A Review of Schindler’s List and Responses to Issues Addressed by Richard Wolin and H. R. Shapiro

Reel Whirled Peas



After watching Schindler’s List in preparation for this assignment, I am ashamed to say it was my first time viewing the film. I recall the subject controversies surrounding it upon its release in 1993, and then the cinematic accolades that followed, including the Academy Award for Best Picture. But for me the subject was just too horrible to think about, and I conveniently kept putting off its viewing on the grounds that such an important subject and film deserved my full attention, and I wasn’t quite ready. I have now watched it twice, over two days, and both times it shook me.

Between viewings, I read reviews of the film by Richard Wolin, and H.R. Shapiro. In addressing the film’s depiction of Amon Goeth, the SS commandant of the Plaszow facilities, Wolin warns the reader not to assume that the Final Solution to eradicate Judaism was solely the work of pathological figures. “By pathologizing Nazi crimes”, he writes, “we spare ourselves the distasteful thought that, were it not for the avid participation of people very much like ourselves, the whole enterprise would have foundered early on” (my emphasis). His observation is right on target. It confirms my continuous thought throughout the film: Why are all those people abetting these crimes? And, it provides a basis of explanation for my reticence in watching the film before now.

Wolin writes “None of the evil perpetrated by the Nazis would have been possible without the support and cooperation, on a truly massive scale, of ‘ordinary men’”. In the film, those “ordinary men” are everywhere. In at least two scenes, Wehrmacht soldiers tousled the hair or pinched the cheeks of young Jewish boys in an affectionate way, both in the course of perpetrating some violence on the adults. There were construction workers building the barracks in the first scene of Goeth’s wickedness, when he ordered the shooting of the construction supervisor. A German officer executes her, and none of the workers seem to notice. I caught myself wondering what would I do if I were on the scaffolding, part of a work detail to build an unjust prison, seeing the brutality. I don’t know.

Wolin goes on to list those “…men and women throughout Europe who either stood to profit from the Jews so-called ‘disappearance,’ or who, more often, just did not care.” The other profiteers that Schindler tried to engage in his plan to “buy” the Jews’ safety were men of power and influence, yet none in the movie could be convinced to help. A few years ago documentation surfaced that implicated Deutsche Bank and some Swiss banks, claiming that they had benefited from the theft of Jewish property by the Nazis, and that they had made little effort to return the assets to their rightful owners. They paid reparations.

And there were those who just did not care. In a scene showing a wealthy Jewish couple being evicted from their large apartment (the one Schindler would inhabit), Poles are screaming epithets and throwing rocks at the displaced, who wander toward the Krakow ghetto. You sense the animosity many working class Poles must have felt toward the Jews. What caused widespread anti-Semitism? Perhaps it was jealousy toward the Jews for their education, business acumen, and relative affluence. In any case, many Europeans apparently cared little about the fate of the Jews.

H.R. Shapiro suggested that many Jews cared little about the fate of other Jews.

Shapiro contends that Spielberg made a film that “does not tell the whole story of the vast majority of Jews, but only a small elite who were part of the Nazi apparatus”. Schindler’s Jews were members, family, and associates of the Krakow Judenrat, the Jewish Council empowered to implement Nazi policies. Shapiro is highly critical of the Councils, suggesting that without their organization and leadership the number of Jewish deaths would have been far less than the 4.5 to 6 million estimated. He further claims that many in the Judenrate, along with the Nazi-Jewish police and enforcement squads, exploited their position for material gain. In the movie, Goldberg lands a Jewish policeman position early in film, and suggests to Pfefferberg that he do the same, implying to his fellow black marketer that profit could be made. Goldberg’s enterprising eventually pays off as Schindler begins providing trinkets to him, through Stern, for moving certain workers into the ceramic factory.

Shapiro makes an interesting point, and his assertion that many Jews today look contemptuously on the Judenrate as self-serving Nazi collaborators is probably true. I do not think, however, that everyone who served did so with avaricious intent. In Holocaust: An End to Innocence, Seymour Rossel admits that bribery and smuggling became part and parcel of ghetto life. But he also describes the Judenrat’s responsibilities for watching over the community’s health and sanitation, and for running and staffing the clinics and hospitals. Rossel suggests that like any other kind of bureaucracy there are bad leaders and good leaders. The leader of the Lodz Judenrat, Chaim Rumkowski, was a power-hungry Nazi collaborator who wielded king-like authority over the lives and deaths of 160,000 Jews until the Nazis put him on the last train out if the Lodz ghetto in 1944. He was, after all, a Jew. Rossel contrasts Rumkowski with Czerniakow of Warsaw and Rotfeld of Lvov, both Judenrat heads, who each committed suicide rather than decide their people’s fates.

A major part of their job was to assign work in ghetto factories and elsewhere. In the movie, Stern used his influence and Schindler’s money to insure the right people, (Shapiro would say the “privileged Jews”) showed up on the right work manifest. This was often the case where the worker had no particular skills – a certain death sentence absent Stern’s intervention. Shapiro suggests that for each “privileged Jew” benefiting from an association with the Judenrat, another, perhaps more qualified but less connected, was shipped out for special treatment. I found nothing in the movie to refute that assertion.

And yet, as you watch the film, you pull for the characters you meet. This brings me to my third topic.

Wolin asserts that Schindler, Goeth, and Stern are the only characters developed in the movie. The Jews are seen as “…tragic victims and servile accommodators. But they are devoid of personality. They are the film’s supernumeraries and huddled masses, waiting to be saved.” I strongly disagree with that statement. Although each character has limited time on screen, the sum of his or her dialogue, expressions, and interactions with the surroundings develops the character enough for the film viewer to connect with them. Early in the film, Pfefferberg surreptitiously removes his gold star and wanders into the Catholic Church to discuss smuggling with the other black marketers. In a short dialogue, we see that he clearly is a tough businessman. A moment later Schindler approaches him, and Pfefferberg’s facial expressions and body language perfectly reflect a savvy man sizing up a situation. While the others slither away, Pfefferberg goes with his instinct and begins a business relationship that ultimately saves his life. He becomes Schindler’s contact to the black market.

Later, stolen glances between Pfefferberg and wife Mila indicate a deep affection for one another. During the liquidation of the Krakow ghetto, Pfefferberg is nearly being caught in the sewers, and afterward comes face to face with Goeth. We are not surprised to see the hustler once more close the sale, pretending to be a nebbish sycophant following orders to clear the street of debris. Later he escapes the trains because he is Goeth’s mechanic. He operates, and survives, around the edges.

Goldberg is another survivor, preferring to work from the inside as opposed to Pfefferberg’s outside. Helen Hirsch, the woman whose only wish is for a small list of rules to follow that will guarantee her safety. The movie depicts the maternal fortitude of Chaja Dresner, and the faithfulness and industriousness of Rabbi Lewartow. In each case the actors created individuals.


Reading each movie review allowed me to focus more closely on specific details as I watch the film a second time. Wolin made two other excellent points not addressed in this paper: The Nazis’ irrational compulsion to annihilate the Jews, and the modern reliance on visual media to get information. I felt Shapiro was harsh in his assessment of the Judenrate, but privilege was clearly at work among the Schindler Jews. However, the issues of fairness, collaboration, bribery, and compromise all come down to this quote from Stern to Schindler: “There will be generations because of what you did.”


Source:
Rossel, Seymour, Holocaust: An End to Innocence, Copyright 2003 by Seymour Rossel
http://www.rossel.net/Holocaust07.htm