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
52 responses so far
Create a free edublog to get your own comment avatar (and more!)
52 Responses to “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?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I think everyone has complete authorities or rights to write about the holocaust, it’s their view of looking at it and it just gives us more ways of looking at the holocaust . When you are writing something historic the biggest question arises is that is the information credible? and in Art’s case it most definitely is because he is getting the story straight from one of the survivors of holocaust (his dad).
Art might not have lived through the Holocaust, but he did live during the after math. Art lived with his dad and mom and because of this he did get to see first hand what the Holocaust could do to people. His dad was losing his mind and his mom later comitted suicide. Also, Art’s parents put a lot of guilt and pain on Art because he wasn’t there and he didn’t live through it. I think Art had the right to write his book because he got the whole true story from his dad, and he lived with his parents who were able to show and tell him what it was like during the Holocaust. Everyone has the right to write and say what they want. Even if he didn’t have the right he is not offending anyone by writing this book. Also, many surviovors don;t want to personally write their storie, so if people like Art write them for them then people all around the world will become more caught up on the Holocaust.
I think that it is ok for anybody to write about the holocaust as long as they are basing what they are saying off of some facts. Also I agree with Matt Bray because he is basing his whole story off of what his father told him, and his father knows first hand what happened.
I think it’s fine for anybody to write about the holocaust because either they had a family member that was in it and told them there story. And like what Harsh said its there views of the holocaust, why cant they write about it? And it gives you another way to look at it. I fully agree with Harsh.
Personally, I do not think Spiegelman was in the wrong for writing about the holocaust, simply because he was accredited and used a reliable, primary source– his father. I mean, think about it, the majority of nonfiction, historical stories are written by a second- or third- hand account. . . When using these secondary sources, however, we must be skeptical in what we believe to be factual or false. Art Spiegelman is a well respected author, as are many other nonfiction writers, so as far as him be having the “authority”, well, that was granted by his father when he bagan to share his story.
Those like Art i believe have a right to write about it because his book was all that his father told him about his experience of going through that. He recorded his father telling him the story and then wrote his book by doing that. People who maybe didn’t have that connection with a survivor their books just might be a different point of view maybe from journals and stories that they’ve been told. But i do believe that they still have a right to write a book about it, it’s their view of how it happened.
I think that one should be allowed to express their ideas. In such a sensitive subject as the holocaust you have to be careful not to offend others, but discussion is how we come to conclusions and find the answer closest to the truth when there isn’t a definite answer.
I think that anyone has the right to write about everything they want. Just like it says in the constitution we have the freedom of press. It doesn’t matter if you went through it or not especially in Art’s case where he is using a primary source for his writing.
I think that it is important for people that did not live through the holocaust to keep telling its story because when all of the people who did go through it die off, we wont forget what happened. This is important if we ever want to stop genocide and persecution.
I think if the information is acurately presented than it’s lagit. In Arti’s case he was writing about much more than just the holocaust, he was writing about the affects of the holocaust on his family, with his multiple storylines he incorporated his relationship with his father and the felling associated with that; and his fathers story of the holocaust. In my opinion that is what made this book so interesting, it wasn’t just another survivors tale.
I don’t see any problems with Art writing down his father’s story. Art had the right to do that for his father. He also has the freedom to express the things that he wants to in his books. There might be some people who aren’t qualified to write about topics like the Holocaust, but Art was indirectly effected by it and he was justified in doing what he did. He knew what he was talking about. He didn’t just make up a story, it was based on something that really happened. I dont think he did anything wrong.
Based on what the topic of the book is, many times it doesn’t matter who is writing about an event, but I think that in the case of the Holocaust the authors need to base their writings on facts. I agree with Brady Jensen and Matt Bray, for Art Spiegelman to have someone who actually lived through the Holocaust helped his book so much. It doesn’t matter who is writing about an event but if it is historical then it needs to be based on the truth.
I think it’s okay for people to write about things they haven’t experienced. Everyone is allowed to have their own feelings and if they feel like expressing them through a book why shouldn’t they? It’d probably still be better if you did experience it though, that way you can show your own personal experiences.
I think people, like Art Spieglman, do have the right to write about the Holocaust. Art was merely telling his father’s story. Sometimes people can’t express their story in writing as well as they do in telling, so thats where writers come in, to help the person tell their story. Sometimes its too hard for a survivor to recall their story of the Holocaust and for them to have to think about it everyday, and write it down, would be a very difficult task. It would be a very painful process. So i definitely think people like Art Spieglman have the right to write about the Holocaust.
I agree with Mattbray and bradyjensen86. I think that it is appropriate for those who did not experience the holocaust first hand to write about it. I think that having individuals who were not directly involved express their views is beneficial because it adds more of a non-bias outlook. Those who were directly involved would obviously be more emotionally attatched to the issue. Also, when children of holocaust victims voice their opinions we gain a better understanding of the aftereffects the holocaust has created.
