Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, has devoted his life to informing others about the violence that is inflicted and then transforms into indifference. In his millennium talk on "The Perils of Indifference" on April 2, 1999, Elie Wiesel outlines the injustices that people experience and implores the audience to become activists and never to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others. Such a strong message, a cry for humanity. He correctly recognized this as an idea worthy of this particular stage on this particular day—a call for people to recognize the allure of indifference and rage against apathy.
In order to inform the audience about the existence of indifference in the world and how harmful it is
…show more content…
light and darkness, twilight and dawn, crime and punishment, cruelty and compassion, good and evil,"(2) he says in one sentence, listing a number of brief sentences. Wiesel's use of the antithesis to explain apathy reveals that most people tend to ignore the details that lie between two extremes. The use of an antithesis is a great approach to highlight how individuals are usually aware of situations that are obvious. Antithesis is the ideal tool to emphasize indifference because it isn't immediately apparent. For instance, during a conflict, people will either inquire about the heroics or the casualties. Numerous instances of catastrophic incidents that "have thrown a black shadow over humanity" are cited by him. He discusses the murders of Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr., as well as cruel incidents like Hiroshima and Auschwitz. He says all of this in one phrase to overwhelm the audience with examples of indifference in a wide range of contexts. By citing so many instances of indifference, he hopes to make the point that it is exceedingly …show more content…
"And together, driven by intense anxiety and incredible hope, we move toward the new millennium." Wiesel repeatedly brings up the wrath throughout the speech, but he also anticipates a moment when change will be met with indifference. He encourages the audience to apply their own experiences to start future change, therefore this concludes his speech. He also makes a reference to God in order to convey a message of hope. Wiesel discusses how God is present everywhere you are and whatever you are doing. Wiesel found hope and strength in the knowledge that God had been with him during the Holocaust. He demonstrates how faith can help individuals overcome hardship. Using a reference to God illustrates Wiesel's individual ideas and confirms that he has had personal encounters with God. As a result of Wiesel's own experience being directly impacted by God and His power, this inspires both emotional regard for him as well as believability. Wiesel thinks that change is possible if a person has hope, a good attitude, and a belief in the
The Emotional Effect of Elie Wiesel’s, The Perils of Indifference In Elie Wiesel’s heart-wrenching speech, the Perils of Indifference, he uses various rhetorical appeals to explain his point to the audience. He shares his personal experience of the Holocaust and what happened to those around him to show that indifference, albeit comfortable, is the reason the jews suffered so much for so long. Political officials, acquaintances, and any of the others who bore witness to his speech were able to empathize and understand Wiesel through his use of ethos, pathos, and logos.
Wiesel pinpoints the indifference of humans as the real enemy, causing further suffering and lost to those already in peril. Wiesel commenced the speech with an interesting attention getter: a story about a young Jewish from a small town that was at the end of war liberated from Nazi rule by American soldiers. This young boy was in fact himself. The first-hand experience of cruelty gave him credibility in discussing the dangers of indifference; he was a victim himself.
Furthermore, the author wants us to know that when someone is indifference to the suffering of someone else, he or she is just as guilty as the other person. Wiesel's purpose is to inform us that everyone is different but not everyone is indifferent in order to create awareness of the danger. He establishes a thoughtful tone for readers by using stylistic devices such as repetition , imagery and syntactic
Wiesel must take it upon himself to ensure such human suffering is not repeated, that his warning will be heard and the world will take action. As he speaks about the horrors of the Holocaust, he makes sure to establish that “the world did know and remained silent”-- it was not ignorance that cost millions of lives, but apathy; silence. He continues, telling the listener “we must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”
On April 12, 1999, Elie Wiesel delivered a poignant speech during the Millennium Lectures. (Wiesel 1) In his effective speech, the author emphasizes the word “indifference” in order to establish a closer connection between the past and the present – contrasting what we, as a country, have done and what we should do going forward. “The Perils of Indifference” is a call to action in order to defend human life in the new millennium. Wiesel captures his audience with facts, appeals to the human conscience, and utilizes many strategies to add weight to his words.
