Oct 28 2009
Blog 6: Do those, like Art Spiegelman, who did not experience the Holocaust or other atrocities have the authority or right to write about them?
REMEMBER: We have blog leaders again, so you have to wait until they respond before the rest of you can respond to them!
Blog Leader SAAM-1:
I think that it is alright for people who did not actually experience the events to write about them. Especially in cases such as that of Art Spiegelman. He was merely writing what his father told him, and his father actually did experience the Holocaust. Everything he wrote was based on what his father said. It would be nearly the exact same as if his father wrote the book instead. So I think that it is alright.
-Mattbray
Blog Leader SAAM-2:
I think that it is definately alright for people who did not experience the Holocaust or other things to write about them. I think it is best when they know someone who has been through such things so they can get an accurate story told, instead of things they think happen. More people will read something they know is factual and that someone has experienced and has been written about. I do not think that they are obligated to write about it, but that they definately have the authority.
-bradyjensen86
Blog Leader 14- 1:
I think that they have a right to write about them. It’s a historical event, anyone can write about it. I think its a matter of how well it is taken up by the literary community. If you have a religious activist who is all about the word of God writing about Gay rights, it might seem a little contradictory and a little less credible. It just doesn’t seem to go well together. Art Spiegelman on the other hand experienced this is a second nature, sort of. It was his father who went through it, so he wasn’t completely ignorant about it. If things such as this cant be written by one person and ONLY the survivors then it brings up the question: what can anyone write? we will only have to stick t what we know in writing and that is part of the fun of writing- expanding your experience and knowledge and allowing ohers to read it for themselves and form their own opinion about what you have written. I’ll use this for example because it is widely known and i think it’s perfect: Twilight. According to the author, her vampires sparkle in the sun, but according to other writer (such as Anne Rice) they burn in the sun or are hurt tremendously. Its a matter of opinion and how you want others to see it. Now does that mean one is better than the other? no. So, i think anyone should be able to write about whatever they so choose, if they experience it or not. it’s not WHAT they write, but HOW they write it.
-mtrunik
Blog Leader SAAM-3:
I agree with Mattbray, I don’t think it should matter whether you have first-hand experience with a certain occurrence in history in order to write a book about it. Although if you do write about a historical event I believe it should be factual, in my opinion Art Spiegelmen did the right thing by getting perfect background experience (his father). So yes from me!
-jonjones
Blog Leader 10-1:
If people who didn’t experience something don’t write about it then we would have much less stuff to read. There isn’t going to be anyone living that was alive in the middle ages but someone has to write about it. In the case of Maus he was taking the information directly from his father. From the reading I would say there is no way his father would have wrote about it on his own. That does not go to say that everyone should write about everything. I would go on writing books about philosophy because I don’t know about it. If Hitler wrote a book about the holocaust from the Jews point of view it wouldn’t be very credible. Which is what it all comes down to, Credibility. Some people are qualified to write about certain things some people are not.
-garrywhitely
Blog Leader 10-2:
I believe people do have the right to write about whichever topic they desire. Because they are writing about historical events really puts the author at risk for the big question of being credible. I do not doubt that people will question the writings of these authors; but the importance’s of it, and where they are getting the information from is what makes them have a right. For instance in Maus; Art Spiegelman shows the world a graphical view of the Holocaust through his father’s eyes. In my mind that is an important experience to tell and more personable than a text book.
-KimberlySpicer
Blog Leader SAPM-1:
I think he should have rights to write about Holocaust. Because everyone should be allowed to write about anything they want. Art got the story for his book from a man who has experienced the Holocaust. Which makes it totally fine for him to write a story about it. If people stopped writing about what they haven’t experienced then we wouldn’t have many books to read. There would not be many fiction stories and reading would be extremely boring. As long as the writer is not making stuff about something that has really happened, I believe that the writer should have rights to write about it.
-tigerjz32
Blog Leader SAAM 4:
Everyone has got the right to share their own voice and opinion. I think its definately okay to Art to have written that book, it was an amazing book! If Art didn’t write it, nobody would know the story because there is no way his father would ever have written it. Most Holocaust survivors try to avoid reliving their past (writing about their life would make them relive it), so somebody has got to write it down for them, right?
-lisacash
Blog Leader 02-1:
I believe that it truly depends on the situation. In the case of Art Spiegelman I feel that he does have the authority to write about the Holocaust because his father did, and in turn it did affect the relationship with his father because it changed who his father was. He got the stories and first hand experiences directly from someone who had gone through it. On the other hand there are some people out there that write about the Holocaust and other events that happened throughout history that should not be writing about it. They either do not have a personal experience about it or do not do enough research on it and in turn end up shedding the improper light on the subject.
Do those, like Art Spiegelman, who did not experience the Holocaust or other atrocities have the authority or right to write about them?”
-tyleradams1
Blog Leader-14-2:
I think that Art Spiegelman does have the right to write about things in the Holocaust even though he did not experience it because he has the right to share a survivors story that is no longer living. For him to raise awareness about it and share one individuals story in a way that is able to reach people our age in a graphic novel is very respectable. Since it hit him so hard to the point that he was physically and mentally depressed. If he felt that way just living the story onto a page, do you think it was a good idea for us to read it? If we can feel at least an ounce of what the survivors felt at that time, then I think it is a good idea for stories to be shared that way.
-silkedayley
Blog Leader 2-2:
I think it is ok to write about the holocaust even if they were not involved in it. Art Speigleman had good information due to his father being in it that being ok. I dont agree on people writing about it if they have no facts and they just look up what others have written about it and make their own story or whatnot. So if they have family or someone they know were involved with or actually a jew in the holocaust they do have a right to write about it.
-carissaakohley
