The Perils Of Indifference Summary

1729 Words4 Pages

Another typical characteristic of Wiesel’s pieces is employing logos as definition and description. Throughout The Perils of Indifference, Wiesel uses an extended and multifaceted definition of the term indifference. The author starts out by stating that “Etymologically, the word means ‘no difference’”, or in other words the most common definition of indifference is uniformity (The Perils of Indifference 1). Wiesel then further qualified this definition as an unfamiliar state of opposing ideas. Qualification. as known as clarification, of Wiesel’s definition of is vital to the development of Indifference in his piece is vital because it pinpoints exactly what the author want the audience to understand from his speech. By stating exactly what …show more content…

The tone of the pieces are incredibly different. In Hate Speech Has a Friend in Silence: Lessons from the Holocaust speech at the Remembrance day Celebration, the author, not being a survivor, took a different approach. She used a copious amount of description of what the general concept of the Holocaust was and what the survivors endured. The purpose of her speech remembrance and prevention of such horrific events for the future as the number of survivors and authentic survival stories is decreasing and future generations will learn about the Holocaust solely from books. Her audience was Holocaust survivors, their families, and the world as the event was broadcasted. She also used this in the current election, though we may not like the outcomes, it is now that we must prevent a smaller scale version of this happen under Trump’s Presidency (Pritzker). She also makes a comment on theoretic in the early part of her speech “We humans have within us the capacity to create realities, good and evil, with speech and with our words”, words are incredibility powerful and harnessing them is dangerous (Pritzker). This tone is positive as she uses her voice to help others and this uplifting spirit with the positivity of words, this tone contradicts the style of Wiesel in his pieces, however both are …show more content…

A major reaction to this piece is to refute many of his points. The article written by Clarence Page focuses mainly on the idea that America is not to blame for waiting, but choose to avoid entangling themselves in conflict until they could produce positive results (Page). The article was crafted soon after he gave his speech which should be considered when looking at the public reaction as ideas and ways of using rhetoric have changed over the years and the audience then and now may respond differently to rhetorical techniques. In a more recent article, a group Jewish individuals wrote an open letter to Elie Wiesel and reacted negatively to his current ideas of Jerusalem after not having been back since the Holocaust (An Open…). The public’s reactions are as expected because individuals do not react well to be blamed and having their country blamed, placing blame makes individuals uncomfortable and so it is

Open Document