
Born in Hannover, Germany in 1906, Arendt’s family moved to Königsberg, when she was still a toddler. Losing her father to syphilis and attendant complications, and being targeted for her Jewish pedigree, birthed in Arendt not only a sense of introversion but also an unshakeable degree of determination and righteousness. A chance opportunity to see Rosa Luxemburg in the flesh at a feisty Spartacist rally further exacerbated Arendt’s independence and fueled a passion that would thread through her entire life. Arendt was dispatched by her mother to Berlin, where she studied philosophy and theology under Romano Guardini.
Arendt’s life took a tumultuous turn when she landed at the University of Marburg after being goaded into doing so by her childhood friend, Ernst Grumach, who was deeply influenced by the teaching of Martin Heidegger. Arendt not only took Heidegger’s classes on Plato and Aristotle, but also started a turbulent affair with Heidegger, reverberations of which would be felt for decades. The University of Leipzig followed Marburg where Arendt wrote her dissertation on love and Saint Augustine under the tutelage of Edumund Husserl, Heidegger’s professor. However Arendt’s greatest influence would be the inimitable existentialist philosopher and psychologist, Karl Jaspers. Jaspers ‘ thinking was premised on the worldly, and the concept of constituting the world in common can be seen permeating the works of Arendt.
Arendt soon married Günther Anders and began working on her habilitation, Rahel Vahnhagen: the Life of a Jewish woman. Hannah Arendt’s life took on a decisive colour of defiance and morality after the infamous burning of the Reichstag. Talking about the event, she said, ‘I couldn’t be a bystander.” She fled Hitler’s Berlin in 1933, to Paris without papers and a smattering of French. This period characterised a ferment of intellectual thinking. An astounding gang of ‘intellectuals in exile’ such as Jean Paul Sartre, Bataille, Lacan, Breton, Merleu-Ponty and Arendt formed an eclectic band of heterogenous thinkers. A brief and horrific spell at the Gurs internment camp preceded a fortuitous escape to the United States, when Arendt and her second husband Heinrich Blücher were the lucky recipients of 2 of the 238 visas granted by the United States to Jews escaping the Nazis.
It was in the United States, in 1951, that Arendt published her 600-odd page magnum opus, The Origins of Totalitarianism. Origins contended that there was a clear distinction between the features of authoritarianism, tyranny fascism, and totalitarianism. The perfidy of totalitarianism rested on the bulwark of a radical atomization of the individual, elimination of spontaneity and political freedom. Thus according to Arendt, the basic construct of totalitarianism was the instrumentalization of terror and construction of concentration camps. According to Arendt, ‘The real horror of the concentration and extermination camps, lies in the fact that the inmates, even if they happen to keep alive, are more effectively cut off from the world of the living than if they had died, because terror enforces oblivion.’
Arendt was offered a lectureship at Princeton University, thereby becoming the first woman to be offered such a position at Princeton. She also assumed teaching duties at University of Chicago, University of California Berkeley, and at Williams College. The Origins was followed by The Human Condition in 1958. Samantha Rose Hill describes this book as one ‘which demonstrates the activity of thinking itself’. The Human Condition is a searing examination of the life of action from the perspective of human experience and activity in the world.
Arendt covered herself in controversy with her work Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Covering the Eichmann trial in Israel, Arendt was disillusioned with the proceedings which she termed a ‘circus’. The notorious Eichmann, according to Arendt was a clown. This was not because of any element of hilarity, but because of an element of irrationality and a lack of expansive thinking. Arendt took refuge in a line from the poet Bertolt Brecht, who contemplates ‘The great political criminals must be exposed and exposed especially to laughter’. Arendt was eviscerated by the Jewish community for reducing an evil of untold proportions to the trivia of banality. Affected people alleged that Arendt was claiming anybody could have done what Eichmann did.
Arendt was vociferous and convinced in whatever stance she took. Maybe this iron clad self-belief was what attracted a bevy of intellectuals to her. After the demise of Blücher, both W.H. Auden and Hans Morgenthau made platonic proposals to her which were understandably turned down. On December 4th, 1975, Hannah Arendt entertained Salo and Jeanette Baron for dinner. Post dinner, she was taken up by a brief coughing spell, which made her sink into her chair and lose consciousness. A doctor who was summoned pronounced her dead. Arendt had suffered a massive heart attack.
The legacy of Hannah Arendt’s work is rich not just in quantum but in content. She always exhorted her readers to ‘think without a banister’. According to her, thinking was equivalent to traipsing up and down a staircase with absolutely nothing to hold on to. But even with nothing to hold onto, the thinker might have everything in his arsenal to bank on.
‘Hannah Arendt‘ – a biography of contemplation.
February 9, 2023
Criticism has been levied against Samantha Rose Hill's biography as being too general: either Hill assumes the reader is already familiar with Arendt's work or that the details are not important. I did not find this to be the case since I was not interested in someone else's interpretation of Arendt's political and philosophical theories nor was I interested in the minutae or salaciousness that can come with certain types of biographies.
I appreciated how succinct Samantha Rose Hill weaves Arendt's life and the circumstances that coloured her experience. And whilst I do think there were times in which Hill was a little too generous in her characterisation of Arendt, I admire Hill's efforts to concretise the shape of Arendt's experiences to provide understanding of Arendt's theoretical responses to the world around her.
Probably what I enjoyed most is the subtly of Hill's narrative. Early in Arendt's life, she turned her back on Heidegger, whom she believed prioritised thought over action that led to his associations with Nazism--it was the practice of theory over the awareness of the real. Yet, ironically, Arendt would encounter this issue herself--thought over action--time and again in her own work. This, in of itself, is interesting, but what is more interesting is the philosophical complexity of thought and action in real time through Arendt as a representative.
The distinct nature of thought requires lack of action: it is a removal of action (both of acting and of doing) that subjects itself to a lack of experience. Whenever Arendt attempts to 'act out' her premises, she was met with criticisms, e.g. the Eichmann trials and the idea of the banality of evil. Theoretically, philosophically, her ideas are profound and insightful but she grounds her ideas to real life, where it causes tension because her 'actions' are tied to other people's personal beliefs, worth, history and experience. The theory no longer exists as an abstract thinking experiment but an action with real implications that thought cannot reconcile when turned into an action.
And yet, the beauty of this tension is how individuals try to make meaning over and over again as thought turn to actions that require more thought and then action. Meaning is ever-changing because thought can never capture the totality of the real but our actions would amount to nothing if we did not have the capacity to make it mean something to us through our thoughts.
I appreciated how succinct Samantha Rose Hill weaves Arendt's life and the circumstances that coloured her experience. And whilst I do think there were times in which Hill was a little too generous in her characterisation of Arendt, I admire Hill's efforts to concretise the shape of Arendt's experiences to provide understanding of Arendt's theoretical responses to the world around her.
Probably what I enjoyed most is the subtly of Hill's narrative. Early in Arendt's life, she turned her back on Heidegger, whom she believed prioritised thought over action that led to his associations with Nazism--it was the practice of theory over the awareness of the real. Yet, ironically, Arendt would encounter this issue herself--thought over action--time and again in her own work. This, in of itself, is interesting, but what is more interesting is the philosophical complexity of thought and action in real time through Arendt as a representative.
The distinct nature of thought requires lack of action: it is a removal of action (both of acting and of doing) that subjects itself to a lack of experience. Whenever Arendt attempts to 'act out' her premises, she was met with criticisms, e.g. the Eichmann trials and the idea of the banality of evil. Theoretically, philosophically, her ideas are profound and insightful but she grounds her ideas to real life, where it causes tension because her 'actions' are tied to other people's personal beliefs, worth, history and experience. The theory no longer exists as an abstract thinking experiment but an action with real implications that thought cannot reconcile when turned into an action.
And yet, the beauty of this tension is how individuals try to make meaning over and over again as thought turn to actions that require more thought and then action. Meaning is ever-changing because thought can never capture the totality of the real but our actions would amount to nothing if we did not have the capacity to make it mean something to us through our thoughts.
August 23, 2021
Samantha Rose Hill accurately describes her intellectual biography of Hannah Arendt as "introductory." A slender volume, it is at once over-ambitious and insufficiently ambitious. Hill's ambition is to provide a coherent introduction to the life and each of many important works of an almost unbelievably prolific thinker and writer. In my disputable opinion, Hill employs too much shorthand and frequent terse summaries that I found often too abstract or theoretical to connect to Arendt's great, lifelong project of writing from reality. Thus I thought the book insufficiently ambitious, particularly for those of us who have read Arendt in articles or excerpts, have only modest knowledge of the most important works, and are drawn to intellectual biography for keys to a subject's life, thought, and significance. I thought Hill's editor was remiss in allowing her, particularly in the important central 1950s chapters, to sometimes leave us hanging in the air with a missing connection to a work or an idea or a particular Arendtian word usage. A little more fleshing out would have helped. Elsewhere, gossipy passages took up valuable space without actually shedding light on Arendt or her work. And then there's the name-dropping list of all the brilliant friends, attracted by Arendt's gigantic intellect, that she harvested. (Who would have thought both W.H. Auden AND Hans Morganthau, in their 60s, proposed marriage to Arendt, also in her 60s, after the death of Arendt's husband?) I would have greatly appreciated a more capacious 25-50 or so pages of additional explication, spread across the works.
Many chapters, however, and particularly the ones that focus on Arendt's more popular writing in the New Yorker or in literary reviews and newspaper articles, are excellent, answer questions raised by Arendt herself or by Hill's commentary, and are, as they stand, perfectly self-sufficient.
As a guide to further study, Hill provides a useful select bibliography of significant titles in English and German. Moreover, she includes a fairly extensive gallery of photographs of Arendt, her family, and of course her distinguished friends.
If you've taken the time to read these words, I'll hazard to guess you're interested in Hannah Arendt. Consequently, I would recommend that you dismiss my gripes and read the book. Hill has written a useful, extensively sourced introduction to a unique life and and a still more unique life of the mind. Hannah Arendt is indeed an author for our times, having investigated and commented on many of the potential sources of our political and social maladies, polarization, the drift toward authoritarianism, and the dangers of herd thinking, or more usefully, herd thoughtlessness - the thoughtlessness of the many who who are willing to surrender their minds to those politicians, propagandists, political parties, lobbyists, massive corporations and governmental institutions that strive every day to colonize our minds. These are challenges, political, social, and moral, that we have to address as we approach the abyss that awaits us...unless we find a place for thoughtfulness, pluralism, and other- regarding civility. Hannah Arendt is a useful guide in coming to grips with our political dysfunction, and Samantha Rose Hill has provided a useful vehicle for prompting us to ponder what is to be done.
Many chapters, however, and particularly the ones that focus on Arendt's more popular writing in the New Yorker or in literary reviews and newspaper articles, are excellent, answer questions raised by Arendt herself or by Hill's commentary, and are, as they stand, perfectly self-sufficient.
As a guide to further study, Hill provides a useful select bibliography of significant titles in English and German. Moreover, she includes a fairly extensive gallery of photographs of Arendt, her family, and of course her distinguished friends.
If you've taken the time to read these words, I'll hazard to guess you're interested in Hannah Arendt. Consequently, I would recommend that you dismiss my gripes and read the book. Hill has written a useful, extensively sourced introduction to a unique life and and a still more unique life of the mind. Hannah Arendt is indeed an author for our times, having investigated and commented on many of the potential sources of our political and social maladies, polarization, the drift toward authoritarianism, and the dangers of herd thinking, or more usefully, herd thoughtlessness - the thoughtlessness of the many who who are willing to surrender their minds to those politicians, propagandists, political parties, lobbyists, massive corporations and governmental institutions that strive every day to colonize our minds. These are challenges, political, social, and moral, that we have to address as we approach the abyss that awaits us...unless we find a place for thoughtfulness, pluralism, and other- regarding civility. Hannah Arendt is a useful guide in coming to grips with our political dysfunction, and Samantha Rose Hill has provided a useful vehicle for prompting us to ponder what is to be done.
January 22, 2022
"Arendt refused to quit smoking, she refused to eat sensibly, she refused to drink less coffee. Arendt refused to live life in order to preserve mere existence." S. Rose
June 4, 2022
One thing this fine, brisk, rewarding book does very well is dwell in and enjoy the connections between Arendt’s restless and evolving mind + the shocking world undulations she lived through + the extraordinary, iconoclastic life she built, in spite of it all.
The image of this towering human, spending her last years on a terrace in Switzerland, living boldly, courting luminaries and hapless suitors, frantically finishing what she views as her seminal work (and deep-seeded unfinished business), is to my mind, the perfect expression of how we all ought to be approaching our short time on this earth. We can’t all be Hannah Arendt, but why the hell can’t we see that type of spirit as something to admire, and lionize, and aspire to?
My criticisms of this book are nitpicky: I feel it could’ve done more to ground Arendt’s relevance in todays madness (but understand and admire the decision not to), and my favorite passages were when the writer’s eye was most present - when Prof. Rose Hill’s human engagement with Arendt the character shone through- and would’ve loved more of that.
I’ve seen some criticisms of this book as slight, but I think that’s nonsense. Massive biographies and highfalutin criticisms of Arendt exist. Great. But this book is an efficient, purposeful examination of an historic mind, a brilliantly lived life, and a magnetic character. It’s a very worthwhile read.
The image of this towering human, spending her last years on a terrace in Switzerland, living boldly, courting luminaries and hapless suitors, frantically finishing what she views as her seminal work (and deep-seeded unfinished business), is to my mind, the perfect expression of how we all ought to be approaching our short time on this earth. We can’t all be Hannah Arendt, but why the hell can’t we see that type of spirit as something to admire, and lionize, and aspire to?
My criticisms of this book are nitpicky: I feel it could’ve done more to ground Arendt’s relevance in todays madness (but understand and admire the decision not to), and my favorite passages were when the writer’s eye was most present - when Prof. Rose Hill’s human engagement with Arendt the character shone through- and would’ve loved more of that.
I’ve seen some criticisms of this book as slight, but I think that’s nonsense. Massive biographies and highfalutin criticisms of Arendt exist. Great. But this book is an efficient, purposeful examination of an historic mind, a brilliantly lived life, and a magnetic character. It’s a very worthwhile read.
March 23, 2022
Was an average biography, felt more like a "greatest hits" summary than anything insightful about either the person or her contributions. But I really wanted to learn more about Hannah Arendt - mainly my fault for attempting this before reading anything she's actually written...
