Talk:The Kindly Ones (Littell novel)

message: "the most prestigious" should not be used to describe the prix goncourt. It is a point of view. It is the same reason "prestigious" is not used to describe the Grammy Awards, the Nobel Prize, or the American Ivy League schools. C5mjohn 14:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most Prestigious 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 13:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: I have corrected a couple of the glaring mistakes.  Aue engages in homosexual relationships already the section Allemande I & II. But the entry needs a lot of work.  If I find time I will try and add some references.--Joel Mc (talk) 16:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Corrections and work to be done

message: I have tried to revert to the orginal title, Les Bienveillantes, but don't seem to know how to do it.  Even if it is consistent with WP policy, it would have been good to discuss moving it before taking such an action.  The Kindly Ones doesn't mean much in English. As far as I know, it is never used to refer to to the Eumenides, which is the name used in the English title of the Greek tragedy.  Secondly, we don't know what actual title Littell will use in English and rather than making another move it might have been better to leave it until the book comes out this year in English. True there is little harm done, specially with the redirect, still the title klangs in the ears of this English speaker.  But maybe that is what Littell wants and we will find that a second move will be unnecessary.Joel Mc (talk) 09:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The move was wrong and the user appears not to have understood the policy he was using as a reason for the move. The book is known in English under the name Les Bienveillantes and hasn't been translated. Home made translations of titles is very far from the policy of using English on English Wikipedia. JdeJ (talk) 10:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving page

message: This image has been deleted ot of the article, although the author describes these incidents in several pages. --Alex1011 (talk) 10:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ukraine pogroms 

message: Apparently the recent move was made without looking at the discussion above.  It was intended to move the page when the English translation appeared (it is now scheduled for March 2009), or at least when the reviews of the English edition began to appear. However, since JL decided to translate the title as The Kindly Ones, it is probably good to just leave well enough alone.  --Joel Mc (talk) 10:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving Page (2)

message: The image :Image:Theodor Oberländer.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --12:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Theodor Oberländer.gif

message: Is it correct that Degrelle was the major influence for the Aue character? Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 09:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Evenfiel (talk) 12:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Leon Degrelle]]

message: Hello everyone. If you have this page on your watchlist, please take note that I'll be reviewing the article during the next few days for Good Article status, so now's the time for any last-minute cleanup. I realize there's been a long wait for the review, so I'll try to get it done as quickly as possible. Skoal. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 18:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My preliminary review is finished. It can be found here. The article needs some work before GA status can be awarded. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 22:09, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:GA|Good Article]] review

message: However, is this picture of Kosmodemyanskaya avaible? I guess it would be the most important illustation here. --83.13.135.170 (talk) 07:55, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  fix'd nao 

message: An accusation against Littell that he was a "pornographer of violence" was linked to an article on (literal) violent pornography!! Is this someone's idea of a joke? Valkotukka (talk) 12:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: pornographer of violence

