A Meal in Winter:

by: Hubert Mingarelli

page number: 95

published on: 2012

"I was always pierced by those thoughtful maternal displays of tenderness." (pg. 58)

A Meal in Winter depicts the story of three German soldiers stationed in Poland during World War 2. The German troops' duty is to capture and persecute run-away Jews. Soldiers split into two groups: one who finds and captures Jews and the other who does the killing. Those who can bring back a Jew to the camp get to avoid the direct act of killing and have a chance to search again the next day. The three main characters prefer to be in the searcher group to evade being in the firing squad. Nevertheless, they are still murderers, only ones who don't witness the bloody scene of the dead.

---

Conscience is the moral compass within us that separates the good from the bad. It causes us to feel guilt and remorse after we act wrongfully. Conscience is the noise in our inner dialogues that reminds us to take the morally right path. It is the element that leads people to be aware and grounded.

A Meal in Winter explains three soldiers' inner battles with their conscience. They are three people: Emmerich, Bauer, and the author. Emmerich is a German soldier who is constantly worried about his son. He is particularly distressed about his son smoking cigarettes- a strange thought to have in battle. Then there is Bauer, the oldest of them. He is a bold soldier with a habit of stealing. Lastly, there is the author. What stands out about the author is his dislike of seeing the personal belongings of Jews, not things produced in a factory but more memorable and unique pieces. He especially hates the snowflake knitting on the newly captured Jew's hat. He can't stand the sight of it. He regrets thinking that the mother who sewed it on won't see his son again. In his mind, the personal items humanizes the Jew, whom he must find and kill.

All three face a moral dilemma; they don't want to kill a Jew directly, but to avoid that means killing them indirectly. If they only capture and take the Jew to the camp, they don't see the killing and can justify their actions to their conscience. Maybe they will be free from the heavy sense of shame if they don't see the dead. But are they really free of the crime? Are they not to be blamed as much as the firing squad for finding the Jews and bringing them to their place of death? Is the blame only on the one who pulls the trigger, or can it also be on the ones who are silent and motionless in the face of injustice and cruelty?

personal rating of the book: 7/10