Schindler’s
List Writing
Assignment
Vocabulary:
Carpetbagger any opportunistic or exploitive outsider (takes advantage of others)
truehandler proper owner
precarious dangerous or perilous
cognac good French Brandy (a type of alcohol)
puritan person who is strict in moral or religious matters, often excessively so
ideology the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual, social movement, institution, class,
or large group
gleaned collected bit by bit
flaunt, to parade or display oneself conspicuously, defiantly, or boldly
aktion German word for an action
sybaritic devoted to a lifestyle of pleasure and luxury
cajoled to persuade by flattery or promises; wheedle; coax
procure to obtain or get by care, effort, or the use of special means clandestine hidden
bemused lost in thought; preoccupied
paroxysm any sudden, violent outburst; a fit of violent action or emotion émigré an emigrant, esp. a person who flees from his or her native land because of
political conditions
sinew source of strength
TASKS:
1. Actively read the article, “A Good Man in a Bad Time.”
2. Read the following commentary:
In
the prologue of Schindler's List, Keneally writes that "this is the story of the pragmatic triumph of good over evil,
a triumph in eminently measurable, statistical unsubtle terms." Pragmatic means
“to be action-oriented and concerned with facts and practical information.” Schindler was able to save as many
people as he did because he was a man of action who acted on facts. Initially, Schindler made money off of the Jews who worked
for him. He saw it as merely a business deal. Only after he saw the unchecked
brutality of the SS against the ghetto Jews, did he act in the Jews’ defense by creating a safe haven at his factory.
According
to Paul Zweig’s article “A Good Man in Bad Times,” the author of Schindler’s
List, Mr. Keneally “has given Oskar Schindler the stunning reality of a man who was neither “good” nor
“virtuous” but a “genius of life, a savior”. Oskar Schindler’s wife, Emilie, “remarked
that Oscar had done nothing astonishing before the war, and had been unexceptional since. He was fortunate, therefore, that
in that short fierce era between 1939 and 1945, he had met people who summoned forth his deeper talents.”
3. Answer the following questions (due by Friday, March 23rd to Ms HB in room 336 or via email) using information
from the movie and from the article “A Good Man in a Bad Time”:
a.
Was Oskar Schindler a good man, a fortunate man as his wife calls him, or merely a pragmatist? Was Schindler a hero for saving the Jews, or was he fortunate and “saved”
by the Jews? What kind of man do you think Oskar Schindler was? Why? Write a brief response to what kind of man Oskar Schindler
was.
b.
Does history make the man, or does the man make history?
Relate this to what you have learned about Oskar Schindler.
c.
Is it really possible for one person to make a stand
and make a difference in the world? How would you have responded if you were
in Schindler’s place? Explain.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ (dictionary definitions)
RUBRIC
|
Exemplary |
Acceptable |
Limited |
Deficient |
Ideas/ Content
|
This paper is clear and focused. The writing commands the reader's attention. Writing contains extensive
and relevant details with examples to support topic/theme. |
This paper is clear and focused. It holds the reader's attention. Writing contains sufficient and effective
details with examples to support topic/theme. |
This paper has a loosely defined topic, but may not be clearly developed. Writing contains some details
with examples to support topic/theme. |
This paper has a general topic, but is not clear. To extract meaning from the text, the reader must
make inferences based on sketchy or missing details. |
Organization |
Progression of ideas is logical and transitions are clear, effective and enrich the fluency of the
writing. Introduction, body, conclusion and format are excellent. |
Progression of ideas has some inconsistencies in unity and/or coherence. Transitions are clear. Introduction,
body, conclusion and format are good. |
Progression of ideas has major inconsistencies in unity and/or coherence. Transitions are poor. Writing
has a weak introduction, body, conclusion, or all three. Format is fair. |
Progression of ideas is difficult or impossible to follow. Transitions are missing. Introduction, body,
conclusion and/or format are lacking. |
Voice |
The writer is consistently aware of and connects strongly with the audience, presenting relevant details
to the paper's purpose. Writing reflects a strong commitment to the topic and is engaging. |
The writer is aware of and connects with the audience, presenting mostly relevant details to the paper's
purpose. Writing reflects a commitment to the topic and is mostly engaging. |
The writer is somewhat aware of the audience, presenting some relevant details to the paper's purpose.
Writing reflects some commitment to the topic. |
The writer does not demonstrate awareness of the audience, presenting few details to support the paper's
purpose. Writing reflects lack of commitment to the topic. |
Word Choice |
Words convey the intended message in a precise, interesting, and natural way. The words are powerful
and engaging. |
The language is functional, even if it lacks much energy. It is easy to figure out the writer's meaning
on a general level. |
The writer struggles with a limited vocabulary, searching for words to convey meaning. |
The writer demonstrates a deficient vocabulary, using incorrect words to convey meaning. |
Sentence Fluency |
Sentences are well-built, strong, and varied in structure and length. Writing has an easy flow, rhythm,
and cadence. Writing contains creative and appropriate connections between sentences and thoughts, showing how each relates
to, and builds upon, the one before it. |
Sentences are well-built, strong, and may vary in structure and length. Writing has flow, rhythm, and
cadence. Writing contains creative connections that build upon prior statements. |
Sentences begin the same way and follow the same patterns. Writing is more mechanical than fluid. Writing
contains some connections that build upon prior statements. |
Sentences begin the same way and follow the same patterns. Writing is mechanical, and lacks fluency.
