Documenting the Holocaust for Eternity

(Option 2)

“History is written by the victors”—rather, by whatever mode of communication, be it written, spoken, or recorded, to name a few, that said victor has at their disposal.  The way in which someone communicates itself conveys almost as much, if not more, information as the facts or opinions that were supposed to be conveyed in the first place.  If someone chose to communicate through writing- what did they write on?  Did they decide to handwrite or to type?  What could these factors reveal about societal trends and values at the time?  Similarly, when considering types of visual communication, factors such as tone of voice, expression, setting, lighting, and more can all lend insight into the customs of a particular group of people and/or a place in time.  By choosing to set his Holocaust documentary Never Forget to Lie in the present, as a reflection on the past, Marian Marzynski successfully implemented many modern modes of communication to weave together all elements of his story and really connect to the audience.

Although Never Forget to Lie is a relatively current documentary (released May 2013), it did not seem to utilize all of the fanciest special effects, lighting techniques, or camera styles available today—for understandable reasons.  By refraining from implementing the most sophisticated effects into the film, Marzynski gave the film an air of simplicity and honesty that did not detract from or try to gloss over any of the atrocities of the Holocaust.  In addition to helping define the Holocaust and really place it into perspective for the audience, this tactic shows how choosing not to use all of the most up-to-date methods of communication to make a point can convey ideas just as effectively and fluidly as can the most up to date methods.  In addition, the lack of the most flashy current effects gave the film a more timeless air, linked by its filming style and footage to neither the 1940s nor to the early 21^st century, which complimented the film’s juxtaposition of elements from “then” and “now”.  This juxtaposition communicated to the audience that although time has passed, the Holocaust must not be forgotten, and cannot be as a result of the memories and intangible scars that will not fade.

The documentary’s striking usage of emotional survivor testimony and footage must also be discussed in the context of communication reflecting history and society.  Emotional outpourings—smiles, frowns, laughter, tears—are some of humanity’s most basic and one of society’s earliest forms of communication that can be understood across societies around the world, even across time.  That Marzynski uses raw signs of emotion such as the aforementioned in tandem with bare, striking images and haunting anecdotes to create a sense of pathos reinforces Marzynski’s ability to clearly convey simple, plain truths about the Holocaust to people around the world.  In addition, the barren, stark nature of this emotional footage suggests to the audience the way in which the Holocaust dehumanized and attempted to strip from countless people their most intrinsic human identity.

The film’s simple portrayal of an immensely complex matter further demonstrates how modern modes of communication can intensify and broaden the rhetorical devices individuals have at their disposal.  The form of a modern documentary itself, with all of its varied visual and audile components, immediately enhances the rhetorical decisions the filmmaker can make.  This is shown in all of Marzynski’s choices, including lighting (generally dark), camera angle (generally straight; sometimes directed up to present buildings, such as the Warsaw Ghetto, in more dramatic ways), camera movement (generally not that much; slow if any), musical elements (haunting orchestral music to accompany especially chilling moments), and ability to synthesize (Marzynski synthesized image, text, sound, and movement not only from the same era but also across time periods).  Marzynski’s full synthesis of these various components allowed him to seamlessly juxtapose images from war-ravaged Europe with current footage of the Warsaw Ghetto or Treblinka concentration camp; to juxtapose footage of himself reconnecting in the 1980s with certain righteous gentiles who hid him during the war as he stands currently in the very monastery where he was hidden; and to juxtapose actual Holocaust-era artifacts with the ornaments and collectables in his nicely furnished and cared for American home.

The capacity to involve all of these different types of media in one type of interface is an asset unique to the technology and forms of communication of the present time.  Less visual forms of modern communication can still deliver a compelling message to an audience through sound effects, music, and dialogue.  Similarly, forms of communication lacking sound can do this through photographs and pictures that have often been edited with new technology to sharpen or blur or lighten or darken an image.  Never Forget to Lie, a conglomerate of both of these facets of communication and more, is extremely effective in forging a lasting bond with the audience, and will likely be capable of doing so with subsequent generations far into the future.

Never Forget to... Lie?

Marzynski, Marian, dir. Never Forget to Lie.  PBS Frontline, 2013. Film.

