Consider the ways language is used by the attendees of the Wannsee Conference, particularly the use of euphemism. Identify a few examples that stood out to you. Compare the literal meanings of each word or phrase to their intended meanings. Consider the connotations (the associated or secondary meaning of a word, its "baggage"). What effects do euphemisms have for the speakers? For the audience?
Source: Adapted from Facing History and Ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Throughout the Wannsee Conference language was manipulated by the attendees for a variety of reasons; mostly to hide the severity and harshness of the actions they were speaking of. At the beginning of the meeting, the “storage problem in Germany” is addressed. Many of the attendees claim that they “cannot store these Jews.” These statements portray Jewish peoples as less than human. Storage is a word used for objects or things that are not currently of use; both of which they think accurately describe the Jewish population. In discussing how to deal with the storage problem, one says, “we have to eliminate the Jew” and another talks of the imminent “cleansing of the entire continent of Europe.” Eliminate is used as a vague term to describe deportation or killing. They choose to use the word eliminate because it does not convey a specific action, so the speakers cannot be held accountable for intention or direction to kill the Jewish people. Overall, the euphemism in this film is used to protect the speaker from incrimination based on the conference tapes or transcripts. Their strict control of what was explicitly said and what information and documentation was allowed out helped many of the attendees to evade conviction on war crimes. The audience is forced to consider all possible connotations of the euphemistic words or phrases in order to understand the feelings of the speakers.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Wannsee Conference, the ways in which language is used by the attendees is carefully chosen so that they cannot be penalized for what they say. The use of euphemism is demonstrated throughout the entire movie, especially when the men attending the meeting speak of the “evacuation of the Jews”. By using the word “evacuation”, it only appears as though these Jews are being relocated and given forced labor, when in reality they are preparing for total elimination of the race. In addition to the frequent use of this word, the Jews were also referred to as “members of the tribe”, which categorizes them into one specific group of people and basically diminishes them to a lower level of society. According to the Germans, and the attendees of this meeting, the Jews were no longer people but a “tribe” of animals waiting to be eliminated. Through the use of euphemism, these men are protecting themselves from the consequences faced of any evidence of their denounced attitudes toward the Jews. The members are hiding the literal meaning of their words so that they cannot be prosecuted for anything in the future, and that is why when specific people were not cautious of their word choice, the typewriter recording the meeting came to a pause.
ReplyDelete- Christina
I agree, the way they used language throughout the Wannasee Conference were important, for each other’s and also to keep their conference hidden throughout these words so they wouldn’t be penalized. Considering, during the conference, when the men were stating the facts on how to “evacuate” the Jews from Europe completely, Lange states how the word evacuation is need to be said as eliminated or executed. Eichmann uses a gesture to erase that part in the conference so they can keep it hidden and not be stated in the documents. Furthermore, General Heydrich seems quick and calm to use some euphemism, when he states the “Cleansing of Europe” and “Immigration is over for the Jews”, meaning the Jews can’t deported no more and can’t be held in the Ghettos. Sooner or later they need to be eliminated for Europe to be cleansed. The Jews are considered as animals in which needed to be eliminated for space and also to eradicate their population and all these euphemism is creating a some sort of rat like problem in Europe. And keeping these words hidden keeps them from being tried in court for any war crimes. While the audience understands, some find it hard to use these euphemisms when it talks about a huge eradication of a race. Such as Kritzinger and Lange, as they interrupt Heydrich statement for the exact meaning of the words he is using throughout the conference.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Desal ,Christina, and Ellery that the Wannasee conference consisted of men who were cautious with their words. I found it interesting to think if they were so confident about their choice of killing all the Jews in Europe then why would they be so cautious about their language? I understand that their every word was being written on a transcript but I still found it surprisingly odd that they didn’t want to use words such as “eliminate” or “execute.” That is probably why one man in the conference said, “There must be another word for this,” when he was trying to describe what they were doing to the European population of Jews. I think another reason why they used different words or types of language to describe the mass murder were to make it easier for them to talk about. It seems to me that if they had used more appalling types of language then more of the men would have protested against mass murdering the Jewish population in chimneys by burning them. The men may have simply been saving themselves from the thought of making the decision of how to kill millions of people. It was shown that some of the men looked physically uncomfortable when it was hinted that they were going to murder millions. Whatever the case was, all the men in the conference used language that helped them to make murder of a race seem less horrific and more humane.
ReplyDelete-Sandhya
It is hard to respectfully disagree with my peers who have already pointed out how the men at this conference were able to protect themselves by hiding in their words. I’m sure the fact that so many of them were lawyers had an influence on their seemingly common value on the power of words. As Ellery points out, the men could not be held accountable for doing any actual killing if they only mandated elimination or evacuation, both of which are not necessarily killing. This clever technique was evidently very effective, since we later learned from Ms. Kitsis that many of the men who were put on trial and convicted, were actually convicted of other smaller more concrete crimes they had committed that could actually be proven.
