• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Günter Grass

eyez0nme

eyez0nme

New Member
Talk about a hypocrite:

Nobel Prize-winning author Günter Grass has shocked Germany by admitting that he was a member of Hitler's SS during World War II. Gass, a liberal writer, has written many books about coming to terms with the events of World War II and the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis. He is a national hero.
Germany was rocked by the revelations last night that Günter Grass, its greatest living author and doyen of the Left, was a member of Hitler's elite Waffen-SS. The Nobel laureate, who has been the country's moral guide for decades, admitted in an interview published today that he became a member of the infamous Nazi corps at the age of 17.

The 78-year-old said he was driven by feelings of guilt to reveal the details of his "shameful" past in his autobiography, Peeling the Onion, due to be published next month. "It was weighing on my mind. My silence over all these years is one of the reasons why I decided to write this book. I forced myself to do it," he told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper. Asked why he was breaking his silence after more than 60 years, Grass said: "It had to come out finally." He added: "It will stain me forever."

*****

He did not give any details as to whether he knew whether his division, the 10th Tank Division Fundsberg was involved in any atrocities, but claimed that he never fired a single shot. He stressed his youthful naivety, and his desperation to get out of the corps because he found it gruelling. "It was very hard. It was all there was. The only question you asked was: 'How do I get out of it?' So I infected myself with jaundice, but that only helped for a few weeks. Then the grind began again and an inadequate training with ageing equipment. In any case, I had to write about it." He said his feelings of guilt developed only in later years. "It was always combined with the question: 'Could you not have realised at that point what was happening to you?'"

Grass, the author of dozens of plays and 11 novels, the most famous of which, The Tin Drum, is an examination of wartime Germany, has long been seen as the embodiment of the German zeitgeist. Throughout his career he has famously criticised those unwilling to deal with Germany's Nazi past.
Click to expand...
 
Hypocrisy

Unfortunately there is no other word for it.

But tell me, does it really bother you that much? Unless you are German, why should it matter to you?

Mr. Grass has understandably upset German people because his work and his moral posturing directly condemn the German people and their guilty past.

Being from Portugal, I can easily ignore the preaching and just enjoy his work for what it is: literature.
 
I could be wrong about this, but I was under the impression that that information was NOT unknown, just never addressed publicly. I feel it took a lot of guts to come out with it publicly, knowing what the result would be. When I was seventeen, I was graduating high school and throwing out my last pair of hot pants.
 
I think the information was unknown, but available to public. I read in the newspapers that an insurance company had access to the documents, I believe back in the '70s.

And the Der Spiegel newspaper published the documents three days after Mr. Grass came out publicly. That was a bit quick, wasn't it?

I just find it strange that no one in sixty years ever bothered to look into Germany's most famous modern writer. Not even his biographer checked it out, which I think is sloppy work for a biographer. He said Grass never told him, but I think a biographer's job is exactly to find out what you're not being told :D
 
Heteronym said:
Being from Portugal, I can easily ignore the preaching and just enjoy his work for what it is: literature.
Click to expand...

I wish I could do that. The moment I hear something bad about any author I like, it immediately makes me think less of their work. Even when it's something completely trivial, like they hate my favourite flavour of marmelade or something.
 
Well, you'd better not tell me what writers you like, for I'm sure I could easily find some dirt on each one, the poor guys being humans and all :D

If I thought like that I couldn't read TS Eliot, Ezra Pound, John dos Passos, Knut Hamsun, Gabriel García Márquez, and so many more. Some writers' mistakes are more easily forgivable than others. Mr. Grass joining the SS at the age of 17, considering the time and place, should be more forgivable than an adult Pound writing anti-semitic speeches for Mussolini or Mr. Eliot's suggestion that there should be a 'limited number of intelligent Jews' :rolleyes:

I just try to separate the man from the work.
 
