On December 18, 1986, Elie Wiesel accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo. He referred back to many people and brought up some memories of his life during the Holocaust. The first person he mentions in his speech is Andrei Sakharov. Andrei Sakharov was a Russian Nuclear physicist and won the Nobel Peace Prize himself, in 1975. Andrei Sakharov was awarded this prize because of his contribution towards human rights. However, the Soviet authorities had stopped him to travel to Norway and collect his award. Elie Wiesel references him during his speech because Sakharov had the same intentions Elie did. Elie stated during his speech, “To me, Andrei Sakharov's isolation is as much of a disgrace as Josef Biegun's imprisonment”. After Andrei Sakharov …show more content…
Wiesel addresses, “As long as one dissident is in prison, our freedom will not be true. As long as one child is hungry, our lives will be filled with anguish and shame”. Ellie Wiesel is conveying that there is always something that can be fixed or there is always someone who can be helped. Moreover Wiesel explains, “What all these victims need above all is to know that they are not alone; that we are not forgetting them, that when their voices are stifled we shall lend them ours, that while their freedom depends on ours, the quality of our freedom depends on theirs”. Elie Wiesel’s central message is that by speaking out for the powerless, an individual can make a great impact and that there are people in the society that depend on the voice of others. Weisel also states, “There is so much injustice and suffering crying out for our attention: victims of hunger, of racism, and political persecution, writers and poets, prisoners in so many lands governed by the Left and by the Right”. Weisel makes a point that if societies do not start to speak out against unethical actions, the people suffering will never be able to come out of the darkness and will always be confused on what action to take next. For this reason, Elie Wiesel makes a statement and a call to action that without the help of the people surrounding them, the individuals who are mistreated will never be free of their
“The Cry of the Restrained” “The world did know and remained silent…I swore never to be silent whenever wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation.” (Wiesel, Elie; “Hope, Despair and Memory”) This quote states, I shall not be silent and will rise up in any crisis to aid those in need; not aiding the oppressor(s). This speech demonstrates Wiesel’s point of view about human suffering and ideas to prevent or lessen the situation. And Wiesel achieves this via the use of third and first person and terminology.
In Elie Wiesel’s acceptance speech of 1986 he stated that “when human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Wherever men or women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must –at that moment – become the center of the universe.” Considering the events that occurred in World War I, such as the Holocaust, I strongly agree with Wiesel’s statement about making those who are endangered our priority. It is the duty of those who inhabit this world to protect and set the imprisoned free regardless the circumstances. If no one has the courage to step up and do something to help, the oppressor will end up believing that treating people unjustly and forbid them from their freedom is indeed right.
Every year since 1890 the Nobel prize is given to laureates for their breakthrough or preventions in certain categories. Yet out of all the laureates who were chosen the board of Nobel peace prize has made a surprising decision . That a Ultimate Nobel peace prize a prize only given to the bravest and most Nobel laureates will be given out to Elie Wiesel for speaking out against oppression and hate crimes. Since 1890 when Alfred nobel created this prize thousands of amazing people have one in multiple categories like Medicine, Chemistry,peace, mathematical,and literature.
Wiesel explains, it is “easier” to avoid “victims” as it can be “troublesome” to be “involved” in one’s “pain” and “despair” (para. 8.) Wiesel asks us, “Is it necessary at times to practice it simply to keep one’s sanity, live normally, enjoy a fine meal and a glass of wine, as the world around us experiences harrowing upheavals?” Wiesel's warning, if taken by heart, can save many individuals who face unnecessary pain everyday. As his speech concludes it acquires a more buoyant tone in the future as individuals. As a nation we have the decision to resist and evolve as a nation for the better of
In the East room of the White House during the 12th of April 1999, Elie Wiesel, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and a Holocaust survivor, elaborates in his hopeful speech, “The Perils of Indifference,” the apathy of the American government to the sufferings of the people victimized by the tragic past to show how indifference can cause misery to other people. By stating his personal experiences, questioning his audience, and by citing proofs and facts, he was able to appeal to his audience emotionally and logically; thus, conveying his message of hope to welcome the new century and move them towards social action and away from indifference. Wiesel’s purpose is to share his experiences in order to remind the world, not just his audience, that people
The speech Elie Wiesel gave on April 12th, 1999, Perils of Indifference, portrays the same message but mainly in three different ways. The first was his use of a lot of rhetorical questions. These were used in the topics of legacies, philosophies, and questioning the actions of President
In 1956 he moved to New York to meet the United Nations and became a citizen of the U.S.A. in 1963. Wiesel won the Nobel Peace Prize and was a professor at Boston University. He worked much of his adult life in favor of oppressed people. His personal experience of the Holocaust has allowed him to use his talents as a writer , teacher and storyteller to defend human rights and peace throughout the
Nobel Peace Prize-Winning Author, Elie Wiesel, in his sympathetic speech, “The Perils of Indifference,” warns people about the dangers of indifference. He supports his claim by describing a scenario with a young Jewish boy and him being saved by American soldiers from a concentration camp. Wiesel also supports his claim by telling a story about how indifference is worse than anger and hatred through descriptive words. He finally uses imagery to give us a descriptive image of what indifference could do for the future. Wiesel’s purpose is to warn people of the danger of indifference in order to inform people of all the harm indifference can because.
Elie Wiesel makes a speech that was very intense. Is speech was so powerful that the people just had to listen. He made two very important statements in this speech. These two statements were probably the strongest points of this speech.
In the speech, titled “The Perils of Indifference,” Elie Wiesel showed gratitude to the American people, President Clinton, and Mrs. Hillary Clinton for the help they brought and apprised the audience about the violent consequences and human suffering due to indifference against humanity (Wiesel). This speech was persuasive. It was also effective because it conveyed to the audience the understanding of
Kamalpreet Kaur 10/25/2015 2nd period English 11 Final Draft Essay Night by Elie Wiesel is a Holocaust memoir about his experience with his father in the Nazi German concentration camps in Auschwitz and Buchenwald in 1944–1945. Elie Wiesel was born in Sighet, Transylvania on September 30th, 1928. On December 10, 1986, in the Oslo City Hall, Norway, Elie Wiesel delivered The Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech. Elie Wiesel is a messenger to a variety of mankind survivors from The Holocaust talked about their experiences in the camps and their struggle with faith through the
Wiesel’s speech shows how he worked to keep the memory of those people alive because he knows that people will continue to be guilty, to be accomplices if they forget. Furthermore, Wiesel knows that keeping the memory of those poor, innocent will avoid the repetition of the atrocity done in the future. The stories and experiences of Wiesel allowed for people to see the true horrors of what occurs when people who keep silence become “accomplices” of those who inflict pain towards humans. To conclude, Wiesel chose to use parallelism in his speech to emphasize the fault people had for keeping silence and allowing the torture of innocent
When the young boy asks, “Who would allow such crimes to be committed? How could the world remain silent”, (paragraph 5) again the audience is prompted to emotionally respond. They have to realize that it was all of them, all of us, who remained silent and that this silence must never happen again. Wiesel demonstrates a strong use of pathos throughout his speech to encourage his audience to commit to never sitting silently by while any human beings are being treated
In seeing human beings as less than human beings, individuals were able to treat one another with a lack of dignity and voice. Wiesel 's work reminds us that anytime voice is silenced, dehumanization is the result. This becomes its own end that must be stopped at all
The obvious activist voice in these paragraphs show how much Elie wanted to change how people ignored others. Elie Wiesel wrote these passages to explain his point about not being indifferent, because to him, nothing could stifle progress as much as not