     In the documentary film Never Forget to Lie, filmmaker Marian Marzynski, a child survivor of the Holocaust, ventures into previously unexplored territory: his childhood memories of the Holocaust.  Composed of emotional interview clips and footage of places in Warsaw, Krakow, Treblinka, and other areas in or around Poland, the film revisits Marzynski’s past. Marzynski uses the stories of other child survivors as fragments around which he tells his own story, a story Marzynski kept inside of him for the majority of his life.  Yet as difficult as it was for Marzynski to finally share this private information with the public, he felt obligated to, so that as sections of the Warsaw ghetto are even now being turned into condominiums, the world would never forget what transpired during the Holocaust.  By travelling to the places of his and the other survivors’ youth while allowing them to tell their stories, Marzynski captures the pain and suffering unleashed by the Holocaust in a startling and indelible way, while lending an interesting perspective to the true meaning of family, love, and sacrifice.

     Marzynski’s jarring perspective is captured in the documentary’s title: Never Forget to Lie.  Although a counterintuitive phrase that seems to defy logos, the title makes perfect sense relative to the ways in which the Holocaust turned social and behavioral norms upside-down.  It was this fanatical time that Marzynski recaptured in memories and footage, and one of the most prominent ways he did so was through juxtaposition.  By revisiting the past from the present and subsequently juxtaposing footage from “then” and from “now,” Marzynski was able to show that while time can erase something’s physical remnants, it is incapable of fully removing emotional scars.  This juxtaposition was complimented by a mixture of black and white photographs and footage with sharp, color images, as well as by deliberate intangible gestures: hugging, handholding, and other tender, emotional gestures in such ravaged, violent places as the Warsaw ghetto and Treblinka concentration camp.  In the paradoxical ambiance thus created, Marzynski was able to convey one of the film’s most important themes: that despite the hardships and unspeakable horrors of a past, there is always hope for a brighter future; for this reason, the past must always be remembered.

     And remembered it will be, for Never Forget to Lie’s estimable creation of pathos through emotional testimony, archival footage, and the presence of heirloom photographs and artifacts ensured that Marzynski’s enduring messages remained in the audience’s minds.  The majority of the film took place in Warsaw, Poland, largely under the context of a reunion/conference of child Holocaust survivors.  This organized gathering established credibility (ethos) for Marzynski, and subsequently made the survivor testimony seem unequivocally authentic and cinematically unembellished (what the survivors themselves perhaps added or changed to their memories is impossible to know for sure; however, the filmed renditions themselves did not seem to have been coached by Marzynski).  The survivor testimony was extremely poignant; Marzynski captured on camera what for many of the survivors was the first time they had either voiced their memories aloud or revisited the places of their memories.  Outbursts of raw emotion—tears, shaking, minor hysteria—marked the telling of the interviews and solidified their lasting impact on the audience.

     The interviews were further enhanced by Marzynski‘s deliberate location of them, generally in front of decrepit and plain buildings.  This placement forced the survivors’ words to become the focus of the interviews, and did not permit them to be overshadowed or distracted from by the surroundings.  Also, for almost the entire documentary the camera was placed at eye level with those speaking.  By purposefully placing them on the same level as the audience, Marzynski was able to humanize them.  Occasional side-view shots of those being interviewed added a sense of humility to the documentary, because it made it appear as if Marzynski was granting the interviewers some privacy.  This resonated especially with the audience, putting again into context how difficult it was for the survivors to speak of their pasts.

     Furthermore, Marzynski worked hard at establishing certain associations between objects, sensations, and the audience throughout the film.  The inclusion of artifacts such as Marzynski’s father’s watch and a landlady’s book of all the tenants to whom she rented apartments helped the sense of loss and connections through time to become more tangible for the audience.  Finally, the mixture of Polish and English language and normal background noise with only hints of music gave the film in its entirety an unedited, authentic, and purposeful air.

     Above all, one of the most outstanding elements of the film was its somewhat abrupt ending.  This masterfully mirrored how the Holocaust changed Marzynski’s and so many others’ lives, and how despite the questions people will constantly be asking about what happened during the Holocaust, one can never know for sure what the world could have been without the loss of so many lives.  The ability of Marzynski to so powerfully recreate these sensations within the audience is what truly set apart this film from many other Holocaust themed works.

What was the point?

     “Your toe?  What do you mean, you have to “do your toe” by this Sunday night?”  No, I remember explaining to my mystified parents.  My TOW, not my toe.  An assignment I was already dreading, for not only would it entail critically and rhetorically analyzing various works, but would also require doing so on a weekly basis.  What fun.  Unenthused, I set out each weekend to conquer my TOW, a mindset that consequently revealed itself in my writing.  Yes— while I did my TOW dutifully every weekend, my initial entries were hardly more than generic works that simply listed each piece of the “TOW guideline sheet.”  Heavy with summary, these first entries were largely explanatory and seemed to include bits and pieces of rhetorical analyses as mere afterthought.  An audience and author’s purpose were explicitly defined in these early TOWs, which all seemed to follow the same cut-and-dry pattern: simple hook, introductory information, summary, intended audience, rhetorical analysis, and the author’s purpose.  As weeks turned to months and I continued to slog through this weekly chore, I couldn’t help but wonder: what was the point?  Was I actually gaining anything useful from this experience?

     Turns out I was.  Slowly, subconsciously, my TOWs were morphing from simple, amateur writing to more mature, thoughtful prose (in tandem with their increasing length).  As I began to perceive the TOW guideline sheet less as a crutch and more as a guide, I noticed the focus of my TOWs shift from summary to analysis.  A flow became present in the writing between what the author said, my impressions and analyses, and back to the author’s intended purpose.  It seemed less and less as if phrases were stuck haphazardly into the TOW, but rather as if they belonged there, in their natural place beside other analysis and transitional words.  I stopped “doing” my TOWs and started crafting them; stopped analyzing the same few rhetorical devices and began to extend my analyses into the plethora of devices out there.  I noticed marked improvements in my thesis statements and the overall flow of my work; it seemed as if I had begun to master the art of expression, not just of my own thoughts but also of translating into my own words what I perceived to be other authors’ beliefs and techniques.

     Granted, there is still much room for improvement.  I still wrestle with the “consequence” aspect of my thesis statements, and I know that I can always improve and expand upon the sources of my TOWs as well as the devices through which I analyze them.  Sometimes, it still feels as if I’m simply writing sentences to make sure I include all of the TOW’s necessary components, and at other times I sense a rushed conclusion, or a string of sentences that isn’t quite cohesive.  Yet gaining this appreciation for myself as a writer and a more solid understanding of my place in the community through my analysis of the rhetorical elements that surround me in daily life is certainly one of the best rewards that the TOW assignments have provided me.  I understand the purpose of these TOWs was significantly to help prepare students for the AP Exam, and while I cannot say that I used any of my TOWs in either the Mock or actual AP exam, I know that the rhetorical analysis process itself I used in constructing my TOWs certainly helped me on 5-10-13.  Furthermore, the ability to rethink an author’s purpose and find subtleties in works and expressions is a valuable skill that I know I was able to hone through these TOW assignments.  Therefore, it is clear to me now that I benefitted from completing a TOW every weekend.  Although I could not grasp initially how much I was to grow as a thinker and writer through these assignments, I am appreciative now of the diligence and work I put into each TOW, for now I have a much more solid understanding of not only the world around me but also of myself.

"A Child's Wild Kingdom"

     It may come as a surprise to some how inundated American children’s culture is with animals.  Animals—rather, often, the cute, storybook versions of their wild counterparts—litter the literature, toys, pictures and clothing that young children are exposed to.  In his New York Times opinion piece entitled “A Child’s Wild Kingdom,” Jon Mooallem, a contributing author to the New York Times Magazine as well as to other publications, delves into the psychological aspects of this phenomenon.  In examining why children over other groups are particularly drawn to animals, as well as how children’s mannerisms may resemble those of animals, Mooallem effectively shows how adults can use animals to represent the types of people they hope their children will grow into.

     Before delving into these comparisons, however, Mooallem creates the backdrop of a child’s animal-centered world for the audience through careful usage of imagery, statistics, and other types of data.  In describing the pages of children’s storybooks where animals are given human characteristics and shown portraying human actions, Mooallem shows rather than tells the audience how animals are used in humanlike ways in American culture.  Additionally, by supporting almost all of his assertions with evidence from scientific experiments and other forms of research, Mooallem makes it clear to the reader that he is a credible source of information (ethos).

