VIDEO

Schindler's List. DVD (Widescreen). © Universal Studios, 1993. DVD released March 9, 2004. Running Time: Approximately 3 hours, 16 minutes.

REVIEW

Schindler’s List is an engrossing film, one sure to leave the viewer in a state of emotional turmoil. While happiness tends to be one condition missing from the spectrum of feeling, the viewer will certainly experience periods of apprehension, anger, despair, sadness, tension, revulsion, and perhaps even numbness. I recall vividly the feeling I had upon completion of my first screening of this work – I simply could not get it out of my head for a couple of weeks. I found it disturbing yet moving, and preoccupying my time as I mentally and emotionally waded through the events I’d seen depicted, and the themes that dominated the landscape of the film. Debriefing not only took time, but encouraged me to enhance my then-meager knowledge of the Shoah.

I have found that using this film with high school students is a powerful accessory to book study, but in no way should it be considered a vehicle for any teacher to just take the time off during the classroom showing. Students, even those with a fair grasp of the Holocaust and its themes, may find it difficult to keep up with the real-life machinations of Schindler, the black-marketeering Jews, the SS officers, the Jewish victims, etc. I find myself stopping the DVD after each scene early in the film to do a “check-up” on the students to make sure they are all following the events on the screen. For example, the opening sequence portrays a Jewish family standing around their kitchen table, lighting candles and singing. As the film rolls, the family disappears; the candles still burn, down and then finally out. The film fades from color to black and white, and the ending plume of smoke morphs into the belching of a locomotive’s smokestack. Perhaps (if you’ve seen this film) you’ve never considered this as important, but I feel it’s a summary of the entire film (and of the Shoah in general). Students need to be made aware of the metaphors and symbolism director Steven Spielberg used in creating this introduction to this project.

Oskar Schindler’s ethical character is brought into question in the initial scenes. We first see him dressing to go out on the town, and notice that he carries a great deal of money. We see how he butters up the SS men of Krakow, and later how he continues to bribe them for favors in return. His sexual appetite becomes apparent (I always send home a parental permission slip with this movie, despite the fact that most of the students who will view it in my classroom are over 17, the boundary for R-rated films. In it I note that there is nudity in the film, both of a sexual nature as well as in the context of the camps. Parents should also be apprised of the graphic violence.), and his amorality is overt as he sees no reason to debate the merits of paying Poles for labor versus using Jews more cheaply rented from SS “slave dealers”. We also see Schindler encounter Jewish black marketers, and learn the many places traffickers created to hide their goods. At the conclusion of each of these scenes, as stated, I check for student comprehension. I’ve found that even if everyone says they “get it”, there will be some poor soul who is completely befuddled with what has transpired.

As the film progresses so does the violence. Many of your students will be dismayed by what they see – I have had students return their permission slip, fully expecting to see the whole film, and ask to leave after the ghetto clearing scene and not come back until we are finished watching. Even though some might engage in watching today’s teen entertainment and have become somewhat desensitized to onscreen violence, their (hopefully) prior learning experiences with the Holocaust will put convey the horror of those specific events as portrayed in Schindler’s List that even survivor testimony can’t quite accomplish. The mind creates suppositions of images that the screen can bring to life. The violence of Schindler’s List becomes a very real and personal thing to the viewer, far removed from the fantasy/escapism of the aforementioned teen-geared movies (for those who find such oft-bloody films entertaining…). On those occasions when the timing works out such that a class period ends at or shortly after a moving portion of the video, such as when the SS has cleared the ghetto, one can hear a pin drop as the DVD player is shut off. I experienced a class one year when there were 2-3 minutes until the dismissal bell, I had stopped the film, and no one said a word. Do not underestimate the impact of a superior film to get a point across to your students.

As the film progresses, students will begin to sense the changes in Schindler. We see him soften his heart toward Stern, as he gives the accountant numerous “gifts” which Stern in turn uses to bribe the Jewish collaborators in charge of prison records. Stern becomes a player in generating the initial lists of Jews to be saved, working his way toward getting specific Jews in Schindler’s employ. Schindler is at first a reluctant hero, but feels nudged toward rescue as he comes to know certain Jews (or their stories) as individuals, and begins to experience their sufferings as a close witness to the ever-tightening Nazi noose. While we are left feeling that ultimately the bottom line continues to be just that – Schindler’s balance sheet for his factory must show the profit he craves – we see a Schindler who now has a more moral agenda. The middle part of the film establishes a dichotomy between this “new and improved” Oskar and the sadistic camp commandant, Amon Goeth. Scenes including Goeth are always edgy, tension-filled. We are “quick hit” with violence at times, at other times his actions play out longer, building the fear in our hearts as we wait on his climactic move. Of particular cinematic achievement is the 3-in-1 scene of the Jewish wedding, Schindler at the nightclub, and Goeth with Helen, his maid. Goeth’s monologue during that scene conveys the ingrained antisemitic views held by many in Europe at this juncture.

