Spielberg and the 6 Million

[Bonnie Surfus (ENG)]

On Tue, 11 Jun 1996, Andrew Dinn wrote:

> LBernier at tribune.com writes:
> 
> >         The only redeeming virtue of Schindler's List--which, afterall,     
> >         glorified a businessman who utilized slave labor and soft-pedaled   
> >         the horror chambers of Auschwitz--was Y. Perlman's haunting score,  
> >         IM--humble--O.
> 
> >   So, would it have been better if Schindler had been a flawless man who 
> >   chose not to utilize slave labor, and all those people had died?  This is 
> >   not a black & white issue.  Do not judge it as such.
> 
> Note, Steely is accusing Spielberg (of `glorifying' Schindler), not
> Schindler. Kennealy managed not to `glorify' Schindler - and that's
> one of the best features of the book, the way it presents his frailty,
> his selfishness, the tarnish to his magnanimity. I have not seen the
> film (no intention of doing so) but judging by previous output I doubt
> SS's version was capable of presenting such subtle and ambivalent
> truths. He is indeed no Leni Riefenstahl. Whoever said Nature abhors a
> vacuum was clearly unacquainted with SS's oeuvre.
> 
> 
> Andrew Dinn
> -----------
Look what I missed!  Jeez.  I am one of the few among many disgruntled 
scholars to find plenty to enjoy in Speilberg's work.  A-and I don't 
think he ever aimed for the arthouse, anyhow.  Maybe it's my cynicism 
over my profession (growing daily with the frustrations of having written 
myself into a corner--but that's another story) but I find I can't 
tolerate such sweeping dismissals without some comment regarding the 
redeeming qualities in a work (I think, here, of the DFW wars).  

Let's just say that, sure, SCHINDLER'S LIST has its flaws, not the least 
of which is that the infamous "shower scene," where the S. women were 
herded into Auschwitz and--just when we/they thought they were to be 
doused with gas--well, given showers.  This DID happen.  But it was to a 
group of MEN.  Hmmmm.  I've discussed this scene with my students, during 
a unit on the Holocaust.  Interesting.  But what's really more 
interesting to me is that MANY, MANY of my college-age students had 
virtually NO knowledge of the holocaust.  In particular, I recall one 
woman--23--who came to my office to discuss her work.  She was having 
trouble getting beyond the images--the horror.  She told me that until 
this class, SHE HAD NEVER HEARD OF THE HOLOCAUST, THE 6 MILLION (11, or 
so, including Polish, and other "minorities"), 	AUSCHWITZ, etc, etc.  

For what it's worth, I think Speilberg did  a service to American 
education by simply bringing the Holocaust to light.  Yeah, it's big 
Hollywood, but considering the audience, it's maybe the smartest way to 
go anymore, in terms of trying to "teach."

All this does not deny that Speilberg played hard and fast (aggressive 
terms intentional) with very delicate and complex issues.  

And to satisfy my urge to jump in and diss SS, I will add that the final 
scene ("I could have saved ONE MORE, ONE MORE!!") was highly 
disingenuous--in terms of both historical accuracy (?) and ACTING.  Jeez, 
what was Liam thinking?

BAck to teaching:  one other thought.       I recall discussing the BIG 
PICTURE with my class, namely, that in the year the Hollywood gave SL 
nearly every award imaginable (including best makeup, primarily for those 
women's--the ones in the shower--shaved heads, Hmmmmm), we could witness 
the existence of massive prisoner/death camps in Bosnia.  All the while 
Hollywood, the president, the media, were busy spouting lies like, "WE 
CAN NEVER LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN!"  

big field of lies