Hope Despair And Memory Analysis

696 Words2 Pages

One’s past affects the way one views unjust behavior that will continue to occur in today's society. In “Hope, Despair, and Memory” Ellie Wiesel repeats, “it would be enough” to express his frustration that words are not “enough” to explain the time of hate he lived through. Wiesel’s point of view differs from Solzhenitsyn oration in “One Word of Truth Outweighs the World” because Solzhenitsyn believes lying and violence are inseparable. However, Wiesel and Solzhenitsyn compare in that they are both frustrated with our society not learning from past mistakes. In “Children Without Pity” by Nancy Traver, her work contrasts to Wiesel’s oration because she demonstrates how humanity continues to hurt each other. Traver, Solzhenitsyn, and Wiesel all choose to cope with injustice differently or in a …show more content…

Wiesel's repetition, relates to when Solzhenitsyn states, "whether for its cowardly humiliation or for its self-satisfied weakness, or the light headed escapades of the young," he demonstrates the connection between the passages because we don't learn from our past mistakes (Solzhenitsyn 161). Clearly, Solzhenitsyn believes no one has courage to make a stand to demand change or care for others besides their own or themselves in today’s society to stop injustice. Both orators express their frustration to their audience of how our present society must remember the past, so acts of injustice do not repeat in the future. “Whoever has announced violence as his method must inexorably choose lying as his principal” illustrates if one chooses lying; one also chooses violence, according to “One Word of Truth Outweighs the World.” In addition, Solzhenitsyn reveals in his oration violence continues to grow as long as one continues to lie, but the truth can destroy violence to help prevent the repetition of history and past mistakes. Both authors uncover how they have had a troubled past and do not want humanity to go through what they went

Open Document