November 28, 2022
Rád čtu podobné biografie, ale tahle se obzvlášť povedla. Jedna z těch knih, které vás při čtení pohladí na duši a když zjistíte, že jste už na konci, budete si přát, aby byla ještě trochu delší.
November 20, 2021
Hannah Arendt offers an extraordinarily readable 210 pages, combining sharp analysis with concise and precise summary of Arendt’s life and works. imagine having an encyclopedic knowledge of the papers of one philosopher whose life read like fiction, and now turn that into a biography. Hill wields such a thorough knowledge of available details, quotations, and sources regarding Arendt that she chooses the most engaging, thought-provoking ones and integrates them into her prose. perhaps the greatest strength is the book’s consistent integration of Arendt’s own phrasing owing to Hill’s encyclopedic knowledge of the archives and relevant sources. Hill's Hannah Arendt fuses the gap between the wisdom not to have heroes and the human desire to focus on historical figures who provide inspiration both personally and professionally. Hill’s biography blends sophisticated philosophy, productive historical context, and ‘Easter eggs’ of human-interest story.
January 4, 2022
A gem of a book! It serves as an excellent introduction to Arendt’s honestly Hollywood-worthy life. It’s also a great primer on her oeuvre and the fascinating intellectual context in which she developed her ideas.
November 14, 2021
A Guide for Hope for Humanity in Dark Times
A reflection on why we must think, through the life of a great teacher in our times, and for all times.
A reflection on why we must think, through the life of a great teacher in our times, and for all times.
January 24, 2022
A brilliant and analytical introduction to both Arendt’s life and her work.
(Probably should’ve read this BEFORE her other stuff but there we go).
(Probably should’ve read this BEFORE her other stuff but there we go).
February 21, 2023
The British philosopher R.G. Collingwood (1889-1943) thought very poorly of the genre of biography. He considered such endeavors as little more than tabloid level writing. And this attitude doubled when applied to biographies of philosophers. Collingwood wrote in his Autobiography that the biography of any philosopher (if such be undertaken at all) should be the history of his (or her) thought. To this end, Collingwood attempted to discourage any would-be biographer by writing his own Autobiography, which was well-received and is still highly regarded. But his entreaties and efforts notwithstanding, his life has nevertheless been plumbed by biographers. (And a major biography is in the works.)
I offer this observation in part to explain my own reticence about reading Hill’s biography of Arendt. I don’t buy Collingwood’s blanket disdain for biography as a genre. Collingwood didn’t have the benefit of being able to read Robert Caro, or even—perhaps more to the point—biographies written by Ray Monk of Collingwood’s contemporaries, Wittgenstein and Russell. (See the useful biography-appreciation of Collingwood, Fred Inglis’s History Man: The Life of R. G. Collingwood, where Inglis quotes and then rebuts Collingwood’s invective against biographies.) But still, Collingwood’s objections do raise the question: why read the biography of a philosopher, whose life was defined primarily by her thought, what she wrote and said? And this question seems especially acute in regard to Arendt. In the time since her death in December 1975, and the publication of a major biography of her by Elizabeth Young-Bruehl in 1982, a great deal of Arendt’s private papers have become available. These documents include letters between her and her teacher (and for a while, her lover) Martin Heidegger, as well as letters exchanged with her close friend and confidant, Mary McCarthy. Would this trove of Arendt’s private thoughts and observations grant readers additional insights into her profound political and philosophical thought? (Arendt, as Hill notes, was at once a very social person and very private. Hill shares the fact that when a guest at McCarthy’s home, Arendt was unnerved that her close friend McCarthy knew precisely what items Arendt preferred at breakfast.) How would Arendt have responded to having her private life opened to the public?
All of these preliminaries explain in part why I’m late to reading this book. (It was published in late 2022.) Also, I’ve a virtual (via a Zoom group) acquaintance with the author, who was an associate at the Hannah Arendt Center at Bard College. Both she and I participated in the virtual reading group based on Arendt’s works. She seemed a very capable and knowledgeable young scholar. What if I didn’t like her book!
Well, all my worries have happily come to naught. I quite enjoyed this biography. I’d recommend it to anyone who wanted to know more about Arendt the person and how she arrived at her position as one of the most (if not the most) important political thinkers in the twentieth century. Hill strikes a balance between Arendt the person and Arendt the thinker. Arendt witnessed and experienced many of the dislocations and horrors of the twentieth century. She was a German Jewess, and as such, she became a refugee before finding sanctuary in the U.S. Arendt was twice incarcerated; once in Germany when the Nazis gained power, and once again while attempting to flee Vichy France. Arendt’s life was both an active and a contemplative one. The events of Arendt’s life informed and motivated her thinking. Hill does an exemplary job of shifting her attention between Arendt’s works and the events of Arendt’s life within only 210 pages of text. And this was no easy task, given Arendt’s rich life as a friend, lover, wife, writer, refugee, activist, and so on. This rich life goes along with Arendt’s unique insights into the contemporary world based on her deep knowledge of philosophy and history (especially Greco-Roman political thought).
As an example of Arendt’s complexity, she eschewed the title of “philosopher,” but me thinks she did protest too much. Read her final (and incomplete) work, The Life of the Mind, and tell me how one can agree with her that she’s not a philosopher. Why did she make this distinction? Is it purely academic? Or was there something in her experience—say her relationship with Heidegger and his with Nazism—that sparked with stance? I know of no definitive answer other than Arendt’s own words, but Hill’s biography, on this and similar topics, allows the readers to contemplate how Arendt’s life and work intersected.
In sum, this is a well-written, carefully constructed biography of a complex person and thinker. As I stated above, it would serve as an excellent brief introduction to the person who wrote so many intriguing, informative, and provocative works about politics, thinking, and acting in our world.
I offer this observation in part to explain my own reticence about reading Hill’s biography of Arendt. I don’t buy Collingwood’s blanket disdain for biography as a genre. Collingwood didn’t have the benefit of being able to read Robert Caro, or even—perhaps more to the point—biographies written by Ray Monk of Collingwood’s contemporaries, Wittgenstein and Russell. (See the useful biography-appreciation of Collingwood, Fred Inglis’s History Man: The Life of R. G. Collingwood, where Inglis quotes and then rebuts Collingwood’s invective against biographies.) But still, Collingwood’s objections do raise the question: why read the biography of a philosopher, whose life was defined primarily by her thought, what she wrote and said? And this question seems especially acute in regard to Arendt. In the time since her death in December 1975, and the publication of a major biography of her by Elizabeth Young-Bruehl in 1982, a great deal of Arendt’s private papers have become available. These documents include letters between her and her teacher (and for a while, her lover) Martin Heidegger, as well as letters exchanged with her close friend and confidant, Mary McCarthy. Would this trove of Arendt’s private thoughts and observations grant readers additional insights into her profound political and philosophical thought? (Arendt, as Hill notes, was at once a very social person and very private. Hill shares the fact that when a guest at McCarthy’s home, Arendt was unnerved that her close friend McCarthy knew precisely what items Arendt preferred at breakfast.) How would Arendt have responded to having her private life opened to the public?
All of these preliminaries explain in part why I’m late to reading this book. (It was published in late 2022.) Also, I’ve a virtual (via a Zoom group) acquaintance with the author, who was an associate at the Hannah Arendt Center at Bard College. Both she and I participated in the virtual reading group based on Arendt’s works. She seemed a very capable and knowledgeable young scholar. What if I didn’t like her book!