Writing contains few or no connections between statements, and is difficult to understand. |
Conventions |
The writer demonstrates a good grasp of standard writing conventions (e.g. - spelling, punctuation,
capitalization, grammar, usage, paragraphing) and uses conventions effectively to enhance readability. Errors are so few that
just minor corrections would make this piece publishable. |
The writer shows reasonable control over an acceptable range of standard writing conventions. Conventions
are sometimes handled well and enhance readability; at other times, errors are distracting and impair readability. |
Errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, usage, and grammar and/or paragraphing repeatedly
distract the reader and make the text difficult to read. |
Errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, usage, and grammar and/or paragraphing continuously
distract the reader and make the text nearly impossible to read. |
Presentation |
The form and appearance of the text enhances the reader's ability to understand and connect with the
message. It has a professional appearance and fully conforms to project standards. |
The form and appearance of the text mostly enhances the reader's ability to understand and connect
with the message. It has a mostly professional appearance and mostly conforms to project standards. |
The form and appearance of the text somewhat enhances the reader's ability to understand the message.
It has a somewhat professional appearance and conforms to project standards. |
The form and appearance of the text does not enhance the reader's ability to understand the message.
It lacks a professional appearance and does not conform to project standards. |
October 24, 1982
A GOOD MAN IN A BAD TIME
By PAUL ZWEIG; PAUL ZWEIG TEACHES COMPARATIVE LITERATURE AT QUEENS COLLEGE AND IS THE AUTHOR OF ''THE ADVENTURER''
AND ''THE HERESY OF SELF-LOVE.''
SCHINDLER'S LIST By Thomas Keneally. Illustrated.
398 pp. New
York: Simon & Schuster. $16.95.
WHEN the German Army
invaded Poland in 1939, a swarm of carpetbaggers trailed after it, eager for the
spoils of empire. They were the black marketeers and middlemen, the young sharks who knew how to get a general drunk and leave
with a contract in their pockets. Among them was a young Sudeten German named Oskar Schindler, who had a reputation for womanizing
and giving lavish parties for hisp influential friends. Schindler knew how to make a bureaucrat happy, and he was rewarded
with one of Cracow's plums. He was appointed Aryan treuhandler -read plunderer - of a prosperous Jewish-owned enamelware factory.
It was good to be an
enterprising young German in Cracow in 1939. There was a problem, though, which Schindler experienced firsthand in the anguished
faces of the Jewish workers at his newly acquired factory. A stream of directives had made Jewish life increasingly precarious in Cracow. Walls went up around a suburb,
and the city's Jews were packed into it, half a dozen to a room. Schindler shrugged uncomfortably and hoped that these excesses
would soon stop. They were the exuberance of empire, the unruly high spirits of various unpleasant elements in the occupying
forces, in particular the SS, those puritans who swallowed ideology the way Schindler swallowed cognac. Meanwhile he dropped
hints to some of his Jewish workers about upcoming Aktions by the SS, which he
had gleaned during his drinking parties with the colonels, captains and supervisors.
History would not normally
be concerned with such a man as Oskar Schindler, a mere minor player in the sybaritic
night life of a small Polish city during an unspeakable war. But history is not an exact science, and Oskar Schindler is remembered,
as few men have ever been, in the testimony of 1,300 Jewish workers who escaped Poland's cities of death because Schindler,
against every probability, became a possessed man, ready to risk everything in a daring, almost flaunted mission of rescue.
THE versatile Australian
novelist, Thomas Keneally, tells the true story of Schindler's rescue effort in this remarkable book which has the immediacy
and the almost unbearable detail of a thousand eyewitnesses who forgot nothing. The story is not only Schindler's. It is the
story of Cracow's dying ghetto and the forced labor camp outside
of town, at Plaszow. It is the story of Amon Goeth, Plaszow's commandant and Schindler's dark twin. Like Schindler, Goeth
loved women and fine cognac; like Schindler, he was sleek, overweight. If Schindler raked in the profits from his Emalia factory,
Goeth raked them in from the plundered suitcases of Jews, the gold teeth, the extorted diamonds. If Schindler saved Jews,
Goeth killed them: singly, as when he picked off workers with a rifle from his front porch, or in bunches, as when he ordered
lines of inmates up a hill to be killed by his Ukrainian guards and buried in the woods. Goeth was distressed that his black
market friend, Oskar Schindler, had been infected by the Jewish ''virus,'' as Goeth put it, but he helped Schindler almost
whimsically in his embarrassing crusade: When millions were dying, what did it matter that a thousand lived a year or so longer?
Such was Cracow during the war: a hallucination, a madness,
and it drove Oskar Schindler to his own saving madness.
