Schindler’s Ark: The Book Review

First Printed Edition of Schindler’s Ark

Introduction

Australian author Thomas Keneally‘s novel first “Schindler’s Ark” (later republished as Schindler’s List) brought the story of Oskar Schindler’s rescue of Jewish people during the Nazi Holocaust, to international attention in 1982, when it won the Booker Prize. It was made by Steven Spielberg into the Oscar-winning film Schindler’s Listin 1993, the year Schindler and his wife were named Righteous Among the Nations.

Schindler’s Ark later republished as Schindler’s List

About The Author

Thomas Michael Keneally, (born 7 October 1935) is an Australian novelist, playwright, essayist  and actor.  Keneally’s first story was published in The Bulletin  magazine in 1962 under the pseudonym Bernard Coyle. By February 2014, he had written over 50 books, including 30 novels. He is particularly famed for his Schindler’s Ark  (1982) (later republished as Schindler’s List), the first novel by an Australian to win the Booker Prize and is the basis of the film Schindler’s List. He had already been shortlisted for the Booker three times prior to that: 1972 for The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith, 1975 for Gossip from the Forest, and 1979 for Confederates. Many of his novels are reworkings of historical material, although modern in their psychology and style.

Thomas Keneally

Storyline of The Novel

The story of the novel is based on true events, on account of the Nazi Holocaust during World War II. Oskar Schindler, (born April 28, 1908, Svitavy [Zwittau], MoraviaAustria-Hungary  [now in the Czech Republic]—died October 9, 1974, Hildesheim, West Germany), German industrialist who, aided by his wife and staff, sheltered approximately 1,100 Jews from the Nazis  by employing them in his factories, which supplied the German army during World War II.

Poster of Steven Spielberg‘s movie Schindler’s List (1993)

In the shadow of Auschwitz, a flamboyant German industrialist grew into a living legend to the Jews of Kraków. He was a womaniser, a heavy-drinker and a bon viveur, but to them he became a saviour. This is the extraordinary story of Oskar Schindler, who risked his life to protect Jews in Nazi-occupied Poland and who was transformed by the war into a man with a mission, a compassionate angel of mercy.

Liam Neeson as Oskar Schindler in Schindler’s List (1993)

Analysis of The Storyline

The novel introduced a vast and diverse cast of characters. However, the focus of the narrative was between Oskar Schindler and Amon Goeth. In the story, there was a dichotomy between what is essentially good and what is evil, that was personified by these two primary characters. Goeth represented everything evil. The war churned out a selfish and heartless sadist who found delight in inflicting pain on the Jews. Ironically, he lusted after his Jewish maid. Schindler, on the other hand, was portrayed as the Good German. He didn’t believe everything that the Nazi regime was saying against the Jews. He was, however, a man of contradictions. Despite being depicted as the epitome of goodness, he lived a self-indulgent lifestyle, which included proclivity towards the bottle and women. His infidelities have been a constant source of pain for his wife, Emilie. He also uses his connections to gain the upper hand in negotiations; it would also be a seminal part of his campaign to save the Jews.  

Ralph Fiennes as Amon Goeth in Schindler’s List (1993)

Criticism of The Storyline

The amount of research poured to recreate the story of Oskar Schindler was astounding. And the starting point to this is as interesting as the novel itself. As noted in the Author’s Note, a chance encounter in 1980 led to the novel. Schindler’s motivation for protecting his workers was rarely ever clear, especially at the start. Questions still hound his true intentions. He, after all, brazenly took advantage of the cheap labour the Jews offered at the start of his enterprise. Is Schindler an anti-hero? The answer can be found in Keneally’s extensive research. Through interviews with surviving Schindlerjuden and different Second World War archives, he managed to identify the point in which Schindler decided to protect the Jews. While horseback riding on the hills surrounding Kraków, he witnessed an SS Aktion unfold on the Jewish ghetto below. The Jews were forcefully taken out of their houses. Those who resisted were shot dead, even in the presence of children. Witnessing the atrocious acts firsthand turned Schindler’s stomach. It was then that he resolved to save as many Jews as he can.

Scene from Schindler’s List (1993)

Overall, what didn’t work was the manner in which Keneally related the story of Oskar Schindler. As the story moved forward, it became clearer that Keneally was unsure of how to deliver the story. His resolve to remain loyal to Oskar’s story was commendable. He endeavored to do just that but it never fully came across. The result was an amalgamation of fiction and historical textbook. The strange mix muddled the story and the result was a perplexing work of historical fiction. It is without a doubt that one of the darkest phases of contemporary human history is the Second World War. Nobody expected that the meteoric ascent of Der Führer, Adolf Hitler, in the German political ladder would lead to a devastation of global scale. As the Axis forces march towards and beyond their boundaries, they would leave death and destruction in their wake, stretching from Europe, to the Pacific, and to the Far East. The consequences of the war would resonate well beyond its time. With genocides, concentration camps, and slave labour commonplace, the war was a reflection of the human conditions. Its peak, the Holocaust, exhibited the extent of the darkest shades of the human spirit. It was a grim portrait.

Indeed, the Second World War brought out the worst in humanity. However, in times of darkness, there are those among us who rise to the occasion. One of them is Oskar Schindler whose story was related by Thomas Keneally in his nonfiction novel, Schindler’s List (1982).

Conclusion

While Keneally‘s dramatization of this great man’s exploits is lacking in novelistic shape or depth, the brutality and heroism are satisfyingly, meticulously presented–as plain, impressive, historical record; and if admirers of Keneally’s more imaginative work may be disappointed, others will find this a worthy volume to place beside one of the several Wallenberg biographies.

