Teaching Holocaust Literature: Respond to Students

[John Cole]

I am teaching a short story class during the summer and recently taught two stories in the anthology, Tadeusz Borowski's "This Way for the Gas, Ladies and Gentlemen" and Cynthia Ozick's "The Shawl." We looked at the stories closely over two days, and I concluded with showing Alain Resnais's documentary Night and Fog.

I find that students don't wish to be discomfitted, and many--sometimes most--don't understand why I would assign these works or show the film. And sometimes when they ask why I do, I have trouble explaining. I do keep in mind that I am teaching literature--not history--and remind them of that. I want them to be able to form aeshetic judgments because all these works raise the question of how the stories should be told. I also raise the question whether or not we can even make aesthetic judgments about Holocaust literature.

In discusion of these stories I find that students see the world largely in terms of absolute right and wrong, good and evil. (The characters in the story the students find evil and morally reprehensible are not Nazis, but victims themselves.) Because of their responses, I believe that teaching the stories is somehow important. (Note: before I teach these stories I review various guidelines for teaching Holocaust literature.)

If any of you are familiar with these works, could you give me some guidance? How would you respond to the question--Why would you make us read these stories and watch this film?

John

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I find that students don't wish to be discomfitted

Tough. Part of what a good educator does is to take students out of their comfort zone a confront them with ideas/images that challenge their perceptions. Higher education warrants more difficult assignments.

How would you respond to the question--Why would you make us read these stories and watch this film?

I'd say that literature isn't just about a great escapist story (though there's nothing wrong or lowbrow about a ggod novel). It's also about the way art reflects life. Literature is about views of the human condition; the difficult events that rise up and confront many of us in our lives.

[Cyrus]

Two cents: One, the difficulty in relating a historically distant event in interesting ways. The challenge is to rise above mere reportage onto literature, given that the situations being related seem only right for reportage. The challenge is to express a multitude of themes in a setting that is seemingly overwhelmed by a singular theme. We watch intensely a film about boring ol' Civil War because it's also about Rhett and whatshername.

Two, our work witll take us to the limits of human capability for evil, we shall seek homo sapiens pushing the envelope, an always intriguing search. You think you have serial killers now? John Gacy was a boy scout compared to Eichmann!

.. I sympathize with your plight, John. The Holocaust atrocities are farther from the mall than Alpha Centauri. Good luck.

"Before I teach these stories I review various guidelines for teaching Holocaust literature."

What those guidelines might be?

[Zeno]

I started to write a response similar to what 'Kurn' posted but erased it, - I have not seen the film or read the stories mentioned. By fate I then opened 'The Meditaions' (Book 3, # 11). I read, in part, the following:


When an object presents itself to your perception, make a mental definition or at least an outline of it, so as to discern its essential character, to piece beyond its separate attributes to a distinct view of the naked whole, and to identify for yourself both the object itself and the elements of which it is composed, and into which it will again be resolved. Nothing so enlarges the mind as this ability to examin methodically and accurately every one of life's experiences, with an eye to determining its classification, and the ends it serves, its worth in the universe, and its worth to men as the members of the supreme city in which all other cities are as households. Take, for example, the thing which is producing its impression upon me at this moment. What is it? Whereof is it composed? How long is it designed last? What moral response does it ask of me; gentleness, fortitude, candour, good faith, sincerity, self-reliance, or some other quality?


Perhaps this would be useful.

-Zeno

[Gamblor]

Imagine all the Holocaust literature that's been crammed down my throat.

Coffee Table books, Escape from Sobibor, Schindler's List (betcha can't tell me the major mistake in that one[1]), the annual Yom haShoah (Holocaust Day) remembrace ceremony. Hell, the Yad vaShem is a 45 minute drive from my house.

Except for one thing. Before all of that was school. And in school, when you first learn about the Holocaust, you question the victims, not the perpetrators. You question how, 6 million people, the exact population of Jews in Israel, could go so quietly while we are able to defend ourselves. Anyone who didn't fight back is just as guilty as the Nazis. It's the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and the Holocaust-related Aliya and nation-building in Israel that defines the Holocaust for modern Israelis, while it is Auschwitz that defines it for diaspora Jews.

In America, there's nothing that reminds you that you're Jewish unless you actively pursue it. In Israel, it's everywhere. It's every Friday at 2pm when the country shuts down. It's every Tisha b'Av at the Western Wall. It's every Lag B'Omer with the barbecues and bonfires. You can't avoid it. Even if you just ate a bacon double cheeseburger, you know where you are and you know who you are, and you're not a hidden minority in a sea of different customs. Everyone, even the guy that just cut you off on your bicycle, even the guy that just told you to "Go to Hell" (the saying is actually "Go to Gaza") knows what everyone else's families have been through. It is a nation of immigrants, but with a common history. And a damn fine nation indeed.

[1] At the end of Schindler's List, the workers in the factory are singing "Yerushalayim Shel Zahav" - Jerusalem of Gold. While that scene takes place in 1945, the song was written by Naomi Shemer in 1967 just before Israel reunited the city of Jerusalem, which had been left decrepit and a garbage dump by the Jordanians.

[John Cole]

Cyrus,

Many good online resources are available although many really fit a history class better than a literature class. Still, though, I read through some of the advice and various timelines before teaching the classes.

[ThaSaltCracka]

as someone who is still currently in College, and I assume this is college you are teaching, maybe I can help you out a little. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
I find that students don't wish to be discomfitted, and many--sometimes most--don't understand why I would assign these works or show the film.

[/ QUOTE ] They are asking you why did you assign this because they did not enjoy reading them. The topic is probably something they don't want to know about because it bothers them. Many kids nowadays only have a passing knowledge(if that) of what happened in WWII. The reality that 6 million Jews were killed for no reason is a totally uncomfortable thing for them. \

Okay, I looked up the word aeshetic, because I did not know what it meant, apparently it pertains to self-denial of something, is that right? So if thats the case, are you trying to point out these two works as being aeshetic in regards to the Holocaust?

Maybe I am lost here, but are you having them read stories which don't tell the whole truth about the holocaust?

Am I close at all here? If I am then I think it would be an excellent example of writers "re-writing" history. I would think it would make your students question the content they are reading and the motives behind what they are reading much more frequently.

Please clarify for me, I think I have confised myself /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[John Cole]

Somehow you stumbled across the word "ascetic" rather than "aesthetic." I asked students to contemplate how the stories could be appreciated for their "artful" qualities, or perhaps even more to the point, asked them to look at what is "beautiful" in the stories. Certainly, given the subject matter, this is no easy task for anyone. Or, I aksed, can you separate the content of the stories from those qualities that make them what I would consider important works in the literature.

And, no one story or novel or work of history can ever hope to tell the "whole truth" about anything. No, this is not "revisionist history" as some people use the term. (Keep in mind that "revisionist history" isn't a bad thing. Some people believe the term connotes telling lies by rewritting history.)

Out of curiousity, since you are a college student, what sort of discormfort level can you stand? Thanks for responding.

John

[John Cole]

In Borowski's story, Henri, a French Marxist, comments that the Jews would rise up against the Nazis if it weren't for their religion. Since, by this point, I've already introduced students to a Marxist reading of a story, they (or some anyway) can understand the context of Henri's idea. Henri is, of course, wrong, but it seems you'd agree with him given what you wrote above.

[ThaSaltCracka]

weird for some reason that word didn't come up on dictionary.com.....

hmmm.... I can see why your students are having a hard time understanding why you picked those stories. I would have to say that is a tough assignment, but also a very good one too, that should make them think. I guess if I were in your class I would try to point out how the author is describing scenes or settings, also what kind of mood the author is setting and how they are setting that mood. Interesting premise..... I can see why you picked these works too, because its not as clean cut. People don't want to find something beautiful or artful in a story about the holocaust, so in essence they have to think to find something....

[ QUOTE ]
Out of curiousity, since you are a college student, what sort of discormfort level can you stand?

[/ QUOTE ]
Do you mean as far as content or comfort level. I mean, its college, their parents aren't there to hold their hands, so as far as content goes, I think anything is fair game. Now as for comfort level, what I mean is, does this class break the mold of simply reading and then responding via paper and/or test. They should expect anything at this point as well. I think discussions would be very valuable with a topic like this, because this is the sort of thing some students probably can't figure out on their own, they need someone to help them through it. Not all are like this, but I can see how this may be very abstract thinking for some people.

Hope this helps!!!

[Gamblor]

In Borowski's story, Henri, a French Marxist, comments that the Jews would rise up against the Nazis if it weren't for their religion. Since, by this point, I've already introduced students to a Marxist reading of a story, they (or some anyway) can understand the context of Henri's idea. Henri is, of course, wrong, but it seems you'd agree with him given what you wrote above.

I don't believe it was their religion that prevented them from rising up, but rather the mentality that goes with being an exile.

There was no forum or medium for Jews to assert their rights in Nazi Germany, and that is why they marched like lambs to their own slaughter. Jewish religion has nothing to do with not "fighting back", but rather implores Jews to take any action necessary to prevent or death or at least to die with honour. In Judaism, one is permitted to commit any and every sin imaginable, only if it will save one's own life.

The rationale? A dead man does no good deeds, but if he sins once to save his life, than he can repay it a million times over through Torah study, hard work, and charity.

So, why did the Jews of Europe die? Well outside of tiny pockets of militant resistance (mostly in Poland), the annihilation happened so gradually that nobody really noticed. First they were forbidden from some trades, than most freedoms were taken away (always under some rationale), then the yellow star, then the jailings, then the Zyklon B.

They never even thought about asserting themselves, as Hitler's reign was supposed to be only temporary, until the economy improved or a new government was elected.

I would cautiously agree with Henri. As exiles, Rambam determined that Jews are required to adopt the laws of the their temporary home so as not to incur the wrath of their hosts. Of course, most Jews of Eastern Europe didn't know this, so Henri is way off. But when in Rome...

In every nation but the US, Jews have always been guests, outsiders. When the host makes a demand, you accept his decision, and by the time European Jews figured out where all of Hitler's policy was leading, the organized Jewish groups had all fled into hiding, and everyone else was stuck there.

But it comes back to being an exile. And now that there's Israel, Jews don't have to be visitors, even if they feel like their adopted home is somewhere else.

[GeorgeF]

1) As time passes all history blurs and then fades away. For example you still hear alot about Aushwitz. Not much is heard about Verdun (WWI battle 1916, million or so dead). Who forced WWI soldiers to go the front. When they occasionally mutanied, where they heros?

2) "don't understand why I would assign these works or show the film"

Unless you are teaching a course that addresses the holocast, I don't either. If it is a high school class it is because you have to. If it is a university class it is because it is what you are qualified to teach. My guess is that Holocaust literature will end up in the same catagory as those thick Russian lit books.

On problem I have with genecide studies is that you are required to be symathetic to the victems in ways that you are not if you are studing Russian lit for example. This makes the lectures very dull. My guess is that each student knows for sure that if they say something stupid they might be tagged as an antisemite for the rest of their lives. This is not the case of someone taking russian lit who thinks it is good that Boris the peasant finally commited suicide. Please don't get mad, just a thought, possibly not a good one.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
My guess is that each student knows for sure that if they say something stupid they might be tagged as an antisemite for the rest of their lives.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is, I think, a very important point. And it works in both overt and in subtle ways. It can and probable does stifle debate, openness of students and teachers, and the ability of Holocaust literature to speak freely to students (and perhaps to all of us). I note that John Cole looked up guidelines about teaching holocaust literature etc.

John, do you think this a problem? Could this be part of the discomfort you sense in the students? You would know more about it as you interact with the students.

-Zeno

[John Cole]

Zeno,

Since I work at a community college, I see a huge variety of students. Some can barely read, and others would make Ivy League students envious. (I once had an Intro to Lit student who spoke twelve languages, held a masters in Salvic languages, a Psychology degree from SUNY, and was finishing up her fourth and fifth college degrees simultaneously.) In other words, I see a wide range of opinions and ideas. And I have heard, shall I say, less than politically correct comments.

Yet, many of the students I teach seem to want easy answers and clear cut distinctions that I cannot offer to them. One student asked why the Jews in Borowski's story didn't simply overwhelm the guards. Night And Fog helps to explain the answer to this question, I think. Mostly though, they feel bad after reading the stories. And, for some reason, they believe that reading--perhaps education in general--shouldn't make them feel bad.

I am far from knowlegeable about Holocaust Literature, but of what I have read, it's unsettling because of both the subject matter itself and the lack of heroes. In another place and time, we'd easily condemn the actions of the Jewish mother who denies her child in her attempt to survive, and she would be an easy villian in a melodrama. But I don't think she's the evil villian, yet all of my students do. Why?

If you can find it, read Ozick's short story, and tell me who the villian is.

I guess the discomfort--apart from the subject matter--is really that students don't find the answer--or the answer isn't complete or satisfactory. Or that the answers aren't answers at all.

[John Cole]

Believe it or not, my standard reply--often--is "Tough sh*t."

[Zeno]

John,

I checked out The Shawl from the library. I just finished reading the first story (The Shawl) and will start Rosa, maybe tomorrow.

[ QUOTE ]
If you can find it, read Ozick's short story, and tell me who the villain is.


[/ QUOTE ]

Stella. The Guard is almost an afterthought. As literature this is an excellent story. The sentence structure, the simple but poignant writing, the stark and short nature of the story line and the imagery, and the bare bones choices presented. It is deeply disturbing - I still feel the shock of the story.

I fully support your effort in making students read this story for both the literary value and the intrinsic value of the story itself. I now, at least partially, understand the difficulties you are confronting.

Answers can be just as disturbing as the ugly circumstances that foster the questions. Or perhaps there are no answers. No easy ones, no hard ones - just no answers at all.

-Zeno

[Gamblor]

My guess is that each student knows for sure that if they say something stupid they might be tagged as an antisemite for the rest of their lives.

Frankly, I'm of the opinion that many Jews bring it on themselves. If secular schools learn about the Holocaust, then can you imagine how much time is spent in Jewish religious and Israeli secular high schools on Holocausts, inquisitions, Crusades, Roman exiles, Arab countries?

If that much tragedy has happened to Jews in the past, how do we know that today it doesn't still exist? And given the UN's fantastic record of even-handedness with Israel, there isn't much reason for a Jewish kid educated in Jewish history to believe anything has changed - as in, it's all mental. The first sign of any sentiment that goes against Jewish belief, well, it's "uh oh, here we go again"

For a non-Jewish kid, in my opinion it's pretty much "it didn't happen to me, fine it's a sad story, but why do I have to go home and write a book report on it?"