Charlatan's Latest Venture Meets with Unfavorable Reviews.

Published: 2016-09-13

Least we forget, David Hare’s last Holocaust exploitation movie was The Reader… about a beautiful ex-SS guard who liked to bath a 15 year old boy and then have sex with him. It too was about a trial about Auschwitz. Unfortunately, Mr. Hare has no more concern for accuracy or truth in this Holocaust related film than he did in his last. Odd, since the movie is supposed to be about defending historical accuracy.

Despite what Mr. Hare and others have proclaimed, the Irving v. Penguin was not about “proving the Holocaust.” Judge Gray specifically stated in his Judgment:

“It is no part of my function to attempt to make findings as to what actually happened during the Nazi regime.”

Irving opened the case telling the court:

“I have never held myself out to be a Holocaust expert, nor have I written books about what is now called the Holocaust.”

The case is better described as a wide-ranging questioning of Irving’s competence as a historian; an ex post facto effort to substantiate Lippstadt’s claim that Irving had falsified historical facts.

Judge Gray broke the alleged falsification of historical facts into 4 elements:

  1. 19 specific individual criticisms of Irving’s historiography on esoteric points like Hitler’s trial in 1924 or a mistranslation of an entry in Himmler’s telephone log for December 1, 1941
  2. his [Irving’s] portrayal of Hitler…
  3. his claims in relation to Auschwitz
  4. the bombing of Dresden.

The movie Denial should have been a truthful exploration of the actual important issues that Irving v. Penguin raised. Instead, it seems to be no more than humbug.

Additional information about this document
Property Value
Author(s): David Merlin
Title: Charlatan's Latest Venture Meets with Unfavorable Reviews.
Published: 2016-09-13
First posted on CODOH: Sept. 13, 2016, 12:17 a.m.
Last revision:
Appears In: