While reading All But My life I made several comparisons to Night, Children of Willesden Lane, and First They Killed My Father. I noticed that in nearly all the books faith was one of the few things that kept families going and stable when everything around them was falling apart. Faith gave the characters' hope that they will make it out alive. In addition, I made a comparison between First They Killed My Father and All But My Life when the lack of food becomes and issue and tensions start to rise. In All But My Life, Gerda gets noticeably upset when she finds out the rolls she was going to eat were gone and she threatens to kill a man for taking them. This is very similar to First They Killed My Father because tensions rise when the girl takes a small spoonful of rice and her entire family turns on her. It goes to show how hunger truly affected the relationships of families and friends. On a different note, I was impressed with how the author included details of her life outside of the holocaust and yet it still seemed completely appropriate. For example she talks about her growing relationship with Abek. I think by adding other details of her life it shows that she was just an ordinary teenager dealing with unordianary circumstances.
I agree with the comparisons you made, and would like to note that at this point, there are many common stories throughout the literature of genocide. Like you said, the idea of food being scarce and people being forced to steal food from family and neighbors is one that has come up several times. And again faith plays a role, which is fitting because it is the differences between faiths that are generally at the heart of a genocidal conflict. The most important difference is that Gerda's story is not the same as the others, despite many common factors. Your last few lines touched upon the idea that she was having a life still, and that is an important point. The stories of the Holocaust are all different, which is why we still read them. There would be no purpose in reading more than just one article about the Holocaust if every story were identical, and Gerda's story is an interesting one with which to conclude the year, because after reading different stories and seeing the common traits in this type of story, we see something that challenges the standard. Her story is like the others in some ways, but her literary tone changes it, as does the humanity that she brings to the writing. She is forced to work for the direct benefit of the Nazi war effort, yet she says that she is comfortable there, that she almost likes her job. She is in a comfortable position, but is helping the people killing her own people. She is not an infinitely strong character. The archetype genocide survival story is a strong character who looses everything but keeps on fighting to survive. Gerda looses plenty, but she is given a relatively comfortable living situation and is interned at what is often regarded as the best of the camps. She is not the archetypical Holocaust-survivor character; she is human. That is what makes her story different, what makes it more of a memoir than a story. She is human, and in including her doubts, her fears, and her romantic life, she is allowing the reader into her humanity, which many genocide novels cannot do with nearly as much refinement.
Andy, I thought you had a lot of great points. I liked how you pointed out that she felt “comfortable” working with the Nazi war effort because it shows how dynamic this character really is. One moment she is very bitter with what is going on in her life, but then we see her working with the Nazis and feels content. One thing I noticed the author does very well is how she voices all of her thoughts and opinions, regardless if they are good or bad. For example, when Gerda witnessed a Nazi being killed she wrote how she wanted to kill the man herself and she talked about what she would do if she had the chance to hurt him and how she wouldn’t feel an ounce of guilt or remorse if she did so. On the surface it seems inhumane for someone to think such things, however knowing these men were responsible for killing her loved ones it is not crazy to wish death upon them. Like you said before, it is simple things like this that allow the reader to see that she is only human. This particular part also reminds me of First They Killed my Father when the girl witnessed a man from the Khmer Rouge being killed. Much like Gerda, the girl also envisioned what she would do if she got her hands on the man. Although I can make several comparisons between this book and other genocide novels, this book differs from others I have read because it is a story that has a lot of hope.
I also wanted to point out her relationship with Iisle. It seems as though every time Iisle goes to console or talk to Gerda, Gerda either ignores her gestures or tells her to stop. Given the circumstances, one would think it would be comforting to have someone to share your grief with, however Gerda refuses to show any grief or despair. I think this may contradict your point that she doesn’t seem particularly strong because for someone to never show any signs of weakness during this time shows how strong and determined she is to live.
I like your point about how Gerda voices all her thoughts, good or bad. The story is not about how strong she is but about how human she is, and humans are imperfect. And with Ilse, I feel like the relationship is unspoken, or the details of it are missing. They do seem quite devoted to each other and they are happy to stay together for so long, but Gerda doesn't take much from her. You're right that she never accepts Ilse's help, and while it may show strength to be independent, it could also show weakness, that she could not at the time understand or face her problems directly enough to explain them, which could be what prompts her to write a book about her experiences decades later. She does show strength, but I think her most distinguished quality from the canon of Holocaust novels is her ambivalence in that respect. Like I've said, she is far from perfect and while at times is strong, she does not claim to have survived due to strength or sacrifice. She is different because she is honest with her flaws and she openly displays her humanity, blurring the difference between herself and the reader.
I was born and raised in Saint Louis, Missouri and first moved to Massachusetts to attend Amherst College, where I majored in both English and Russian literature. After graduation, I accepted a Fulbright Scholarship to the University of Tartu in Estonia, where I studied children's literature and semiotics ("the study of signs and symbols"). I returned to the United States to spend a few years exploring the wide world of business, but the classroom kept calling. It was high time to earn my Masters in Education from Tufts University and join the staff at Arlington High School.