ReplyDeleteThe entire film contained countless euphemisms for horrific plans, but there was one term in particular suggested by Stuckart that was so over-the-top that t was not even used further. It was during the major debate over legalities when Stuckart suggested they refer to sterilization, which is somewhat of a euphemism in itself, as “medical re-socialization.” I thought this term was just a caricature of a the typical types of euphemisms used throughout the movie to mask what is really being said. We should not allow people so clearly guilty of war crimes be pardoned simply because they were not direct with what they said. This only allows the educated to commit crimes from behind the scenes and get away with it.
The overall theme conveyed by the use of euphemisms in the film is that the men at the Wannsee conference wanted to convey their plans to each other without giving the outside world, by way of their conversations' transcripts, a concrete idea of what they were planning to do to the Jewish population in Europe. The vast majority of euphemisms used refer to the "Jewish problem" and its possible solutions. By being deliberately vague, the conference attendees cover their interests and ensure that they won't themselves be charged with any crimes based on statements made at the conference. The film makes it clear that the attendees’ purpose was to come up with a “final solution,” and nobody was willing to leave the room they shared until they had done that. Even with this understanding of a final goal between them, they were unwilling to be frank about what they were discussing because, although they had the approval of Hitler, these men knew that they would not have the approval of the rest of the world.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, the system of euphemisms used seems to have developed into its own language, where some words no longer mean what one would think. Phrases such as "storage problem," "cleansing," "evacuation," and even "medical re-socialization" are mundane terms which, in the context of the Wannsee conference, take on chilling second meanings which, though they may be deduced by people reading the conversation transcripts, can never be proven.
-Jocelyn
The euphemism used at the Wannsee Conference was an attempt for the men to sound more professional, as if it actually was business they were conducting, and it of course made light of the situation. It was so odd that these human beings could refer to the Jews as a "problem," because the Nazi's were just being zombies to Hitler. Euphemism seemed like an attempt for the men to retain some credibility to their work.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard for the use of "elimination" and "cleansing" of Jews to leave ones mind. These terms of course referring to the attempts made by the Nazi's to follow Hitler's orders and kill all Jews. Those terms, as well as the act itself, dehumanize the Jewish population. The terms definetly make the millions of Jews living in Europe sound like a rodent problem or something unpleasant and difficult to deal with.
I know I raise this at the risk of sounding sympathetic to Nazi's, but I just thought that there is a possibility that the Nazi's used euphemism because they felt horrible and guilty for what they were doing and could not fully admit to their actions. Discussing the various ways government can "eliminate" or "cleanse" a country of part of its population sounds better than saying one wants to "kill" them all, so is it possible the Nazi's had to use these terms and other little things to convince themselves that they weren't bad people?
-Michelle
I agree with Pat when he says that during the Wannsee Conference “many of them were lawyers had an influence on their seemingly common value on the power of words.” The conversation most of the time seemed really fake because of the way they were twisting their words around (which was the base of the euphemism throughout the movie) for example when Stuckart mentioned that “the Jewish problem should be solved” or when one of the officers suggests that a sterilization is needed to be done. Nobody around the ever used the word “kill”, “execute” or “eliminate” and that is because if they used those kinds of words then they could have been easily penalized for it. That is when the man with the typewriter machine was recording everything that was being said after they gave him the command to stop (silently and so that nobody could see) writing officers and other lawyers stopped caring about the use of language and started constantly using words such as death, killing, executing and getting rid of. In my opinion that was a turning point in the movie. One thing that I am still confused about is this: If they could command the man with the typewriter to stop writing at any time then why was he there anyways? It does not make sense to me because as I understand he wasn’t a required figure there and others had a full control of him. Or was he there to confuse other officials and make them think that everything was being recorded?
ReplyDelete- Avetis (Avo)
I think that Avetis brings up a very interesting point as to the significance of the typist (although, I'm not sure if I remember his presence in the room). The question of, why was he at the meeting if the characters could command him to stop typing at any moment is very interesting. I think that the typist's presence also plays into the use of euphemisms in the film. As many people previously stated, the characters at the meeting used words such as "storage problem," "cleansing," "eliminate" to cover up the real purpose of the meeting. Each man could have easily used to words, "kill" or "murder" but avoided such use to not only protect themselves from future prosecution, but to hide the real atrocities that were hidden behind those words. To cover up the real purpose of this meeting. Going back to the typist, I think that his presence was also to cover up the true purpose of the conference. If he was there, he must have been used as a "piece of furniture." To make the meeting seem legitimately innocent, like all other official meetings, there needs to be a typist. If there was no typist, some people might be skeptical and question the subject of the conference; which could put nearly everyone involved at risk.
ReplyDeleteNell
I noticed that right when one of the members at the meeting began to get angry and rant on, the guy typing the transcripts was stopped from typing any further. This usually occurred after a misunderstanding or a disagreement based on the euphemism that was used in speech.
ReplyDeleteEven though everyone at the meeting understood all of the euphemism, Heydrich still used "evacuation of the Jews" in his speech.
Using euphemism, I felt like it gave Heydrich more power over the other members at the meeting, using relatively misleading words. I felt like he was talk to them as an adult would talk to a child. It also made him a little more creepy than he already was, smiling when he said things like "evacuate" and "cleansing."