I didn't say I wouldn't read them, it's just at the back of my mind would be whatever terrible thing they've done and it would inevitably lessen my enjoyment of the work. For example, Bertie Wooster's antics seemed somehow less funny when I heard about PG Wodehouse's collaboration with the Nazis, but then I read George Orwell's defence of him (the gist of which is that he was as stupid as Wooster when it comes to politics) and I was ready to visit the Drones club again. ;)

As for Grass, I completely agree that joining the Waffen SS in his circumstances was forgiveable - I doubt he'd be alive today if he had refused. But to keep it a secret for 60 years whilst preaching to his countrymen to be open about their past really is about as hypocritical as it gets.

I think separating the man from the work is exactly the right thing to do. I just find it difficult to do that myself.
 
Interesting that whenever a writer sides with the wrong politics, he's just politically naive or stupid. Writers are so clever about some things, but can't read newspapers and add two and two to make four :rolleyes:

I wouldn't know about PG Wodehouse's case, but Pound's fascination with Fascism surely comes from his fascination with classicism. Fascism was the modern embodiment of the Roman Empire; I can imagine that Pound would love all the revival of an ancient world that influenced a lot of his work.

Writers, like political leaders, suffer from being seen as super-human creatures, morally superior to everyone else, wiser and deeper. And when the truth comes up, everyone is shocked that they're flawed just like everyone else. The fact is, writers are by definition just good at writing. It doesn't mean they can't genuinely see Fascism, Soviet Communism or Fidel Castro as great things, or that they're naive about them :eek:
 
Heteronym said:
Writers, like political leaders, suffer from being seen as super-human creatures, morally superior to everyone else, wiser and deeper. And when the truth comes up, everyone is shocked that they're flawed just like everyone else. The fact is, writers are by definition just good at writing. It doesn't mean they can't genuinely see Fascism, Soviet Communism or Fidel Castro as great things, or that they're naive about them :eek:
Click to expand...

I think some are naive, others knowingly and proudly support causes but it still doesn't mean they can't write or in the case of other artists create.

What concerned me about the Grass case was that people were suggesting that he be stripped of the prize once the information came to light which I believe is a nonsense.

I think the idea of good literature is self policing. Good writing will only be judged as good if it is. (if that make sense). If someone writes something which is merely racist, sexist, whateverist propaganda and drivel then most sensible readers will reject it out of hand.

The work should be judged on its own merits not the merits of its author. otherwise where would we draw the line abnd who would make the judegement?
 
This is such an interesting thread and I'm wondering if, through all the years of his taking a moralist stance and admonishing Germans about not facing their pasts, he was trying to come to terms with his own culpability. Seems rather obvious now that he may have been given extra voom toward writing on this subject because of his own situation. I don't think a 78 year old writer can be judged by his long ago actions. Aren't we all constantly in process? Maybe the important thing is his work, like Heteronym says. I find it really difficult to judge people like this, especially since he was 17 and not an adult.
 
I am German and frankly, I don't care about Grass's past. Many people in Germany are very overreacting. I wonder what they would have do if they were in WW II. It's easy to jugde now, but at WW II people didn't have much of a choice. Grass took a big opportunity and I doubt that he realised what "Waffen-SS" really meant. People were brainwashed, and it was not easy for 17 years old to see the cruel truth like Sophie and Hans Scholl did (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Scholl).
 
Most people in hindsight say they wouldn't have joined the Nazis. But of course they weren't there, inside that society, to understand it was inescapable. It's very easy to seem morally superior now, but I doubt these people would have the courage to really die for their convictions :rolleyes:

I regret the lies; I think coming forward sooner would only have given more authority to his books' preaching. It's easy to denounce Nazism; any sensible people would do that after the war. But Grass would have been a former Nazi who had admitted, repented, adopted a pacifist stance and spoken for truth. In essence, Grass's work is important: he showed how Nazism easily won the minds of most people when everyone in the post-war days was trying to give the illusion that German folks were unwilling partners of a madman. For that Grass will always be important.
 
To Flor and Mafalda: I think you've missed the point. Nobody in Germany or anywhere else is criticising Grass for having been a member of the Waffen SS (at least, nobody with any sense. But for the grace of God we could all have been in that position). The real question is why he didn't admit this for 60 years afterwards, even as he built his post-war career on telling others to come clean about their past.
 
