Subject:
|
Re: A question of remembrance...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:08:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
431 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> I don't see how representing the plight of a specific group of people
> reduces that plight to a cliche.
I believe that an omission is a lie. So, to omit the whole history of the
Holocaust and focus only on one group of people that suffered and died, and
to repeat and repeat only that part of the history (allowing the other stats
to be obscured) only contributes to make it cliche.
> Any truth-grounded story is necessarily
> focused on the group to which it pertains, and if others are left out,
> that's a shame, but it shouldn't be a surprise. The message conveyed by a
> portrayal of that tragedy can have broad-reaching implications, but not
> everyone touched by the message need be expressly represented by it.
Well, please think about it this way: "Schindler's List" reached the whole
world during the height of the genocide ("ethnic cleansing') of the
Bosnians. Like the Nazis, the Serbians carried out mass executions, torture,
rape camps and so on. The recent estimate is 600,000 Bosnians murdered, over
2 million living as refugees in neighboring countries. At that time, many
Holocaust survivors spoke out publicly against the genocide and urged
America to intervene. I remember a televised press conference at the White
House rose garden pertaining to Holocaust rememberence in which one Jewish
survivor (can't remember his name, he's a prominent human rights activist)
chewed out President Clinton for not helping end the Bosnian genocide.
So, with this issue on the tip of the worlds tongues, it baffled me that
Spielberg couldn't say one word at the Oscars about the "ethnic cleansing"
that was taking place at that very moment. After portraying the terrible
suffering of the Jews in his movie, why not use that moment before the world
to condemn all genocide? Why be so small minded and ask the world to only
remember the Jews? I guess as an admirer of his work, I was disappointed. I
know it is his choice, but by not speaking up, I feel he reduced his noble
work to cliche. If I were a Jew and I was up on that stage, how could I not
mention the Bosnian genocide?
Dan
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) Ah! Now I see where you're coming from. I still hold that, in itself, the film can't be blasted for failing to address matters outside its scope, since to do otherwise would by definition require that everything address everything--a (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| I was thinking of not putting anything into this thread. Tough to stay out of though. Lots of good points are being made by all parties and clearly this is a nicely behaved and well reasoned thread, kudos to all posters. (...) Good point. But where (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) In my view, since the film was about Schindler's List, anyone outside of the direct effect of The List is irrelevant to the film. That's not to say their deaths weren't tragic or aren't signficant, but they are beyond the intended scope of the (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
197 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
