In tonight’s reading, when Liesel and Rosa learn that Hans will be returning they are ecstatic, rejoicing that he only has a broken leg. But in the moment it seems that they forget about Rudy’s father, as if all their anxiety is blown away in an instant, and they can’t even remember the powerful, desperate feeling of not knowing if your loved one will return home. Rudy is left to deal with his pain all alone, he doesn’t feel able to confide in Liesel about this, which is saddening especially because they have shared countless unforgettable childhood experiences. It’s hard to feel such instantaneous relief and then have to force yourself back down to earth again to comfort a friend. But it’s even harder to watch your friend receive the only letter in the world that could soothe the looming threat of loss. And here, in this cloud of strong emotions, that blurs wise judgment and tears at rooted friendships, Death drops us a little commentary to clear the air for a moment. “Why him? Why Hans Hubermann and not Alex Steiner? He had a point.” At a complicated and tricky time in the plot, where the reader feels completely hopeless, why does Death feel the need to remind us that a sole human is no more important or part of this world than the next man or woman? How can we possibly believe that he feels that way? … But how can we not stop to ponder if fate really exists, if a person dies is it simply a matter of endless coincidences that make up their life? Is nothing within our power, is no faulty action avoidable, precluding a death? Or as Death so frequently suggests – why does it even matter to us who or when…if we all go in the end?
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe you have dissected this part of the novel to an ace. To respond to one question you raise, I find that Death reminds the readers of the constant value of humans to spark in our mind a better understanding of the challenges facing equality during the late 1930s and early 40s. When it came to Hans and Alex, it could have been either one to come back, as realized by Rudy. When it comes to a Jew or an Aryan in a concentration camp, the answer is a definitive; the religious opponent of Hitler suffers. However, through the subtle language, Zusak poses a flawed parallel; there is equality when it comes to who returns from war, but the people suffering in the war can also be anyone. Jews can suffer in concentration camps, while Germans can suffer while their families are out at war. In a time where equality was non-existent, Death manages to point out that everyone is equal when it comes to dying; a Jew can die, a German can die, Hans can die, and Alex can die.
ReplyDelete