ENTERTAINMENTTHE ENEMY
WITHIN
By ROD DREHER
PARK
CITY, Utah - Errol
Morris, America's most accomplished
documentary filmmaker, has made his
first Holocaust film. It's terrific -
the kind of picture that keeps you
awake at night - and it will surely
become part of the Holocaust film
canon.
But it's not going to win Morris any
awards from the Anti-Defamation
League, to say nothing of the
Academy of Motion Picture Arts and
Sciences.
"Mr. Death:
The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter,
Jr." crawls inside the mind
of a mild-mannered Massachusetts fellow
who has, almost inadvertently, become
one of the leading lights of the
Holocaust-denial movement.
The film, which is unfinished and
without a distributor, is not
interested in condemning Leuchter;
rather, it seeks to understand the
creepy little man and tell us something
deeply unsettling about his capacity
for evil. The most chilling aspect of
"Mr. Death" is the unshakable feeling
that it's about its audience as much as
its subject.
Morris became ill with the flu while
at the Sundance Film Festival and
canceled his interviews to fly home to
Cambridge, Mass. The director did
participate in question-and-answer
sessions following "Mr. Death"
screenings, where he heard some
complaints that the film didn't take a
hard enough line against Leuchter and
the Holocaust deniers. Reid
Rosefelt, Morris' longtime friend
and publicist, said most people want
the Holocaust dealt with in
good-vs.-evil terms.
"Meanwhile, you have Bosnia, and Pol
Pot, on the news every night, and
people making excuses for genocide,
saying it's time to put the past behind
us and move on. We just accept that,"
Rosefelt said. "Errol is much more
interested in saying that Leuchter is
us. That's not a message people are
willing to celebrate."
Fred Leuchter (pronounced
"LOOSH-ter") is a self-described
engineer whose thorough averageness -
his slight physical stature, genial
conversational style and homely,
jug-eared face taken from a Norman
Rockwell portrait - belies his peculiar
fascination with the mechanics of
execution. He traces his macabre
interest back to his childhood visits
with his prison-guard father.
Leuchter's knowledge of electric
chairs, gallows and the like earned him
consulting positions with state
penitentiaries. He made a nice living
analyzing execution devices and
redesigning them to make for more
humane and efficient killing
machines.
His expertise even earned him a
phone call from Ernst Zundel, a
neo-Nazi who was born in Germany and
now lives in Toronto. In 1988, the
Canadian government put Zundel on trial
for disseminating material denying the
Holocaust. Hired by Zundel, Leuchter
and a small crew visited Auschwitz,
where they
illegally
chiseled samples from the walls of the
gas chambers and smuggled them back to
the United States.
A lab analysis showed no significant
traces of cyanide residue. That, and
Leuchter's on-site assessment of
gas-chamber architecture, led him to
conclude that no gassings had been
committed at Auschwitz. That was his
testimony to the Canadian court.
HOUGH
the court refused to allow "The
Leuchter Report" into evidence, the
document quickly became a "smoking gun"
among the international
Holocaust-denial movement. It has been
widely disseminated in those circles,
and people such as British
revisionist-historian David
Irving appear in the Morris film
praising both the report and the
heroism of the "mouse of a man" who
produced it.
Of course "The Leuchter Report" is
an absurd document of pseudo-science,
as the Morris film easily demonstrates.
Jim Roth, the scientist who
performed the lab analysis of the
Auschwitz fragments,
says that he
didn't know where the material came
from, and explains why the tests
he performed would not have detected
cyanide. Historian Robert Jan Van
Pelt, who has made the study
of Auschwitz his life's work,
demolishes the credibility of
Leuchter's conclusions beyond a shadow
of a doubt. "Mr. Death," it should be
made clear, is not about the validity
of "The Leuchter Report," but an
investigation into how and why a man
like Fred Leuchter can believe such
pernicious nonsense.
Van
Pelt chalks up the strange, sad case of
Fred Leuchter to vanity, to the man's
unassailable belief in his own judgment
and expertise. Near the film's end,
Leuchter, who has
lost everything because of "The
Leuchter Report," tells Morris that he
never doubts himself.
Furthermore, he even sees himself as
something of a humanitarian. In the
film, Leuchter talks at length about
the utterly gruesome effects of
electrocution - the "eyeballs flying
across the room," the "meat ... coming
off the bones like a cooked chicken" -
as being examples of the most humane
ways to kill a person.
"Mr. Death" is perhaps the most
arresting explication of Hannah
Arendt's famous phrase "the
banality of evil" since Albert
Camus' novel "The Stranger." Arendt
said she meant that this "new type of
criminal" is a man who commits his acts
"under circumstances that make it
well-nigh impossible to know or feel
that he is doing wrong."
But does that excuse Leuchter from
moral culpability for the pernicious
use to which neo-Nazis are putting his
work? No, but one sees a source of
great anxiety in the troubling
possibility that contemporary
audiences, who have largely lost the
ability for moral discernment, will
pity Leuchter, or
even admire him for standing up
for his beliefs.
This is what will put Morris on the
hot seat when the finished version of
"Mr. Death" hits theaters, possibly
next year (Rosefelt says Morris may try
to have it shown first at the Toronto
and New York film festivals in the
fall).
The director obviously wants
audiences to realize that the potential
for evil exists in all of us. In this
sense, "Mr. Death" is both an
exploration of the enigma of human evil
and a cautionary tale about hubris.
There's a line from Leuchter
regarding his work with prisons which
perhaps suggests the kind of response
"Mr. Death" may receive from those who
fight Holocaust deniers. "A lot of
people are not interested, are morally
opposed to working on execution,"
Leuchter tells Morris. "They think it's
going to change them."
Similarly, some people are going to
be uninterested or morally opposed to
this brilliant, extraordinary film,
which puts an all-too-human face on
terrible evil. They will be afraid it
will change minds, and not for the
better.
Copyright (c)
1998, N.Y.P. Holdings, Inc.