One Piece from 102
Forgiving, Forgetting, and Remembering
Sarah Bennett
Southern Oregon University
The Sunflower has a huge theme that is asked readers, “What would I have done?” Several questions are asked in a submissive form to readers to answer these uncomprehend able way: was it right for Wiesenthal to keep silent and not tell the mother what he knew of the SS man’s crimes, is it only the leaders who are responsible for the war, did the SS man learn anything from his horrific experiences, why does Wiesenthal dream about the little boy Eli, is silence accepted as a positive or negative way, did Wiesenthal act rightly or wrongly/ should he have done something different, and are there times when forgiveness is understandably impossible? Being asked these questions as a reader is difficult. The majority answers with yes or no as a direct response to all the prompts. Readers should elaborate their way of thinking as if they wouldn’t know how to answer their own question, “What would I have done?”
Wiesenthal, a Jewish man who had been dehumanized for long amounts of time encountered an SS man “cleansing” himself to him about what horrible crimes he committed in addition to how he was a “good” boy when he was younger. The SS man was seeking for forgiveness in one aspect or another, though Wiesenthal never gave him a direct yes or no answer; Wiesenthal kept silent because he didn’t even know himself. Surviving the war, Wiesenthal visited the SS man’s mother. He contemplated to whether tell the mother how he actually knew her son through the war or not and to find if he truly was a “good” boy or not. Wiesenthal made the decision to not tell the SS man’s mother the truth about her “good” son; it was not right or wrong to not tell her, this was a moral decision for him. It depends on the person to depict whether it should have been something said or not. The way The Sunflower was told, Wiesenthal had a grudge on the SS man because he was regretful, and however at the same time he didn’t. The SS man told Wiesenthal he was a Catholic as a young “good” boy before joining the Hitler Youth Group in addition, was the apple of his parents’ eyes. It was fate for Wiesenthal to be the one in millions of Jews to have listened and survive the Holocaust in order to visit the SS man’s mother. It may haven’t been right for Wiesenthal to not to tell her the truth counting all of the dead Jewish members he contributed to killing, although looking at only from his perspective, it was right for the comforting satisfaction for himself; that’s what I would have done.
Blame is pointed at one or another person instead of taking blame for ourselves so we don’t look like the cause of the outcome. There are many directions to cross for the blame of the millions of deaths of Jews; if it was the leaders, other countries, or local supporters. The majority of fingers was and still is still pointed towards the leaders of the Holocaust for the outcome that happened. It is true, they were a large factor, but they were also supporters, advocates for the belief of diminishing the population. The lack of people around the world not getting involved with it sooner was an additional factor along with immature level of technology that it was at. I also blame the other countries in the world for denying the immigrants from Europe when they had passports to use with hope of surviving. The selfishness of these countries was a contributor to the millions of deaths.
The SS man is viewed as a dehumanizing man towards the Jews. Karl was regretful for the person he became and wanted to tell a Jew his confessions along of what a “good” boy he was before becoming a German SS man. I believe that the SS man learned what his actions caused at the end. Karl’s way of trying to say that he did learn from his experiences was by telling his stories from when he was a boy, to what traumatic events he witnessed, to knowing how it feels to be dying slowly and painfully. Karl didn’t want to specifically say the exact words of, “I’m sorry” because he knew that they would be too weak, negatively unforgotten for Wiesenthal, and inappropriate for Wiesenthal and himself for in the time they were present. Karl confessed to a/the random Jew, which happened to be Wiesenthal of what a “good” boy he was when he was younger for Wiesenthal to try or not try to believe it. Karl continued to see Jews as subhumans to some extent because that is what he was told over and over again till the time of his death. The SS man was regretful for the outcomes that happened due to his contribution of the millions of deaths. The SS man didn’t learn from his experiences, he learned from regret.
Page 68, “During the night I saw Eli. His face seemed paler than ever and his eyes expressed the dumb, eternally unanswered question: Why? His father brought him to me in his arms. As he approached he covered his eyes with his hands. Behind the two figures raged a sea of flames from which they were fleeing. I wanted to take Eli, but all that existed was a bloody mess…” This, Wiesenthal’s dream one night of which awoke him from his sleep can be interpreted many ways to the reader. As a reader and answering the question, why does Wiesenthal dream about the boy Eli? is not easy. Thinking elaborately and possibly far fetched, I believe every detail as a symbolic way. “Why?” Why did these deaths even occur? “His father brought him to me in his arms.” The helpless Jewish children and adults hold each other and sacrifice for one another to continue to survive for as long as possible. “Behind the two figures raged a sea of flames from which they were fleeing. I wanted to take Eli, but all that existed was a bloody mess…” The raging sea of flames represents the deaths of which they cannot escape; reaching out to take Eli could represent the possibility of forgiving the SS man’s apology, but know it could cause extreme controversy between millions of other dead, dying, alive Jewish members and himself. The dream was for Wiesenthal, for him only for the understanding of trying to understand of himself whether to forgive or not of the unfinished part of the dream which is not even knowing himself to forgive or not.
“There are many kinds of silence,” Wiesenthal states (page 97). The positive aspects to this for Wiesenthal are; the mother to the SS man never found out of what man her son became to be being told from someone else instead of Karl himself or the truth after death, keeping silence for himself kept him alive after hearing the story told by the SS man, and not sharing his opinion to whether or not he forgives Karl or not. The silence towards the SS man was acceptable. Karl knew he did wrong, though the way Wiesenthal carried himself after the confession during, after the war, and for the rest of his life was the answer to Karl after his death. Morally, I think Wiesenthal would have forgiven Karl after time went on, not for Karl, but closure for himself. Telling the story to other people and asking for replies of what other people would be interesting to read and understand many different reasons why people would or wouldn’t forgive, but for me, if I ever came to a conclusion where I wouldn’t even think I would keep to myself, even if it is still confusion, I would wait to tell Karl myself first out of anyone because it would be the right thing to do.
The ending to the book is an open-ended question: What would you have done? I accept that there are no yes or no responses. There are questions we can ask ourselves everyday to whether it could be yes or no, but we accept that there is neither. As a reader, we can ask ourselves, everyone else, and even the author, though accepting the answer of not knowing what the author would respond is acceptable. The author didn’t even know for himself. Wiesenthal shouldn’t change the ending to his book ever because there are many open-ended questions everyday and he wouldn’t know how to respond to his own question.
Wiesenthal had the right to forgive the SS man for himself if he wanted to, but he could not speak for anyone else because everyone else is their own person with their own opinions. It takes a big person to tell this story and not to be controversial with oneself to whether they should forgive or not for themselves. Asking other people if we have the right to forgive for the wrongs others committed was Wiesenthal’s choice however for me, I would not. We can try to answer the question for ourselves, but you and me didn’t endure the experience, nor did billions of other people. Reading a story about an unforgotten event in history and trying to understand the attempt of forgiving of what happened is incomprehensible.
References
Simon Wiesenthal. The Sunflower. On the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness. New York: Schocken Books, 1997
