Gimple The Fool Essay, Research Paper
Although
Gimpel did not die a fool he lived his life primarily as a fool. Singer’s use
of «Gimpel the Fool» demonstrated two lower levels of the human
scale. The first is the coward’s ability to justify to himself the reasoning
behind his behavior. The second is the crowd’s ability to pick out the weakling
and exploit him for their own amusement. Gimpel proved he was a fool by all
that he did. He allowed himself to be cornered, prodded, and teased yet he
never stood up for himself or what he knew to be the truth. He was forced into
a life created for the merriment of the villagers and refused to live a life
made by him (100). Further he was guilty of blindly loving a woman who would
never treat him as a human being. Gimpel did not think of himself as a fool but
every reaction betrayed his lie to himself. Gimpel did not make his own way
through life and allowed others to persuade his every thoughts. When the voice
of reason or logic presented itself, Gimpel chose to ignore common sense. Gimpel
was a fool despite his self-denial.As a
necessity of his community Gimpel served the purpose of bread maker and as in
all societies he served also as the scapegoat. Gimpel could have been an
integral part of his society but instead he was untrue to himself and he was
lost. The townspeople treated Gimpel much like the court jesters of the
renaissance period, turning the baker into the village harlequin. Although the
target of many pranks and antics, they were not directed at him for intentional
harm. He was the target though due to his accessibility and convenience.
Instead of seeking Gimpel out for his talents as the baker, Gimpel’s neighbors
sought him out to entertain themselves by ridiculing his naÏve nature. The
baker was not naÏve and when the town’s people came with their lies and pranks,
Gimpel knew what they were saying was not true (99). The village jester chose
to be laughed at as opposed to cause harm or offense. Possessing tact is an
asset but Gimpel defined tact as having no opinion but what the villagers gave
him. Gimpel seemed content living the life prepared for him by the villagers.
Gimpel reacted to what was provided to him and never acted on his own.
Throughout his life he was provided with numerous opportunities to evolve and
rise above the taunting and the meaningless existence in which he was embroiled
Gimpel became a product of his environment. A fool mocked by all.Gimpel
related to the reader his way of living in his society. «I had to believe
… If I ever dared to say, ‘Ah, you’re kidding’ there was trouble»
(99). All cultures and societies have their cruel side and people are expected
to cope but all creatures of these societies have their limits. Limits of pain,
pleasure, and tolerance. Unless a person is not aware he is the subject of
ridicule he will break when his limits are pressed. Gimpel did not appear to
have the limits, which inhabit human nature. Gimpel proved he was capable of
emotion during the absence from his wife Gimpel «felt it all very
bitterly. A longing took me, for her and for the child» (103). Gimpel
loved his child as his own and loved his wife for that. The emotions Gimpel
felt prove he was human. However, he was to half-witted to realize he was not
feeling all the consciousness inherent to his relationship. Gimpel further
experienced the human emotion of cowardice. By demonstrating his firm grasp of
this base human emotion he often invited himself for further ridicule and gibes
at the hands of his tormentors. Not once standing up for himself and becoming his
own person created the imbecile, which Gimpel was. The
impelled lifestyle of Gimpel involved loving a woman who could never love him
and who continuously mistreated him. Love may be blind but it is not dead. Love
has a keen sense of awareness, which allows people to understand and desire one
another. Elka had no love for Gimpel yet he convinced himself he loved Elka,
despite her caustic words and devious nature. Even in her death when Elka asked
for Gimpel’s forgiveness Elka does not feel remorse for Gimpel’s misconceptions
but instead wants «to go clean to my Maker» (106). On the evening of
their union Elka did not even wish to consummate the ceremony, yet bore a child
four months later. Elka performed her duties as Gimpel’s wife only by providing
him with children. Unfortunately none of which belonged to him. Even a person
secure in his relationship with a woman would have to doubt the validity of the
alliance. Secure and blissfully ignorant Gimpel lived with Elka and her lies
for twenty years. There was
a constant in Gimpel’s life other than the ugly banter and deceptions. The
rabbi was someone Gimpel could go to when he needed help. The rabbi, considered
the local fountain of wisdom, could be trusted for information and support.
Even with the assistance provided by the rabbi, Gimpel could not pull free of
his namesake. Gimpel refused to heed the advice of the rabbi even knowing the
rabbi had never said an unkind word. When the rabbi told Gimpel to divorce his
wife, Gimpel stayed with her despite all the shortcomings he had just described
to the bishop (103). Any other citizen would have obeyed the rabbi’s word, but
not Gimpel who lived his life in a fantasy world created by other’s minds.A man who
had designed his own life could not have fallen for the duplicity presented by
his society. Through trickery and deceit the townspeople shaped Gimpel into a
fool. A lack of fortitude and individual thought created a simpleton. His wife
and the town’s people took advantage of poor foolish Gimpel. While he might
have gained wisdom towards the end of his life Gimpel lost the respect entitled
to all human beings. Gimpel worked hard and acquired money and his own business
but he could have gained more had he not chose to be the village jester.?