Evolution Of The Cold War

Cold War After The Truman-Stalin Era

In early 1953, there was a change in the leadership of both the superpowers- the US and USSR. In the US, President Truman’s tenure ended in January 1953. He was succeeded by Dwight Eisenhower. an ex-army general who had commanded the Allied forces in Europe during the Second World War. Meanwhile. Soviet leader Stalin died in March 1953. He was succeeded as party chief by Nikita Khrushchev and by Georgy Malenkov as prime minister. The two Soviet leaders were not very comfortable with each other. Malenkov was replaced by Nikolai Bulganin in 1955. He was more acceptable to the party chief.

But in 1958 even Bulganin was dropped and Khrushchev assumed the prime ministership as well. President Eisenhower led US for eight years till he was succeeded by John F Kennedy in January 1961. Khrushchev remained at the helm of affairs till he was overthrown in 1964 by the troika of Leonid Brezhnev, Nikolai Podgorny and Alexei Kosygin. After the Truman-Stalin era, the US-Soviet relations eased considerably, but the Cold war showed no signs of ending. During 1953-64 several steps were taken by both the sides to improve relations, but at the same time tension got accelerated on different occasions.

CRISIS IN POLAND

Poland was the first to ignite. In June 1956, riots in the industrial city of Poznam were brutally suppressed, leaving dozens of people dead and hundreds wounded. A conflict occurred in the Polish Communist Party between two factions – one owing allegiance to Boleslaw Bierut, who had died earlier the same year, and the other led by Gomulka, who was a Nationalist Titoist communist, and had remained in jail since 1949, and was recently released. Gomulka faction succeeded.

In October, Polish Communist Party issued a proclamation that Poland would henceforth pursue a ‘national road to socialism’, and Gomulka was elected Secretary of the Polish Communist Party. The Soviet leaders decided not to use force against Gomulka. This was second set-back to USSR after Yugoslav decision in 1948 to follow Nationalist Communism.

REVOLT IN HUNGARY

Since the end of Second World War, Hungary was governed by an orthodox Communist leader, Matyas Rakosi, a nominee of Stalin. (He had been freed from jail before the War on Stalin’s initiative after the Soviet Union returned old Hungarian flags captured by the Czar in 1849.) The Rakosi regime was severe ‘even by Stalinist standards.’ In 1953, he was summoned to Moscow, reprimanded and replaced by a reformist communist Imre Nagy.

A more intangible effect of 1956 arises with the spread of its talented diaspora. Many thousands of gifted Hungarians left their country and settled as far afield as Australia, the United States, and across Western Europe. The contributions they made to their adopted countries were incalculably beneficial. Nowhere have I heard the kind of objections to Hungarian refugees that one regularly encounters in relation to other refugee and asylum-seeking groups. To some degree this is because everyone knew what the Hungarians had fled from; they received instinctive sympathy. But it also reflects the performance of the Hungarians in their adopted countries. They assimilated well and quickly, and were soon more than repaying their hosts.

Even though assimilated, however, they were eloquent voices critical of communism and the Soviet empire. The eminence many soon achieved in their fields of scholarship and enterprise added weight to their criticisms. And in the United States especially, they formed the influential “captive nations” lobby with other émigré groups, to press for a realistic foreign policy and, in time, to provide Reagan with intellectual heft.

REFERENCES : International Relations By V.N. Khanna

Belarus: Escalating political tension and sanctions

Belarus is an overlooked country that is located east of Poland and south of Lithuania and Latvia. It is bordered by Russia in the East and also bordered by Ukraine in the South. The landlocked country has an area of 207,600 square kilometers (80,200 square mi) and a population of little over 9 million people. Belarus was one of the newest countries that were formed after the disintegration of the USSR in 1991.

Alexander Lukashenko was elected Belarus’s first president of Belarus in 1994. Since then he has held the position and has been governing the country for more than 25 years. Lukashenko’s style of governance has been deemed as authoritative as there have been no free elections since he got elected. He has maintained many of the Pre-Soviet policies and Belarus’s Democracy Index rating is the lowest in Europe. In the 2020 Belarusian elections, Lukashenko was declared the winner against the opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. The election was marred by allegations of widespread electoral fraud. Many western countries had demanded a re-run but that never happened. This also triggered mass protests across the major cities in Belarus. But to control the critics and protesters, the government reacted with brute force, arresting demonstrators and sending numerous protestors behind the bars.

In May 2021 the kidnapping of opposition journalist Roman Protasevich and his girlfriend, Sofia Sapega was another sign of the Belarusian government’s woes against any kind of critics. This was basically a state-sponsored hijacking of air piracy. This incident occurred on Ryanair Flight 4978 en route to Vilnius on May 23 when the plane was diverted to Minsk with a fake bomb threat from Belarusian air traffic control. After this violation of international aviation rules, both were arrested on questionable charges of organizing mass unrest.

Belarus has always swayed between Russia and the EU but recently European Union has imposed one of the toughest restrictions against Belarus. EU has blocked the sale or supply of major technology to Belarus, as well as restricted access to capital markets and trade in oil and potash. EU has also imposed airspace restrictions against Belarus. But any sanctions against Belarus must not target ordinary people. Because the land borders are already sealed off with Poland and Lithuania. The only viable option for Belarusian people was air travel. So this restriction will also affect the citizens of the country. To counter the problem of Potash sanctions, Lukashenko has struck a deal with his Russian business friend to create a new Potash mining and processing plant. But this will come at a cost of increased taxes for the individual citizens of Belarus amid the Covid-19 crisis and economic downturn. The United States has also imposed visa bans and other sanctions on 62 individuals who were identified as contributing to the Belarus crackdown.  

The citizens of Belarus deserve free Elections and a leader who can think about the citizens of the country instead of holding onto the power. With a progressive leader, Belarus could have been on par with the Baltic countries. The recent sanction might or might not work but in the end, the common citizens of the country suffer the most. 

References: