critical-review范文

IntroductionInMan’sSearchforMeaning,ViktorE.FrankltellstheverypersonalstoryofhisexperienceasaprisonerinaconcentrationcampduringtheHolocaust.Hepresentsthisstoryintheformofanessayinwhichheshareshisargumentsandanalysisasadoctorandpsychologistaswellasaformerprisoner.ThispaperwillreviewFrankl’sstoryaswellashismainarguments,andwillevaluatethequalityofFrankl’swritingandfocusonanyareasofweaknesswithinthestory.SummaryThissectioncontainsasummaryofMan'sSearch.FranklbeginshisbookbystatingthathispurposeinwritingthebookisnottopresentfactsanddetailsoftheHolocaust,buttoprovideapersonalaccountoftheeverydaylifeofaprisonerlivinginaconcentrationcamp.Hestates,“Thistaleisnotconcernedwiththegreathorrors,whichhavealreadybeendescribedoftenenough(thoughlessoftenbelieved),but…itwilltrytoanswerthisquestion:Howwaseverydaylifeinaconcentrationcampreflectedinthemindoftheaverageprisoner?”(21).Franklthengoesontodescribethethreestagesofaprisoner’spsychologicalreactionstobeingheldcaptiveinaconcentrationcamp.Thefirstphase,whichoccursjustaftertheprisonerisadmittedtothecamp,isshock.Thesecondphase,occurringoncetheprisonerhasfallenintoaroutinewithinthecamp,isoneofapathy,or“thebluntingoftheemotionsandthefeelingthatonecouldnotanymore”(42).Thethirdphase,whichoccursaftertheprisonerhasbeenliberatedfromthecamp,isaperiodof“depersonalization”,inwhich“everythingappearsunreal,unlikely,asinadream”(110).Inthisphase,releasedprisonersalsofeelasenseof“bitternessanddisillusionment”whenreturningtotheirformerlives(113).Frankldescribeseachofthesephasesusingpsychologicaltheoryandprovidespersonalexperiencestoexemplifyeachofthestages.Author’sArgumentsAsdescribedabove,Frankl’smainpurposeforwritingthisbookistopresentandanalyzetheaverageprisoner’spsychologicalreactionstotheeverydaylifeofaconcentrationcamp.Histhreemainargumentsarehispresentationandanalysisofeachofthepsychologicalstagesthattheaverageconcentrationcampprisonerexperiences:shock,apathyanddepersonalization.Hebaseshisanalysesofeachofthesestagesontheactionsoftheprisonersandhisownpersonalthoughtsandreactionsasheexperiencedlifeinaconcentrationcamp.Forexample,Franklarguesthatthesecondphaseofapathyforces“theprisoner’slifedowntoaprimitivelevel”(47)inwhich“alleffortsandallemotionswerecenteredononetask:preservingone’sownlifeandthatoftheotherfellow”(47).Hebasesthistheoryoneventshewitnessedwhilelivinginthecamphimself,andstates,“Itwasnaturalthatthedesireforfoodwasthemajorprimitiveinstinctaroundwhichmentallifecentered.Letusobservethemajorityofprisonerswhentheyhappenedtoworkneareachotherandwere,foronce,notcloselywatched.Theywouldimmediatelystartdiscussingfood”(48).Franklcontinuouslyusesexamplesfromhisexperiencesintheconcentrationcamptoillustrateandstrengthenhispsychologicalargumentsthroughoutthetext.EvaluationThissectioncontainsanevaluationofFrankl’sbook.Firstly,theauthorisasurvivoroftheHolocaustandwasaprisonerofaconcentrationcamphimself,whichgiveshimthepersonalinsighttobeabletocommentonthepsychologicalconditionsofanaverageprisoner.However,thisalsocreatesabiasandbecauseofhispersonalexperience,heisunabletobeentirelyobjectiveinwritinghisanalysis.Franklacknowledgesthisbiasinthebeginningofhisbook,bystating,“Onlythemaninsideknows.Hisjudgmentsmaynotbeobjective,hisevaluationsmaybeoutofproportion.Thisisinevitable.Anattemptmustbemadetoavoidanypersonalbias,andthatistherealdifficultyofabookofthiskind”(24-25).Althoughheisawareofthisbias,itcreatesapartialitythatwillswaythereadersthroughouthisstoryanditservesasaminorweaknessinhiswritingstyle.AsecondweaknessinFrankl’swritingisintheassumptionshesometimesmakestoprovehispoint.Hemakesoverarchinggeneralizationsseveraltimesinhisbook,makingstatementsthat,althoughmayhavebeentrueforhimselfandthosearoundhim,mightnothavebeentrueforeveryprisonerineveryconcentrationcampduringtheHolocaust.Forexample,inoneinstance,hesays,“TheprisonerofAuschwitz,inthefirstphaseofshock,didnotfeardeath”(37).ItisveryboldtosaythatnoprisonerofAuschwitz,oneofthemostwell-knownanddeadlyconcentrationcampsoftheHolocaust,didnotfeardeath,asdeathwasallaroundthemandwasaveryrealthreatintheirdailylives.Althoughhemighthavenotfeareddeathduringhisphaseofshock,itisimpossibleforhimtoguaranteethatnoprisonerwasatallfearfulofdeathinthisfirstpsychologicalphase,andforhimtomakeoverarchingassumptionslikethisisaweaknesstotheoverallqualityofhisbook.Finally,Franklsometimesbecomestootechnicalandverboseinhiswritingstyle,whichmakesitveryhardfortheaveragereadertounderstand.Oneexampleofthisisasfollows.Franklstates,“Irememberanincidentwhentherewasanoccasionforpsychotherapeuticworkontheinmatesofawholehut,duetoanintensificationoftheirreceptivenessbecauseofacertainexternalsituation”(102).Thissentence,whichisoverlywordyandcomplicated,makesitdifficultfortheaveragereadertounderstandexactlywhatheissaying.Areadercaneasilygetfrustratedwhentryingtodeciphertheauthor’smeaningduetooverlycomplicatedlanguage,andthisisathirdweaknessofFrankl’swriting.ConclusionThiscriticalreviewhasevaluatedthebookMan’sSearchforMeaningbyViktorE.Frankl.ThepsychologicaltheoriesthatFranklpresents