Logan Lampkins

Mrs. Thomas
UWRT 1102-034
16 February 2015
I have MUCH more evidence and research materials now. Since making
the first draft, I have researched various experiments relating to my
question, and I am even more confident in my inquiry question.
Bystanding
The issue that interests me the most about the events of The Book
Thief is the effect of corruption on the citizens as well as the Jews. Onlookers
today cannot understand the psychological effect this event had on all types
of people, so it is hard for us to wrap our heads around how these people
were feeling as the events of the Holocaust were taking place. In The Book
Thief, I love to analyze the dialogue and actions of the characters because I
am curious about their mental state. This curiosity is what I wanted to center
my inquiry question around, but I didnt form a clear question until surfing
the Internet recently.
I saw a political post about how U.S. citizens are apathetic to bad
things happening to others around them. It was mentioned that citizens allow
corruption to happen to others around them as long as they arent involved.
This relates to my previous curiosity because it deals with how peoples
minds work as social issues are happening around them. From this, I
developed a clear question that I wanted to research: To what extent will

citizens let bad things happen as long as it does not involve them? In more
words, what is the level of apathy of citizens who arent involved in the
horror and corruption happening around them? I am wondering how all types
of citizens view and deal with these desperate situations.
Evidence for this question would come from research on the attitudes
of people living within the boundaries of the areas that Jews and other
minorities were captured from. I think that the attitudes of these people
would be similar if the same thing happened again today, with a few
differences including exposure to issues and the ability to help in different
ways. Who would risk their life to try and change something on a global or
even a local scale? The curiosity of a persons motives in certain situations
has sparked psychological studies such as the Stanford Prison Experiment in
1971, where volunteers played the roles of prisoners and prison guards in a
Stanford basement for six days. Participants exhibited psychological
instability that differed from their real personalities, pointing to the fact that
certain situations can alter a persons motives and actions. Similar studies
have been conducted in the past that involved measuring psychological
effects of simulated horrifying events, and they serve as good data for this
inquiry question.
In The Book Thief, questions arise about how Jews like Max deal with
the terror going on in the world, as well as the way citizens like the
Hubermanns view the situation. I think the story takes place in a time in
which it would be harder for average citizens to actively seek to stop the

corruption. With the Internet playing such an important role in culture today,
I think more awareness and more opinions would be revealed to the world if
an event like the Holocaust were to happen in todays time. However, there
are many exceptions to this, including the current use of slaves in Africa to
make the chocolate we eat every day. Events like this are rarely exposed to
everyone because of the small scale on which the events happen, but I think
an event like the Holocaust would cause the Internet to explode into anger.
Citizens like the Hubermanns would not approve of how the
government dealt with things, and this theory is supported through the
actions and concerns of Liesel and Hans Hubermann. Citizens at the time
could not speak out against Hitler or the government because of being
punished (usually with social shame), so I am wondering if average citizens
would have been willing to risk their lives and social status to speak out
against an issue they were against.
This inquiry question leads to a few other questions. Could the
corruption depicted in The Book Thief have been prevented earlier? Could it
have been stopped sooner if more world powers had taken interest in it, or
would it have dragged on longer if more parties were apathetic?
I came across a Christian Blog post about spiritual apathy
(http://pastortonysblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/spiritual-apathy.html), and I
came across a sentence that read, You don't care about what you dont
know. I believe this is very accurate and it is also true for not caring about
what doesn't AFFECT you. This is true for many people regarding issues such

as the events of The Book Thief, but I also think citizens are usually unable to
help because of a lack of voice. However, this could be used as an excuse to
dodge the problem, so I am wondering about the extent to which citizens will
put forth effort for the benefit of others, with no personal gain.