 |
|
Dialogues@RU is published
annually
by the
Writing Program at
Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey
Volume 4
Fall 2005
Page 3
By Jennifer Flynn
The starting point for Seidman's analysis is Wiesel's declaration that Night is an edited version of his earlier Yiddish work. In his 1995 book, Memoirs: All Rivers Run to the Sea , the author discusses his extensive process of revision and the further changes stipulated by his French editor, Jérôme Lindon. Their joint editing led to "significant differences in length among the successive versions. I had cut down the original manuscript from 862 pages to the 245 of the published Yiddish edition. Lindon edited La Nuit down to 178" ( Memoirs 319). Significant alterations occurred in the cutting of 67 pages of manuscript; this loss is not simply a consequence of translation. In gauging the significance of these massive revisions, Seidman reaches the conclusion that Wiesel's numerous, specific declarations of rage have been removed and replaced with a general mysticism. She cites four specific locations within the texts that support her assertion: the dedications, one passage in both texts that concerns the behavior of liberated Jews, and the beginning and end of both works. A careful examination of her evidence in light of Wiesel's modification of the autobiographical genre suggests a different conclusion.
From its very first page, Night is more than a mere translation of its Yiddish predecessor. Its dedication, in which Wiesel offers his work to his family, appears markedly different from the earlier version. Seidman feels this is the first indication of a sacrifice of rage. She writes, "While the French memoir is dedicated 'in memory of my parents and of my little sister, Tsipora,' the Yiddish names both victims and perpetrators: 'This book is dedicated to the eternal memory of my mother Sarah, my father Shlomo, and my little sister Tsipora - who were killed by the German murderers'" (Seidman 5). Seidman sees the removal of "German murderers" as proof that Wiesel sought to redirect accountability from men, in this case Germans, to God. By removing the oppressors' ethnicity, she believes that he attempts to alleviate the guilt of the German people. Beyond this, she feels that by specifying murder, the Yiddish conveys rage that is absent from the French. The dedication of Night does not state that Wiesel's family has been murdered, only that he wishes to remember them. Seidman sees the missing pronouncement of murder, as well as the missing indictment of specific perpetrators, as early confirmation of her theory. While competently employed in Seidman's argument, these illustrations can be considered from a different perspective. Wiesel's aim in removing references to Germans could have been an expansion of guilt rather than a reprieve. By indicating that Germans are solely responsible for his family's murder, as he does in the Yiddish text, Wiesel thwarts his plan to condemn the whole of humanity who stood by and allowed the Holocaust to happen. By removing specifics, then, he amplifies rather than suppresses his rage. Also, he places the focus back on his family and his desire to honor them. Not sharing the dedication with their murderers can be viewed as a tribute Wiesel pays to his parents and sister.
Evidence continues, Seidman claims, in a passage appearing in both texts, which again specifies ethnicity only in the Yiddish version. The quote records Wiesel's impressions of Holocaust survivors after their liberation. In the Yiddish text he writes, "'Early the next day Jewish boys ran off to Weimar to steal clothing and potatoes. And to rape German girls'" (Seidman 6). The starkly different French text reads, "On the following day, some of the young men went to Weimar to get some potatoes and clothes - and to sleep with girls" ( Night 109). The boys and their intended acts have obviously been altered, as Seidman rightly declares: "In the Yiddish, the survivors are explicitly described as Jews and their victims (or intended victims) as German; in the French they are just young men and women" (6). While the removal of ethnicity and the Jewish desire to perpetrate crimes against Germans is critical, it is not necessarily important for the reasons Seidman suggests. She claims Wiesel attempted to keep his true feelings from surfacing in the French version: "To describe the differences between these versions as a stylistic reworking is to miss the extent of what is suppressed in the French" (6). The element that Seidman believes "suppressed" is the author's rage against German criminals. She believes that his goal to eliminate human culpability is vividly portrayed.