I believe it is okay for people that have not experienced the Holocaust to write about it. However, they need to have appropriate sources so that they are not just making things up and writing down their opinions instead of stating the facts. Before writing about the Holocaust they should at least talk to a person who has been through it before they write anything.
As long as the person writing about the event has done research and is knowledgeable on the subject than absolutley. If a person just writes about it and makes up facts and says things that they think are correct, then that is so not cool. If they are educated and had facts to back up what they are writing about then go right on ahead and write about what ever you want to. I agree with Blog Leader 2 – SAAM.
I agree that anyone should be able to write about history as long as what they are saying is accurate. If they have don’t their research, or if they have someone who experienced it telling them about it, then there is no reason why they shouldn’t be able to write about it.
I agree with Matt Bray and Brady Jensen. I think that it is fine for people, such as Art Spiegelman, to write about the Holocaust. Oftentimes, that is how people learn about events that have happened; they research a topic and write about it. As long as they cite their sources, I think that they have the right to write about almost anything.
I think that history will have some kind of impact, large or small on any of us, even those who do not experience it directly. I have not gone through anything close to the events of the holocaust, but even reading or learning about it has had an emotional effect on me, which I feel gives me a right to share how learning what I have has changed my ideas or perspectives in my life. If there is anything out there that is going to leave it’s mark on you in any way, you have the right to record it and share it with others. Even though Art was not there in the concentration camps with his father, the changes the holocaust rendered in Art’s father changed everything about the way he grew up and was raised. Because of the impact his father had on his life, his father’s story becomes a part of his story.
I think that it’s definatley a right for people to write about it! There’s people claiming the Holocaust didn’t even exist getting the story and true stories out to te public is thebest wayto get people informed. People’s accouts on stuff is history. They are history. The best way to reaccount history is to record it!
I think anyone can right about anything. I mean if you have knowledge about the subject that is accurate it shouldn’t really matter if you lived during it or if you have done it. As a writer experience is better than just reading up on stuff though but not a neccesity. Art at least had the first hand account of his father and he did live through the aftermath and heard about it his whole life. History needs to be recorded so we can learn from our mistakes.
I think it’s alright for Art to write about the Holocaust. If we don’t continue to write down the stories of the survivors, we will end up losing their amazing story of survival, just as we have lost the millions of people’s stories that did not survive the Holocaust. It was a dark time for humanity, and it needs to be written down by many people many times, so that we will never forget the darkest age of man. As humans, we learn from history, and if the stories are never written, we will undoubtedly forget them, and inevitably repeat them. Art had the authority to write about the Holocaust because he was writing down a survivor’s tale.
I agree with most everybody. Art Spiegelman did have a right to write about the Holocaust and his father’s story because he was getting it from the main source, Vladik Spiegelman. Who was involved in the holocaust and so everything in the story is based on fact. People need to hear about the holocaust and I’m sure there are few survivors that have the ability to write down their storyies. So somebody needs to do it. And as long as the author bases his book, article, comic, etc. on fact then I find nothing wrong with it.
I believe that all story tellers have the right to share what know, and with that right comes the responsibility to do so with integrity. If done correctly it offers different perspectives and it gives those a chance that need help telling their story to tell a great story. In the case of Art Spiegelmann, not only was he motivated because he did not want to let his father down; he also portrayed to his readers that this is his story too of where he came from and how he came to be who he is.
I think that it is alright as well for him or anyone else to write about the Holocaust. That is why we live in America and have the right to be free, so that we can write about whatever we want. I don’t feel we should only be able to write about it if we have to talked to someone that has actually experienced it although it would help. But i definitely think that before it is done it should be researched so that people don’t just write bull when they know nothing about it.
i agree with mtrunik. people have the right to wright about any thing they want. It is better if the person has experienced it first hand but it can still be good if they havent. Art had his dad to tell him what really happened, its not like he wrote a book about some made up character he wrote about his dad who was there.
I agree with Harsh because everyone has the right to write on their opinion. Art has even more of a right because he has a valid source from which he is getting his information. Even if someone were to write a complete lie about the holocaust it would be left up to someone if they want to publish such lies. As for writing people should be able to write and read what ever they want. People are still going to believe what they want.
I believe that Art has every right to write about it because he got all his facts straight because he had his father to give him specifics. He didn’t make anything up he made sure he got everything right, but also added his father’s own twist to it. And even if it was lies, like romansanchez says, he could publish it. Also I agree with romansanchez with people should be able to read/write whatever they want.
I agree with what Tyler Adams has written. It depends on the situation and what is being written. Art basically wrote a biography of his father’s life during the Holocaust and got the information from Vladek first hand. In a case like that, I believe there is no harm. On the other hand, if someone just decides to write about the Holocaust and has no first-hand background information, and not enough supporting evidence as to what they are writing, that isn’t the best information. I wouldn’t say it is wrong, because anyone can publish anything on the internet, but if one is trying to find reliable information about the Holocaust, they need to be careful where their sources are coming from.
