yra sanchez
Professor combads

English 1A
26 May 2013
In a different pair of eyes In the story The Sunflower, written by Simon Wiesenthal, discusses his life changing experience during the Holocaust. Like any other prisoner, he is taken to a hospital in a group to clean up for trash. While at the hospital, he meets a dying Nazi soldier, by the name of Karl. He listens to his story about what he has done to Jews, the people he’s killed, and his mother. They later have a unique connection with each other. Although, when he’s done telling his story, he asks Wiesenthal for forgiveness and ends up passing away. Wiesenthal remains silent, but later questions himself about his experience whether or not he should have accepted his apology. If I were in his situation, I would have not remained silent and forgave the Nazi soldier because he was not promoting any action of hate, rather than forgiveness, my moral values, and my own experiences. A writer that does not reflect my point of view is Herbert Marcuse. Marcuse states that Wiesenthal should not have forgiven the soldier because it perpetuates the crime. I do not agree with his view completely because in this case, the entire government was promoting evil and majority of people were brainwashed. Also Karl was a growing up child and comprehended the propaganda from a very early age. He was not trying to promote any type of war, but rather forgiveness. For example, when he had asked for forgiveness, Wiesenthal had second thoughts after he had remained silent. “Had a doctor entered the room with a miracle drug that would have restored this young man to full vigor, would he have remained weighed down with guilt? And had the German Army then offered him whatever was the Nazi equivalent to a Purple Heart for bravery in battle would he have scorned the award?” (Wiesenthal 94). Karl knew the only way for him to have a peaceful death was to ask for forgiveness, he was not trying to perpetuate the crime. If there is no forgiveness, then world would have been in a perpetual state of war. My moral values take a significant part in the decision making of why I would have forgave Karl if I were in Wiesenthal’s situation. Mary Gordan had a view I found intriguing. She states in her argument, it is not possible nor right for a person to not forgive due to race, no matter whether that person is a member of a specific race or not. I completely agree with her point of view. My moral values show that, Karl should have been forgiving even if he was apart of the Nazi soldiers and done many hurtful acts, such as killing towards Wiesenthal’s race, of being Jewish. Race should not determine forgiveness, rather than your moral values. From Wiesenthal’s words, “It all seemed to be doubtful and unreal as our whole existence in those days…it could not have been all true; it was a dream induced by hunger and despair…it was too illogical – like the whole of our lives” (67). This shows, that he didn’t want to believe that Karl took all the responsibility of the murders of the Jews during the Holocaust. Forgiving is never that easy, but can be determined. Having my own experience with forgiveness, I disagree with Susannah Heschel and Theodore Hesburgh. First, Heschel argues that she would forgive Karl because the Nazis have destroyed normal lives of people that have not done anything to them. She also says that the Nazis did not fight against humanity, they made Germany an iron cage which was a threat to the other Germans in the country. I completely disagree with her because the Nazis had a job they were being told to do and I don’t think that should have any effect towards his individual apology towards Wiesenthal. The forgiveness was only meant for him and no one else. According to Karl’s words, “Believe me, I would be ready to suffer worse and longer pains if by that means I could bring back the dead…I am left here with my guilt” (54). He has nothing left of him self but to be forgiving and wishes that he could bring back the dead from all the lives that were lost.
Another writer I disagree with is Theodore Hesburgh, he argues that he has to forgive him as a monk. A monk has to forgive the people but as a human being, he cannot. He explains that it would be unusual that a human being or citizen would forgive an SS man who killed many people because he wanted it, and now after he had done that, he wants forgiveness because the war is over. I don’t support his theory because I believe everyone is capable of being forgiving, as for myself. My experience with forgiveness is that we often can never forget a situation but we can always forgive. For example, my personality is what usually determines my outcomes in a situation. I would describe myself to be the type to forgive easily and is kind to others. I strongly believe that my own experiences with forgiving others, is what would make me forgive Karl if I were in Wiesenthal’s position.
The Sunflower shows different opinions towards Wiesenthal and his situation with Karl. I don’t think it was easy for him to talk to a Nazi soldier and build a strong connection with him. Although, he kept silent, it was one of the rare moments in his life he would not forget. While some people say that Karl did not deserve to be forgiven in any case, I personally believe that Karl should have gotten Simon’s absolution, because he showed the genuine repentance. He was ready to pay the price for his crimes by asking for forgiveness. Also my moral values and my own experiences lead me to accept Karl’s forgiveness, if I was in Wiesenthal’s situation. Forgiveness is a long process that has different perspectives.