Analysis Of Elie Wiesel's Perils Of Indifference

Many people wonder how could horrible things be aloud to happen. When people simply do not care, what can be the result? Indifference is the defining word that describes people who have a lack of interest, concern, or even sympathy. In Elie Wiesel’s “Perils of Indifference” speech, he is conveying that indifference is worse than “hate” or “anger” (Wiesel 311). In 1999, Wiesel presented a very strong emotionally spoken speech to President Clinton, other members of Congress, friends, and other officials from around the world in an attempt to connect to the audience’s emotions and to help people understand more about indifference. He delivered this speech to inspire the American people to take action in times of human suffering and violence

in order to prevent events like the Holocaust from happening again in the future. He uses personal experience as well as pathos and ethos throughout his speech to confront his audience on their resolve to change.
Elie Wiesel is a noted author, political activist and holocaust survivor.

Wiesel endured much horrors in the world and he has worked his entire life to help get rid of hatred and ignorance from the world. “Fifty-four years ago to the day, a young Jewish boy from a small town in the Carpathian Mountains woke up, not far from Goethe's beloved Weimar, in a place of eternal infamy called Buchenwald. He was finally free, but there was no joy in his heart. He thought there never would be again” (Wiesel 310). This quote from Wiesel’s speech is located at the very beginning of his speech because he wants to build credibility with his audience. He is showing that he had first hand experience of being in the Holocaust. It allows the audience to visualize a young Wiesel being part of the Holocaust having dealt with the pain, punishment, and starvation. Wiesel describes himself as a Jewish boy “without joy in his heart” because even though he finally had his freedom, he felt much compassion from the American soldiers. This quote lets the audience know what the speaker went through and how it affected his world view. Elie Wiesel is a good source to hear about indifference towards World War II from because he lived through it. This quote impacts the meaning of the speech because its lets the audience know a little background information on what happened to Wiesel and we know that what he is saying is truthful because he tells us about what he saw, what he was thinking, and

what happened to him afterwards.
Wiesel appealed to the ideology of his audience in order to persuade of the dangers of indifference.

One of these ways included respecting the First Amendment right of freedom of religion. Wiesel recalls how it felt to be the subject of apathy, and the reason it might have been the indifference of God that was the most troublesome to reconcile with, “We felt that to be abandoned by God was worse than to be punished by Him” (Wiesel 311). He is distinctly using strong feelings and Gods name because he is reaching out to certain people in the audience who are understanding of religious beliefs. By associating himself with his religion, Wiesel took advantage of the ideological acceptance of freedom of religion; an acceptance taken seriously by his particular audience. His solid point of view and morals closes this paragraph with the strong and unforgettable statement, “Man can live far from God – not outside God. God is wherever we are. Even in suffering? Even in suffering” (Wiesel 311). The meaning of this quote restates Wiesel’s values and strong religious beliefs.  Wiesel recalls with great detail the hopelessness and desolation that people could not resist while the holocaust changed millions of people lives. Wiesel is recalling the sense of abandonment that the jews endured. The jews in the concentration camps were puzzled over the evil that the Nazi’s inflicted upon them, but what they found most difficult to accept was indifference of God. This quote can be

directed at the people in the audience whom most believe in some form of religion. Invoking the thought of abandonment from your God is by far the worst form of punishment any person can endure. The thought of being tortured and even killed and having no where to go after death, since God had abandoned them, is horrible to think about. This statement also shows that Wiesel used the rhetorical appeal of pathos to enhance his point that indifference can be as dangerous as hostility. By addressing his audience and ideologies, Wiesel effectively conveyed his firm belief that effective action must be taken in order to inhibit the trauma induced by indifference.
There is repetition of ethos in Wiesel’s speech when he refers back to the little Jewish boy in the mountains. Since he wants his audience and readers to feel empathy, he uses repetition in his speech. He wants them to feel like what happened is completely wrong and it should never happen anywhere else in the world at whatever expense. Wiesel states at the end of his speech, “And so, once again, I think of the young Jewish boy from the Carpathian Mountains. He has accompanied the old man I have become throughout these years of quest and struggle. And together we walk towards the new millennium, carried by profound fear and extraordinary hope” (Wiesel 313). From an adolescent kid trapped in a concentration camp, to an old man seeing various acts of indifference; Elie Wiesel wants his audience to understand the message he has toward the future of humanity. By efficiently using distinct tones and emotional pause, Wiesel’s clear message is to indifferent is to be inhuman. He does conclude his speech in a positive note by including himself in his audience, using words like “we”. This is effective because the conclusion focuses on how indifference has to be resolved. So Wiesel putting himself back into the audience at this point shows that he’s not pointing fingers at people, he is showing that he needs to improve also.
In conclusion Elie Wiesel did a remarkable job tying together whom he was speaking to and who he was actually trying to reach by using effective language. This speech really shows how inspirational Elie Wiesel really is. He does a remarkable job trying to show people how they do need to change in order to better themselves, their lives and the world. The author brings his audience back to the past by re-telling his story at the end, but the point he is trying to make is that we need to fight for the present, so we don’t allow these atrocities to happen again. By the end of his speech Wiesel persuades his audience to help fight to protect human rights. His great speech concludes with hope in the future. Wiesel persuades his audience to believe that the indifference is wrong and is to be avoided in the future millennium.