Please don't hesitate to email me; I love to hear from my students and their caregivers. I look forward to getting to know you!
Just a friendly reminder that class calendars are subject to change. Sometimes I make mistakes (it's true!) and sometimes we just move a little more or less quickly than predicted. I will announce any changes in class and try to post them as quickly as possible on the blog. You are responsible for any updates made in class.
While reading All But My life I made several comparisons to Night, Children of Willesden Lane, and First They Killed My Father. I noticed that in nearly all the books faith was one of the few things that kept families going and stable when everything around them was falling apart. Faith gave the characters' hope that they will make it out alive. In addition, I made a comparison between First They Killed My Father and All But My Life when the lack of food becomes and issue and tensions start to rise. In All But My Life, Gerda gets noticeably upset when she finds out the rolls she was going to eat were gone and she threatens to kill a man for taking them. This is very similar to First They Killed My Father because tensions rise when the girl takes a small spoonful of rice and her entire family turns on her. It goes to show how hunger truly affected the relationships of families and friends. On a different note, I was impressed with how the author included details of her life outside of the holocaust and yet it still seemed completely appropriate. For example she talks about her growing relationship with Abek. I think by adding other details of her life it shows that she was just an ordinary teenager dealing with unordianary circumstances.
ReplyDelete-Cherelle
Dear Cherelle,
ReplyDeleteI agree with the comparisons you made, and would like to note that at this point, there are many common stories throughout the literature of genocide. Like you said, the idea of food being scarce and people being forced to steal food from family and neighbors is one that has come up several times. And again faith plays a role, which is fitting because it is the differences between faiths that are generally at the heart of a genocidal conflict. The most important difference is that Gerda's story is not the same as the others, despite many common factors. Your last few lines touched upon the idea that she was having a life still, and that is an important point. The stories of the Holocaust are all different, which is why we still read them. There would be no purpose in reading more than just one article about the Holocaust if every story were identical, and Gerda's story is an interesting one with which to conclude the year, because after reading different stories and seeing the common traits in this type of story, we see something that challenges the standard. Her story is like the others in some ways, but her literary tone changes it, as does the humanity that she brings to the writing. She is forced to work for the direct benefit of the Nazi war effort, yet she says that she is comfortable there, that she almost likes her job. She is in a comfortable position, but is helping the people killing her own people. She is not an infinitely strong character. The archetype genocide survival story is a strong character who looses everything but keeps on fighting to survive. Gerda looses plenty, but she is given a relatively comfortable living situation and is interned at what is often regarded as the best of the camps. She is not the archetypical Holocaust-survivor character; she is human. That is what makes her story different, what makes it more of a memoir than a story. She is human, and in including her doubts, her fears, and her romantic life, she is allowing the reader into her humanity, which many genocide novels cannot do with nearly as much refinement.
Andy,
ReplyDeleteI thought you had a lot of great points. I liked how you pointed out that she felt “comfortable” working with the Nazi war effort because it shows how dynamic this character really is. One moment she is very bitter with what is going on in her life, but then we see her working with the Nazis and feels content. One thing I noticed the author does very well is how she voices all of her thoughts and opinions, regardless if they are good or bad. For example, when Gerda witnessed a Nazi being killed she wrote how she wanted to kill the man herself and she talked about what she would do if she had the chance to hurt him and how she wouldn’t feel an ounce of guilt or remorse if she did so. On the surface it seems inhumane for someone to think such things, however knowing these men were responsible for killing her loved ones it is not crazy to wish death upon them. Like you said before, it is simple things like this that allow the reader to see that she is only human. This particular part also reminds me of First They Killed my Father when the girl witnessed a man from the Khmer Rouge being killed. Much like Gerda, the girl also envisioned what she would do if she got her hands on the man. Although I can make several comparisons between this book and other genocide novels, this book differs from others I have read because it is a story that has a lot of hope.
I also wanted to point out her relationship with Iisle. It seems as though every time Iisle goes to console or talk to Gerda, Gerda either ignores her gestures or tells her to stop. Given the circumstances, one would think it would be comforting to have someone to share your grief with, however Gerda refuses to show any grief or despair. I think this may contradict your point that she doesn’t seem particularly strong because for someone to never show any signs of weakness during this time shows how strong and determined she is to live.
-Cherelle
I like your point about how Gerda voices all her thoughts, good or bad. The story is not about how strong she is but about how human she is, and humans are imperfect. And with Ilse, I feel like the relationship is unspoken, or the details of it are missing. They do seem quite devoted to each other and they are happy to stay together for so long, but Gerda doesn't take much from her. You're right that she never accepts Ilse's help, and while it may show strength to be independent, it could also show weakness, that she could not at the time understand or face her problems directly enough to explain them, which could be what prompts her to write a book about her experiences decades later. She does show strength, but I think her most distinguished quality from the canon of Holocaust novels is her ambivalence in that respect. Like I've said, she is far from perfect and while at times is strong, she does not claim to have survived due to strength or sacrifice. She is different because she is honest with her flaws and she openly displays her humanity, blurring the difference between herself and the reader.
ReplyDelete