Literature and the Holocaust have a complicated relationship. This isn't to say, of course, that the pairing isn't a fruitful one—the Holocaust has influenced, if not defined, nearly every Jewish writer since, from Saul Bellow to Jonathan Safran Foer, and many non-Jews besides, like W.G. Sebald and Jorge Semprun. Still, literature qua art—innately concerned with representation and appropriation—seemingly stands opposed to the immutability of the Holocaust and our oversized obligations to its memory. Good literature makes artistic demands, flexes and contorts narratives, resists limpid morality, compromises reality's details. Regarding the Holocaust, this seems unconscionable, even blasphemous. The horrors of Auschwitz and Buchenwald need no artistic amplification.
Both stories show how the holocaust leaves marks that are difficult to erase and necessary to provoke reflections. This shows how literature is reflective, explanatory, and capable of dealing with profound issues.
Both works force the reader to think about the sins of humanity and how it is necessary to prevent events such as the holocaust from being repeated.
This is all possible through literature that can present complex and difficult topics such as the holocaust in a comprehensive, objective, and reflective way.
More information about the holocaust in the link:
https://brainly.com/question/4192988
