Crownshaw's PN article

[Paul Mackin]

Some of the this morning's posts give the impression Crownshaw's
paper makes light of the Holocaust. No way, unless one might
draw such meaning from the fact that he points out (as did rj and
others) that the Holocaust is only referred to at a few points in the
book. Seems to me rather  that C is searching, perhaps fruitlessly, for
a means (beyond the constraints of literal/logical argument, which would
be hopelessly mired in logocentrism) to grant the Holocaust (and more
broadly Nazism itself) a more central place in history than it is
officially accorded--link it more convincingly to the mainstream of the
Postwar World.

				
One doesn't have to accept the tenability of the project or the
tools Crownshaw employs to appreciate or respect his aims.

			P.