     Moving beyond the mere content of Mooallem’s piece, one can see the ways in which he skillfully and subtly draws attention to various points in order to further his main argument about the role of animals in children’s lives.  In describing this trend, Mooallem writes, “I’m not arguing that seeing a link between kids and animals is an exclusively modern phenomenon — that it’s some anxious, overcompensatory affectation of nature-deprived Americans, like those elaborate stone shower stalls, made to look like waterfalls and grottos, or the Paleo Diet…” By explaining vividly what he does not think the trend is, Mooallem subtly characterizes for the audience what he does think it is.  This strategy makes it very difficult for Mooallem’s points to be argued against, another asset that contributes to the sophistication of his writing.  He tends to present points in a suggestive, rather than definite, manner, consequently inviting self-doubt upon his claims and making it more difficult for the audience to feel strongly against his claims.

     This unique writing style helps Mooallem’s points to stick with the audience, anyone familiar with and/or interested in learning about psychological trends dealing with children and animals.  Perhaps the feelings and mannerisms of children are embodied within animals; only more conclusive and comprehensive research into the matter, as suggested by Mooallem, will tell.

The Globalization of Language

     “Languages are dying at an unprecedented rate.  A language dies every 14 days,” Patricia Ryan sadly informed those in attendance at her 2010 TED Talk.  As a seasoned English teacher in the Arabian Gulf countries, Ryan has witnessed drastic cultural and linguistic changes in the Arabian countries of her students.  Ryan uses her experiences to show that even languages have fallen prey to the negative effects of globalization, as what was once a rich part of the diverse societies across the world is being lost as people strive to learn English.  Ryan worries that humanity is limiting its future opportunities for growth and knowledge by inadvertently forcing potentially great scientists and thinkers to master the English language before continuing their studies in fields such as mathematics and science at prestigious English-speaking universities.  Limiting foreign entry into such schools based significantly on the results of an English proficiency test is unfair in Ryan’s eyes; while she sees value in the English language uniting people across the world, she dislikes how it can conversely be used to prevent people from sharing everything they have to offer to society.

     Ryan uses personal experience in the form of many concise anecdotes to help illustrate her points to the audience, educated global citizens concerned with English’s dominance as the global language.  She begins with a story about a colleague of hers who, teaching English in an Arab school, took her students outside the classroom to teach them nature vocabulary and ended up learning more herself about the traditional Arab names and histories of said plants.  In addition, Ryan explains how even though her daughter, who went to school in England and in an Arab country, would have to translate everything she learned in math and science in her Arabic classroom into English, she was nevertheless the best math and science student in her English class.  Both stories exhibit that despite the barriers presented by different languages, every language has its own idiosyncrasies and unique take on aspects of life that compliment those found in other languages.  As the pool of languages from which they can pull words and ideas grows smaller and smaller, people risk losing diverse approaches to problem solving and facets of creativity unique to certain languages.

     Furthermore, Ryan’s talk was made compelling by the personal way in which she addressed her audience.  In using phrases such as “I know what you’re thinking,” or “You must be wondering…” Ryan invites the audience into her talk.  This seems to place the audience on the same level as Ryan, encouraging them to listen carefully and thoughtfully consider every word she says.  By approaching them as intellectual equals rather than people to speak down to, Ryan ensures her audience can get the most from the talk.

     Given Ryan’s discussion of the limits created by the globalization of language, it is especially important that the audience be capable of really connecting to Ryan’s words.  In that way, they are able to truly ponder the challenging question raised by Ryan: Is the world’s focus on English limiting great ideas in other languages?

The "Right" To Remain Silent

     As people across America struggle to recover from and understand the actions of brothers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, suspected terrorists behind the Boston Marathon bombings, one thing seems consistently to be on American minds: that justice be served to Dzhokar for his alleged acts of terrorism.  Consequently, the fact that Dzhokar will not hear his Miranda Rights before being interrogated by the FBI has gone largely unnoticed by many Americans.  In her Slate article entitled “Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?” Emily Bazelon, a Slate senior editor, hastens to inform the greater American public of the troublesome implications of this governmental trend of neglecting to initially announce the Miranda Rights in cases dealing with terrorism (which law enforcement agencies have the power to do because of the “public safety exception” to the Miranda Rights).

     In order to establish the scope of this governmental trend for the audience, Bazelon chronologically progresses through instances of American terrorism where the “public safety exception” was used, including that of Zacarias Moussaoui, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, and Faisal Shahzad.  The examples chosen illustrate how the usage of the exception has increased in recent years, which in turn helps to further Bazelon’s main point: if law enforcement agencies are able to make their own rules now, what/who will/can stop them from doing so, in more dangerous ways, in the future?  In addition, the examples add credibility (ethos) to Bazelon and her claims.

     These claims are dramatically enhanced through Bazelon’s colloquial yet cautionary tone, which speaks directly to the audience in a friendly and direct way while at the same time clearly warning them of the implications of this abuse of governmental power (abuses the Miranda act initially aimed at reducing).  Casual, simple transitional phrases such as “Here’s the legal history,” and affable, informal authorial asides such as “Fine. Good, even—that gun could have put other people in danger” really allow Bazelon’s words to make tangible connections with the audience.  Furthermore, Bazelon’s habits of addressing the audience directly (“you”) and of simplifying explanations and diction so they are easily comprehendible helps the audience to feel as if they are on the same level as Bazelon.  This subsequently helps Bazelon’s points to resonate and really leave a strong impression on the audience.

     Americans will continue to wait in trepidation for more details about Dzhokhar, his brother, and the Boston Marathon bombing to surface.  After reading Bazelon’s article, one can only hope that this new information will not be gained at the expense of Dzhokhar’s basic American rights.

Angels and Ages: Darwin in Time

Passage: pages 168-196, the latter half of Chapter 4: Darwin in Time 

     Author Adam Gopnik’s persistence and meticulous attention to detail become especially evident in this section of Angels and Ages.  This section is a culmination of information Gopnik previously discussed about the circumstances that led Darwin to write and eventually publish On the Origin of Species.  In his discussions, Gopnik is able to evoke in the audience strong feelings of sorrow for Darwin because of the loss of a daughter, admiration of Darwin’s own attention to detail and observation, and awe of Darwin’s masterful understanding of not only the natural world but also of rhetoric and prose.  Although this section was incredibly dense and often tangential, Gopnik’s ability to bring together themes from both Darwin’s and Lincoln’s pasts lent a unique perspective to the writing, and allowed Gopnik to make some valuable insights about Darwin’s effect on the world. 

     A notable strategy used by Gopnik to help create a holistic sense of Darwin for the audience was his inclusion of countless excerpts and quotes from things Darwin wrote and said.  The snippets of private letters to his wife, Emma, help to create a sense of him as an affectionate and caring husband and father; sections of his published novels convey his patience, wisdom, and painstaking observation of the natural world; and segments of letters exchanged between Karl Marx and him help the reader to visualize Darwin in his own time, as his contemporary philosophers, economists, and scientists grappled with the Darwinian concept of natural selection.  These primary source documents subsequently add a level of credibility (ethos) to Gopnik’s research of Darwin’s life.

     Impressively, these inclusions flow well within Gopnik’s writing, a flow that is further enhanced by his usage of many “sound” devices.  For instance, Gopnik describes, “Dogmatic, difficult, and determined, he [Louis Agassiz] dominated American natural history…” (185).  The implementation of consonance in the repeated “duh” sounds, as well as some assonance in the repeated “ih” sounds, allow Gopnik’s diction to roll smoothly off the reader’s tongue.  Yet, this flow did occasionally feel disrupted when certain words seemed not to fit the diction of the other words around them.  For example, take Gopnik’s description of one of Darwin’s books, “Having studiously avoided comparisons for hundreds of pages packed with ornithological detail…” (Gopnik 183).  The word ornithological seems out of place in a sentence with simpler diction, of which the most complex word is “studiously.”  Overall, however, this was only a minor occurrence.

     Consequently, the majority of Angels and Ages flowed well, and nicely expanded but later brought together seemingly disparate points about the separate yet similar lives of Lincoln and Darwin.  Perfect for an audience that enjoys historical novels with a flair of mystery and focus on rhetoric, Angels and Ages is a book sure to offer an intriguing new look on the lives of some of society’s most respected icons.