Well, all my worries have happily come to naught. I quite enjoyed this biography. I’d recommend it to anyone who wanted to know more about Arendt the person and how she arrived at her position as one of the most (if not the most) important political thinkers in the twentieth century. Hill strikes a balance between Arendt the person and Arendt the thinker. Arendt witnessed and experienced many of the dislocations and horrors of the twentieth century. She was a German Jewess, and as such, she became a refugee before finding sanctuary in the U.S. Arendt was twice incarcerated; once in Germany when the Nazis gained power, and once again while attempting to flee Vichy France. Arendt’s life was both an active and a contemplative one. The events of Arendt’s life informed and motivated her thinking. Hill does an exemplary job of shifting her attention between Arendt’s works and the events of Arendt’s life within only 210 pages of text. And this was no easy task, given Arendt’s rich life as a friend, lover, wife, writer, refugee, activist, and so on. This rich life goes along with Arendt’s unique insights into the contemporary world based on her deep knowledge of philosophy and history (especially Greco-Roman political thought).
As an example of Arendt’s complexity, she eschewed the title of “philosopher,” but me thinks she did protest too much. Read her final (and incomplete) work, The Life of the Mind, and tell me how one can agree with her that she’s not a philosopher. Why did she make this distinction? Is it purely academic? Or was there something in her experience—say her relationship with Heidegger and his with Nazism—that sparked with stance? I know of no definitive answer other than Arendt’s own words, but Hill’s biography, on this and similar topics, allows the readers to contemplate how Arendt’s life and work intersected.
In sum, this is a well-written, carefully constructed biography of a complex person and thinker. As I stated above, it would serve as an excellent brief introduction to the person who wrote so many intriguing, informative, and provocative works about politics, thinking, and acting in our world.
Read
January 14, 2025RS:
이 책을 감수한 분이, '저도 처음엔 한나 아렌트가 어려웠습니다' 라는 제목으로 짧은 글을 실었다.
한나 아렌트로 학위를 받은 사람도 한나 아렌트가 어려웠구나 싶어 위안이 되었다. 한나 아렌트의 책들은 도전하는 족족 실패했다. 책장에서 발견하게 된 한나 아렌트의 평전이 나에게 한나 아렌트의 주옥같은 글을 다시 도전하게 해 줄 응원이 되길 바라며.
p20
고정된 틀이 없었으며, 현실적인 정치 문제를 해결할 목적으로 글을 쓰지 않았고, 진실이나 아름다움, 선 같은 개념을 이론화하는 체계적 철학을 다루지도 않았다. 한나는 소크라테스식 방법을 따랐다. 즉 대화하고, 모순이 있을 가능성을 염두에 두고 언제나 다시 시작하는 방식이었다. 1955년 한 세미나에서 '정치 이론의 역사 The History of Political Theory'를 주제로 강의할 때 한나는 "개념은 그 자체로 목적이 아니라 우리 사유의 원천이다" 라고 말한 바 있다. 즉 ' 진리' 같은 건 있을 수 없다는 뜻이다. 가장 최근의 경험을 토대로 다시 살펴야 하는 것이 '진리' 이기 때문이다.
p24
한나는 이야기를 통해 의미가 생겨나고 달라질 수 있다고 생각했다. 그녀는 새로운 세기의 정치적 현상에 목소리를 내기 위해 새로운 언어를 찾기를 원했다. 그리고 새로운 사람들 속 철학, 신학 정치이론, 문학, 시에서 함께 이를 이끌어내기 위해 전통에서 벗어났다.
한나는 무신론자였다. 성경이나 유대교 경전을 별로 마음에 두지 않았고 진보 신화도 믿지 않았다. 오로지 보통 사람들의 일상, 즉 현재에만 관심을 가졌다. 미래가 지금보다 나으리란 생각에서 미래중심으로 삶을 꾸리고 정치를 구성하기보다 지금 해야 할 바람직한 일들을 하는게 중요하다고 생각했다.
p54
사유는 내게로오고,
나는 더 이상 사유가 낯설지 않다.
나는 자라서 사유의 집이 된다.
마치 밭갈이를 마친 들판처럼.
p65
한나가 아우구스티누스를 읽은 건 신의 존재를 증명하기 위함이 아니었다. 한나는 심지어 영혼도 존재하지 않는다고 생각했다. 한나에 따르면 우리가 마주해야 할 세계는 단 하나, 바로 지금 우리가 사는 세계다. 한나는 신의 구원 대신 세속적 사랑에 기댔다. 사랑으로 변모한 의지는 무게, 즉 성격을 형성하는 중력을 지녔고, 어떤 행동을 취할지 스스로 의사 결정을 하도록 자아를 길들인다.
한나는 "사랑은 영혼의 무게다"라고 썼다.
사랑에는 세 가지가 있다. '사랑하는 자, 사랑받는 자 그리고 사랑 그 자체'이다. 사랑은 특정 대상에 대해 느끼는 애정, 감상적 형태가 아니라 정신에 감명을 주는 '발자국' 내지 '지성적 행동'이다. 정신이 지성으로 변모한 이 영속성의 발자국은 사랑하는 자도, 사랑받는 자도 아닌 사랑 그 자체이며, 이 사랑은 서로 주고받는 사랑이다. 의지가 사���으로 변모할 때 그 힘은 그대로다.
"사물이든 사람이든 그 대상을 사랑하는 것만큼 그 대상에 대해 깊은 말을 하는 건 없다. 다시 말해, 사랑은 상대가 있는 그대로의 모습이길 바라는 것이다. 'Amo: Volo ut sis'. 즉 사랑이란 있는 그대로 너이길 바라는 것이다."
이 사랑만이 영생과 구원을 가져오며, 이는 정신이 할 수 없는 일로, 이 사랑은 해방을 필요로 한다.
p71
아우구스티누스는 사랑amor, 욕망cupiditas, 박애caritas 를 서로 구분했는데, 한나는 이를 바탕으로 아모르 문디 Amor Mundi라는 자신만의 개념을 발전시켰다. 이는 세계를 사랑한다는 뜻으로 인간은 세계를 사랑함으로써 이 세계에 자신의 안식처를 마련하고, 이 세계에 오롯이 기대어 내 안에서 선과 악을 발견한다.
p72
한나는 이 논문을 쓸 때 아우구스티누스를 연구하��� 학자들이나 문헌을 의도적으로 찾아 읽지 않았다. 그를 신학자 혹은 초기 기독교 사상의 역사를 널리 알린 인물로 바라본 것이 아니기 때문이다. 실존주의 안에서 그의 <고백론>을 읽은 한나는 그가 말하는 다원성과 이웃 사랑을 공동 세계 건설에 필요한 하나의 구성 요소로만 이해했다. 야스퍼스의 실존 철학은 한나에게 참된 존재란 속세와 떨어질 수 없다고 가르쳤다. 여러 비판 세력이 있었으나 한나의 <사랑 개념과 성 아우구스티누스>는 독창성과 통찰력 면에서 만점을 받았다.