message: So I just consulted the book. Here go the relevant parts:
The next morning, Standartenführer Blobel, our commander, gathered his Leiters together to go to HQ. The Leiter III, my immediate superior, wanted to type up a report, so he sent me in his place. The headquarters of the Sixth Army, the AOK 6, to which we were attached, had occupied a large Austro-Hungarian building, its façade gaily painted orange, enhanced with columns and stucco decorations, and riddled with shrapnel. An Oberst, who seemed to know Blobel well, received us: “The Generalfeldmarschall is working outdoors. Follow me.” He led us toward a vast park that stretched down from the building to a bend in the Bug, down below. Near a solitary tree, a man in swimming trunks was walking with long strides, surrounded by a buzzing cloud of officers, their uniforms drenched in sweat. He turned toward us: “Ah, Blobel! Hello, gentlemen.” We saluted him: he was Generalfeldmarschall von Reichenau, the commander in chief of the army. His hairy chest, thrust forward, radiated vigor; embedded in the fat that, despite his athletic build, drowned out the Prussian fineness of his traits, his famous monocle gleamed in the sun, incongruous, almost ridiculous. Without stopping his precise and meticulous instructions he continued his jerky movements to and fro; we had to follow him, which was a little disconcerting; I bumped into a Major and didn’t grasp much. Then he stood still to dismiss us. “Oh yes! One other thing. For the Jews, five guns are too much, you don’t have enough men. Two guns per condemned man will be enough. As for the Bolsheviks, we’ll see how many there are. If they’re women you can use a full squad.” Blobel saluted: “Zu Befehl, Herr Generalfeldmarschall.” Von Reichenau clicked his bare heels and raised his arm: “Heil Hitler!”—“Heil Hitler,” we all replied in chorus before beating a retreat.
Sturmbannführer Dr. Kehrig, my superior, greeted my report sullenly. “Is that all?”—“I didn’t hear everything, Sturmbannführer.” He made a face and fiddled distractedly with his papers. “I don’t understand. Who should we take our orders from, in the end? From Reichenau or Jeckeln? And where is Brigadeführer Rasch?”—“I don’t know, Sturmbannführer.”—“You don’t know much, Obersturmführer. Dismissed.”
(...)
I must not have been the only one asking questions. A mute but profound uncertainty was pervading the ranks of the Wehrmacht. Cooperation with the SS was still excellent, but the Great Action had provoked anxious stirrings. A new order of the day by von Reichenau was beginning to circulate, a raw, harsh text, a brutal disclaimer of Rasch’s conclusions. It described the men’s doubts as vague ideas about the Bolshevik system. The soldier in the territories of the East is not only a fighter according to the rules of the art of warfare, he wrote, but also the bearer of a pitiless völkisch ideology and the avenger of all the bestialities inflicted on the German and ethnically related nations. Therefore, the soldier must have a full understanding of the necessity for harsh but just countermeasures against Jewish subhumanity. Human pity had to be banished: offering a traveling Slav, possibly a Bolshevik agent, something to eat was pure thoughtlessness, a mistaken humanitarian act. The cities would be destroyed, the partisans annihilated along with the uncommitted. These ideas, of course, didn’t all come from von Reichenau; the Reichsführer must have suggested a few passages to him, but the main point was that this order worked correctly toward the Führer, along his lines and toward his aims, to use the fine expression of an obscure employee of the Prussian Ministry of Agriculture, and so it was hardly surprising that the Führer was delighted with it, that he caused it to be distributed as an example to all the armies in the East. But I doubted if it was enough to set people’s minds at rest. National Socialism was a complete, total philosophy, a Weltanschauung, as we said; each person had to be able to find his place within it; there had to be room for all. But now, it was as if an opening had been forced into this whole, and all the destinies of National Socialism had been driven into it, on a one-way path of no return, which everyone had to follow until the end.
(...)
There was some agitation on the ground floor: groups of men were milling in the corners, whispering agitatedly. I caught a Scharführer by the sleeve: “What’s happening?”—“I don’t know, Obersturmführer. I think there’s a problem with the Standartenführer.”—“Where are the officers?” He pointed to a stairway that led to our quarters. On the way up, I met Kehrig, who was muttering as he came down, “This is insane, just insane.”—“What’s happening?” I asked him. He glanced at me gloomily and said, “How do you expect to work in such conditions?” He continued on his way. I climbed up a few more steps and heard a shot, the sound of broken glass, some shouts. On the landing in front of the open door of Blobel’s bedroom, two officers from the Wehrmacht were pacing furiously back and forth in front of Kurt Hans. “What’s happening?” I asked Hans. He gestured toward the room with his chin, his hands clenched behind his back. I went in. Blobel, sitting on his bed, wearing his boots but no jacket, was waving a pistol around; Callsen was standing next to him and trying without grasping his arm to direct the pistol toward the wall; a window pane had shattered; on the floor, I noticed a bottle of schnapps. Blobel was livid and spluttering incoherent words. Häfner came in behind me: “What’s happening?”—“I don’t know, it seems the Standartenführer is having a fit.”—“He’s gone nuts, you mean.” Callsen turned around: “Ah, Obersturmführer. Go ask the gentlemen from the Wehrmacht to excuse us and come back a little later, all right?” I stepped back and bumped into Hans, who had made up his mind to come in. “August, go find a doctor,” Callsen said to Häfner. Blobel was bawling: “It’s not possible, it’s not possible, they’re sick, I’m going to kill them.” The two officers from the Wehrmacht hovered in the hallway, rigid, pale. “Meine Herren…,” I began. Häfner pushed me aside and ran down the stairs. The Hauptmann squeaked: “Your Kommandant has gone mad! He wanted to shoot at us.” I didn’t know what to say. 
(...)
Von Radetzky appeared at the door: “What is this mess?” Kurt Hans spoke up: “The Generalfeldmarschall gave an order and the Standartenführer was ill, he wasn’t able to bear it. He wanted to shoot at the officers from the Wehrmacht.”
(...)
An hour later, the officers met in the main hall. Von Radetzky and Häfner had left with Blobel; he had started kicking when they put him into the Opel, Sperath had been forced to give him another shot while Häfner held him round the waist. Callsen began to speak: “Well, I think you’re all more or less up to date about the situation.” Vogt interrupted: “Could you perhaps go over it quickly?”—“If you like. This morning, the Generalfeldmarschall gave the order to undertake a retaliatory action for the ten German soldiers found mutilated in the fortress. He ordered us to execute one Jew for each person assassinated by the Bolsheviks; that is more than a thousand Jews. The Standartenführer received the order and that seems to have brought about a fit…”—“It’s also somewhat the army’s fault,” Kurt Hans said. “They should have sent someone with more tact than that Hauptmann. And transmitting an order of this importance through a Hauptmann is almost an insult.”—“We have to admit that this whole business reflects badly on the honor of the SS,” Vogt commented.
--Niemti (talk) 18:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Orders from the 6th Army / Wehrmacht in general

