Italian Jewish Chemist, Writer and Holocaust Survivor
Primo Levi, fully Primo Michele Levi
Italian Jewish Chemist, Writer and Holocaust Survivor
We who survived the Camps are not true witnesses. We are those who, through prevarication, skill or luck, never touched bottom. Those who have, and who have seen the face of the Gorgon, did not return, or returned wordless.
We will not return No one must leave here and so carry to the world, together with the sign impressed on his skin, the evil tidings of what man's presumption made of man in Auschwitz
When your friend falls down, you do not rejoice, nor could he not have help to get up.
Why does it happen? Why is the pain of every day translated so constantly into our dreams, in the ever-repeated scene of the unlistened-to story?
Willingly or not we come to terms with power, forgetting that we are all in the ghetto, that the ghetto is walled in, that outside the ghetto reign the lords of death, and that close by the train is waiting. by Primo Levi in Drowned
You who live safe in your warm houses, you who find returning in the evening hot food and friendly faces: consider if this is a man who works in the mud who knows no peace who fights for a bread who dies because of a yes or a no. Consider if this is a woman, without hair and unnamed no more strength to remember eyes empty and her womb cold like a frog in winter. Never forget that this was: remember these words. Carve them in your heart being in home because, bed, rising; repeat them to your children. Or have you undone the house, illness impede you, may your children twist their faces from you.
Except for cases of pathological incapacity, one can and must communicate, and thereby contribute in a useful and easy way to the peace of others and oneself, because silence, the absence of signals, is itself a signal, but an ambiguous one, and ambiguity generates anxiety and suspicion. To say that it is impossible to communicate is false; one always can.
He reminded me by his presence, by his natural and plain manner of being good, that there still existed a just world outside our own, something and someone still pure and whole, not corrupt, not savage, extraneous to hatred and terror; something difficult to define, a remote possibility of good, but for which it was worth surviving.
I have many times been praised for my lack of animosity towards the Germans. It's not a philosophical virtue. It's a habit of having my second reactions before the first.
Imagine now a man who is deprived of everyone he loves, and at the same time of his house, his habits, his clothes, in short, of everything he possesses: he will be a hollow man, reduced to suffering and needs, forgetful of dignity and restraint, for he who loses all often easily loses himself. He will be a man whose life or death can be lightly decided with no sense of human affinity, in the most fortunate of cases, on the basis of a pure judgment of utility. It is in this way that one can understand the double sense of the term extermination camp, and it is now clear what we seek to express with the phrase: to lie on the bottom.
It is neither easy nor agreeable to dredge this abyss of viciousness, and yet I think it must be done, because what could be perpetrated yesterday could be attempted again tomorrow, could overwhelm us and our children. One is tempted to turn away with a grimace and close one's mind: this is a temptation one must resist. In fact, the existence of the death squads had a meaning, a message: 'We, the master race, are your destroyers, but you are no better than we are; if we so wish, and we do so wish, we can destroy not only your bodies, but also your souls, just as we have destroyed ours.
Man's capacity to dig himself in, to secrete a shell, to build around himself a tenuous barrier of defense, even in apparently desperate circumstances, is astonishing and merits a serious study.
Pavel interrupted him. I?ll explain what the Talmud is to you, with an example. Now listen carefully: Two chimneysweeps fall down the flue of a chimney; one comes out all covered with soot, the other comes out clean: which of the two goes to wash himself? Suspecting a trap, Piotr looked around, as if seeking help. Then he plucked up his courage and answered: The one who?s dirty goes to wash. Wrong, Pavel said. The one who?s dirty sees the other man?s face, and it?s clean, so he thinks he?s clean, too. Instead, the clean one see? s soot on the other one?s face, believes he?s dirty himself, and goes to wash. You understand? I understand. That makes sense. But wait; I haven?t finished the example. Now I?ll ask you a second question. Those two chimneysweeps fall a second time down the same flue, and again one is dirty and one isn?t. Which one goes to wash? I told you I understand. The clean one goes to wash. Wrong, Pavel said mercilessly. When he washed after the first fall, the clean man saw that the water in his basin didn?t get dirty, and the dirty man realized why the clean man had gone to wash. So, this time, the dirty chimneysweep went and washed. Piotr listened to this, with his mouth open, half in fright and half in curiosity. And now the third question. The pair falls down the flue a third time. Which of the two goes to wash? From now on, the dirty one will go and wash, Wrong again. Did you ever hear of two men falling down the same flue and one remaining clean while the other got dirty? There, that?s what the Talmud is like.
That the nobility of Man, acquired in a hundred centuries of trial and error, lay in making himself the conquerer of matter, and that I had enrolled in chemistry because I wanted to maintain faithful to that nobility. That conquering matter is to understand it, and understanding matter is necessary to understanding the universe and ourselves: and that therefore Mendeleev?s Periodic Table, which just during those weeks we were laboriously learning to unravel, was poetry, loftier and more solemn than all the poetry we had swallowed doen in liceo; and come to think of it, it even rhymed! ? The chemistry and physics on which we fed, besides being in themselves nourishments vital in themselves, were the antidotes to Fascism ? because they were clear and distinct and verifiable at every step, and not a tissue of lies and emptiness like the radio and newspapers.
The trade of chemist (fortified, in my case, by the experience of Auschwitz), teaches you to overcome, indeed to ignore, certain revulsions that are neither necessary or congenital: matter is matter, neither noble nor vile, infinitely transformable, and its proximate origin is of no importance whatsoever. Nitrogen is nitrogen, it passes miraculously from the air into plants, from these into animals, and from animals into us; when its function in our body is exhausted, we eliminate it, but it still remains nitrogen, aseptic, innocent.
This fills me with anger, although I already know that it is in the normal order of things that the privileged oppress the unprivileged: the social structure of the camp is based on this human law.
Translation is difficult work because the barriers between languages are higher than is generally thought ? knowing how to avoid the traps is not enough to make a good translator. The task is more arduous; it is a matter of transferring from one language to another the expressive force of the text, and this is a superhuman task, so much so that some celebrated translations (for example that of the Odyssey into Latin and the Bible into German) have marked transformations in the history of our civilization. Nonetheless, since writing results from a profound interaction between the creative talent of the writer and the language in which he expresses himself, to each translation is coupled an inevitable loss, comparable to the loss of changing money. This diminution varies in degree, great or small according to the ability of the translator and the nature of the original text. As a rule it is minimal for technical or scientific texts (but in this case the translator, in addition to knowing the two languages, needs to understand what he is translating; possess, that is to say, a third competence). It is maximal for poetry...
We were also born, Line said abruptly. Mendel questioned her with a look, and Line tried to clarify her thought: Born, expelled. Russia conceived us, nourished us, made us grow in her darkness, as in a womb; then she had labor pains, contractions, and threw us out; and now here we are, naked and new, like babies just born. Isn't it the same for you? Narische meidele, vos darst do freden? Mendel rebutted, feeling on his lips and affectionate smile and a light veil over his eyes.
Fascism had silenced them for twenty years, and they explained to us that fascism was not only a bad government clownish and improvident, but the denier of Justice; had not only dragged Italy into an unjust war and poor, but had risen and had established itself as the guardian of legality and a detestable order, founded on coercion of the worker, the uncontrolled profit of those who exploit the labor of others, on silence imposed to those who think and do not want to be a servant, on the systematic lies and calculated. They told us that our mocking indifference was not enough; He had to turn into anger, and anger to be channeled into a revolt organic and timely, but we did not teach you how to plant a bomb, or how to shoot a rifle.
He understood before any of us that this life is war; he permitted himself no indulgences, he lost no time complaining or commiserating with himself and with others, but entered the battle from the beginning.
I live in my house as I live inside my skin: I know more beautiful, more ample, more sturdy and more picturesque skins: but it would seem to me unnatural to exchange them for mine.
In countries and epochs in which communication is impeded, soon all other liberties wither; discussion dies by inanition, ignorance of the opinion of others becomes rampant, imposed opinions triumph. The well-known example of this is the crazy genetics preached in the USSR by Lysenko, which in the absence of discussion (his opponents were exiled to Siberia) compromised the harvests for twenty years. Intolerance is inclined to censor, and censorship promotes ignorance of the arguments of others and thus intolerance itself: a rigid, vicious circle that is hard to break.
It is not at all an idle matter trying to define what a human being is.
Many people ? many nations ? can find themselves holding, more or less wittingly, that ?every stranger is an enemy?. For the most part this conviction lies deep down like some latent infection; it betrays itself only in random, disconnected acts, and does not lie at the base of a system of reason.
Perfection belongs to narrated events, not to those we live.