이후 1950년대 중반까지 한나는 오랫동안 아우구스티누스를 찾지 았았으나 그럼에도 그는 일평생 한나의 대화친구였다. 새로운 시작이라는 표현 및 이웃 사랑, 세계사랑은 <전체주의의 기원>, <인간의 조건>, <혁명론>, <예루살렘의 아이히만>, <과거와 미래사이>, <정신의 삶>등 한나의 여러 저서에 빠짐없이 등장한다.
pp114-115
한나는 파른하겐 전기에서 벼락출세한 자 파브뉴와 의도적 떠돌이 파리아를 처음으로 구분했다.
...
한나가 생각하는 파리아는, 파리아로 살기 위해 자신의 남다름을 일평생 간직하면서 이방인을 자처하는 사람들이었다. 한나는 언제든 새로운 환경에 자신을 맞출 준비가 된 파브뉴의 낙관주의를 거부하는 대신 환경에 구애받지 않고 어디서든 자신의 정체성을 지키는 파리아를 높이 치켜세웠다. 정체성을 잊지 않는가는 건 그만큰 손해를 감수한다는 뜻이다.
"정체성을 버리면 확실히 우주처럼 무한한 존재가 될 수 있다. 하지만 새로운 성격을 갖는 건, 세상을 창조하는 것만큼 어렵고 불가능에 가까운 일이다."
파브뉴는 과거에서 벗어나고자 자신의 정체성을 버리기 위해 노력한다. 한나로서는 터무니없어 보이는 노력이었다. 한나는 비록 이방인으로 살아도 죽을 때까지 정체성을 지켜야 한다고 생각했다.
p157
한나에게 유대인 문제는 언제나 정치적 문제였다.
<전체주의의 기원> 서문에서 한나는 이렇게 말한다.
"유대인의 역사에서 유감스러운 사실 중 하나는, 유대인 문제가 정치적 문제임을 적군은 알았으나 정작 유대인 친구들(유대인 자신들)은 몰랐다는 것이다."
한나는 유대인에게 고향이 필요하다고는 생각했지만 유대 민족 국가 건립은 반대했다. <아우프바우>에 게재한 칼럼에서 한나는 모든 유대인이 고향을 가질 수 있는 유럽식 연방제를 지지했다. 그래야만 유럽에서 그랬듯 민족국가 체제가 실패하더라도 안전을 보장받기 때문이다. 한나는 국가가 국민의 기본권을 보장하지 않으면 이에 항의할 줄 알아야 한다고 생각했다. <전체주의 기원>에서 한나는 이를. "권리를 가질 권리"로 공식화했다. 한나는 유대인 전선을 원했고 여러 국가에 흩어져 사는 유대인들의 연대를 바랐다.
p186 (RS: 용서하는 자와 용서 받는자의 계급형성의 대안을 이야기하며, 용서하는 자가 우위의 계급이 되는 것)
이 같은 용서의 대안이 화해다.
p196
전체주의가 사람을 고립되고 외로운 개인으로 만드는 방법 가운데 하나는 체계적으로 현실과 가상을 구분하지 못하도록 하는 것이다. 이데올로기는 공포가 확산될 때 힘을 얻는데 이러한 이데올로기와 마주했을 때 분별 있게 판단하거나 생각하지 못하면 현실과 가상을 구분할 수가 없다.
p197
"그러므로, 외로운 상태에서, 자명하다는 말은 더 이상 지식을 나타내 보이지 않고, 나만의 독자적인 생각이 발달했음을 보여줄 뿐이다. 전체주의운동에서 가장 악명이 높은 극단주의는 진정한 급진주의와는 거리가 멀고, '이모든 것을 최악으로 생각'하는 것이며, 이러한 연역 방식으로 언제나 가능한 한 최악의 결론에 도달한다."
p208
한나가 말하길, 이러한 현상은 사람들이 더 이상 위대함이나 영속성을 추구하지 않고 인간의 조건에서 완전히 벗어나려고 안간힘을 쓴다는 것을 보여준다. 하지만 인간이 온전하게 존재하기 위해서는 공적영역에 나아가 타인 앞에 서야 하고, 사유라는 걸 하기 위해서는 고독 속에서 사유하는 사적영역을 가져야 한다. 그 고독의 공간 아에서만 세속의 일들을 내적 경험으로 치환할 수 있다. '이 내적 경험은 진실을 비추는 거울이 된다'. 그리고 그 진실의 일부는 우리가 함께 시구에 살고 공동으로 세상을 건설해야 한다는 것이다.
p214
"너무 늦게, 정말 최근에야 진정으로 세계를 사랑하게 되었어요. 이제 내가 그 일을 할 것 같아요. 감사한 마음을 담아, 정치 이론에 대한 이 책을 '아모르 문디 Amor Mundi'['세계에 대한 사랑' 이라는 뜻의 라틴어] 라고 부르고 싶어요."
p234 RS: 아이히만 재판에 관하여)
정치는 탁아소 같은 게 아니다. 따라서 정치에서 복종과 지지는 같은 말이다. 그리고 유대인 및 다른 수 많은 민족과 이 지구를 공유하지 않겠다는 정책을 피고가 지지하고 실행했듯이, 설령 피고와 피고의 상관에게 이 지구에 누가 살고 살 수 없는지 결정한 권한 이 있었다손 치더라도, 우리 인류 구성원 가운데 그 누구도 피고와 이 지구상에서 함께 살아가기를 원치 않음을 밝힌다. 이게 당신이 교수형에 처해져야 할 이유, 바로 유일한 이유이다.
한나는 전쟁범죄를 법적 테두리를 넘어, 인간끼리 지구를 공유하는 문제로 다루었다.
p237
"어떤 경우든 악은 극단성을 지닐 뿐 급전적이지 않다고 생각합니다. 악은 깊이가 없기 때문에 악마 같은 구석이 없다. 악은 곰팡이가 자라나 표면을 온통 뒤덮듯이 세상을 집어삼킨다. 오직 선만이 늘 깊이 있고 절대적이다."
이 책을 감수한 분이, '저도 처음엔 한나 아렌트가 어려웠습니다' 라는 제목으로 짧은 글을 실었다.
한나 아렌트로 학위를 받은 사람도 한나 아렌트가 어려웠구나 싶어 위안이 되었다. 한나 아렌트의 책들은 도전하는 족족 실패했다. 책장에서 발견하게 된 한나 아렌트의 평전이 나에게 한나 아렌트의 주옥같은 글을 다시 도전하게 해 줄 응원이 되길 바라며.
p20
고정된 틀이 없었으며, 현실적인 정치 문제를 해결할 목적으로 글을 쓰지 않았고, 진실이나 아름다움, 선 같은 개념을 이론화하는 체계적 철학을 다루지도 않았다. 한나는 소크라테스식 방법을 따랐다. 즉 대화하고, 모순이 있을 가능성을 염두에 두고 언제나 다시 시작하는 방식이었다. 1955년 한 세미나에서 '정치 이론의 역사 The History of Political Theory'를 주제로 강의할 때 한나는 "개념은 그 자체로 목적이 아니라 우리 사유의 원천이다" 라고 말한 바 있다. 즉 ' 진리' 같은 건 있을 수 없다는 뜻이다. 가장 최근의 경험을 토대로 다시 살펴야 하는 것이 '진리' 이기 때문이다.
p24
한나는 이야기를 통해 의미가 생겨나고 달라질 수 있다고 생각했다. 그녀는 새로운 세기의 정치적 현상에 목소리를 내기 위해 새로운 언어를 찾기를 원했다. 그리고 새로운 사람들 속 철학, 신학 정치이론, 문학, 시에서 함께 이를 이끌어내기 위해 전통에서 벗어났다.
