27 March 2015
There was a play last evening. My
dear friend and colleague, Tami, directed a performance of the play And then they came for me: Remembering the World of Anne Frank. The
play represents an account of the life of Eva Schloss and her family during the
Holocaust. Schloss and her mother survived Birkenau, but her father and brother
died on the forced march from Auschwitz days before its liberation. Eva became (by
default and in Anne Frank’s absence) Anne’s stepsister—after the war Schloss’s
mother married Otto Frank, the only member of that family to survive the Nazi
horror. Anne is a Jewish icon of no less
prominence I think than Moses. Her diary has been and will continue to be read
by millions of people speaking myriad tongues; she is the subject of countless
academic and [inspirational] papers. She figures prominently as trope in Philip
Roth’s novel, The Ghost Writer, in
which Nathan Zuckerman fantasizes that the girl sleeping upstairs at the home
of his hero is Anne Frank, and that they fall in love and he brings her home to
his parents. “Look Mom, I have found the perfect Jewish girl.” What parent
could criticize this choice for a bride? Ellen Feldman’s novel, The Boy Who Loved Anne Frank is an
account of Peter Van Pels based on his relationship with Anne gleaned from the
diaries, and speculating on the life he might have lived had he survived the
camps. Anne is in the public eye continuously.
Chapter 19 of Deuteronomy begins with the ritual of the red heifer (a chukkat—a
commandment without explanation or even rationale), and then the following
chapters of the weekly portion tells the story of the failure of Moses, Aaron
and Miriam to gain entrance to the Promised Land after their forty years of
wandering. After all of those years in the wilderness—forty years— after all
that they had suffered and endured, after all that time wandering, and after
all that they had accomplished, Miriam, and Aaron and Moses are denied access
to the Promised Land. First Miriam dies, and then Moses and Aaron are told that
neither of them will be permitted to enter Israel. It is a long way to go, I
think, without ever arriving. The Grateful Dead seem to speak to the experience
of Moses, Aaron and Miriam when they sing, “Such a long, long time to be gone
and a short time to be there.” Though we never hear Moses and Aaron and Miriam ever
wonder when they are going to be there, they at least know that they are going
somewhere. But to have traveled almost to the destination and then to be denied
access to it, well, that just seems too ironic. I wonder how one defines a life
that never arrives at a destination. At
the end of their lives, Moses, Miriam and Aaron will not sit comfortably by the
pool and reminisce nostalgically about their lives; they will not say, ‘Well,
it was tough going, but now, look, it was worth the trouble.” Indeed, only Aaron
has anyone to pass things to—after his death, Aaron’s son, Eleazar, assumes the
sacred vestments and the role of high priest. But, Miriam and Moses not only
have no one to pass things on to, they have nothing to pass on. These three
have struggled for the past forty years—Aaron and Miriam had never even lived in
the palace and been raised as royalty¾and now, having come
almost to the end, they are denied resolution, denied completion, denied final
satisfaction. How can they answer to their lives?
Robert
Pirsig wrote that it was the sides of the mountain that sustained life, but
that it was the peak that defined the sides. There must be some idea of an end
to define the means. Ends do change, and means change along with the change of
ends, but means and ends exist in a relationship. It is a cliché to say it is
not the destination but the journey that is important. I think it is a cliché because
unless we are headed somewhere, unless there is a destination, a peak to define
the travels, well, then there is no journey but only aimless wandering. Perhaps
it was this that led the people wandering in the wilderness to grumbling: oh,
they might have known they were headed towards the Promised Land, but as do children,
they immediately wanted to know “Are we almost there?” And they complained,
“We’re hungry!” “I’m thirsty!” “Are we there yet?” “I have to go to the
bathroom!” A failed journey is a journey that doesn’t arrive at a destination;
not to arrive at the destination is to remain on a journey, but if you aren’t
headed anywhere, then all the wandering is not a journey—it is just aimless
wandering. For the hoboes, for Kerouac and the Beats, for the hippies of the
1960s, it wasn’t aimless wandering in which they engaged; it was the experience of the road. But after
four hundred years of slavery, well, perhaps the Israelites could be excused
for their abhorrence of the road and with their impatience to arrive. Aren’t we
there yet?
I think
often of Anne Frank, who, too, did not enter any promised land after spending
twenty five months of wandering, albeit, in the sedentary confines of the
Secret Annex. After 25 months in the Secret Annex, living a life in conditions
so horrific that they exceed my capacity to comprehend, her life ended of
typhus at Bergen-Belsen. We turn the page of the diary—ah, but we know the
destination here—we read, “Anne’s diary ends here.” What was all of her
suffering for, I asked myself. The incredible, almost inhuman discomfort, the
perpetual terror of being discovered, the experience of an excruciating,
horrible claustrophobia defies my ability to conceptualize it. That hiding
which was supposed to be a journey, but where did it lead? What was it for? Only
to exit into the stench of the camps and the horrible issue of smoke from the
chimneys of the crematoria. When I consider Anne, my grief overwhelms me. How
to answer for the twenty-five months journey in the Secret Annex? For what
purpose? I remain dumb.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home