Wiesel first presents his definition by iterating a loose description of the word but then he follows this description by asking a series of rhetorical questions each giving more for the audience to think about and potentially causing inner turmoil. Wiesel then details, “...indifference can be tempting -- more than that, seductive. It is so much easier to look away from victims. It is so much easier to avoid such rude interruptions to our work, our dreams, our hopes. It is, after all, awkward, troublesome, to be involved in another person's pain and despair” (2).
“Liberated a day earlier by American soldiers, he remembers their rage at what they saw” (Wiesel). In the Holocaust six million Jews were killed. They were brought to the concentration camps in cattle cars. At Auschwitz one-point-six million people died. Elie Wiesel’s “The Perils of Indifference” uses ethos, pathos, and rhetorical questions in order to persuade people that the opposite of love is indifference and not hate.
Indifference is not a response. Indifference is not a beginning; it is an end. And, therefore, indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor -- never his victim” Wiesel also repeats other words throughout his speech as in a previous part of his speech, he repeats the word “God” as he talks about how it is always worse for someone to be ignored by God than to be punished by God. Wiesel uses repetition to complement his use of allusion and imagery.
This issue turns to Wiesel's description of apathy, and the different circumstances in which it can occur. Indifference can be subtle and tempting, because it is easier (6). Wiesel uses this to show the gravity of what the Holocaust was. People would assume that it was in the hands of someone else, so they did not have any reason to do anything about it. Indifference is vicious.
He draws attention to the cruelties inflicted on other people when a person betrays their humanity. Standing by and watching people suffer is just as damaging as inflicting the suffering. The audience feels guilty for the times they may have been bystanders and became less than human. Wiesel emphasizes that other people are affected by indifference through his use of the phrase “Indifference, then, is not only a sin, it is a punishment.” This phrase switches the idea that indifference is something that hurts an individual to something that hurts numerous other people.
Indifference is a lack of interest, concern, or sympathy; to be indifferent is to not care about the struggles of anyone but yourself. Most times, indifference is portrayed as a bad thing that does nothing good to anyone. In the CommonLit article “Elie Wiesel’s ‘The Perils of Indifference’ speech” Elie Wiesel, describes some thoughts that he has on indifference and its effect on history. Elie Wiesel agrees that indifference is a bad thing that should be addressed because it always benefits the aggressor and never the victim, it reduces others to an abstraction, and it’s what makes humans inhuman. First and foremost, the aggressor is like a school bully.
Indifference need to be gain awareness and be stopped. He develops his claim by narrating the dangers of indifference, and how it affected his life then, describes how wrongful it is to be treated in such a way. Finally Wiesel illustrates examples of how indifference affected the world. Wiesel’s purpose is to inform us about the dangers of indifference in order to bring change about it. He establishes a straightforward tone for the president, ambassadors, politicians, and congressmen.
You Denounce it. You Disarm it. ”(Wiesel). This was the biggest part I though Wiesel used for his strongest point of Pathos. These words made me take a step back from what exactly was being said by Wiesel, how anger and hatred are less dangerous than indifferent because hatred and anger have somewhat
In the speech, titled “The Perils of Indifference,” Elie Wiesel showed gratitude to the American people, President Clinton, and Mrs. Hillary Clinton for the help they brought and apprised the audience about the violent consequences and human suffering due to indifference against humanity (Wiesel). This speech was persuasive. It was also effective because it conveyed to the audience the understanding of
In his 1986 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, Elie Wiesel strives to inform his audience of the unbelievable atrocities of the Holocaust in order to prevent them from ever again responding to inhumanity and injustice with silence and neutrality. The structure or organization of Wiesel’s speech, his skillful use of the rhetorical appeals of pathos and ethos, combined with powerful rhetorical devices leads his audience to understand that they must never choose silence when they witness injustice. To do so supports the oppressors. Wiesel’s speech is tightly organized and moves the ideas forward effectively. Wiesel begins with humility, stating that he does not have the right to speak for the dead, introducing the framework of his words.