I think that it can go either way with this issue, it really just depends upon the situation. And certainly everybody has a right to write about whatever they want, but the question of authority is a little different. However, I think that Spiegelman certainly has the authority to write about the holocaust, because he got the story and information directly from his father, who did experience it.
I agree with kimberlyspicer. I think that anybody has a right to right about whatever they want as long as they have credible sources to back up the information. In Art’s case he is writing about first hand experiences that his dad had during the Holocaust. As long as writers have good sources like that they have the right to write whatever they want as long as it is true and correct.
I believe that if you are inerested in somethin and have the knowledge to write about it than you should. As Kimberly Spicer said. Art had the information to go off of and the interest to wite about it all and not leave details out. I think he did the right thing of writing about it.
Of course Art has a right to write about something he has not experience first hand. If we were only allowed to write about events we went through then we wouldn’t have any history books and if authority is an issue then the fact that it is his father’s story gives him all the authority he needs.
I agree with lissa because i think that if they do have a reliable source and know somebody that they can get the information from it would be okay, but i don’t think it would be okay for someone to just write about it if they didn’t have reliable information.
I agree with silkedayley. I feel it is important for people to carry on the story of the holocaust. It’s a piece of history that should not be forgotten and the only way we can continue to study this event is by written and video documentation
I do not find any problems with someone who did not directly face these trials, writing about them. The holocaust was a horrible event that should not have happened and should not be repeated. If people can get out books and stories about what it was like, it can only help us to avoid a genocide like this is in the future.
I agree with the last blog leader carissakohley that as long as the information is correct, anyone has the right to write about such things as the holocaust. When the information begins to loose credibility, that is when the author looses the right to write about historical events. Nobody has the right to alter history, via writing.
i agree with mattbray. even though art didnt live through the holocaust he is still writing about someone who did, also he is writing about what that survivor told him so that make it ok. but if someone does write about the holocaust they should at least get an account from someone who did live though it so it is alright.
I believe he does have the right to write about the holocaust because he is getting all the right facts from someone who actually went through it.
Of course he does! The Holocaust did not just affect his father. It directly affected his childhood. His father dictated his actual, factual experiences to his son that wrote them down to be preserved. By getting some insight into his fathers life i think it helped Art understand why his father raised him how he did.
I think that all people deserve the right to write about the Holocaust. I agree with Harsh because hearing different perspectives about the Holocaust gives us more knowledge about the subject. I do not think it is appropriate for people to write about events like the Holocaust when they have no legitimate sources or facts about the subject.
I agree with bradyjensen86. The person writing down there past has the right to do that. The writer is writing down a story that must be saved so people in the future can actually know what the holosaust was like and not just make up what they think happened. But the writer has the rsponsibility of writing down the exact story that is being told. They need to accoritly record the story and not leave things out.
I believe that people that did not experience the Holocaust can have full authority to write upon it. However, their will be people writing false writings about the Holocaust, their point of view, some people write upon not believing it ever exsisted. That’s not right, but people will do that no matter what. Usually people do try to right about the Holocaust in their best detail, especially if their getting their stories from real survivors. Those are what make the best stories, but yes they should have authority to write about it.
I completely agree with the first response. I also think that the holocaust should be an open discussion for all people. It is a person’s way of expressing how the holocaust was viewed. In Maus, Art had authority because his dad was one of the survivors which makes him completly capable of speaking of the holocaust from his father’s point of view. Along with that, it also gives a variety of ways to look at the holocaust.
There are many cases in today’s society where news stories and books are based off of secondary sources. This is perfectly fine as long as the information is accurate. When Art Speiglman wrote Maus, he put the information from his father directly on to paper. This is how we know his story is true. Plus, a person doesn’t need the authority to write about a certain event. In English, we find topics we like and write about them. We don’t have to be experienced in these areas of information but we research the topic so we can learn more about it and write down accurate information for our audience.
I think that people can write about what ever they want as long as it is credible. Most of the stories that we have about the Holocaust are from people who didnt live through it, people who witnessed it from outside, or people who learned about it afterwards. Because Art wrote this book we have more information about what happened.
I think as long as their information is correct there shouldn’t be a problem. His father went through the War, and he passed a lot of the stories and information down to his son. It doesn’t make it less credible. It affected his childhood in a lot of ways, and the books he wrote afterwards help people everywhere learn about the Holocaust.
yes i do think that they should be able to write about the holocaust. Art had a lot of inside stories from his father that really added to liturature about the holocaust. I think as long as the facts are credible anyone who can contribute should be allowed to write about the holocaust
I believe those like Art do have a right to write about them. if there wasn’t any body like him then these stories would never get out. Others that have experienced them most likely don’t want to write about it because it brings up bad memories of their passed. that is why i think Art is doing the right thing so others like us could learn about others past.
of corse i agree. authority can kiss my butt if authority doesnt like what i have to say then they can mind their own business
Ya I think that he has plenty of authority, especially because a comes from a Jewish family that had to suffer through the hardships that were the holocaust. Anyone has the freedom to write and express their feelings. The first amendment says so.