|
|
From Auschwitz to Oslo: The Journey of Elie Wiesel
| Article
# : |
12224 |
|
|
Section : |
MODERN THOUGHT
|
| Issue
Date : |
2 / 1987 |
2,944 Words |
| Author
: |
Michael Berenbaum
|
The announcement from Oslo - only hours after Yom Kippur had ended - that Elie Wiesel had been awarded the 1986 Nobel Prize for Peace may have come as a surprise to most Americans, but to American Jews, the award seemed natural. The world had recognized what they had long known, that this child of the Holocaust, who had transformed a boy's memories of evil and destruction into eloquent testimony on behalf of the Jewish people - and all oppressed people - was the world-class spokesman for compassion, decency, and human dignity.
Students of American Jewry know that Wisel has attained a unique stature within the American Jewish community. With the passing of Martin Buber and Abraham Joshua Heschel, Wisel represents Jewish history and values to Jews and non-Jews alike. He is widely revered by all elements of the American Jewish community. "An icon of American Jewry's new religion Holocaust and Israel," remarked one nameless detractor, with anger and envy as well as with respect. He is also viewed by gentiles as the one non-Israeli embodiment of the Jewish people for this generation.
Wiesel is an unusual figure among American Jewish leaders. Neither the leader of an organization nor the head of a movement, he has no institutional base. Unlike Jacob Neusner or the late Gershom Scholem, he has not defined a field of scholarship. Although employed by a university (Wiesel is Andrew Mellon distinguished Professor of the Humanities at Boston University), he has not built a base of power within the academic community. Widely regarded as a spokesman for Israel, he is deliberately not an Israeli and stands apart from partisan Israeli politics. In Israel, he is regarded by many as a yored, one who has left Israel and abandoned the quest for a national Jewish renaissance in the ancient homeland. The one institutional base he did enjoy was as chairman of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council is rather problematic, and Wiesel is often ambivalent and uncomfortable in his institutional role - most especially where it conflicted with his stance as an individual. He is perhaps the only Jewish leader who speaks with the charisma of a person unaided by the power of office. Aloof from politics, he stands above the fray that consumes more ordinary Jewish leaders.
He also is shielded from criticism. Few organizationally affiliated Jews will take him on directly or go on the record with their backbiting comments. His role is too significant and he is too irreplaceable in American Jewry. Only in the Yiddish press in America and in the Hebrew press in Israel is Wiesel attacked openly - often with abandon.
Although he has influenced theologians - Jewish and gentile - Wiesel is also not a religious figure in any ordinary sense. Rabbis lead their congregations, speak from their pulpits, and are ordained by a tradition. Hasidic masters have a court and a community, disciples and students, followers and supporters. They counsel their community and exercise complete authority over their followers. Theologians propose new religious interpretations and command authority by virtue of their teaching. Wiesel has been called a nonorthodox rebbe, the leader of a diverse group of admirers and followers, yet he does not exercise authority in any direct way. His teaching - as Robert MacAfee Brown, John Roth, and I have shown in Elie Wiesel: Messenger For All Humanity, A Consuming Fire, And The Vision Of The Void, respectively - are open to diverse interpretations, depending upon the background of the critic. Yet like a Hasidic master,
...
Read Full Article
|
|
