For this analysis, you should attempt to answer the ‘what, how and why’ questions brought to the fore by the chosen primary source.
Obviously, your ‘what’ answer should be straightforward description. What is the source? Describe it.
Your how’ answer will be defining how this source assists our understanding of the topic at hand.
Your ‘why’ answer should be the most in-depth and unique. Why is this source important? Why does it help us understand the topic at hand.
Each analysis will be worth 70 points. You will be graded thus:
10pts Clarity of language and meaning.
10pts Description (what)
15pts Explanation (How)
Please follow rubric listed above^^
The link to the Primary Source is https://alphahistory.com/holocaust/nazi-theft-of-jewish-property-1941-43/. That is the Primary Source that will be needed to be Analyzed .
In this course you will write two 5-8-page papers in response to prompts. Papers should be typed, double-spaced, and in a common 12-point font, such as Times New Roman, Helvetica, or Courier. You should reference the books and readings in the class, include quotes, and use information and data from the lectures and readings to support your argument. You should also have a solid thesis statement that lays out the paper’s argument, as well we providing a “map” or the paper’s structure.
Based on what you have learned from the lectures and readings of the course, discuss the relationship of the modern world and the Holocaust. Is the Holocaust one (but perhaps not the only) result of the modern world itself? Do things like industrialization, mass media and politics, bureaucratization, and science lead to the Holocaust, or are these things incidental, not really an essential part of the Holocaust? In particular, are there characteristics of modernization (industrialization, bureaucratization, mass media, science, etc.) that made the Holocaust more likely to happen? Did the Holocaust HAVE to happen once we had built a modern society with these things? Did the dehumanization that occurred in the Holocaust relate to the larger anonymity of modern society? Finally, are future Holocausts going to happen, or are they preventable? In answering this question, you should use as many concrete examples and ideas as possible from the readings, especially Survival in Auschwitz, the Niewyk book, and Ordinary Men.
for this short paper, you will write a book review of one of the books listed below. A book review is an opportunity to critically evaluate an author’s argument and how they make that argument. As such, a book review is not a summary but in fact contains an argument of its own by commenting and discussing the book under review. You might agree or disagree with an author’s conclusions and you might find their methods convincing and impressive or unconvincing and deficient. You must clearly articulate your evaluation of the book’s argument and method; this statement is your thesis statement.
Book reviews are generally brief and therefore provide a challenge in writing concisely. Before writing, you’ll want to identify the author’s main argument(s), the structure used to outline that argument, the methods and evidence used to support that argument, and the book’s overall effect on you as a reader. You might also want to do some minimal research on the author and their general field of expertise. Then, when writing your review, you should ultimately provide a summary of the book, a critical evaluation of the book, and a suggestion of the book’s relevance for study of the Holocaust in general. Remember this latter point especially when reviewing Sarah Stein’s text. For in-text citations, parentheticals with page numbers are sufficient as the text in question will be obvious.
BOOK: Jan Gross Neighbors: The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne Poland 2012
“Write about the dictum “never be a bystander,” based on Frydel’s article, Sakowicz’s
diary, and our class discussions so far.”
Analytical Paper **
ARTICLE :THE DEVIL IN MICROHISTORY
THE “HUNT FOR JEWS” AS A SOCIAL PROCESS,
Diary: Ponary Diary, 1941-1943 : A Bystander’s Account of a Mass Murder
The diary and article needs to be used in my paper please!
**I NEED 2.5 PAGES = MIN 1400****
Pick one out of the two
1. Magilow and Silverman argue that the first edition of Elie Wiesel’s memoir differs markedly from the latter French and English versions. In particular, they contend that “Jewish anger” was replaced with the Christian notion of “turn the other cheek.” How does this shift shape our understanding of survivors’ accounts? Why do you think observers/readers want survivors of the holocaust to show forgiveness rather than anger?
2. After reading the short excerpt from Night, what do you think Wiesel was trying to convey to his readers? How can we, as a society, become more receptive to a diverse array of survivor accounts (instead of just popularizing the ones that mirror American moral scripts)?