 |
|
Dialogues@RU is published
annually
by the
Writing Program at
Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey
Volume 4
Fall 2005
Page 4
By Jennifer Flynn
As concerns the theft and rapes in the Yiddish that disappear in the French, Wiesel's own statements suggest that he is protecting the image of the Jewish victims. In his aforementioned memoir, he states that he will not tarnish their image for any reason, even if doing so serves the facts: "Moreover, I must warn you that certain events will be omitted, especially those episodes that might embarrass friends and, of course, those that might damage the Jewish people. Call it prudence or cowardice, whatever you like" ( Memoirs 17). Clearly, Wiesel feels strongly for the victims, and crafts his text around this empathy. There was no need to safeguard Jews in his first work because his audience was Yiddish-speaking, and thus, predominantly Jewish. However, once he introduced his story to non-Jews, Wiesel undertook specific efforts not to injure his fellows and to avoid obscuring their image as victims. Thus, the protection of these survivors, and not an attempt to increase his audience and influence, can be seen as his motivation for eliminating references to Jewish crimes.
Another source of evidence for Seidman is Wiesel's reworking of the introduction and conclusion of the Yiddish text for their inclusion in Night. The original text begins with a detailed description of Wiesel's hometown, complete with a "historical account of the region" (Seidman 5). On the other hand, the French text summarizes the location in a single sentence. Instead, its introduction concentrates on a youthful Wiesel's interaction with Moshe the Beadle. It claims that this local man nurtured the boy's budding interest in Jewish mysticism, a tradition customarily pursued by experienced scholars that uses prayer and meditation to answer cosmological questions about God and his relationship with man. Moshe also appears in the Yiddish, but not until much later, and not as the person who "initiates Eliezer into the mysteries of Kabbalah" (Manseau par. 49). In the earlier text, Moshe tries in vain to warn local Jews about the Nazi's diabolical intentions. He plays no spiritual part, nor any direct role in Wiesel's life. Seidman claims the addition of mysticism and its placement at the forefront of the French text indicate Wiesel's conscious decision to focus on God rather than man. However, she overlooks the fact that the original text has many religious references that mirror the spiritual questions of Night . According to Peter Manseau, author and former administrator of Boston University's Division of Religious and Theological Studies, "Not only are all the French version's famous passages about God present in the Yiddish volume, but the latter contains other equally harrowing examples of the young death camp inmate's struggle with his faith. In fact, God's role in Un de Velt Hot Geshvign is not entirely unlike that in Night " (Manseau par. 31). Thus, Seidman's assertion that Wiesel's mysticism is a strictly French development is unreliable, and what remains of her idea is the movement of mysticism to the foreground by way of the new introduction. The motive for this reorganization gains clarity when viewed as the author's turn towards novelistic technique.
By replacing the lengthy description of his obscure hometown with the story of Moshe, Wiesel disregards the autobiographical custom of presenting time linearly and begins, as a novelist would, at the point where he can best grasp the reader's attention. In this way, he avoids the constricting design of previous works of which renowned autobiographical theorist Roy Pascal wrote, "The linear narrative form of the autobiography imposes a distortion on the truth" (Elbaz 10). In other words, Wiesel avoids the pitfalls of autobiographists who present their lives as one steady and consistently accumulating stream of events. Since neither life nor memory develops in this linear, non-reflexive way, Wiesel is wise to choose an alternate portrayal. By dispensing with chronology, Wiesel focuses on the event he perceives as the true beginning of his story, not simply the life event that occurred first. In this way, he presents his self in an individualized way. Additionally, Wiesel seizes an opportunity to establish symbolism in the introduction to Night . Moshe's struggle parallels Wiesel's efforts. The character attempts to warn townspeople of the Nazis' aims, but they will not heed his warnings: "I wanted to come back, and to warn you. And see how it is, no one will listen to me" ( Night 5). Moshe's desperate attempt to connect with his community mirrors Wiesel's enterprise. His first autobiography was an effort to share his tale, but it did not deliver his message to those who needed it most. With his second text, Wiesel reaches out to non-Jewish readers to explain the implications of the Holocaust in their lives, and even more, the effect of their lives on the Holocaust. The inaction and subsequent slaughter of the townspeople symbolizes the apathetic world that allowed the Nazis to perpetrate the Holocaust unchecked.