Introtorical Analysis Of Elie Wiesel's 1986 Nobel Peace Prize Speech

Writer, Elie Wiesel in his metaphorical speech “The perils of Indifference” argues that the future will never know the agony of the Holocaust and they will never understand the tragedy of the horrific terror in Germany. Wiesel wants people to not let this happen but at the time many modern genocides that are occurring and people shouldn’t be focused on just the Holocaust, they should focus on making this world a better place; moreover, Wiesel expresses his thoughts about all the genocides that has happen throughout the years. He develops his message through in an horrifying event that took place 54 years ago the day “ The perils of Indifference” was published. Wiesel illustrates the indifferences of good vs evil. He develops this message

Elie Wiesel uses rhetoric to convey his message in his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech. In the speech, he uses rhetoric by telling from his own perspective or from his own point of view. In paragraph three, the authors explains his opinion from his point of view that he doesn’t think he has the right to accept the Nobel Peace Prize: “It frightens me because I wonder: do I have the right to represent the multitudes who have perished? Do I have the right to accept this great honor on their behalf? I do not. That would be presumptuous. No one may speak for the dead, no one may interpret their mutilated dreams and visions.” He questions himself and he thinks that he doesn’t deserve the honor to be given the Nobel Peace Prize. In paragraph eleven, the author explains that there’s always something that can be done: “There is much to be done, there is much that can be done. One person...of integrity can make a

In modern times, children face violence in the Middle East such as Alan Kurdi, a Middle Eastern boy who drowned in the Mediterranean Sea in an attempt to escape conflict similar to the many Jewish boys that struggled to flee from Nazi Germany. Although they do not know it, these children are representations of innocence, whom are unaware that their situation could have been prevented if not for the indifference of other countries. In both these situations, the U.S. takes no action to help end the suffering of people and the purpose of the speech is to change that very aspect. Wiesel expresses appreciation to the U.S. government; “… I am filled with a profound and abiding gratitude to the American people,” however, it is also a strategy to develop a non-aggressive approach to the audience as he will be identifying the tragedies that Americans created by their indifference (1). Wiesel reminds the audience of the atrocities during the 20th century through

Elie Wiesel’s speech falls into the deliberative genre category, and was designed to influence his listeners into action by warning them about the dangers indifference can have on society as it pertains to human atrocities and suffering. The speech helped the audience understand the need for every individual to exercise their moral conscience in the face of injustice. Wiesel attempts to convince his audience to support his views by using his childhood experience and relating them to the harsh realities while living in Nazi Death Camps as a boy during the Holocaust. He warns, “To be indifferent to suffering is to lose one’s humanity” (Wiesel, 1999). Wiesel persuades the audience to embrace a higher level of level moral awareness against indifference by stating, “the hungry children, the homeless refugees-not to respond to their plight, not to relieve their solitude by offering them a spark of hope, is to exile them from human memory”. Wiesel’s uses historical narrative, woven with portions of an autobiography to move his persuasive speech from a strictly deliberative genre to a hybrid deliberative genre.

When it comes to issues that arise that can potentially destroy life as we know it, issues like mass genocide, terrorism, and abuse of power, indifference will lead to the ultimate demise our most simple human characteristic, humility. Denoted as the lack of difference or distinction between two or more things, indifference is the worst response. Not only are you empowering the oppressor and giving them the green light by not checking their actions but you are saying to the oppressed, “Your cries of pain are not heard.” Holocaust Survivor, Elie Wiesel graced an audience with his April 12, 1999 White House Millennium Lecture entitled, “The Perils of Indifference.” Many people hide behind the vail of the bystander effect theory, which is commonly

In the world during the time of the Holocaust, there was indifference towards the suffering of millions of Jews. When individuals reflect about the Holocaust, the majority of the time the responsibility of the terrible events is placed upon the perpetrators. However, bystanders and witnesses indirectly affected the victims of the Holocaust as well. The silence of these people played one of the largest roles in the Holocaust, they influenced it by avoiding any type of involvement and by becoming blinded towards the suffering of others. In his Academy Award acceptance speech, Elie Wiesel says, “the opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference”. This exert from his speech reveals the importance of the role that bystanders played in the

After nearly two years of misery, a young boy finally saw the first ray of hope on the horizon; the Americans had finally arrived, and the Nazis were gone. In his autobiography Night, Elie Wiesel shares his experiences in Auschwitz-Birkenau, one of Hitler’s concentration camps. Wiesel was one of the minority of Jews to survive the Holocaust during World War II. His family did not make it through with him, and this had lasting effects. Wiesel’s identity changed completely during his experiences in Auschwitz; he lost his faith in God and he became indifferent to his survival and the survival of his family members. Despite these hardships, however, he ultimately became a stronger person than he was before.

