Write short answers to a series of questions about Elie Wiesel's "The Perils of Indifference." You'll reference the speech directly to describe how its language and structure contribute to its tone, purpose, and overall meaning.


1. Look at Wiesel's discussion of the St. Louis. How does this section of text follow from the section before it, and how does it connect to Wiesel's overall purpose?









2. Look at the paragraph full of rhetorical questions near the end of the speech. It begins with "Does it mean that we have learned from the past?" How does this section of text follow from the section before it, and how does it connect to Wiesel's overall purpose?









3. Look at Wiesel's use of the word vanishing in the third paragraph. What sort of connotation does vanishing have (as opposed to the more straightforward finishing or ending)? How does the word support Wiesel's purpose or ideas?









4. Look at Wiesel's use of the word abandoned in the seventh paragraph. What sort of connotation does abandoned have (as opposed to the more straightforward left behind or moved on without)? How does its use support Wiesel's purpose or ideas?












5. In the fifth paragraph, Wiesel writes, "Of course, indifference can be tempting — more than that, seductive." What kind of figurative language is this (metaphor, personification, hyperbole)? How does it support Wiesel's main ideas about indifference?









6. When he's speaking of his time in the camps hoping for rescue, Wiesel writes, "If they knew, we thought, surely those leaders would have moved heaven and earth to intervene." What kind of figurative language is this (metaphor, personification, hyperbole)? How does it support Wiesel's main ideas about indifference?









7. Using the examples of word connotation and figurative language from the speech, explain how Wiesel's language choices contribute to the increasingly harsh, accusatory tone as the speech progresses. Feel free to use any of the examples already discussed.