Silence In Trial Of God By Elie Wiesel

Silence is not simply the absence of sound, not simply the absence of activity; rather, it is the sum of all things that can be heard, seen, or felt. Silence is not simply produced from discipline, not simply produced from anxiety; rather, it involves everything before and everything after - comprising a period of time rather than a single moment. On the other hand, what is silence’s effect? As complex as silence is itself, its effect is complex as well; generally, it serves as an amplifier to that associated with it in the first place. Silence with anger produces exacerbated anger, and silence with ignorance produces exacerbated ignorance. In Trial of God by Elie Wiesel, Berish, the tavernkeep, lashes out at God for his silence and allowance

Yankel and Avrémel have repeatedly inquired about the happenings on that night of the Pogrom, and now is no exception. As the Priest leaves, the room is still left with a lingering of tension; now, no one wishes to continue the trial. That is, until Mendel broaches the subject of Hannah with Berish. Consequently, Berish inadvertently reminisces, “ . . . she is silent: something in her is silent. . . . She speaks silently, she weeps silently; she remembers silently, she screams silently. At times when I look at her I am seized by a mad desire to destroy everything around me” (Wiesel 104). Undoubtedly, Berish uses a diazeugma here to invoke a sense of haste, a sense of inundation; this helps to refer back to that night where the tavern was attacked, and Hannah was overrun by savages. Even though it was one night that caused her to be silent, why does it persistently anger those around her? Clearly, she serves as a living reminder, an everlasting feeling of helplessness and violence. When Berish looks at her, he imbibes this “strange kindness” (104) that she radiates; however, he also imbibes this feeling of being wronged, hurt, and stolen from. Before the Pogrom he “was warm towards everybody, Jews and Christians” (104), but now what is he to do after having his life stolen from him? He looks for fault, he looks for something to blame: that is why the King Almighty is on trial - a dichotomy in and of itself. In addition, there is

One day, Simon Wiesenthal was called to the side of an SS member in his deathbed. Fully knowing that he was the reason of the death of eighty-nine of Simon’s relative, the SS man, Karl, “wanted Simon to somehow relieve him of his guilt” (Fox 144). There is a large dichotomy here: a man guilty of the most inhuman of acts is following a human algorithm for repentance; specifically, Karl, a lapsed Catholic, is only attempting to undergo penance like all Catholics. If one is to consider the savage man’s shoes, one would realize that he only received orders - he followed an algorithm, followed rules without emotion; it was this mindless following that was his soul’s downfall. When he was ordered to these “acts of hatred and sadism and antisemitism” (144), his mind and heart were at each other’s throats - there was cognitive dissonance; yet, he chose to follow his mind and keep his heart silent, his morals silent, his ethics silent. Specifically, he stayed silent for reconciliation, but now seeks another kind of reconciliation. Wiesenthal, when invited into this hospital for the man’s penance, “gave Karl the only penance available to him to bestow: Silence” (144). It was a trade: silence for silence - Karl was ignorant to expect more than that. As Berish was ignorant to expect God to reconcile for his “crimes,” Karl was ignorant to expect Wiesenthal to hand him full forgiveness. Clearly, the