 |
| 1931 comedy directed by Norman Z. Mcleod |
#3. Before we leave the first page, consider the first sentence in the second paragraph: “My personal experience with Nazi monkey business was limited.”
What do you make of that phrase: “Nazi monkey business”? The Nazis started World War II which, I am told by my good friends at Wikipedia (always there when I need them), resulted in
more than 60 million deaths, including 6 million civilians (Jews, mostly) who were murdered in concentration camps. What effect is achieved by using the term “monkey business” to refer to what the Nazis did? (Just a few pages later the author refers to bombing victims as “jumbo fried grasshoppers.”)
Vonnegut is often praised for his dark sense of humor, but others find his irreverence offensive. Can you think of any reasons a sensible person might say comedy can serve a higher purpose than adding a few giggles to your day, a purpose that might justify its cheeky treatment of serious or tragic subjects? When is it inappropriate to make jokes about something?
Irreverent humor may be humane humor when it serves a higher purpose and Vonnegut’s reference to “Nazi monkey business” certainly qualifies (I am not so sure about “jumbo fried grasshoppers”). Emil Fackenheim, a noted Jewish reform rabbi and philosopher once made a plea that Jews not give Hitler any “posthumous victories.” In the context of the speech that he delivered, this meant that the Jews should, first of all, survive as a people and secondly, not despair of their God in the face of the Holocaust, but defiantly continue in their faith and in the observance of Jewish ritual law. For me, Vonnegut’s lampooning of Nazism called to mind Fackenheim’s words, although his denial of a posthumous victory for Hitler is distinct from what Fackenheim had in mind.
ReplyDeleteOne entirely understandable reaction to the Holocaust has been to stress the unique evil of the event. Hitler and his henchman have been portrayed as the personification of evil. Perhaps this is why the Nazis continue to exercise a sick fascination in our culture, decades after Hitler’s demise. If you doubt this, just consider the weekly line-up on the History Channel. Consider also the constant invocation of Hitler and the Holocaust by politicians on the right and the left to tar any policy or politician with whom they disagree.
But painting the Nazis as diabolical figures of supernatural malevolence, while understandable in light of their crimes, gives them more respect than they are due. Setting aside possible theological debate, most would say that the devil is to be feared rather than laughed at. This is why Vonnegut’s derision at “Nazi monkey business” should provoke humane laughter. In the 1989 documentary, “The Fatal Attraction of Adolf Hitler”, one biographer of the “fuehrer” suggested that it would be easy to imagine Hitler as ending his days as just another “crank” in a bar. If not for the unfortunate conjunction of historical circumstances that made possible the rise to power by a man like Hitler, that may well be how he would have ended—as an object of ridicule. The result of Vonnegut’s irreverent humor does just that. Vonnegut is not mocking the seriousness of the suffering that the Nazis caused, but he is mocking the seriousness with which the Nazis took themselves and their hateful ideology. While critics might accuse this approach of leading to complacency towards those who advocate similar policies (e.g. Neo-Nazis), I think that Vonnegut would argue that ridicule will guard more effectively against would-be Hitlers than fear. In this way, by mocking the Nazis as one would “cranks” in a bar, Vonnegut is true to Fackenheim’s goal of denying Hitler posthumous victories.
A Clarification and update:
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, let me be clear that in my citation of the History Channel I am not advocating willful ignorance of the history of Nazism. I merely cite this as evidence of our societal obsession with Hitler.
Secondly, as if on cue, another example of the misuse--in my view--of Hitler in political rhetoric here in the States at the following link:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57164.html
In accordance to the comment above, I agree that the term "Nazi monkey business" is not meant to be interpreted as a negative remark towards the annihilation of the Jews, but instead to describe the ideology that Hitler, and all Nazi communists, believed was true.
ReplyDeleteVonnegut incorporates comedy into his work in order to connect with the readers as well as catch the attention of the reader. The purpose of the "inappropriate" terms that Vonnegut uses is to help the reader create a better mental picture of the war itself and everything it encompasses.
The term "jumbo fried grasshopers" on the other hand is to illustrate the thought of people being turned into nothing but ash silhouettes of their former selves. Vonnegut's dark humor is a nice attribute to have but only can be properly comprehended by a number of readers.
I agree with Nik when he says that Vonnegut uses comedy to connect with his readers and also that not all people will be able to understand the way that Vonnegut uses humor. On a more shallow level, his dark humor keeps the book from being flat out depressing.
ReplyDeleteI also think that possibly his humor is somewhat more "accepted" by people of OUR age group because we didn't actually see those days or experience any of the awful things that happened. I know it doesn't change the fact that those things still happened and affected a ridiculous amount of people; but it's just a thought. I don't know how someone that is older than me would agree with that statement but that's just one way to look at it.
Just to play the devil's advocate on the issue of "Nazi Monkey Business," what if Vonnegut was not saying that phrase with comedy? What Vonnegut could be portrying is a social opinion of the war (at least while the war was taking place). People all over the world turned their heads to what was going on in Germany and in concentration camps across Europe. People did not want to see or acknowledge the atrocious acts Hilter was committing. Instead they acknowledged it as "Nazi Monkey Business." This phrase isn't necessarily Vonnegut's point of view of the war but just society's way of downplaying it. If people would have acknowledged the serious of what was happening, then they would have felt guilty about not doing anything about it. Instead they choose to do what ostriches do: put their head in the sand and pretend everything is ok.
ReplyDeleteAgreeing with Kaitlyn, we more willing fully accept Vonnegut’s sense of humor because we were not around during the era of Holocaust. I think his sarcasm keeps us from falling asleep. However, as for the phrase “Nazi monkey business,” the use of the term “monkey business” is so wrong. When I think of monkey business, I think of a happy-go-lucky children’s event. I agree with Tyffany. People did not see the seriousness of the situation. Maybe they thought that by using the phrase in such an insensitive way, they were downsizing the reality of things.
ReplyDelete