on Ian's comment
amlit338
Ian--I took that comment toward the end of class as being an expression of how profoundly affected the speaker was by what she sees and reads, so that not wanting to read the book is not an act that denies sympathy, but oddly discloses it. Even so, I take your framing of the question to be a good one: to what extent can we ethically turn away from other people's suffering (or the evil they do)? If we do turn away, are we responsible for what we do not see, to change Herr's wording? Look to Herr for his answers, then tackle the question, using your own experiences as a guide.
aloha, Susan
Ian--I took that comment toward the end of class as being an expression of how profoundly affected the speaker was by what she sees and reads, so that not wanting to read the book is not an act that denies sympathy, but oddly discloses it. Even so, I take your framing of the question to be a good one: to what extent can we ethically turn away from other people's suffering (or the evil they do)? If we do turn away, are we responsible for what we do not see, to change Herr's wording? Look to Herr for his answers, then tackle the question, using your own experiences as a guide.
aloha, Susan
posted by Susan at 9:47 PM
1 Comments:
A moment of pretentiousness(and self consciousness): Camus talks about us all being responsible no matter whether we think we are or not. Just by being part of a system which is killing people in Iraq, for example, we are just as guilty as those fighting the war directly; we've all got blood on our hands, so to speak.
I hadn't previously seen that guilty side of Herr as I read, but after it was brought up in class, it's pretty clear. That eventhough he's not the one doing the killing, he is no less guilty, and he is very aware of his guilt.
Post a Comment
<< Home