Overall, while there are historical events depicted in the film that have been called into question, it goes without saying that the film is an accurate depiction of events of the Shoah. If the teacher is willing to discuss material that competes with director Steven Spielberg’s telling of this story (see below), students will not only come away with an experience that they will remember, but of the nature of historiography as well. Rarely do we “know it all” when it comes to historical figures and their motivations or historical events, and the life and times of Oskar Schindler is no exception.

A note to the teacher: David Crowe published a new biography of Schindler in 2004. It bears attention, as this brief excerpt from the review found on amazon.com tells –

In contrast to the impression given by Steven Spielberg in "Schindler's List," Crowe discovered that the famous list was not compiled by Schindler but by one of his Jewish administrators, Marcel Goldberg. There is, Crowe reveals, a seamy side to this story. Aware that inclusion on the list could mean the difference between life and death, Jews bribed Goldberg to get themselves on it. In certain cases, entire families were listed, while people of lesser means were dispatched to Auschwitz and other camps (The Washington Post's Book World/washington post.com [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/ 081333375X/002-3580009-1957623?v=glance&n= 283155&s= books&v=glance – accessed November 17 2005]).

For a longer, alternative review of Crowe’s book, see below.

PASSAGE/QUOTE FOR CLASSROOM USAGE

Approximately 50 minutes into the film, there is a scene where Izthak Stern has forgotten his work papers, is arrested, and finds himself on a transport. Schindler has been made aware of the situation, and rushes to the terminal to get Stern off the train. Upon doing so, Schindler responds to Stern’s apology with the following quote –

“If I had arrived five minutes later, then where would I be?!?”

Pause the film at this point and ask your students to assess the character of Oskar Schindler at this juncture of the movie. This scene occurs shortly before the Krakow ghetto is cleared and the famous scene with the girl in the red coat takes place. Schindler was changed by this event in the film, and his attitude toward Stern and the Jews begins to soften. At the conclusion of the film, the instructor could again bring up the above quote, and ask your students to assess Schindler after the events of the latter part of the film. Use also the quote that Stern says to Schindler upon completion of the list:

“The list is an absolute good. The list is life.”

How does this statement relate to the statement by Schindler earlier in the film?

RATIONALE FOR USAGE/UNIT RELEVANCE

Schindler’s List has become one of the “films to show” in high school history and literature classes that deal with the Holocaust. As there are certainly some artistic liberties taken with the Schindler story, I would caution the teacher who considers using the film to discuss with your students a more recent study on the life of Oskar Schindler. See the book review below. Students will be interested to gain an alternative view of some of the details of Schindler’s life and actions, and the story of the List. While this may cause them to question the veracity of the Spielberg film, you can assure them that the scenes depicting Jewish persecution are accurate and took place numerous times in Europe during the Shoah years.

A Scholar's Book Adds Layers of Complexity to the Schindler Legend
November 24, 2004 By DINITIA SMITH

An authoritative new biography of Oskar Schindler, the German businessman who saved more than 1,000 Jews from the Nazis, clashes sharply with his idealized portrayal in the Oscar-winning 1993 Steven Spielberg movie "Schindler's List" and the 1982 historical novel by Thomas Keneally that inspired it. The Schindler who emerges in this latest account - based on interviews with Holocaust survivors and newly discovered papers, including letters stored in a suitcase by a mistresses - is far more flawed than the one depicted in the movie and novel. Even so, scholars say, the fresh revelations about Schindler's darker side cast his moral transformation and heroism into starker relief.

To begin with, there was no Schindler's List.

"Schindler had almost nothing to do with the list," said David M. Crowe, a Holocaust historian and professor at Elon University in North Carolina, whose book, "Oskar Schindler: The Untold Account of His Life, Wartime Activities and the True Story Behind the List," was published this fall by Westview Press.

In the film, Schindler, played by Liam Neeson, is shown in 1944 giving the Jewish manager of his enamelware and arms factory in Krakow, Poland, the names of Jewish workers to be taken to the relative safety of what is now the Czech Republic. But at the time, Mr. Crowe said in a telephone interview, Schindler was in jail for bribing Amon Göth, the brutal SS commandant played by Ralph Fiennes in the film. And the manager, Itzhak Stern (Ben Kingsley), was not even working for Schindler then.