한나는 무신론자였다. 성경이나 유대교 경전을 별로 마음에 두지 않았고 진보 신화도 믿지 않았다. 오로지 보통 사람들의 일상, 즉 현재에만 관심을 가졌다. 미래가 지금보다 나으리란 생각에서 미래중심으로 삶을 꾸리고 정치를 구성하기보다 지금 해야 할 바람직한 일들을 하는게 중요하다고 생각했다.
p54
사유는 내게로오고,
나는 더 이상 사유가 낯설지 않다.
나는 자라서 사유의 집이 된다.
마치 밭갈이를 마친 들판처럼.
p65
한나가 아우구스티누스를 읽은 건 신의 존재를 증명하기 위함이 아니었다. 한나는 심지어 영혼도 존재하지 않는다고 생각했다. 한나에 따르면 우리가 마주해야 할 세계는 단 하나, 바로 지금 우리가 사는 세계다. 한나는 신의 구원 대신 세속적 사랑에 기댔다. 사랑으로 변모한 의지는 무게, 즉 성격을 형성하는 중력을 지녔고, 어떤 행동을 취할지 스스로 의사 결정을 하도록 자아를 길들인다.
한나는 "사랑은 영혼의 무게다"라고 썼다.
사랑에는 세 가지가 있다. '사랑하는 자, 사랑받는 자 그리고 사랑 그 자체'이다. 사랑은 특정 대상에 대해 느끼는 애정, 감상적 형태가 아니라 정신에 감명을 주는 '발자국' 내지 '지성적 행동'이다. 정신이 지성으로 변모한 이 영속성의 발자국은 사랑하는 자도, 사랑받는 자도 아닌 사랑 그 자체이며, 이 사랑은 서로 주고받는 사랑이다. 의지가 사���으로 변모할 때 그 힘은 그대로다.
"사물이든 사람이든 그 대상을 사랑하는 것만큼 그 대상에 대해 깊은 말을 하는 건 없다. 다시 말해, 사랑은 상대가 있는 그대로의 모습이길 바라는 것이다. 'Amo: Volo ut sis'. 즉 사랑이란 있는 그대로 너이길 바라는 것이다."
이 사랑만이 영생과 구원을 가져오며, 이는 정신이 할 수 없는 일로, 이 사랑은 해방을 필요로 한다.
p71
아우구스티누스는 사랑amor, 욕망cupiditas, 박애caritas 를 서로 구분했는데, 한나는 이를 바탕으로 아모르 문디 Amor Mundi라는 자신만의 개념을 발전시켰다. 이는 세계를 사랑한다는 뜻으로 인간은 세계를 사랑함으로써 이 세계에 자신의 안식처를 마련하고, 이 세계에 오롯이 기대어 내 안에서 선과 악을 발견한다.
p72
한나는 이 논문을 쓸 때 아우구스티누스를 연구하��� 학자들이나 문헌을 의도적으로 찾아 읽지 않았다. 그를 신학자 혹은 초기 기독교 사상의 역사를 널리 알린 인물로 바라본 것이 아니기 때문이다. 실존주의 안에서 그의 <고백론>을 읽은 한나는 그가 말하는 다원성과 이웃 사랑을 공동 세계 건설에 필요한 하나의 구성 요소로만 이해했다. 야스퍼스의 실존 철학은 한나에게 참된 존재란 속세와 떨어질 수 없다고 가르쳤다. 여러 비판 세력이 있었으나 한나의 <사랑 개념과 성 아우구스티누스>는 독창성과 통찰력 면에서 만점을 받았다.
이후 1950년대 중반까지 한나는 오랫동안 아우구스티누스를 찾지 았았으나 그럼에도 그는 일평생 한나의 대화친구였다. 새로운 시작이라는 표현 및 이웃 사랑, 세계사랑은 <전체주의의 기원>, <인간의 조건>, <혁명론>, <예루살렘의 아이히만>, <과거와 미래사이>, <정신의 삶>등 한나의 여러 저서에 빠짐없이 등장한다.
pp114-115
한나는 파른하겐 전기에서 벼락출세한 자 파브뉴와 의도적 떠돌이 파리아를 처음으로 구분했다.
...
한나가 생각하는 파리아는, 파리아로 살기 위해 자신의 남다름을 일평생 간직하면서 이방인을 자처하는 사람들이었다. 한나는 언제든 새로운 환경에 자신을 맞출 준비가 된 파브뉴의 낙관주의를 거부하는 대신 환경에 구애받지 않고 어디서든 자신의 정체성을 지키는 파리아를 높이 치켜세웠다. 정체성을 잊지 않는가는 건 그만큰 손해를 감수한다는 뜻이다.
"정체성을 버리면 확실히 우주처럼 무한한 존재가 될 수 있다. 하지만 새로운 성격을 갖는 건, 세상을 창조하는 것만큼 어렵고 불가능에 가까운 일이다."
파브뉴는 과거에서 벗어나고자 자신의 정체성을 버리기 위해 노력한다. 한나로서는 터무니없어 보이는 노력이었다. 한나는 비록 이방인으로 살아도 죽을 때까지 정체성을 지켜야 한다고 생각했다.
p157
한나에게 유대인 문제는 언제나 정치적 문제였다.
<전체주의의 기원> 서문에서 한나는 이렇게 말한다.
"유대인의 역사에서 유감스러운 사실 중 하나는, 유대인 문제가 정치적 문제임을 적군은 알았으나 정작 유대인 친구들(유대인 자신들)은 몰랐다는 것이다."
한나는 유대인에게 고향이 필요하다고는 생각했지만 유대 민족 국가 건립은 반대했다. <아우프바우>에 게재한 칼럼에서 한나는 모든 유대인이 고향을 가질 수 있는 유럽식 연방제를 지지했다. 그래야만 유럽에서 그랬듯 민족국가 체제가 실패하더라도 안전을 보장받기 때문이다. 한나는 국가가 국민의 기본권을 보장하지 않으면 이에 항의할 줄 알아야 한다고 생각했다. <전체주의 기원>에서 한나는 이를. "권리를 가질 권리"로 공식화했다. 한나는 유대인 전선을 원했고 여러 국가에 흩어져 사는 유대인들의 연대를 바랐다.
p186 (RS: 용서하는 자와 용서 받는자의 계급형성의 대안을 이야기하며, 용서하는 자가 우위의 계급이 되는 것)
이 같은 용서의 대안이 화해다.
p196
전체주의가 사람을 고립되고 외로운 개인으로 만드는 방법 가운데 하나는 체계적으로 현실과 가상을 구분하지 못하도록 하는 것이다. 이데올로기는 공포가 확산될 때 힘을 얻는데 이러한 이데올로기와 마주했을 때 분별 있게 판단하거나 생각하지 못하면 현실과 가상을 구분할 수가 없다.
p197
"그러므로, 외로운 상태에서, 자명하다는 말은 더 이상 지식을 나타내 보이지 않고, 나만의 독자적인 생각이 발달했음을 보여줄 뿐이다. 전체주의운동에서 가장 악명이 높은 극단주의는 진정한 급진주의와는 거리가 멀고, '이모든 것을 최악으로 생각'하는 것이며, 이러한 연역 방식으로 언제나 가능한 한 최악의 결론에 도달한다."
