Geheime Reichssache (Secret Reich Business)
Berlin, June 5, 1942

Changes for special vehicles now in service at Kulmhof (Chelmno) and for those now being built Since December 1941, ninety-seven thousand have been verabeitet [processed] by the three vehicles in service, with no major incidents. In the light of observations made so far, however, the following technical changes are needed:

[1] The vans’ normal load is usually nine per square yard. In Saurer vehicles, which are very spacious, maximum use of space is impossible, not because of any possible overload, but because loading to full capacity would affect the vehicle’s stability. So reduction of the load space seems necessary. It must absolutely be reduced by a yard, instead of trying to solve the problem, as hitherto, by reducing the number of pieces loaded. Besides, this extends the operating time, as the empty void must also be filled with carbon monoxide. On the other hand, if the load space is reduced, and the vehicle is packed solid, the operating time can be considerably shortened. The manufacturers told us during a discussion that reducing the size of the van’s rear would throw it badly off balance. The front axle, they claim, would be overloaded. In fact, the balance is automatically restored, because the merchandise aboard displays during the operation a natural tendency to rush to the rear doors, and is mainly found lying there at the end of the operation. So the front axle is not overloaded.

[2] The lighting must be better protected than now. The lamps must be enclosed in a steel grid to prevent their being damaged. Lights could be eliminated, since they apparently are never used. However, it has been observed that when the doors are shut, the load always presses hard against them as soon as darkness sets in. This is because the load naturally rushes toward the light when darkness sets in, which makes closing the doors difficult. Also, because of the alarming nature of darkness, screaming always occurs when the doors are closed. It would therefore be useful to light the lamp before and during the first moments of the operation.

[3] For easy cleaning of the vehicle, there must be a sealed drain in the middle of the floor. The drainage hole’s cover, eight to twelve inches in diameter, would be equipped with a slanting trap, so that fluid liquids can drain off during the operation. During cleaning, the drain can be used to evacuate large pieces of dirt.

The aforementioned technical changes are to be made to vehicles in service only when they come in for repairs. As for the ten vehicles ordered from Saurer, they must be equipped with all innovations and changes shown by use and experience to be necessary.

Submitted for decision to Gruppenleiter II D, SS—Oersturmbannführer Walter Rauff

Signed: Just

That was a real Nazi memo that came out a few months before “the final solution” was implemented. Steven Katz put it through a rhetorical analysis and found that it was a nearly perfect technical communication. Except, of course, for the fact that Just’s “pieces” and “load” actually referred to human beings who were put into the back of these trucks in order that they might be gassed.

This is a reasonably well-known analysis within rhetorical circles, though I’m not sure how well known it is outside of academia. I think, however, that everyone should read it, not just because it shows the evils of Nazism, but because it also shows what happens when a rhetorician disregards the essential ethos of her communication and instead defaults to the ethos of her community. It also shows the danger of people not thinking when they read this type of communication or listen to it on the radio.

Critical thinking: it’s not just for academics.

Doh!

So I’m thinking I might be skimming through the anger stage at the moment (with a brief detour through denial earlier today), which … yeah. Needs to happen. But I also need to pay attention, because seriously, I’m not interested in being the kind of asshole who loses her shit and expects everyone else to just suck it up.

Beer, of course, is a helpful addition.

On the non-brain-breaking end of the scale is Elisabeth Alford, whose Thucydides and the Plague in Athens: The Roots of Scientific Writing is the very model of readability. Her prose is clear and to the point. More importantly, I don’t have to reference my dictionary every other line. Elisabeth, I’m giving you a 4-star rating.

Sweetie, give it up. Seriously. If you aren’t disbarred because of this latest round of misconduct, you surely will be after the next round.

No love,

Me

ETA: It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when a judicial order is my light reading for the night. On the other hand, it’s really well written. And kind of snarky.

Aside from those issues, there were a great many photographs and paintings of Normandy, and what was interesting was how the curator set it up so that the viewer could see the same general image, but from the perspective of multiple artists/photographers. Oddly, it was whilst we were looking at these that I finally understood why Plato (via Socrates) was against art, because it doesn’t accurately portray reality — it portrays the artist’s singular vision of a reality that doesn’t encompass the whole. One of the photographers — Davanne, I think — deliberately framed one of his images of Étratat so that only the fishing boats and ramshackle buildings could be seen. According to the accompanying information, he wanted very much to convey the sense that this small fishing village still retained its rural character despite the fact that beyond the framing, there was actually a fairly large tourist town complete with hotels and casinos.

The stupid thing is, I’ve known this forever, but I didn’t make the connection until yesterday. And the same is true of writing — it doesn’t encompass the whole of the writer’s thoughts, it only conveys a very small and specific portion of the writer’s thoughts. But that’s okay. It really shouldn’t do more than that, because honestly? My brain is a scary enough place as it is, and I don’t think anyone else needs to be rooting around in there. Anyway, it was my little epiphany for the weekend, and I’m happy with it.

Finally, to the campus planners at the University of Michigan: handicap accessible restrooms means that anyone can get through the door, not just the able-bodied. Your restrooms in the basement of the new section of the UMMA pretty much fail this basic test of usability. Hell, I had trouble opening the damn doors, and I’m a healthy adult. D, who is 88 years old and who uses a motorized scooter to get around, could not get into and out of the men’s room without help. Add the electric openers already, would you?

For the record, yes, Roman Polanski, there is a jail cell with your name on it. Suck it up and take it like a man already. Fucking asshole.

Jesus.

Regards,

Tara