Mr. Crowe said that there were nine lists. The first four were drawn up primarily by Marcel Goldberg, a corrupt Jewish security police officer and assistant to an SS officer in charge of transporting Jews. (Goldberg was later accused of accepting bribes and of favoritism.) Schindler suggested a few names, Mr. Crowe said, but did not know most of the people on the lists. The authors of the other five lists are unknown.

Mr. Crowe said the legend of "the list" arose partly from Schindler himself, to embellish his heroism. He was trying to win reparations for his wartime losses, and Yad Vashem, the Jewish Holocaust memorial organization in Jerusalem, was considering naming him a "righteous gentile," an honor given to someone who risked death to save Jews.

Those he saved further enhanced the legend because "they adored him," Mr. Crowe said, "and they protected him."

No one doubts that Schindler, an ethnic German born in what was then Austria-Hungary, was a moral hero, but the revelations add deeper texture to his story.

It has long been known that Schindler was a spy for German counterintelligence in the late 1930's, but he played down those activities. Yet Mr. Crowe said that Czech secret police archives refer to Schindler as "a spy of big caliber and an especially dangerous type." Mr. Crowe also said that Schindler compromised Czechoslovak security before the Nazi invasion and was imprisoned. Later, the Czechoslovak government tried to prosecute him for war crimes. Schindler was also the de facto head of a unit that planned the Nazi invasion of Poland.

Schindler, a big, charming man, was a drinker and womanizer, as depicted in the novel and film. But Mr. Crowe said that he also had two illegitimate children whom he ignored.

There were also rumors, briefly mentioned in the book and film, that after Schindler moved to Krakow in 1939 as a carpetbagger following the Nazi invasion, he stole Jewish property and ordered Jews beaten. Although the charges were unproven, Mr. Crowe discovered that Yad Vashem was so concerned that it delayed designating Schindler a righteous gentile. The film's epilogue says Schindler was named in 1958, 16 years before his death in 1974. But Mr. Crowe found that he was officially named in 1993, after Yad Vashem learned that Schindler's widow, Emilie, who also behaved heroically, was coming to Jerusalem to participate in the film. Both received the honor, he posthumously.

There are many books about Schindler, including accounts by survivors and Emilie's memoirs, but Mr. Crowe's is the first comprehensive biography to draw on newly available records. Mr. Crowe is a member of the education committee of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, and the author of a history of the Gypsies of Russia and Eastern Europe.

He dismissed some scenes in the film and book that are part of Schindler's legend. For instance, in the film Schindler is shown riding with his mistress on Lasota Hill in Krakow and watching the clearing of the ghetto in March 1943, when he sees a little girl seeking shelter. The scene depicts Schindler's moral awakening, but Mr. Crowe called it "totally fictitious." He said that it would have been impossible to see that part of the ghetto from the hill, and that Schindler never saw the girl. Schindler's transformation was more gradual, Mr. Crowe said, and even before the ghetto was cleared he was appalled by the mistreatment of the Jews.

"Steve is a very wonderful, tender man," Mr. Crowe said of Mr. Spielberg, "but 'Schindler's List' was theater and not in an historically accurate way. The film simplifies the story almost to the point of ridiculousness." Mr. Crowe also said that he admired Mr. Keneally's novel.

Mr. Keneally, who interviewed 50 survivors and used available archives for his novel, said it was understandable that Mr. Spielberg and the screenwriter Steven Zaillian would take dramatic license with some events. "I believe Steven behaved with integrity," he said. "And he does make Schindler ambiguous."

Mr. Spielberg is filming a movie and could not be reached for comment, but a spokesman, Marvin Levy, said in an e-mail message that "Schindler was such an enigmatic figure in life, it is not totally surprising that other information or alleged information could continue to surface in death." Michael Berenbaum, former president of the Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation, established by Mr. Spielberg to record survivors' memories,
made a distinction between the craft of the historian and the artist.

"It does neither an injustice to the novel, the film or to history to say that the story is more complex," he said.

Mr. Crowe "is not even altering the story," Elie Wiesel, the author and Holocaust survivor, said. "He's complicated it. He's made Schindler more human, and also more extraordinary."

After Schindler moved his factory to Brünnlitz in the present-day Czech Republic, a period dealt with only briefly in the film, he stalled the manufacture of weapons, and none were ever made for the Nazis. He also bribed Nazi officers and distracted them with alcohol to save his workers. Mr. Keneally describes his heroism. In Krakow, Mr. Crowe said, "he could use the black market to supply his workers with food and health care." But by the time he arrived in Brünnlitz the Russians were advancing, making conditions harsher. "He risks his life and takes all the money he made in Krakow and spends every bit trying to feed his Jews and keep them healthy," Mr. Crowe said. In an episode known as the Golleschau transport, which is depicted in the book but not the film, two boxcars arrived in Brünnlitz filled with Jewish prisoners, some frozen to death. Schindler and his wife were able to save many of the prisoners.

Amid the chaos, Schindler also tried to accommodate Jewish religious law, getting SS officers drunk so that Jews could be properly buried.

Mr. Crowe said that the only part of the film that angered him was the ending, in which Schindler flees as the Russians advance. The Jews are shown as defeated, but in fact, Mr. Crowe said, Schindler had created "an armed guerilla group of Jews."

"They were armed to the teeth, ready to fight till the death," he said. Hours after Schindler left, they hung a Jew who worked for the Nazis.

In the film, Schindler gives a speech and breaks into tears because he did not do more. But Mr. Crowe obtained a transcript in which Schindler, always a wily pragmatist, also reminded the Jews of how much he had done for them, possibly to protect himself from prosecution for war crimes.

After the war Schindler was a failure. He squandered money given to him by the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee and moved to Argentina, where he attempted to breed nutria. He then returned to Germany and bought a concrete factory, where workers attacked him for saving Jews during the war. That factory went bankrupt. Schindler continued drinking, and begged Jews he had saved to help him financially. He died from alcoholism and heavy smoking, Mr. Crowe said.

Mordecai Paldiel, director of the Righteous Among the Nations department at Yad Vashem, said the new revelations show that "even people with all these characteristics can do a great, saintly deed."

"It seems we all have a little angel sitting inside us and just waiting to be allowed to go to the surface, to expose himself," he said. "A little, saving angel."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/24/books/24schi.html?ex=1102253152&ei=1&en=22415fc1bf8bfdf4 (page available through subscription). Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

CLASSROOM METHOD OF USAGE

This movie ties in best with units on Jewish victims and/or rescuers. There are moments in the film where collaboration can be discussed, specifically in regard to Polish/Jewish relations (scenes where children are screaming “Good-bye Jews, good-bye Jews!” and also when a youngster makes a throat-slash motion as a deportation train passes by). Perpetrators and their motivations, psychology, and behavior play out on screen. Overall, this film fits in well with any survey unit on the Shoah, if shown toward the end of the study.

STUDY QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION GUIDE

Name _________________________________

Schindler’s List: Questions For Discussion and Reflection

CHOICES

Examine the following case study:

Tadeusz Pankeiwicz, the Krakow ghetto pharmacist, described the actions of a Jewish woman who wanted to accompany her mother standing in line for deportation:

In the space between the pharmacy and the ranks of the SS men walked a woman with a slow majestic stride. She was a pretty, nicely dressed young lady, wearing a light green cape… He (the SS man) said something, she replied, and suddenly the German started to beat her… The woman bent her head slightly and remained motionless, rigid as a statue. She volunteered for deportation to be with her mother, and this aroused the fury of the SS men. She did not moan or cry, she did not beg. The German could not break her – he could not force her to plead for mercy… She stood next to her mother; they did not exchange a word. The SS men left, she wiped her face with a handkerchief; her mother patted her on the head. Moments passed. The German approached her again, and said something. I did not see her respond. The German grabbed her by her hair, pulled her out of the line and screamed viciously, indicating with his truncheon (club) in which direction she was to go. She was not permitted to remain with her mother; she was spared. This was the will of the SS. The woman left, she went slowly, helpless against the overwhelming power. The mother’s gaze followed her for the last time.

What choices did the young woman have?

What choices did the SS man have?

What choices did the mother have?

Using examples from the film, trace the development of dehumanization of the Jews as it leads to demonization.

How did the Jews resist?

Why did the Jews not flee?

Consider the following two speeches and the choices they represented for the listener:

Today is history. Today will be remembered. Years from now, the young will ask with wonder about this day. Today is history, and you are part of it. Six hundred years ago, Kasimierz the Great so-called told the Jews they could come to Krakow. They took hold. They prospered. In business, science, education, the arts. They came here with nothing. Nothing. And they flourished. For six centuries, there has been a Jewish Krakow. Think about that. By this evening, those six centuries are a rumor. They never happened. Today is history. – Amon Goeth

Just as daylight was breaking, the men arrived at the village of Jozefow and assembled in a half-circle around Major Trapp, who proceeded to give a short speech. With choking voice and tears in his eyes, he visibly fought to control himself as he informed his men that they had received orders to perform a very unpleasant task. These orders were not to his liking, but they came from above. It might perhaps make their task easier, he told the men, if they remembered that in Germany bombs were falling on the women and children. Two witnesses claimed that Trapp also mentioned that the Jews of this village had supported the partisans. Another witness recalled Trapp’s mentioning that the Jews had instigated the boycott against Germany. Trapp then explained to the men that the Jews in Jozefow would have to be rounded up, whereupon the young males were to be selected out for labor and the others shot.