p208
한나가 말하길, 이러한 현상은 사람들이 더 이상 위대함이나 영속성을 추구하지 않고 인간의 조건에서 완전히 벗어나려고 안간힘을 쓴다는 것을 보여준다. 하지만 인간이 온전하게 존재하기 위해서는 공적영역에 나아가 타인 앞에 서야 하고, 사유라는 걸 하기 위해서는 고독 속에서 사유하는 사적영역을 가져야 한다. 그 고독의 공간 아에서만 세속의 일들을 내적 경험으로 치환할 수 있다. '이 내적 경험은 진실을 비추는 거울이 된다'. 그리고 그 진실의 일부는 우리가 함께 시구에 살고 공동으로 세상을 건설해야 한다는 것이다.
p214
"너무 늦게, 정말 최근에야 진정으로 세계를 사랑하게 되었어요. 이제 내가 그 일을 할 것 같아요. 감사한 마음을 담아, 정치 이론에 대한 이 책을 '아모르 문디 Amor Mundi'['세계에 대한 사랑' 이라는 뜻의 라틴어] 라고 부르고 싶어요."
p234 RS: 아이히만 재판에 관하여)
정치는 탁아소 같은 게 아니다. 따라서 정치에서 복종과 지지는 같은 말이다. 그리고 유대인 및 다른 수 많은 민족과 이 지구를 공유하지 않겠다는 정책을 피고가 지지하고 실행했듯이, 설령 피고와 피고의 상관에게 이 지구에 누가 살고 살 수 없는지 결정한 권한 이 있었다손 치더라도, 우리 인류 구성원 가운데 그 누구도 피고와 이 지구상에서 함께 살아가기를 원치 않음을 밝힌다. 이게 당신이 교수형에 처해져야 할 이유, 바로 유일한 이유이다.
한나는 전쟁범죄를 법적 테두리를 넘어, 인간끼리 지구를 공유하는 문제로 다루었다.
p237
"어떤 경우든 악은 극단성을 지닐 뿐 급전적이지 않다고 생각합니다. 악은 깊이가 없기 때문에 악마 같은 구석이 없다. 악은 곰팡이가 자라나 표면을 온통 뒤덮듯이 세상을 집어삼킨다. 오직 선만이 늘 깊이 있고 절대적이다."
March 6, 2025
Over the past decade, no writer has influenced the way. I understand the world more than Hannah Arendt. And no one has helped me understand Arendt’s work more than Samantha Rose Hill, the author of this excellent intellectual biography.
Critical Lives provides a comprehensive biography of Arendt, focusing on how her life informed her thinking and her work. (Or perhaps, as Arendt would put it, conditioned her work). As such, the biography not only provides insights into a rent, but shows how her experiences as were used to formulate her most powerful works.
The biography also provides an excellent summary of each of these major works. Thus, the biography works on two levels, as an exploration of her life and a primer on her work. For those new Arendt, this biography would be an excellent place to start as you will get a clear, concise, but never dumped down, analysis of these works. And for more experience readers of rent, (I've been reading her seriously for almost a decade), there is a wealth of information about Arendt that you will find fascinating, inspiring, and useful in your studies of her work.
I read a fair number of rock 'n' roll biographies, and I tend to move through the early chapters quickly until I get to the "good stuff" when the musicians are forming bands. Yet, in Critical Lives, I found the earliest chapters just as fascinating as the ones dealing with her major works. One sees how Arnedt’s writings cannot be disentangled from Arendt’s experience experiences as a Jew, who twice escaped Nazi camps, moved to America knowing only a few lines of Shakespear (oh Hannah!) and was let down by the intellectual community with which she started her career. One also sees how the help her engagement with thinkers, such as Jaspers, Heidegger, Benjamin, and Scholem modeled the way Arendt exemplified the ideas that motivate the Human Condition and Life of the Mind. Ms Rose Hill summarizes this best:
Well, her work can help orient us to our present moment, as we face a new century defined by new phenomena, we must come face-to-face with what is in front of us. Our century is not Hannah, and this is part of a rent challenge to us. At the heart of her work is the argument that we must continually think the world a new, define new limits, draw new constellations, find new language, and tell new stories. This is the inheritance she has left us. 210
This passage not only inspires us but examples how Arendt lived.
Critical Lives provides a comprehensive biography of Arendt, focusing on how her life informed her thinking and her work. (Or perhaps, as Arendt would put it, conditioned her work). As such, the biography not only provides insights into a rent, but shows how her experiences as were used to formulate her most powerful works.
The biography also provides an excellent summary of each of these major works. Thus, the biography works on two levels, as an exploration of her life and a primer on her work. For those new Arendt, this biography would be an excellent place to start as you will get a clear, concise, but never dumped down, analysis of these works. And for more experience readers of rent, (I've been reading her seriously for almost a decade), there is a wealth of information about Arendt that you will find fascinating, inspiring, and useful in your studies of her work.
I read a fair number of rock 'n' roll biographies, and I tend to move through the early chapters quickly until I get to the "good stuff" when the musicians are forming bands. Yet, in Critical Lives, I found the earliest chapters just as fascinating as the ones dealing with her major works. One sees how Arnedt’s writings cannot be disentangled from Arendt’s experience experiences as a Jew, who twice escaped Nazi camps, moved to America knowing only a few lines of Shakespear (oh Hannah!) and was let down by the intellectual community with which she started her career. One also sees how the help her engagement with thinkers, such as Jaspers, Heidegger, Benjamin, and Scholem modeled the way Arendt exemplified the ideas that motivate the Human Condition and Life of the Mind. Ms Rose Hill summarizes this best:
Well, her work can help orient us to our present moment, as we face a new century defined by new phenomena, we must come face-to-face with what is in front of us. Our century is not Hannah, and this is part of a rent challenge to us. At the heart of her work is the argument that we must continually think the world a new, define new limits, draw new constellations, find new language, and tell new stories. This is the inheritance she has left us. 210
This passage not only inspires us but examples how Arendt lived.
June 8, 2023
Samantha Rose Hill's 'Hannah Arendt' is an enlightening and accessible introduction to one of the most influential political thinkers of the 20th century. Hill's expertise in Arendt's life and thought shines through, delivering a work that offers a clear and engaging distillation of Arendt's ideas, her intellectual journey, and her impact on political and philosophical discourse.
Hill navigates Arendt's complex ideas with admirable clarity. She deftly explains Arendt's views on totalitarianism, authority, power, and the "banality of evil," among other subjects. Arendt's ideas are illuminated through her personal experiences, providing the reader with a comprehensive understanding of how her life shaped her philosophies.
One of the standout aspects of this biography is the way Hill elucidates Arendt's thoughts on the "vita activa" or "the active life" and how she understood the relationship between thinking, willing, and judgment. It's a testament to Hill's writing that such dense philosophical concepts are made accessible and interesting to the reader.
Arendt's personal life is also explored, shedding light on her relationships, experiences as a Jewish refugee during World War II, and how these deeply affected her perspectives. However, the balance sometimes feels tipped more towards Arendt's intellectual journey than her personal life.
