 |
|
|
How does knowing that an individual participated in acts of genocide many years ago influence our perceptions of that person today? Does it make a difference if he or she has tried to make amends through apology or speaking out against those previous actions? And does the same logic apply beyond individuals to our thinking about nations?
In a post-genocide society, whether to forgive former perpetrators is a choice made by former victims and their loved ones. They may make that choice based solely on the perpetrator's actions during the genocide, or they may also take into account the perpetrator's actions and behavior since he or she committed crimes against humanity. In this reading, we look at how people respond to Nobel prize winning author Guenter Grass's revelation that he participated in the Waffen SS. |
|
|
|
At a Facing History and Ourselves seminar, several teachers from Germany commented on the challenges of teaching about the Holocaust in their country. They also discussed the challenges of being German in the world. One teacher talked about how she went out of her way to not sound German when she spoke English because she was so tired of the things people said—the stereotypes they had. Another talked about how burdened she felt by the past and the way she felt it inspired people to look at her. Still another teacher, who was slightly older, said that he had come to terms with the history. He did not feel guilty, he said, but he did feel that he had a responsibility.
Nobel Prize winning author Guenter Grass recently admitted that as a youth he participated in the Waffen SS, the combat arm of Hitler’s SS paramilitary force. Grass has long been viewed by many people around the world as an important moral voice, particularly in relation to the German past. He has demanded that people view the past with complexity and rigor. His books, beginning with The Tin Drum in 1956, frequently explored the need to face up to the past.
Since he has come forward, individuals around the world as well as organizations—including some that have given him awards—have said that his work is now tarnished and that he cannot be viewed as an important moral authority in the same way anymore. Some people have even demanded that his Nobel Prize should be taken away (the Nobel Foundation has rejected this request).
In response to the recent outcry, Grass told a television interviewer “What I’m experiencing is an attempt to make me persona non grata, to cast doubt about everything I did in my life after that—and that later life was marked by shame.”1
Of course, not everyone has attacked Grass. Award-winning author Salman Rushdie has defended Grass.
“We don’t not read the work of Ezra Pound, a Nazi sympathiser as an adult,” he told Today.
“Grass has spent his adult life opposing the ideas he espoused as a child and that in itself is an act of courage, he’s a friend of mine and I don't intend to change that,” he added.
He described the secret as a “partial concealment.”
“His stature comes from the fact he's a giant in the world of literature and the fact he's made mistakes,” he added.2
Another author, John Irving, also defended Grass, calling him a “hero.” “Grass remains a hero to me, both as a writer and as a moral compass; his courage, both as a writer and as a citizen of Germany, is exemplary, a courage heightened, not lessened, by his most recent revelation,” Irving said.
Connections for the Classroom...
- The response to Grass raises crucial questions regarding the relationship between the past and the present. What are the implications of decisions and actions that an individual made in youth? What about an entire country—for how long is it accountable to the past and in what ways?
1 “Grass to Retain Nobel Despite Row,” BBC Online. August 15, 2006. Source.
2 “Rushdie jumps to Grass's defence,” BBC News (bbc.co.uk/news). August 17, 2006. Source.
|
|
 |
|
|
|