GE201 “Auf neuem Kurs: auf der Talsohle” - Part A – Summary of class versions [commented]
On a new course or at rock bottom? / A new direction – we’ve reached rock bottom / Rock bottom:
where next? / quo vadis? [Some consideration of how to link the two, and whether it could be a question
– led to some quite free but effective titles which introduce the article’s line of argument]
People / The people [political context] / The German people are frustrated and apathetic / fed up
[alliterative emphasis] /disengaged [political context]/ disillusioned. They have lost faith in politicians, who
they think are only interested in power, rather than in solving problems. [they think: angeblich =
viewpoint of people. “Allegedly” suggests (wrongly) Dönhoff’s viewpoint]
For their part politicians are angry, heaping all the blame on the media, who they say are only reporting
negative things, and exaggerating the disasters besides.
The media in turn point out that they only report what is actually happening [vor sich gehen] / all they are
reporting is what is happening [re-ordered to convey impact of doch ]. In truth we are all [‘we’ more in line
with argument to engage reader]/ everyone is to blame [schuld an = dat: not ‘guilty of’] for the current
situation / present state of affairs, because it is of course [ja] not the facts that matter /are crucial, but the
perception people have of these facts [repetition to enhance coherence of argument] / the way in which
people perceive [verbal alternative] them / what matters is not the facts, but the perception of these
facts. [variations discussed here to make a key point more forcefully] This in turn means that subjective
perceptions create objective states of affairs. / This then means / This does mean however / This would
then mean / This can only mean that subjective beliefs / assumptions [Anschauungen] give rise to an
objective truth [indefinite article underlines the relative nature / subjective origins of this truth.
Tatbestände is tricky, it has both legal and philosophical connotations, hence the possibility raised in one
class of the actus reus – the physical facts of the matter in a crime, as distinct from the mens rea, the
intention or state of mind behind the crime – but this is not really a criminal context, more a philosophical
one, so the word is chosen to point out that these are not Tatsachen, facts as such]. The resulting
atmosphere of collective frustration means people’s faith in parties and political authority is undermined,
and there ensues a general process of social disintegration. / A general process of disengagement begins,
as society’s links to political parties and authorities are loosened through the climate of collective
frustration. / [or, without beginning a new sentence:] , and that in the climate of collective frustration the
social ties to political parties and authorities are relaxed, and a general process of social decomposition /
political disassociation / disintegration begins. / A process of subversion of / A breakdown in political
allegiances… [Versions of Zersetzung in the dictionary were felt to be sometimes too organic, but this
could be mitigated by the addition of the qualifying adjective ‘political’ or ‘social’]
Yet how is it that this situation came about? [The following section with triple rhetorical parallelism
needed to be strongly structured to force the point home – options included repeating ‘how is it possible
that?; or only picking up on the ‘that’, or a ‘for’; also adding And… Or at beginning of a new sentence.
Maybe the first version below with ; divisions and no repeated ? is not powerful enough?]
How is it possible for sixteen-year-olds to set a hostel for asylum-seekers alight and accept / take in their
stride / condone the deaths of its occupants / those living there; for young men to beat an African of the
same age to death; for two seventeen and eighteen year-old right-wing radicals in court last week to
murder a homeless man in the most brutal manner, by kicking him [boots felt to be implied], then
battering him with a gas cylinder and finally repeatedly submerging him in Lake Kolpin.
Cf.
How is it possible for sixteen-year-olds to set fire to a hostel for asylum-seekers, accepting the risk that
those inside might / will die? / - and the deaths of the occupants are just accepted? [this indignant reordering was a good way to bring out the emphasis on their attitude, and anticipated with its use of the
passive the responsibility of society as a whole which is raised further on in the argument.] For young men
to beat an African of the same age to death? Or for two seventeen and eighteen year-old right-wing
radicals in court last week to murder a homeless man in the most brutal manner, by trampling on him
with heavy boots, then battering him with a gas cylinder, finally holding / forcing [‘holding’ him felt not to
be as violent as implied in original] him repeatedly under water in Lake Kolpin?
People with visible disabilities are verbally abused; violence and barbarity are becoming more and more
widespread. And how did we reach this point? / How has it come to this? Explanations abound / There is
no shortage of explanations for this: [both these structures put emphasis on ‘explanations’, to reproduce
the German word-order’s effect] broken homes, lack of discipline in schools, terror / horror and violence
on television, self-centredness, no sense of community ... it all plays a role. / they all contribute.
But the reason remains the same: we lack a / have no binding morality, we lack the / have no moral
principles to define the limits to our actions. Deprived of metaphysical principles, people are vulnerable to
delusions of grandeur and susceptible to all manner of manipulation. It has become increasingly vital that
we develop a binding morality / morality which governs all our actions.
Previously, when scientific understanding [Erkenntnisse – insight and not just knowledge] and
technological resources were still relatively limited, the Ten Commandments provided adequate moral
direction and a moral code. Today our power has acquired unprecedented dimensions / our powers have
reached a level hitherto unimagined. Today we are in a position to / able to destroy creation, or with the
help of genetic engineering, to create [‘manufacture’ doesn’t work as well in this context] a new human
being, one who will perhaps display qualities that were hitherto inconceivable.
We must therefore cultivate a morality [or ‘an ethic’ or ‘a system of ethics’ but not ‘ethics’ on its own]
that makes us aware of the huge responsibility we bear, all of us / each and every one of us, [even] in our
ordinary everyday activities [too], in our dealings both with our fellow human beings and with nature /the
environment.
[‘Auch’ can be ‘also’ or ‘even’. Hammer §10.4.5(a): ‘Auch der beste Arzt hätte ihr nicht helfen können’:
‘Even the best doctor couldn’t have helped her’. ]