According to Mr. Keneally,
who absorbed archives of eyewitness material in a remarkably short time, it began in earnest one summer day in 1942, when
Schindler and his latest mistress were riding on horseback in the hills surrounding Cracow. Below them stretched a suburb
with a wall around it, the new ghetto. Shouts drifted up the grassy slope, an SS Aktion was in course. Schindler saw Jews
being driven out of houses, lined up and sorted with the crazed orderliness that was the signature of the killing machine.
On one street, a man resisted, and an SS soldier shot him in the head. Schindler noticed a little girl in a red coat turn
around to watch. The SS soldier patted her on the head and coaxed her back into the line. Schindler got off his horse and
threw up. He understood now that the SS did not care who witnessed these acts, because the witnesses, even the little girl
in the red coat, would die too. Death would erase the Jews, and also the killing.
Schindler must have known that he possessed
a genius of sorts. He bribed and cajoled like a master trickster, and then he
had his greatest stroke. He would not merely save a life here and there, procure
Aryan papers for a clandestine Jew, slip bread or money to an occasional inmate
at Plaszow. He would save a thousand lives and, like a ferociously mocking god, he would do it for all to see.
Schindler obtained authorization
to create a work camp in an empty lot next to his factory and house his Jewish workers there. He fed them out of his own pocket,
stole medical supplies for them and managed to keep SS guards from entering the camp on any pretext. When an SS inspector
showed up, he poured cognac down his throat before letting him onto the work floor, so that he would not notice the unseemly
healthiness of Schindler's workers. For three years Schindler manipulated officials who could, with a shrug, have consigned
him to the death camps. He was arrested several times and released with the bemused
blessing of highly placed officials. He slipped between seams of the killing machine, and he saved lives.
IN 1944, the slaughter
of Jews reached its final paroxysm. Auschwitz,
only hours away, was a metropolis of death with, on a given day, half a million inhabitants. Schindler's island of sanity
shook, the cattle cars were never far: A flick of the pen, the transfer of names from one list to another in the infernal
bookkeeping, and the machine would devour a thousand more lives without noticing. But Schindler applied his genius one more
time. He traveled to Berlin, sent cases of liquor to well-placed
generals at SS headquarters in Oranienburg. While Germany
starved, he came up with hampers full of sausages and cigarettes. And he obtained permission to relocate his precious Emalia
factory to the hills of Czechoslovakia along with his entire contingent of ''skilled workers.''
Here Mr. Keneally's narrative
becomes heightened, almost operatic. A list of Schindlerjuden was drawn up by the Plaszow camp authorities: Those on it would
live a little longer (and eventually be saved), those not on it would die now. Schindler's ''skilled workers'' included rabbis,
children, women, a girl dying of cancer, friends, anyone whose name he could remember. The list was a raft on a sea of six
million dead. Among the convoys of Jews that rattled across Poland in cattle cars that fall of 1944, only the Schindlerjuden
were not funneled into the killing camps; only they, 1,300 on a tiny raft, reached the haven of those Czechoslovakian hills.
In his 1980 novel, ''Confederates,''
Mr. Keneally recreated the American South during the Civil War in all its concreteness and lilt of language, surely a stunning
feat for an Australian Irishman. Now he has accomplished a similar feat even more tellingly. ''Schindler's List'' reads like
a novel: Its voices are thick with living tissue; its scenes are so vivid they appear to result from a kind of ventriloquism.
Perhaps after 37 years, it has become possible to write of such things without the cry of anguish, the testimony of rage.
Perhaps by choosing to write about Amon Goeth's reign of deadly caprice - a measurable horror beside the obliterating fact
of Auschwitz - Mr. Keneally has chosen a subject that art can contain. Today the Schindlerjuden
are scattered from Israel to Los
Angeles, and Mr. Keneally has gathered their testimony. He has read the archives they deposited at
Yad Vashem, The Martyr's and Hero's Remembrance Authority, in Jerusalem.
Because of their memories, he has grasped not simply the ''holocaust'' -that end-of-world fire - but the fragile daily acts
of survival and death which human beings manage, even in the mouth of hell. He has given Oskar Schindler the stunning reality
of a man who was neither ''good'' nor ''virtuous'' but a genius of life, a savior.
IN the old epics a character
is occasionally inhabited by a god, and then he acts beyond himself, living on the edge of wonder. When the god leaves him
he becomes ordinary once again. Years afterward Schindler's wife, Emilie, ''remarked that Oskar had done nothing astonishing
before the war, and had been unexceptional since. He was fortunate, therefore, that in that short fierce era between 1939
and 1945, he had met people who summoned forth his deeper talents.''
For three years during
the war Oskar Schindler was inhabited by a profound moral passion, and then the god left him. When the war ended he drifted
from one failed business to another. Eventually he arranged to live part of the year in Israel, supported by his Jewish friends,
and part of the year as a sort of internal émigré in Frankfurt, where he was often
hissed in the streets as a traitor to his race. After 29 unexceptional years he died in 1974.
There is a mystery here,
and Mr. Keneally is too good a writer to try to explain it. He leaves us with the remarkable story of a man who saved lives
when every sinew of civilization was devoted to destroying them.
http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/12/06/specials/keneally-schindler.html
|