Hill's writing is lucid, concise, and unpretentious, making the biography a joy to read for both those familiar with Arendt's work and newcomers. However, given the complexity of Arendt's thought, some readers might desire a more detailed exploration of certain philosophical concepts.
'Hannah Arendt' is a rich and approachable journey into the life and mind of a deeply influential thinker. It serves as an excellent primer for those new to Arendt's work and a valuable resource for those looking to deepen their understanding of her contributions. It's a testament to the enduring relevance of Arendt's ideas and a tribute to her lasting impact on the world of political theory.
Hill navigates Arendt's complex ideas with admirable clarity. She deftly explains Arendt's views on totalitarianism, authority, power, and the "banality of evil," among other subjects. Arendt's ideas are illuminated through her personal experiences, providing the reader with a comprehensive understanding of how her life shaped her philosophies.
One of the standout aspects of this biography is the way Hill elucidates Arendt's thoughts on the "vita activa" or "the active life" and how she understood the relationship between thinking, willing, and judgment. It's a testament to Hill's writing that such dense philosophical concepts are made accessible and interesting to the reader.
Arendt's personal life is also explored, shedding light on her relationships, experiences as a Jewish refugee during World War II, and how these deeply affected her perspectives. However, the balance sometimes feels tipped more towards Arendt's intellectual journey than her personal life.
Hill's writing is lucid, concise, and unpretentious, making the biography a joy to read for both those familiar with Arendt's work and newcomers. However, given the complexity of Arendt's thought, some readers might desire a more detailed exploration of certain philosophical concepts.
'Hannah Arendt' is a rich and approachable journey into the life and mind of a deeply influential thinker. It serves as an excellent primer for those new to Arendt's work and a valuable resource for those looking to deepen their understanding of her contributions. It's a testament to the enduring relevance of Arendt's ideas and a tribute to her lasting impact on the world of political theory.
March 17, 2025
I've only read one of Hannah Arendt's books so far (Eichmann in Jerusalem) but I have always found her fascinating, and felt like I needed to know a bit more about her and her work. I previously read The Three Escapes of Hannah Arendt by Ken Krimstein, which tells her life story in graphic novel form, and while this book by Samantha Rose Hill tells the same stories, it also looks at her life from a slightly different angle. Krimstein's book is, as the title suggests, framed around three crucial escapes in Arendt's life, and while it touches on other personal elements of the story as well as the worlds in which Arendt lived, Hill's book is more in depth. The Critical Lives series from Reaktion Books is "a major series of short critical biographies that present the work of important cultural figures in the context of their lives" (from the publisher website: https://reaktionbooks.co.uk/series/cr...), and Samantha Rose Hill presents a brilliant and accessible overview of Arendt's life and work. She presumes basic knowledge of philosophy and 20th century history on the part of the reader, and I think if you're interested in Hannah Arendt enough to read this book, you'll be fine. I loved reading more about Arendt's early life and her formative experiences, and how these (and others in her life) influenced her interests and her writing. You get a good sense of who she was as a person and what it might have been like to know her. She had a really incredible life, and I think she was born at just the right time for someone with her type of brain. She was incessantly curious and questioned everything, in a way that was vital for challenging the dramatic events of the 20th century. I learned a lot from this book and challenged some of my own thinking, and I am very keen to read more of Arendt's work for myself. Highly recommended.
January 28, 2024
I wanted to know more about Hannah Arendt after the controversy with Masha Gessen (who called out Israel for committing genocide in Palestine) that happened at the same time she was awarded the Hannah Arendt prize. This book is a good introduction to Arendt, her personal background and her essays/books. However it's not enough to really explain in depth her works and so of course you'll need to read those to actually understand her. It was interesting to see her criticism of the use of violence by Black Power during the civil rights movement, and also her rejection of protests, and I agreed with criticism of her by Tom Hayden found of Students for a Democratic Society "arguing that her remarks did not bear upon the present political conditions of injustice in America and were theoretical in nature: 'It seems to me that until you can begin to show - not in language, not in theory, but in action - that you can put an end to the war in Vietnam, and an end to American racism, you can't condemn the violence of those who can't wait for you.' Hayden thought there was a place for violence within the student protest movements, and that sometimes violence was a necessary response when the tactics of non-violence failed."
January 28, 2024
I wanted to know more about Hannah Arendt after the controversy with Masha Gessen (who called out Israel for committing genocide in Palestine) that happened at the same time she was awarded the Hannah Arendt prize. This book is a good introduction to Arendt, her personal background and her essays/books. However it's not enough to really explain in depth her works and so of course you'll need to read those to actually understand her. It was interesting to see her criticism of the use of violence by Black Power during the civil rights movement, and also her rejection of protests, and I agreed with criticism of her by Tom Hayden found of Students for a Democratic Society "arguing that her remarks did not bear upon the present political conditions of injustice in America and were theoretical in nature: 'It seems to me that until you can begin to show - not in language, not in theory, but in action - that you can put an end to the war in Vietnam, and an end to American racism, you can't condemn the violence of those who can't wait for you.' Hayden thought there was a place for violence within the student protest movements, and that sometimes violence was a necessary response when the tactics of non-violence failed."
March 22, 2025
It’s really confusing to see people on this platform expecting a biography would introduce them to Arendt's work. I think it was a right strategy to recount Arendt's life without doing the same for Arendt's thought, for that life was not short of events. The book obviously brings up her writings and situates them in a context of her experiences and intellectual connections, but whenever the author makes an attempt to analyse them, it immediately becomes a mess. The same goes for the bigger historical context. Arendt learned from the dissolution of Stalin's regime when working on The Origins prior to 1951? Oh really? Otherwise I enjoyed the book and learned a lot from it, for which I cannot not appreciate it.
February 16, 2024
[نوشتن مستلزم این است که نویسنده بتواند از دنیای ظواهر کناره بگیرد و در ساحت تنهایی خود مستقر شود...]
آرنت به خواننده های خودش یاد میده که چطور مسائل جهان اطرافشون رو از زوایای مختلف فهم کنند تا در نهایت به نوعی بتونن بین حضور در عرصه عمومی و تنهایی که یکی از لوازم مهم اندیشیدن هست تعادل ایجاد کنند.
روایت کتاب لذت بخش بود...
آرنت به خواننده های خودش یاد میده که چطور مسائل جهان اطرافشون رو از زوایای مختلف فهم کنند تا در نهایت به نوعی بتونن بین حضور در عرصه عمومی و تنهایی که یکی از لوازم مهم اندیشیدن هست تعادل ایجاد کنند.
روایت کتاب لذت بخش بود...
March 24, 2025
This is a very good, probably excellent, introduction to Arendt's life, both professional and personal. For those who know more about Arendt, this might be a frustrating read as so much is skimmed over, by design as it is meant to be an intro. If I knew someone who was reading Arendt for the first time, I'd give them this book.
July 1, 2025
Numa fase inicial estava muito investida na biografia, na história e no trabalho de HA. Porém, com o tempo, apercebi-me que a obra parte do pressuposto que o leitor já está familiarizado com a obra e ideias de Arendt, pelo que passei muito tempo a sentir que não estava a tirar proveito do potencial desta biografia
December 22, 2021
Dr. Hill does an incredible job of getting into the complexities and controversies that comprised Arendt's life; This book is not only enjoyable, but also thought stimulating and a compassionate look at an equally compassionate woman.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews