Guilt, responsibility and coincidence in Harry Mulisch's novel, "The Assault"

Guilt, responsibility and similarity in Mulischs overbold, The Assault: In this es ordinate, I sh al one(prenominal) fashion for the issues of transgression, responsibility and proportion which appear in chafe Mulischs novel, The Assault. Mulischs whole kit and caboodle be quite autobiographic and historical, as t here(predicate) is a great relationship among his life and his novels, especi exclusivelyy in the one I am going to deal with. I start with a apprize biography, followed by a little summary of the novel, and in the presbyopic run come my personal reflection rough the issues already mentioned. An authors biography: Harry Mulisch is Hollands most important post- contend writer. natural in Haarlem, Holland, in 1927 to a Jewish m new(prenominal)wise whose family died in the concentration lives, and an Austro-Hungarian stick who was jailed after the war for collaborating with the bailiwick socialists, Mulisch feels a particularly charged connection with t he stand by introduction war, frequently the subject of his sour. He has received Hollands highest awards for his novels, plays, poems, and essays. Among his works the crush know atomic number 18 his novels The Assault (1982), net C alto take outher (1985), and The Discovery of heaven (1992). This essay focuses on his novel The Assault. The context of the work is set between 1945 -the round back of the Second beingness War- and 1982 -around the end of the Cold War. This story, ground on a true feature, has as its central eccentric the kill of a Dutch policeman, who collaborated with Nazi occupants, by or so communists who belonged to the resistance. Structurally, the novel is divided into a prologue and five episodes. The prologue describes the sic where small Anton and his family tarryd; this was Haarlem (Holland) during the Second World War. At this measure the north of the mountain range was still confineed by the Nazis. The origin episode takes place in 1945. It tell us how the Dutch collaborat! or was killed while he was riding his bike in await of a region of four family lines, and his carcass knock down in drive of one of them. Then the both inhabitants of the shack went fall show up, took the system and travel it in face of the Steenwijks house, Antons family home. Antons br otherwise heady to go out to move the carcass well-nighwhere else, only when while he was out on the street, the German Nazis arrived. They took Antons p atomic number 18nts, stroke them and burnt their house. Anton, who had been forget in a car by the Nazis during the burning and the execution, was taken by one of the Germans and moved to a cell where he was shut in with one of the suppositional killers of the Dutch collaborator. In the cell they lecturing for a while. In spite of the f practice that they could non see each other, as it was whole dark, Anton would never forget her. Finally he was moved to Amsterdam, by the Nazis themselves, with his uncle and aunt. The next four episodes deal with how Anton attempts to forget that untellable acquire of his squirthood, but it is non easy for him as he keeps approaching across different people, by chance, who were conglomerate in the event of that shadow. In the second episode, in 1952, Anton starts to make up ones mind out the allegiance about the event. Firstly, he receives the news that his parents and his brother were executed that night in 1945, and secondly, he meets Mr. and Mrs. Beumer in their house in Haarlem. They burble about what they witnessed on the night of the murder. In the third episode, in 1956, the second important coincidental meeting is described. Here he meets, in a consequence, Fake Ploeg, the son of the Nazi collaborator. The ordinal episode, in 1966, is when Anton meets Takes, the other murderer of the collaborator. Finally, in the last episode, in 1981, the protagonist meets Karin Korteweg, the one who together with her fuck off, moved the dead form from their house to the Steenwijks house. both these meetings w! ill help him to find out what flopfully determineed and why. This novel can be read on different levels: as a psychological drama, as a historical documentary -in spite of the fact that there are fabricated events, for example, the Hungarian revolt of 1956 and the massive peace intro in Amsterdam in 1981-, as a closed book story, as an exploration of criminality and responsibility in the lavation of the Second World War, and, philosophically, as the making sense of this guilty conscience and responsibility. I will now focus on the issues of responsibility, guilt and coincidence, how they make pass and develop throughout the novel and look at the diverse examples connected to the event of that night. So we find a country occupied by the Nazis, who are losing the Second World War. It is 1945, and half of the country is already liberated by the Allies. The Netherlands is suffering the Hunger Winter,and the German policy against any physique of resistance has become harsher . In this context, we pull in two communists who belong to an organized resistance group, who kill a Dutch collaborator in an increased effort against the Nazis to profits the war as soon as possible. further this murder is move in scarer of a neighbourhood, and it could hurt sturdy consequences for its inhabitants. They whitethorn be possible guiltless victims, but maybe, thank to the cleanup position of this collaborator, the deaths of thousands of Jewish families may comport been avoided. However, the killing of Antons family leaves a child orphaned, with an emotional burden which will follow him for the nap of his life. I will now explore the reactions of the neighbours. Mr. Korteweg and his daughter moved the tree trunk towards the Steenwijks house. Absurdly, Mr. Korteweg moved it because he was trying to stay fresh his lizards, however, he is considerate, as he did not leave it in front of the Aarts house because he knew that they were hiding a Jewish family. But p atronage of this last fact, he commits felo-de-se as! he cannot live with the burden of having caused the death of other human universe erect to save his animals. The Beumers stayed at home when every(prenominal)thing happened without lending a hand, even though they were friends of the family, because if they did it, they would clear risked their own lives. So here we induce some different reactions which make you question, how chargeable and how exculpate these people are, alone as Anton asks himself: Was guilt costless and purity sinful? In the case of Truus -the woman in the cell- and Takes, you could say that they are more(prenominal) trustworthy for the consequences since they were aware that the Nazis would punish harshly those they prospect to be the culprits. But, how guilty would they both be if they had sacrificed a fewer lives to save thousands? Or in the case of Mr. Korteweg, is he very guilty of all the consequences of moving the body? Can soul act rationally at a lower place such(prenominal) a pres sure? Often, under such circumstances one tends to react quickly and spontaneously. Korteweg finally kills himself, but, how guilty was he? Was his suicide justified if, after all, he in like way of life saved the Jewish and the Aarts family? On the other hand, was Antons family echtly loose? Peter -Antons brother- treasured to leave the dead body in front of the Beumers house, so he likewise could be considered guilty. Furthermore, how would the Steenwijk family discombobulate reacted if by coincidence the body had been left in front of another(prenominal) neighbours house? Another important character is Ploeg, who was a collaborators son, a son of a Nazi. I will generate some special attention to this character. After the Second World War a hard policy of denazification began. All these children were considered guilty just for being the children of Nazis. Ploegs mother was sent to a camp and Ploeg to a Catholic school even though he was not a Catholic. And when she was lib erated they had to move to another metropolis as thei! r house in Haarlem was already inhabited. The consequences for these children was closing off in Dutch society.

As it is clearly explain in this acknowledgement: After a difficult past, the taboo on their ambit is an enceinte characteristic of their situation, resulting in the feeling of having no objurgate to be there... The process of moving toward a realization of their right to experience and belong, and to give implying to their fate, proves to be complex. As many other children of Nazis, Ploeg cannot believe that his father would pose committed any of the notorious outrages against the Jews. It is some thing that is hard for him to admit. Cases of children of Nazis can be found in the discussion My Fathers Keeper: Children of Nazi Leaders--An Intimate History of Damage and Denial (by Norbert Lebert, Stephan Lebert, Julian Evans), in this oblige we find different attitudes of these children towards their fathers. Some of them viewed their fathers as great men, one of them loves his father but agrees his father was trustworthy for great crimes and others hate their fathers. In the case of Ploeg, he tries to forgive his father, maybe his love for him does not allow him to accept that his father could committ such horrific crimes. If we focus on Ploeg, to what extent is he responsible of his father actions? Or what attitude should one have when facing the children of people who have committed such outrages? Mulisch not only presents the main characters as being guilty and stark at the same time, but also we can also find in his novel good Nazis and bad Nazis. The member of the SS can be considered good as he decides to carry Anto! n to Amsterdam himself. The Germans can be considered as bad as they burn Steenwijks house. Therefore what I involve is that Mulisch tries to pose these moral paradoxes in human beings. The issue of coincidence is also very important in the novel, for instance when the Steenwijk family are playing a game and the assault occurs, Anton keeps the dice in his pocket. The dice can be interpreted as a symbol of chance. We can see that throughout the book a lot of coincidences occur, starting with the assault in front of the neighbourhood, followed by Antons coincidental meetings, with the different characters. The Beumer family thought that the fact that they did not have the body in front of their house was because God desireed to shelter them, but because Mrs. Beumer wonders how one should take that? Because that would mean that he didnt spare you (Anton), and why shouldnt he have spared you? So then why did the coincidences occur in this way? Was it fate, this is to say, because was indentured to happen like this? Or could it be God? The book does not give clear answers to these questions, even when Anton finally discovers the faithfulness of what really happened that night. What also strikes me is Antons reaction, as he is not a character who takes revenge against the murderers, or against Ploegs son or the Kortewegs, he is shown as quite an understanding person, who tries to accept and forgive all those who were involved in the event; but above all he wants is to forget about it. To conclude, I think that the book leaves nonreciprocal questions about how one would react when faced with such a situation and under such circumstances. My personal assent is that every human being has contradictory facets: egoism and solidarity, good and cruelty, the absurdity of some human acts as opposed to the deepness of other acts. Maybe we all are good and bad, guilty and innocent at the same time, and in a situation of caution and repression our real character m ay appear, and therefore it leads us to pay on very ! different ways. Therefore I think that all the controversial of the characters leads us to moral questions such as, are we all guilty or innocent, and are we responsible for our actions? If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay