The Ethics of Responsibility in Elie Wiesel's Work
2011; Volume: 10; Issue: 28 Linguagem: Inglês
ISSN
1583-0039
Autores Tópico(s)Religious, Philosophical, and Educational Studies
ResumoTHE ETHICS OF RESPONSIBILITY IN ELIE WIESEL'S WORK Review of Sandu Frunza, God and Holocaust in Elie Wiesel's An ethics of responsibility (Dumnezeu si Holocaustul la Elie Wiesel. O etica a responsabilitatii), (Contemporanul Publishing House, Bucharest, 2010) Key Words: Holocaust, memory, confession, ethics, responsibility, Evil, Good, indifference, Elie Wiesel, Sandu Frunza Elie Wiesel (born September 30, 1928, Sighetul Marmatiei, Romania) is better known in Romania for his 1986 Nobel Peace Prize than for being a writer, given Romanians' obsession to have a Nobel Laureate of their own. There are, of course, some examples of scholars or writers who were born in Romania but lived, created and worked abroad. Some continued to live in their native country, but were marginalised: George Emil Palade (USA), who was awarded Nobel Prize in Medicine (1974, together with Albert Claude and Christian de Duve); Ioan Morar, member of International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War, who was awarded Nobel Peace Prize in 1985 (together with Mihail Kuzin - former Soviet Union - and Bernard Lown - USA); last but not least, Herta Muller (Germany), born in Romania, who was awarded Nobel Prize in Literature in 2009. Sandu Frunza's recent book is first and only Romanian monograph dedicated to Elie Wiesel. Yet no other Romanian author would have written a better book: endowed with a solid education as philosopher of religion, Sandu Frunza has already published Philosophy and Judaism, 2006; Religious Fundamentalism and New Conflict of Ideologies, 2003; The Religious Experience in Dumitru Staniloae's Thought. A Relational Ethics, 2001; Love and Transcendence, 1999; A Mystic Anthropology, 1996; with Mihaela Frunza, he coordinated volume Essays in Honor of Moshe Idel, 2008. Last but no least, Sandu Frunza was ideal Romanian author to write such a book because, as it is well known, Elie Wiesel is not only a writer, but also a renowned philosopher and theologian, although he refuses to assume latter status. would be in favor of writer in a dialogue with Richard D. Heffner, I am a mere storyteller. And so he is, a special storyteller, one who, in his masterpiece Night, confesses his personal dramatic experience as a prisoner (no. A-7713) in Auschwitz concentration camp, a place he miraculously survived (his parents and younger sister having died there). The first chapter of book, Introduction into issues of evil and responsibility, brings up a topic which is intensely debated in contemporary culture and philosophy: can morality still exist after Auschwitz, considering that God allowed Nazis to do as they wished? Note that philosopher Theodor W. raised a similar question, in relation to poetry; in his article Barbarism, poetry, salvation, Vladimir Tismaneanu stated: Adorno meant that it is frivolous to care about poetry after Auschwitz. Nevertheless, how can poetry be frivolous? It is poetry itself, as it happened to Celan, that helps people survive death of their mother and despair of writing in language of their executioners, as well as lack of sympathy from rest of world. Eventually, Holocaust, too, can be defeated through poetry, in same way as Anna Ahmatova stood up against Gulag that killed her husband and kidnapped her son, by means of her poem, Requiem. Isn't poetry of Hebraic Bible what helped children of Israel survive deportation and exile?1 Sandu Frunza claims that the interference between memory, confession and responsibility is foundation of Wiesel's entire work. In this work, Wiesel proposes an ethic based both on religious thinking of Judaism and on contemporary laic philosophy; thus his statement that he is neither a philosopher, nor a theologian, but a mere storyteller should be considered as an excess of modesty (the Romanian philosopher Constantin Noica, author of Stories about Mankind,2 also rejected his philosopher status, saying that some people should be ashamed to call themselves philosophers just by thinking of Socrates! …
Referência(s)