000			03578cam a2200373 a 4500
001			ocm36041580
003			TZ-ArACH
005			2012020202502.0
008			961129s1997 nju b 001 0 eng
010			_a 96050097
020			_a0765806630
020			_a9780765806635
035			_a(OCoLC)36041580 _z(OCoLC)263632393
040			_aDLC _cTZ-ArACH _dEL$ _dBAKER _dNLGGC _dYDXCP _dBTCTA _dNYDWH _dSTF _dUAB _dBCD _dUAT
049			_aTZAA
050	0	0	_aKZ1168.5 _b.O83
082	0	0	_a341.6/9/01 _221
100	1		_aOsiel, Mark. _94155
245	1	0	_aMass atrocity, collective memory, and the law / _cMark Osiel.
260			_aNew Brunswick, N.J. : _bTransaction Publishers, _cc1997.
300			_ax, 317 p. ; _c24 cm.
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
505	0		_a1. Crime, Consensus, and Solidarity -- 2. Solidarity Through Civil Dissensus -- 3. Defendants' Rights, National Narrative, and Liberal Memory -- 4. Losing Perspective, Distorting History -- 5. Legal Judgment As Precedent and Analogy -- 6. Breaking with the Past, Through Guilt and Repentance -- 7. Constructing Memory with Legal Blueprints? -- 8. Making Public Memory, Publicly -- App. Collective Memory in the Postwar German Army.
520			_aTrials of those responsible for large-scale state brutality have captured public imagination in several countries. Prosecutors and judges in such cases, says Osiel, rightly aim to shape collective memory. They can do so in ways successful as public spectacle and consistent with liberal legality. In defending this interpretation, he examines the Nuremburg and Tokyo trials, the Eichmann prosecution, and more recent trials in Argentina and France. Such trials can never summon up a "collective conscience" of moral principles shared by all, he argues. But they can nonetheless contribute to a little-noticed kind of social solidarity.
520	8		_aTo this end, writes Osiel, we should pay closer attention to the way an experience of administrative massacre is framed within the conventions of competing theatrical genres. Defense counsel will tell the story as a tragedy, while prosecutors will present it as a morality play. The judicial task at such moments is to employ the law to recast the courtroom drama in terms of a "theater of ideas," which engages large questions of collective memory and even national identity. Osiel asserts that principles of liberal morality can be most effectively inculcated in a society traumatized by fratricide when proceedings are conducted in this fashion.
520	8		_aThe approach Osiel advocates requires courts to confront questions of historical interpretation and moral pedagogy generally regarded as beyond their professional competence. It also raises objections that defendants' rights will be sacrificed, historical understanding distorted, and that the law cannot willfully influence collective memory, at least not when lawyers acknowledge this aim. Osiel responds to all these objections, and others. Lawyers, judges, sociologists, historians, and political theorists will find this a compelling contribution to debates on the meaning and consequences of genocide.
650		0	_aWar crime trials _xMoral and ethical aspects. _94156
650		0	_aWar crime trials _xSocial aspects. _94157
650		0	_aProcès pour crimes de guerre _xAspects sociaux. _94158
650		0	_aMémoire _xAspects sociaux. _94159
650		7	_aWAR CRIMES _94160
942			_2lcc _cBOOK
999			_c1533 _d1533