friedrich

A paper on The Problem Novel teaching to transgress:
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/ALAN/spring98/diversity.html
Other Resources on war , for children
Novels
The machine gunners
Millicent Lenz Nuclear age literautre for youth 1990 809.93358
Kate Seredy The Singing Tree 823.9 Hungarian children in WWII
Henry Treece Wardog Beaver books (Hamlyn) 1977 823.914
Websites "poetry for children in war"
Jim Haynes An Australian Heritage of Verse ISBN 0-7333-0898-8:
Judy Small Mothers, Daughters, Wives
Mary Gilmore No Foe Shall Gather our Harvest
journeytoforever.org/edu_kidspoems.html
authorsden.com/visit/viewPoetry.asp?authorID=1142
The World War I Document Archive: www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/
raven.cc.ukans.edu/~jansite/ww_one/links.html
Lost Poets of the Great War: www.ash.udel.edu/incoming/palos7a/swan/warpoets7a.html
A Treasury of War Poems: www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/7086/index_twp.htm

See also a whole chapter of comprehension and grammar on the novel in Sadler, Hayller Powell Word Skills Two, pp. 172-177, Melbourne Macmillan 1980.

Here are my answers to their questions:

"In the shelter" Word Skills Two Ex. 1 p. 175 G. Smith 25/10/93

a. Two pieces of evidence: "Heil Hitler", hatred of Jews.

b. intensive bombing would raze their homes, fear of looting, chance of evacuation.

c. Resch was ruthless but the sergeant was compassionate

d. sergeant more compassionate;

e. bombing is life threatening

f. Rejection; treats like dirt: "OUT! SCRAM!"

g. he uses fear and threats to quieten opposition.

h. makes easier; futile; takes blame on himself.

i. Racial hatred came down to very practical problems.

j. Comes in shouting and pleading; leaves silent.

k.

incendiary: designed to cause burning, inflammatory.

huddled:crowded close together

dank: damp

sputtered: make rapid sounds.

CREATIVE RESPONSE Imagine you are Friedrich. Describe your feelings as you leave the air raid shelter; your worst fears realised, your renewed rejection, your very being the issue for argument among other people. Where would you belong?

Get Friedrich and review it.
Read this section again and supply its fuller context.
Report on the social and political situation in Nazi Germany.
How is it it better today?

A derivative philosophical exercise:

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST EXERCISE: "Who should survive" in Secondary English 2 pages 189-90.

To make decisions about people's lives is hardly the sort of power anyone gives another. Dictators have it and triage doctors do to some extent in war and crisis. But in this exercise, you must find a way of giving authority to your decisions or you cannot make them.

Group decisions cannot be easily made, and if they were, you would have to have someone to enforce the group decision over the individual's.

Devise a procedure where no one takes the ultimate decision (which a decision to kill or let die is in fact) then would be more preferable for your own safety and for fairness. Casting lots or drawing straws

A decision based on Chance should be used to decide. In this way, no one is to blame and everyone should abide by it as they agreed to it. So dying is like the circumstances of life - they occur quite by accident for most people.

What of the result? Well it could be catastrophic the most able to help the others and the best fitted to start the human race again could be lost. But the chances of the human race surviving according to this exercise are slim anyway.

The greatest value then to strive for is social harmony and the procedure that yields it fairly is a decision by lot. Any group remaining will have to cope as best it can anyway that they do it as a group is more important for their survival. But as quarrelling individuals, smouldering with resentment, suspicious of one another and fractured into opposing camps they can only make the final party an unhappy one. Without cooperation there would surely be survival of the fittest only.

Another decision is to do nothing. Let the food run out even after rationing it as best you can. This way death takes its natural course and you are not guilty of murder or unfairness or self-interest or whatever. Your leadership is then impartial and has integrity. You can face yourself and your fellow survivors in the eye.

This exercise has all the complexity and diversity of detail of a real life problem. Whichever way you go, there will be criticism and problems. So you must make your decision on the facts by the usual old criteria: honesty, fairness and sympathy. Otherwise you can expect trouble, unhappiness and even revenge. Survival comes from cooperation. So I believe the best ones to survive should be the fairest people, not the most powerful.

Here are some criteria in random order that were used in our class discussion. Rank them in importance in your opinion and justify your choice:

can speak English
useful to the community
able to procreate
likely to die
experienced dealing with children
healthy
believes in God
white and surname begins with W (White, Wood, Wharton, ....) or any nominated letter
can counsel stressful people
does not need to be helped
eats a lot.

What have you learnt doing this exercise ?

Assembled by G. Smith 2/1/2001.