message: * Bukiet, Melvin Jules (March 7, 2009). A Leering Look at the Holocaust. The Washington Post. Retrieved on 2010-09-24.
* Gates, David (March 5, 2009). The Monster in the Mirror. The New York Times. Retrieved on 2010-09-24.
* Golsan, Richard J., Suleiman, Susan R., Suite Française and Les Bienveillantes, Two Literary "Exceptions" : A Conversation, Contemporary French and Francophone Studies, vol. 12, no 3 (2008), p. 321–330
* Grossman, Lev (Mar. 19, 2009). The Good Soldier. Time. Retrieved on 2009-04-25.
* Hodes, Laura (March 4, 2009). Furious Responsibilities. The Forward. Retrieved on 2009-04-21.
* Hussey, Andrew (February 27, 2009). The Kindly Ones, By Jonathan Littell, translated by Charlotte Mandell. The Independent. Retrieved on 2009-04-21.
* Hussey, Andrew (December 11, 2006). Guilty pleasures. New Statesman. Retrieved on 2010-09-24.
* Kemp, Peter (March 1, 2009). The Kindly Ones by Jonathan Littell. The Sunday Times. Retrieved on 2009-04-21.
* Lasdun, James (February 28, 2009). The exoticism of evil. The Guardian. Retrieved on 2009-08-18.
* Lemonier, Marc, Les Bienveillantes décryptées. Le Pré aux Clercs. (2007) .
* Littell, Jonathan, (November 13, 2006). Lettres de Jonathan Littell à ses traducteurs. Retrieved on 2009-04-24
* Mandell, Charlotte, (March 14, 2009). Living Inside The Kindly Ones. Beatrice.com. Retrieved on 2009-04-24
* Morrison, Donald (February 21, 2009). The Kindly Ones. Financial Times. Retrieved on 2009-04-21.
* Razinsky, Liran, History, Excess and Testimony in Jonathan Littell’s Les Bienveillantes, French Forum, vol. 33, no 3 (Autumn 2008), p. 69–87
* Razinsky, Liran (editor), Barjonet, Barjonet (Editor), Writing the Holocaust Today: Critical Perspectives on Jonathan Littell's The Kindly Ones. Rodopi. (2012) 
* Moyn, Samuel (March 4, 2009). A Nazi Zelig: Jonathan Littell's The Kindly Ones. The Nation. Retrieved on 2009-04-21.
* Schuessler, Jennifer (March 21, 2009). Writing with the Devil. The New York Times. Retrieved on 2010-09-24.
* Suleiman, Susan Rubin, When the Perpetrator Becomes a Reliable Witness of the Holocaust : On Jonathan Littell's Les Bienveillantes, New German Critique, vol. 36, no 1 (2009), p. 1–19
* Suleiman, Susan Rubin (March 15, 2009). Raising Hell. The Boston Globe. Retrieved on 2011-06-20.
* Theweleit, Klaus, On the German Reaction to Jonathan Littell's Les Bienveillantes, New German Critique, vol. 36, no 1 (2009), p. 21–34
An useless collection of links. --Niemti (talk) 01:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That was already discussed above. Just read the discussion again. There is nothing against a "Further reading" section. Plenty of featured articles have it. Evenfiel (talk) 18:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: They have when there are relevant books on the subject. --Niemti (talk) 18:34, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In that list there are books and academic articles written about The Kindly Ones, as well as reviews by Holocaust and French literature specialists. I'll remove the less important links. Evenfiel (talk) 18:44, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Then use them in the article, JUST AS I ALREADY DID WITH SOME. Now revert yourself or I'll report you (for breaking Wikipedia guideline and spamming with external links). --Niemti (talk) 19:00, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've trimmed it down. If you want, you can use them in the article, if not, just leave them there. Thanks. Evenfiel (talk) 19:04, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No, if YOU want, you can use them. Now, it's spam, serving no purpose for th article, breaking Wikipedia guideline. And so you have to remove the spam. You're welcome. --Niemti (talk) 19:11, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read about the "Further reading" section here: Wikipedia:Further_reading. Also, you should add all references used by you to the "References" section. I had to add a few that were still in the "Further reading" section, but you should still add a few more. Evenfiel (talk) 19:18, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "The following is a proposed Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption." No. --Niemti (talk) 19:27, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

text: I have been away for sometime, but having started working on this piece in 2006, and am certainly opposed to deleting the whole "Further reading" section.  Perhaps it had gotten a little long, but Evenfiel's cull works for me, the remaining list seems to be most useful to any reader who wants to further their knowledge.Joel Mc (talk) 19:15, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh yeah? Whatever purpose might some list, compiled either at random or arbitrarily (I'm not sure what's worse), serve to any reader equipped with the arcane powers of an Internet search engine? It's a repository of external links by another name. Also. --Niemti (talk) 19:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

text: If I remember it correctly, it was a 10-volume book about the Second World War, but I'll need to check. He wrote the first 3 volumes and used the ideas for the future 4th volume to start a completely new project, The Kindly Ones. Evenfiel (talk) 01:13, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Further reading" 

message: The Bad Sex in Fiction Award:  In such a long article, surely it's possible to make room for that somewhere? Robofish (talk) 16:12, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of another award this book won? 

message: The unreferenced, speculative, statement: "His name might be inspired...." has now been reverted by two editors.  If you disagree with the reverts, please discuss here before continuing. --Joel Mc (talk) 16:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculative mention of Mandelbrod