Trapp then made an extraordinary offer to his battalion: if any of the older men among them did not feel up to the task that lay before him, he could step out. Trapp paused, and after some moments, one man stepped forward. – Christopher Browning, from Ordinary Men

What does Browning mean when he writes, “After Jozefow, nothing else seemed so terrible?”

Would Amon Goeth agree? Would Major Trapp?

How do you account for the differences in these two speeches?

Browning writes of two men who took part in the murders. One said that he had not wanted to be considered a coward by his comrades. Another – more aware of what truly required courage – said quite simply, “I was cowardly.” Contrast these statements.

POWER

In the scene where Goeth and Schindler are speaking, and Goeth is obviously drunk, he tells Schindler, “The more I look at you – I watch you – you’re never drunk.” As Schindler stares, the commandant continues, “Oh, that’s, that’s real control. Control is power. That’s power.”

Schindler is not so sure. He wonders, “Is that why they fear us?”

To Goeth, the answer is easy. He argues that “they fear us” because “we have the power to kill.”

Schindler disagrees. “They fear us because we have the power to kill arbitrarily. A man commits a crime, he should know better. We have him killed, and we feel pretty good about it. Or we kill him ourselves, and we feel even better. That’s not power, though. That’s justice. That’s different than power. Power… is when we have every justification to kill… and we don’t.”

When Goeth says he does not understand, Schindler expands on the idea, “That’s what the emperors had. A man stole something, he’s brought in before the emperor, he throws himself down on the ground, he begs for mercy. He knows he’s going to die. Then the emperor… pardons him. This worthless man. He lets him go. That’s power, Amon. That… is power.”

Goeth roars. He mockingly gestures like a Roman emperor and laughingly says, “I pardon you.” Yet the next day, Goeth seems taken by the notion and even practices “pardoning” prisoners, particularly Lisiek, the young Jew responsible for cleaning his bathtub. But in the end, he returns to his old ways and the shootings begin again. His first target is young Lisiek.

What is power to you?

What did the word mean to Goeth? To Schindler?

Why did Schindler distinguish between “the power to kill” and “the power to kill arbitrarily?”

Is there a relationship between power and goodness? -- evil?

Support or deny the following statement, citing examples from the film if possible: “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

OBEDIENCE

Concerning the Stanley Milgram experiments on obedience, John P. Sabini and Maury Silver noted:

When the learner makes his first error, subjects are asked to shock him. The shock level is 15 volts. A 15-volt shock is entirely harmless, imperceptible. There is no moral issue here. Of course, the next shock is more powerful than the last. The quality of the subject’s action changes from something entirely blameless to something unconscionable, but by degrees. Where exactly should the subject stop? At what point is the divide between the two kinds of action crossed? How is the subject to know? It is easy to see that there must be a line; it is not so easy to see where that line ought to be.

Philip Zimbardo, a psychologist at Stanford University, focused on the behavior of those who refused to obey:

The question to ask of Milgram’s research is not why the majority of normal, average subjects behave in evil (felonious) ways, but what did the disobeying minority do after they refused to continue to shock the poor soul, who was so obviously in pain? Did they intervene, go to his aid, did they denounce the research, protest to higher authorities, etc.? No, even their disobedience was within the framework of “acceptability”, they stayed in their seats, “in their assigned place,” politely, psychologically demurred, and they waited to be dismissed by the authority. Using other measures of obedience in addition to “going all the way” on the shock generator, obedience to authority in Milgram’s research was total.

What encourages obedience? Is it fear of those in power? A desire to please authority figures? A belief in authority? Peer pressure? A need to conform – to go along with the group?

What is the difference between obedience and conformity?

Why do you think it is difficult to harm someone we touch? Why is it easier to inflict harm upon a person we only see at a distance and easier still on someone we only hear?

Does this explain why it is quite easy to be cruel towards a person we neither see nor hear? Explain.

SYMBOLS

Tom Keneally, the author of the book, Schindler’s List casts light on why one particular event influenced Schindler. Schindler described the March Aktion in the Krakow ghetto this way: “Beyond this day no thinking person could fail to see what would happen. I was now resolved to do everything in my power to defeat the system.

What is the significance of the girl in the red coat?

What are some symbols of power in the film?

How important are they to the various bearers of those symbols? Do symbols come with power, or are the symbols irrelevant if the individual has real power?

RESCUE

Keneally quotes Schindler as having said, “A life is not worth a pack of cigarettes”. Yet Schindler risked his own life.

Why?

When Schindler was asked why he did what he did, he at one time replied, “There was no choice. If you saw a dog going to be crushed under a car, wouldn’t you help him?”

Another time, he replied, “The persecution of Jews in occupied Poland meant that we could see horror emerging gradually in many ways. In 1939, they were forced to wear Jewish stars, and people were herded and shut up into ghettos. Then, in the years ’41 and ’42 there was plenty of public evidence of pure sadism. With people behaving like pigs, I felt the Jews were being destroyed. I had to help them. There was no choice.”

How are the quotes similar to each other?

How are the quotes different from one another?

Which one do you think most accurately explains Schindler’s reason for assisting the Jews? Explain.

Ervin Staub, a Holocaust survivor from Hungary and a scholar on altruistic (helping, selfless, kind…) behavior, has written, “Goodness, like evil, often begins in small steps. Heroes evolve; they aren’t born. Very often the rescuers make only a small commitment at the start, to hide someone for a day or two. But once they had taken that step, they began to see themselves differently, as someone who helps. What starts as mere willingness becomes intense involvement.”

Does Staub’s argument apply to Schindler? How?

When do you think Schindler made the decision to rescue Jews?

When does he take the first step?

Jonathan Dresner, one of the Schindlerjuden (Schindler’s Jews), has said that Schindler “was an adventurer. He was like an actor who always wanted to be center stage. He got into a play, and he couldn’t get out of it.”

Luitgard Wundheiler, a psychotherapist, has investigated Schindler’s behavior during the Second World War. His theory is as follows:

In Nazi-occupied Krakow, Schindler found himself in a position to assist those who were in a precarious state: the Jews. They had been dehumanized. They were on the verge of destruction. Any act of humanity (a job, a kind word, a place to stay) was received with exaggerated but understandable appreciation. “Vain and insecure”, with little family life to speak of, Schindler was moved by the attention a desperate people bestowed upon him.

Initially, Schindler was motivated by friendship to individual Jews (specifically, it would seem, to Stern). But gradually the Nazi industrialist won a reputation as a kind and compassionate man. He was “a savior”. His factory was “a haven”. The Jews working in his factory became “his Jews”, the Schindlerjuden. Schindler began to glory in his reputation as a kind and compassionate man. He liked the role he was playing. It made him feel good. It filled a psychological vacuum in his life. This self-definition was a motivating factor.

Wundheiler argues that Schindler, “being defined by others as a compassionate and caring man,” began to see himself in the same light. As a result, he acted in line with that idea, which in turn reinforced others’ views of him as a humanitarian, and it spiraled.”

In your opinion, did Schindler rescue the Jews to please others or did he rescue Jews out of a subconscious desire to please himself?

The issue of Schindler and self-interest is an important one for you to consider. It demonstrates that a person can be a scoundrel yet can still be capable of selfless acts. Emilie Schindler described her late husband as a “saint of the devil”.

Keneally observed that Schindler and the sadist Amon Goeth may have been two sides of the human personality: “The reflection can hardly be avoided that Amon was Oskar’s dark brother, was the berserk and fanatic executioner Oskar might by some unhappy reversal of his appetite, have become.”

It must be emphasized that Schindler came to Krakow as a war-profiteer. At no point in his early life did Schindler demonstrate a hint of the altruistic behavior for which he is now so widely acclaimed. He became involved with the Jews when he realized that it made economic sense to employ them in his factory (formerly a Jewish factory). His early efforts helping the Jews, it might be argued, were efforts that he made to assure the continuation of his profits. In June 1942, he rescued Jews from a transport on its way to a death camp. In the film, he asks Stern, “Where would I be?” if the train had departed? Stern, of course, might have asked the same question about himself and the other Jews.

What examples are there in the film of Itzhak Stern nudging Schindler in the direction of rescue?

In the film, Schindler sits down with Stern and proposes a toast to the factory’s success. With the Nazi destruction of Jews taking place outside of Schindler’s factory and throughout Poland, Stern in not interested in a toast. “Pretend, for Christ’s sake,” Schindler pleads. “I’m trying to thank you, and acknowledge I couldn’t have done it without you.” Stern replies, “You’re welcome.” But he does not lift his glass.

How does this exchange influence Schindler?

How does Stern, overall, influence Schindler?

It is as if Schindler is backed into the role of being a rescuer, almost against his will. These scenes provide an opportunity to discuss the ways in which humans respond to moral expectations of those around them. In this sense, morality is a social product. A society’s values are sustained by mutual expectations. If we expect people to act decently, they will discover the decency in themselves.

In a 1973 documentary for West German television, Emilie Schindler said that Schindler had done nothing astounding before the war and had been unexceptional since. He was fortunate to have in that “short fierce era met people who summoned forth his deeper talents.”

Schindler developed a strong relationship with the elder Stern that continued after the war. The relationship has been described as one of a “father and son”. When Stern died in 1969, Schindler attended the funeral and wept uncontrollably at the grave.

NOTE: Material in this hand-out was based on or lifted from the following sources:

Facing History and Ourselves, A Guide To the Film Schindler’s List

The Southern Institute For Education and Research at Tulane University, Schindler’s List: Student Discussion Questions (http://www.tulane.edu/~so-inst/slguid8.html)

Schindler’s List: Questions For Discussion and Reflection (KEY)

CHOICES

Examine the following case study:

Tadeusz Pankeiwicz, the Krakow ghetto pharmacist, described the actions of a Jewish woman who wanted to accompany her mother standing in line for deportation:

(1) What choices did the young woman have? Leave earlier to avoid the beating

Press the issue and possibly die

(1) What choices did the SS man have? Shoot her on the spot

Let her join her mother

(1) What choices did the mother have? Protect or defend her daughter, risking death

Do nothing

(5) Using examples from the film, trace the development of dehumanization of the Jews as it leads to demonization.

Star of David badge, cutting the Hasidic Jew’s locks, “Good-bye Jews”, townspeople throwing things at Jews during deportation, Jewish homes being given to Aryans, ghettoization, liquidation of the ghetto: killing, ransacking, random shootings; selection for work/extermination while naked, burning the exhumed bodies, cutting the women’s hair at Auschwitz

(5) How did the Jews resist?

Eating the jewels, hiding, hospital scene (killing patients – euthanasia from the Jewish doctors), refusing deportation (running), holding Jewish ceremonies in the camp (wedding)

(3) Why did the Jews not flee?

Fear, disbelief, sense of cooperation toward the Nazis, seeing others shot, collective responsibility, “we are useful – why would they kill their workforce?”, physical weakness

Consider the following two speeches and the choices they represented for the listener:

(1) What does Browning mean when he writes, “After Jozefow, nothing else seemed so terrible?”

Once the men of Reserve Police Battalion 101 had killed, subsequent “actions” became easier to perform – the bar had been raised.

(2) Would Amon Goeth agree? Would Major Trapp?

Goeth would agree. Trapp would not, although he did continue to lead the battalion.

(2) How do you account for the differences in these two speeches?

Goeth had no conscience – he firmly believed in the task that lay before him. He had absorbed the Aryan ideals. Trapp, on the other hand, may have believed in his order (he did carry them out), but found it difficult to stomach the work.

(2) Browning writes of two men who took part in the murders. One said that he had not wanted to be considered a coward by his comrades. Another – more aware of what truly required courage – said quite simply, “I was cowardly.” Contrast these statements.

The first man is focused solely on himself and his relationship to his comrades. He is concerned for his rank and status within the group.

The second man is able to focus on his relationship to morality (even possibly to God). He understands that he has violated the sense of community and human decency, too.

POWER

Schindler is not so sure. He wonders, “Is that why they fear us?”

To Goeth, the answer is easy. He argues that “they fear us” because “we have the power to kill.”

(1) What is power to you?

The ability to control others, situations; the ability to effect events in one’s own life

(2) What did the word mean to Goeth? To Schindler?

Goeth: to do whatever one wants, or whatever necessary.

Schindler: it is the ability to make a decision based on a set of givens, and create a desired outcome.

(2) Why did Schindler distinguish between “the power to kill” and “the power to kill arbitrarily?”

Power to kill: power to distinguish, to decide, to satisfy a goal.

Power to kill arbitrarily: random abuse of power; no purpose, no impact.

(2) Is there a relationship between power and goodness? -- evil?

Yes on both counts. In either case, it is the ability to make thoughts become reality, to either build up or tear down.

(2) Support or deny the following statement, citing examples from the film if possible: “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Schindler was corrupted by economic power – he bought friends, contracts, sex, and workers – all for his personal satisfaction. Goeth, in his ability to determine a man’s life or death, became drunk with that and lost all sense of himself as a human being – he destroyed his own relationships as well as the sense of human community.

OBEDIENCE

Concerning the Stanley Milgram experiments on obedience, John P. Sabini and Maury Silver noted:

Philip Zimbardo, a psychologist at Stanford University, focused on the behavior of those who refused to obey:

(2) What encourages obedience? Is it fear of those in power? A desire to please authority figures? A belief in authority? Peer pressure? A need to conform – to go along with the group?

[All of the above are possible with explanation. Respondents will come to this from differing reference points]
(2) What is the difference between obedience and conformity?

Obedience satisfies the self’s perception of personal negative consequences to predetermined rules.

Conformity is going along with what is perceived to be the majority opinion, regardless of outcome or moral obligation.

(2) Why do you think it is difficult to harm someone we touch? Why is it easier to inflict harm upon a person we only see at a distance and easier still on someone we only hear?

The degree of personal interaction necessary is tremendously impactful. Depersonalization makes doing what is outside morality easier.

(2) Does this explain why it is quite easy to be cruel towards a person we neither see nor hear? Explain.

Yes. The “desk murderers” in the Nazi regime had no conscience in their actions. However, when looking at the outcomes for men involved in direct shooting of a victim who they saw face-to-face, the level of disgust at their actions, or at least the extent to which their nerves were affected, rose sharply.

SYMBOLS

(1) What is the significance of the girl in the red coat?

She is depicted in such a way as to stand out from the crowd. The use of color in the black-and-white scene shows contrast in Schindler’s previous perception of his world, and the new journey on which he would soon embark. She might represent innocence, and/or hope. Her death pushes Schindler to rescue completely.

(5) What are some symbols of power in the film?

Nazi pins, military insignia, money, weapons, one’s occupation, uniforms/clothes, food, sex, Goeth’s house, orders that are followed, cars, watch, jewelry, cigarette case, the gold ring (the power to save).

(2) How important are they to the various bearers of those symbols? Do symbols come with power, or are the symbols irrelevant if the individual has real power?

Symbols do not make power. They suggest power – how the bearer uses the symbol, or supports it, determines their ability to affect others.

RESCUE

Keneally quotes Schindler as having said, “A life is not worth a pack of cigarettes”. Yet Schindler risked his own life.

(1) Why?

When Schindler saw the March Aktion, he was removed from it – he viewed it from a distance. Prior to that, he was merely a part of the bigger picture, only able to see it from within.

When Schindler was asked why he did what he did, he at one time replied, “There was no choice. If you saw a dog going to be crushed under a car, wouldn’t you help him?”

(2) How are the quotes similar to each other?

He says “there was no choice’; regardless of his initial perception, he arrives at the same conclusion.

(1) How are the quotes different from one another?

The first quote seems to speak of a knee-jerk reaction, whereas the second speaks to the evolution of the realization that the Jews were in trouble.

(2) Which one do you think most accurately explains Schindler’s reason for assisting the Jews? Explain.

In the first statement he compares the Jews to animals, a pet. In the second, the people perpetrating the crimes against the Jews are the animals. It is this second response that speaks more to Schindler’s heart.

(2) Does Staub’s argument apply to Schindler? How?

Yes. At first, Schindler only helped Stern. Later, his heart was melted by the girl in the red coat as well as the young lady who asked him to rescue her parents. He then interviewed Goeth’s housekeeper as to Goeth’s true personality. As he is drawn deeper into the realities of the Holocaust, he is drawn deeper into right morality (as opposed to situational ethics, which he had exhibited prior).

(1) When do you think Schindler made the decision to rescue Jews?

He was first truly aware of the plight of the Jews after he witnessed the ghetto liquidation. The decision to rescue comes after the young lady asks him to employ her parents. He becomes immersed in it after witnessing the little girl whom he’d seen in the ghetto aktion.

(1) When does he take the first step?

When he does not immediately fire the one-armed machinist. Later, when he tells Stern to add the woman’s parents to his list of slave laborers. Still later, when he and Stern meet about the “list”.

Luitgard Wundheiler, a psychotherapist, has investigated Schindler’s behavior during the Second World War. His theory is as follows:

(2) In your opinion, did Schindler rescue the Jews to please others or did he rescue Jews out of a subconscious desire to please himself?

[Either choice is acceptable if supported]

(3) What examples are there in the film of Itzhak Stern nudging Schindler in the direction of rescue?

Hiring the one-armed machinist, compiling the list of workers, letting it get out that the factory is a “haven”

(1) How does this exchange influence Schindler?

It shows Schindler that Stern does not share his enthusiasm for the factory venture. Stern’s attempt at staying alive, his knowledge that he is a victim in this larger unfolding drama preoccupies his every thought.

(1) How does Stern, overall, influence Schindler?

Stern remains stoic in the face of tremendous adversity. Stern represents the helpless, the victim. He is the antithesis of Schindler’s power, persuasion, and freedom. For Schindler, life was what he wanted it to be. For Stern, all the rules of life had changed, and he became a model of that for Schindler.

NOTE: Material in this hand-out was based on or lifted from the following sources:

Facing History and Ourselves, A Guide To the Film Schindler’s List

The Southern Institute For Education and Research at Tulane University, Schindler’s List: Student Discussion Questions (http://www.tulane.edu/~so-inst/slguid8.html)