Kluger Blog

The passage I’m going to address is on p. 82 and it refers to Kluger’s conversations with fellow Jewish people about the deaths that had occurred during the Holocaust. They question, “why no panic broke out during executions, […] why there was no resistance” (Kluger 82). I found this passage to be interesting because Kluger and her colleagues attempt to justify the deaths of millions of people by suggesting that perhaps they had died as martyrs or had demonstrated “the heroic gestures of a senseless fight” (82). Another aspect of this passage that I found to be unusual was that Kluger was engaging in the somewhat odd act of perceiving the way the dead had acted and behaved in order to satisfy some innate desire to “un-victimize” the victims and to believe that they had resisted with all their ability. Finally, the last part of the passage, which includes a quote from Kluger’s historian colleague, states that there was evidence that the people had comforted one another during the whole ordeal and perhaps those actions were better than resistance. I thought this was interesting not only because the historian demonstrates the act of perceiving the way the dead had acted but also because it brings up the question of whether peaceful acceptance is better than resisting violence with more violence.

Also, I quickly wanted to address the idea of “sentimentality” which appears in the paragraph right before the passage above. She states that she did not want to talk to her mother about her brother’s death, because it would require “a phony demonstration of appropriate emotions” (82). I believe that her experiences at the concentration camp Therensienstadt had not only dehumanized her and rid her of emotions, but also destroyed any ability to make human connections. She herself confirms this belief later in the story (86).