Thoughts on "All the Light We Cannot See" by Anthony Doerr

“All the Light We Cannot See” by Anthony Doerr continues a streak of books that I have read that deal with World War II. For the past couple of years, I have been searching for and reading nonfiction and fiction pertaining to this time period. Historical fiction is fun to read as authors weave their characters into scenes that happened in reality. It is definitely one of my favorite genres.

World War II is so interesting because it forces me to self-reflect on what I would have done if I was a German living during the 1930's and 1940's. Werner, a teenage German orphan, is one of the main characters in the book. You can feel his despair and longing to be successful and to gain knowledge of the world, particularly when it comes to mechanics and electronics. His real world experience working on older radios leads him on a path towards joining the German military as his talent becomes recognized by military leaders. Despite objections from his younger sister, Jutta, Werner decides to go off to a Nazi military training school to further his education and become a soldier. As the war progresses, Werner’s skills in repairing and building radios and using radio frequencies to triangulate positions based on detected radio signals becomes invaluable to the Nazis as they snuff out resistance fighters in Europe. He is confronted with various dilemmas throughout the novel that threaten his success and his humanity.

I found myself pondering many questions about these dilemmas while reading “All the Light We Cannot See”:

• Is achieving success worth more than standing up for what is right?
• What is worth giving up my life for?
• Can I stand up to authority when authority is wrong?
• Can I stand up to the mob when the mob is wrong?
• What am I scared to lose that prevents me from doing the right thing?
• Is choosing to do nothing when I witness wrongdoings just as bad as the wrongdoings?

Contemplating these questions ahead of time will not prepare a person for what they will actually do if ever confronted with difficult situations. This is one reason I hesitate to condemn the actions of the military in combat and police officers while fighting crime in the street. When self-preservation is a natural instinct, everything and everyone else is an afterthought.

In the end, Werner is awestruck with Marie-Laure, another main character, and love ultimately transforms his thinking from his own self-preservation to thinking more about the well-being of another person. However, how far does this thinking go? Does Werner’s self-preservation only now extend to that of Marie-Laure?

“All the Light We Cannot See” is a solid novel with intriguing characters that is entertaining and thought provoking. It reinforces that doing the right thing and resisting despotism is difficult. Despite all the evolutionary progress humans have made, we are just animals looking to live another day.

Memorable Quotes

“After she has gone back to sleep, after Etienne has blown out his candle, he kneels for a long time beside his bed. The bony figure of Death rides the streets below, stopping his mount now and then to peer into windows. Horns of fire on his head and smoke leaking from his nostrils and, in his skeletal hands, a list newly charged with addresses. Gazing first at the crew of officers unloading from their limousines into the chateau. Then at the flowing rooms of the perfumer Claude Levitte. Then at the dark tall house of Etienne LeBlanc. Pass us by, Horseman. Pass this house by.”

---

“Don’t you want to be alive before you die?”

---

“Science, my lad, is made up of mistakes, but they are mistakes which it is useful to make, because they lead little by little to the truth.”

US Government and Roe vs Wade

 

Image courtesy of CLEANPNG.com

The United States of America is an interesting place with a complex system of government that seems dysfunctional and full of conflict. Many times the complexity results in many laws and regulations left in legal purgatory with no hope of being passed. Most US citizens lament this fact and accuse the government of being broken. But is it?

  To understand what is going on in US current events, it helps to understand how the federal government is set up and why it was set up the way it is. The federal government consists of 3 separate, but equal, branches of government: the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. The executive branch consists of the President, Vice President, Cabinet, and most federal agencies. The legislative branch is the House of Representatives and the Senate, which together, comprise the Congress. Finally, the judicial system is made up of the courts with the most infamous being the Supreme Court. Each of these branches have specific roles to fill, and by law, should not overreach their role by assuming the role of another branch. In addition, the roles are set up in such a way that a system of checks and balances is created that makes certain that the power of each branch is never exceeded. This design makes conflict inevitable and seems to be exactly what the Founding Fathers of the United States wanted in order to make sure the federal government was held in check.

  The most interesting branch of the federal government, however, is the Supreme Court. Tasked with interpreting laws made by the legislative branch, the judicial branch of government has an important oversight role in determining what legislation may be violating the Constitution. The lower courts usually make determinations on the lawfulness of a piece of legislation before the law is sent to the Supreme Court for a final ruling if an appeal process reaches this point. What the Supreme Court says is the final ruling on the law. If another law is brought forward to the Supreme Court that has legal precedent, many times the Supreme Court will let the precedent stand. However, the Supreme Court can overrule the precedent, which results in a change in the law as was done recently with the overturning of Roe vs Wade.

  Growing up Catholic, attending Catholic school from Kindergarten to 12 grade, and having a pro-life family has always caused me to question the decision of Roe vs Wade. I became curious about abortion in eigth grade and where the legality of such a practice began. During my eighth grade year, I started reading the Constitution and researching why the Supreme Court ruled the way they did, making abortion legal despite no explicit statement in the Constitution concerning the right to privacy. It seemed to me then, as it does now, that a very lenient interpretation of the Constitution was required to get to the decision. My feeling is the Supreme Court took a case and created a federal law based on weak Constitutional backing, making abortion legal and even going so far as to define pregnancy trimesters in order to specify the time periods when an abortion can be regulated and when it cannot. The behavior of the Supreme Court during this 1973 ruling seemed more legislative in nature than judicial.

  When the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade a few weeks ago, I was not surprised. When something is declared lawful based on implied arguments and is then codified in the courts and not through the legislative branch, it is only a matter of time when those implicit arguments can be countered and overruled as a bad judicial decision. From a legal standpoint, the overturning of Roe seems like a valid legal action. From a social standpoint, the negative and positive effects of this ruling will be felt across the country. At some point, the United States Congress will need to create laws that address the various issues that abortion spans, including:

• At what point in life is a person a person?
• When does a person have Constitutional rights?
• A biggie: Do US Citizens have a right to privacy and should it be put into federal law and maybe even added as another Constitutional Amendment?
• What extent can a US state outlaw its citizens from crossing state lines to do something legal in another state despite being illegal in their own state?