陶克思老師介紹
圖片來源： 政治大學歐洲語文學系網站

• 主講人：陶克思 老師（ Christoph Thonfeld）（國立政治大學歐洲語文學系助理教授）
• 講　題：Of demons and ordinary men – Research on perpetrators in Nazi occupied Europe
• 主持人：花亦芬 老師（臺大歷史系教授）
• 時　間：2013年 5月17日（週五）下午6:30-8:20
• 地　點：臺灣大學普通教教室201
• 主辦單位：國立臺灣大學歷史系, 國立臺灣大學邁向頂尖大學計畫「人文多樣性與跨文化」子計畫：歐洲史上的文化與宗教多元性。

  ---

• 摘要：
  As long as persecution and annihilation under Nazi rule are being talked about, investigated and researched into, there are also the accompanying attempts to analyse and to explain the actions of those involved. This, of course, has always taken place within the framework of political and societal developments, important criminal trials and groundbreaking scientific publications. These contexts will be reconstructed during the talk and at the same time they provide the background for a deepened exploration of the so called perpetrator research as it has evolved since the end of World War II. The notable upsurge in perpetrator research since 1990 had been coming a long way since there had been a prevailing tendency to blank out the concrete faces and actions of Nazi era perpetrators for decades after World War II in Germany and across Europe. After the initial confrontation within the framework of the Nuremberg Military Tribunals German society rather developed an attitude of dissociation towards genocidal perpetrators. Scattered research initiatives in the following two decades produced a rather abstract image of perpetration with either no visible perpetrators at all or perpetrators with hardly any distinctive characteristics. In the 1970s this was underscored by social science projects and experiments which cared little about historic context. In the following decade historians eventually attempted a synthesis of the development of Germany’s main genocidal campaign against the Jews of Europe, commonly referred to as the Holocaust, but they arrived at pretty antagonistic ends. One group emphasised the importance of the leadership and of ideology, while the other highlighted institutional and spatial dynamics. In the 1990s this dichotomy was further acuminated, while hitherto unavailable sources finally paved the way for more concrete and differentiated assessments. At the same time, an increased readiness within German society to face individual perpetrators since the 1980s grew into a full scale intra- and intergenerational confrontation between memory and history in the late 1990s. Since around 2000 historians have finally arrived at more integrative approaches towards Nazi perpetration, bringing together the strengths of the various paradigms while also more soberly evaluating their shortcomings. With this presentation a rough overview over the entire development and preliminary results of that process will be given.