Saturday, September 4, 2010
Gunther Grass's Creditability
As evidenced by the article "War and Remembrance" from The New Yorker, Gunther Grass was involved in the Waffen S.S. as a youth. Although this viewpoint may be very anti-Foucaultian, I believe Grass's involvement with the Waffen S.S. directly impacts the reader's judgment of the creditability of his discourse. Personally, because Grass has a first-hand perspective of the horrendous actions taken by the Nazi Germans, he, above others, is given the opportunity to critique these actions in a valid manner. And because he actually performed actions for the Nazis, he is in a way self-critiquing himself. I believe that a self-critique is more challenging and therefore more convincing than a critique of others. Do you guys also believe that Grass's participation in the Waffen S.S. makes his discourse more or less valid? Or is this information irrelevant because, in a sense, the author is "dead" after his work has been published?