Well, I must admit I never read a book written by Grass even though I bought the "Danziger Trilogie" years ago. So I can not really discuss this matter because I don't know what he says in his books.
 
Wintergreen said:
To Flor and Mafalda: I think you've missed the point. Nobody in Germany or anywhere else is criticising Grass for having been a member of the Waffen SS (at least, nobody with any sense. But for the grace of God we could all have been in that position). The real question is why he didn't admit this for 60 years afterwards, even as he built his post-war career on telling others to come clean about their past.
Click to expand...

I think we've left it pretty clear on this thread that it makes him a hypocrite :D

I don't think there's really any convicing explanation. If he spent 60 years preaching to German people to face their past, then he should have admitted his SS role.

Do you think it would harder for an artist, someone supposedly more sensitive and complex (I like Romantic cliches about writers :rolleyes: ) than normal people, to confess being part of something that goes against all the ethical preceits that artists are expected to uphold as part of their role as conscience of Mankind? I'm tempted to think so :D
 
Heteronym said:
Unfortunately there is no other word for it.

But tell me, does it really bother you that much? Unless you are German, why should it matter to you?

Mr. Grass has understandably upset German people because his work and his moral posturing directly condemn the German people and their guilty past.

Being from Portugal, I can easily ignore the preaching and just enjoy his work for what it is: literature.
Click to expand...

That sounds very ignorant. I am not German, but I have many jewish friends. Some of them were born DESPITE people like Mr. Grass. I love my jewish friends (may be one day I will marry one of them :) and I can not imagine that they just could be not born at all! I think that not ANY prize could be given to such a person. May be they should be in prison and write their literature from there. At least the world would be FAIR.

You could also say about somebody (hypethetic): OK, that guy known to have raped and killed, but did not he change? Does not he write a wonderful literature? OK, if he would damage any of YOUR family you would speak differently, would not you?
 
If a Nazi get the Nobel Price than what is about O.J. Simpson? Here in this link however people were less supportive about even reading the Simpson's book:
http://www.bookandreader.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12427

But if you think that for a good peace of literature (if it might come out as such) a criminal can get a Nobel Prize, so can Mr. Grass. Crime is a crime, there is no such think as a "better crime" or "worse crime". and nazis are criminals. They murdered systematically millions of innocent people, including kids! Wake up, people, what's the matter with you?
 
The waveguide said:
If a Nazi get the Nobel Price than what is about O.J. Simpson? Here in this link however people were less supportive about even reading the Simpson's book:
http://www.bookandreader.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12427

But if you think that for a good peace of literature (if it might come out as such) a criminal can get a Nobel Prize, so can Mr. Grass. Crime is a crime, there is no such think as a "better crime" or "worse crime". and nazis are criminals. They murdered systematically millions of innocent people, including kids! Wake up, people, what's the matter with you?
Click to expand...

I don't think that's a fair comparison. Grass was part of the generation (born in the twenties) who were indoctrinated into Nazi society at a very young age when they surely didn't have the critical faculties to even think of resisting.

OJ Simpson, on the other hand, lives in a free country and whatever he did or didn't do was entirely his own choice.

Also, it is absurd to claim that there is no such thing as a "better crime" or "worse crime". Do you really believe that murder is no worse than shoplifting, for example? For the same reason, Grass's "crimes", such as they are, are not equivalent to those of the leaders of the Nazi regime.
 
It's not ignorance, it's detachment. The same detachment that allows me to enjoy Roman Polanski's movies, or Ezra Pound's poetry.

I just don't see what's the controversy here: Grass had no choice; Grass lived in a time and a place that did not allow him to have a choice. In so far as we know, Grass committed no crime; no Jews were left unborn because of him. And he has spent time in prison for his days in the army. He has devoted the rest of his life dealing with this subject through brilliant literature, which is what the Nobel Prize should be given for.

What is the problem?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top