Elie Wiesel’s purpose of this text was to discuss the parallels of the experiences he survived through during the Holocaust and the events in Kosovo that were going through ethnic cleansing. Wiesel has intended this speech to an audience of President Clinton and First Lady Hillary Clinton. Throughout this speech, Wiesel also expressed his gratitude towards President Clinton for the “...justified intervention in Kosovo...a lasting warning that never again will the deportation, the terrorization of children and their parents, be allowed anywhere in the world.” The author feels that this message is important because “We are on the threshold of a new century, a new millennium” and the injustice lessons of the past must be remembered. This shows that Wiesel cares for the

Wiesel opens his speech with an appeal to ethos. He asserts, “Mr. President, Mrs. Clinton, members of Congress, Ambassador Holbrooke, Excellencies, friends:”(Wiesel 1). By associating himself with people in power, Wiesel builds his credibility. Another excerpt from the speech is, “In the place that I come from, society was composed of three simple categories: the killers, the victims, and the bystanders”(Wiesel 3). Wiesel further establishes his reliability by showing that he has personal experience pertaining to the topic. This experience leads the audience to believe that he is a reliable source.

I honestly agree to what Elie Wiesel has to say, “when human lives are endangered when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Where ever men or women are persecuted because of their race, religion or political views, that pace must at the moment become the center of the universe.”

On the 12th of April, in the year 1999, Elie Wiesel gave a speech at the White House. Several members of congress, President Clinton, and the First Lady, Hillary Clinton, were present to listen to him. His speech became a powerful testament to the pitfalls and dangers of being indifferent to the sufferings of others. However, Wiesel’s speech was also a very skillful exercise in using rhetoric for persuasion. By using certain wording and striking the right balance of facts and emotions, he was moving the audience in the direction of understanding his point of view. He was moving the audience to not feel sympathy, but actual empathy to the events he was speaking about. To feel the as closely as he felt for these events in history. He acted as judge, jury, disappointed parent and as vengeful deity. In this paper, I will examine key elements of his speech to show that by instilling deep feelings of shame, fear, and even pride at the right moments can inspire people to open their minds to the dangers of ignoring the pleads of help from their fellow man.

Romanian-born American Jewish writer, professor, political activist, Nobel Laureate, and Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel in his critical speech, ”Perils of Indifference,” maintains the idea that indifference is inhumane. He supports his claim by using his personal experience in the Holocaust. Additionally, it states in paragraph 9 that “They were dead and did not know it.” emphasizes how indifference has made the “Muselmann” completely unaware of their fate. Further, it states in paragraph 8 that “Indifference can be tempting… troublesome… and can make our lives meaningless.” Wiesel’s purpose is to warn the people that change is needed in order to encourage the people to make a change in the world for the better so something as tragic and devastating like the Holocaust never happens again. He establishes a critical tone for readers by using stylistic devices and rhetorical devices such as imagery, contemplative questions,and word choice in order to achieve his message that indifference is inhumane. Wiesel’s message about the inhumanity of indifference and the importance of resistance is still relevant today.

Wherever men and women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must—at that moment—become the center of the universe...” (Acceptance speech, 1986. Elie Wiesel) Here Elie further stresses the importance of speaking out and not being a bystander. Whenever human lives or dignity are in danger, everything else doesn’t matter, skin color, religion, etc. We are all people and should be treated as such. Again Elie uses some vibrant vocabulary to evoke this feeling into people. Such words include, irrelevant, persecut, jeopardy, and

Wiesel is effective with his speech by connecting exaggeration within his revelation. He questions the guilt and responsibility for past massacres, pointing specifically at the Nazi’s while using historical facts, such as bloodbaths in Cambodia, Algeria, India, and Pakistan to include incidents on a larger level such as Auschwitz to provide people with a better idea (Engelhardt, 2002). He is effective in putting together the law and society’s need for future actions against indifference by stating, “In the place I come from, society was composed of three simple categories: the killer, the victims, and the bystanders” 7.(Wiesel 223).

Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel, in the speech “Perils of Indifference”, calls out the American government for being indifferent in an important time in world history. He claims that indifference is a very horrible thing and bad things have come from. He supports his claim by first explaining his childhood, then he goes on to talk about what it means to him, next explains the power it can have and finally explains the consequences that can come from it. His purpose is to educate his audience about indifference in hope of preventing indifference to continue in the future generations in order to accomplish his purpose for the speech. He establishes a calm tone for his audience.