Nobility

In 1895, Alfred Nobel's will provided for the annual presentation of five prizes for signal achievements in specific fields. Nobel was a scientist, and the majority of the prizes were in scientific fields – Chemistry, Physics, and Physiology and Medicine. A fourth was to be given for literature.

There was also a fifth prize which was awarded in Norway rather than Nobel's home country of Sweden where the others were presented. Whether in Sweden or Norway, however, the ceremony is held in the presence of the King. These are noble prizes and merit the honorable supervision of nobility. Why he decided on the second venue is uncertain, but the prizes awarded by the Norwegian committee are usually the most prominent, and they have certainly caused the most controversy that the award has received. (A sixth prize, in Economic Sciences, was added in 1968 but it was funded by a Swedish bank and, although awarded at the same time and equated with them, it is not actually a “Nobel Prize.”) Although there is disagreement over the relative merits of their accomplishments, there is rarely any question about the worthiness of the ultimate winner of an award in one of the scientific fields. And while the literature prize recipients may be more subjectively chosen, the laureates are almost invariably meritorious and well chosen (although James Joyce was passed over for an award).

Would that the same could be said of the Peace Prize. There has been much criticism of the committee choosing the winners, as well as extensive second guessing of some of the recipients. In part this probably results from the public being better able to understand the issues involved than it might be in regard to, for example, physics. But the level of consternation that some of the awards have engendered reflects the fact that personal biases and politics have played a significant role in some of the choices. The awarding of a Peace Prize to Yassir Arafat is enough to make one wonder what the aim of the committee was, and honoring Henry Kissinger, for ending a war that was still going on, was, at best, premature. Many, however, considered it a mockery. Tom Lehrer, who wrote satirical songs in the latter half of the twentieth century, is reported to have said “Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger 'was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.'”

Another questionable award took place in 2009 when the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize to a President who had been in office for less than a year. It was for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” During his term, in the quest for peace as he sees it, he has angered our friends, lost the respect of our enemies, and diminished our nation's prestige. And in his entire term the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize he has not brought our nation a single day when we were not at war. The award was a victory of political bias over reality and common sense. It didn't reflect any accomplishments because there were none. It was merely a slap at the President's predecessor. Skoal.

I raise these points now because of the death last week of Elie Wiesel, 1986 winner of the award. [This essay is being written on July 7^th, 2016.] Notwithstanding the slanders of pro-Palestinians, Wiesel was one of the first to speak out about the horrors of the Holocaust, and one of the most vocal advocates of action to deal with other atrocities in whatever countries they occurred.

In his presentation speech, Egil Aarvik, Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, spoke of the terrible period of the Nazi crimes which Wiesel and millions of others had endured, and then said

… The duty and responsibility which Elie Wiesel preaches are not primarily concerned with the fear of the terrors of the past repeating themselves. It is much more an engagement directed at preventing the possible victory of evil forces in the future. The creative force in this process is not hate and revenge, but rather a longing for freedom, a love of life and a respect for human dignity. Or as Elie Wiesel has said himself: "I will conquer our murderers by attempting to reconstruct what they destroyed." … It is in recognition of this particular human spirit's victory over the powers of death and degradation, and as a support to the rebellion of good against the evil in the world, that the Norwegian Nobel Committee today presents the Nobel Peace Prize to Elie Wiesel. We do this on behalf of millions — from all peoples and races. We do it in deep reverence for the memory of the dead, but also with the deep felt hope that the prize will be a small contribution which will forward the cause which is the greatest of all humanity's concerns — the cause of peace.

And in his acceptance speech Wiesel said

… Words of gratitude. First to our common Creator. This is what the Jewish tradition commands us to do. At special occasions, one is duty-bound to recite the following prayer: "Barukh … shehekhyanu vekiymanu vehigianu lazman hazeh" — "Blessed be Thou for having sustained us until this day." … Do I have the right to represent the multitudes who have perished? Do I have the right to accept this great honor on their behalf? I do not. No one may speak for the dead, no one may interpret their mutilated dreams and visions. And yet, I sense their presence. I always do — and at this moment more than ever. The presence of my parents, that of my little sister. The presence of my teachers, my friends, my companions … This honor belongs to all the survivors and their children and, through us to the Jewish people with whose destiny I have always identified. … [Having suffered myself] I swore never to be silent whenever [and] wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. … Our lives no longer belong to us alone; they belong to all those who need us desperately.

This time they got it right.