BEHIND THE SCREEN · B2/C1 · 50 min

Schindler's List

A businessman comes to occupied Poland to profit from war — and ends up spending his entire fortune to save the people he once merely exploited. The rescue is almost entirely true.

Today: you'll tell the story of Schindler's List — a Nazi Party businessman who arrives in occupied Poland to profit from war, then spends everything he has protecting the very workers he once simply exploited — discover how much of the film is documented history, and master participle clauses (present, perfect and past) for combining two ideas smoothly into one sentence.
Before we begin — talk it through: Can a person who starts out acting purely from self-interest still end up doing something genuinely good? Does it matter why someone helps others, or only that they helped? What do you already know about the Holocaust, and where does that knowledge come from?

The words for today's story

Work through the four short activities. Each word is shown in a situation that gives its meaning away — no need to know the film yet. Say your answer out loud first, then reveal.

A. Infer from context — what does the bold word mean?

1. While ordinary families went hungry, a small number of profiteers grew rich from the war, winning contracts to supply the army and pocketing enormous, unearned profits.
a profiteer (n) — a person who makes unfair or excessive profit from a crisis, war or shortage, usually at other people's expense.
2. The guard did not ask; he coerced the frightened workers into signing papers they had never even read, threatening them until they gave in.
to coerce (v) — to force someone to do something against their will, usually through threats or pressure.
3. Newspapers described the plight of the refugees: no shelter, no food, no legal papers, and nowhere left that would take them in.
a plight (n) — a very difficult, dangerous or unfortunate situation that someone is in.
4. Decades later, the elderly survivor gave her testimony to a historian, describing carefully, in her own words, exactly what she had lived through.
testimony (n) — a formal spoken or written account of what someone experienced or witnessed, often given as evidence.

B. Closest in meaning — which one is nearest?

5. ruthless is closest in meaning to: (a) gentle   (b) merciless   (c) careless
(b) merciless — ruthless (adj) means having no pity or compassion, and willing to cause harm to get what you want.
6. liberation is closest in meaning to: (a) freedom   (b) punishment   (c) confusion
(a) freedom — liberation (n) means the act of being set free from imprisonment, oppression or control.

C. Which meaning fits? (choose a, b or c)

7. The trial presented evidence of atrocities committed during the occupation — acts so cruel that the courtroom fell silent as each one was read aloud.
An atrocity is: (a) a small mistake; (b) an extremely cruel and violent act; (c) a legal document.
(b) — an atrocity (n) — an extremely cruel, violent or shocking act, especially one committed against people who cannot defend themselves.
8. The unscrupulous merchant sold fake medicine to desperate families, knowing it wouldn't work and not caring who got hurt.
Someone unscrupulous is: (a) careful and honest; (b) willing to act dishonestly without any moral concern; (c) extremely generous.
(b) — unscrupulous (adj) — willing to act dishonestly or unfairly, without being troubled by conscience.

D. Infer from context — two bigger ideas

9. After years of selfish choices, his quiet act of courage at the end of his life felt like a kind of redemption — proof that a person can still choose to do right, even very late.
redemption (n) — the act of making up for past wrongdoing, or being changed for the better after a former, worse version of yourself.
10. When the war ended and the full truth came out, many who had looked away faced a moral reckoning — a moment when they had to confront what they had allowed to happen.
a reckoning (n) — a time when past actions are judged or faced, especially wrongdoing that can no longer be avoided or denied.

Now use them — out loud

Talk it through before we watch:
  • Using profiteer, coerce and plight, predict: what kind of person might begin a story like this purely for money?
  • Which of these words feel hopeful (redemption, liberation, testimony), and which feel darker (atrocity, ruthless, unscrupulous)? Sort them out loud and say why.

The film, in three parts

Steven Spielberg's Schindler's List (1993). This film concerns the Holocaust, and we treat it with the seriousness it deserves. Read each part, try the quick check from memory, then discuss. (There are spoilers ahead — that's the point; we're here to talk about it.)

Part 1 — A businessman in occupied Poland

In 1939, Oskar Schindler — a German businessman and a member of the Nazi Party, chiefly because of the useful connections it brought him — arrives in newly occupied Kraków, Poland. Where others see a city at war, he sees an opportunity: he takes control of an enamelware factory and wins lucrative contracts to supply pots and mess kits to the army. To staff it cheaply, he employs Jewish workers from the city's ghetto, where Jewish families have been forced to live under harsh restrictions. At this point, Schindler treats them as he treats everyone — as a means to an end. He charms and bribes local officials with gifts and lavish parties, and cares, above all, about the factory's profits.

Among the workers is Itzhak Stern, a careful, quietly resourceful Jewish accountant who ends up managing the factory's books. Stern says little, but he steers workers toward jobs that might protect them, and, almost without Schindler noticing, begins to nudge his employer's conscience.

Quick check — answer from memory, then reveal:

1. Why does Schindler come to Kraków, and how does he first treat the Jewish workers he employs?

2. Who is Itzhak Stern, and what role does he quietly begin to play?

1. He comes to profit from the war, taking over a factory and using cheap forced Jewish labour; at first he sees the workers purely as a business asset.

2. Stern is the Jewish accountant who runs the factory's books; he quietly tries to protect workers and, over time, influences how Schindler sees them.

Discuss:
  • Schindler, at this point, acts purely out of self-interest. Have you ever known someone who seemed to change a great deal over time — for better or worse?

Part 2 — Witnessing the horror

As the war continues, the situation for Kraków's Jewish community grows steadily worse. The ghetto is violently cleared, and its people are forced into the brutal Płaszów forced-labour camp, run by SS commandant Amon Göth — a man capable of shocking, arbitrary cruelty. Schindler witnesses part of this clearance directly, and for the first time grasps the true scale of what is happening around him. He can no longer see his workers merely as cheap labour.

Quietly, and then more boldly, he begins to act. He bribes Göth and other officials, insisting his Jewish workers are "essential" to the war effort so that they can stay inside his own factory rather than the camp. It is a small, practical form of protection at first — but it grows, and it costs him more and more of his own money and reputation.

Quick check — answer from memory, then reveal:

1. What happens to Kraków's Jewish community, and who runs the camp many of them are sent to?

2. How does witnessing this change the way Schindler treats his own workers?

1. The ghetto is cleared and many are sent to the Płaszów forced-labour camp, run by the commandant Amon Göth.

2. Schindler begins bribing officials to keep his workers inside his own factory, calling them essential — an early, practical act of protection.

Discuss:
  • Schindler protects the workers within his reach, not everyone. Is limited, practical help — saving the people you personally can — still meaningful, even though it can't save everyone?

Part 3 — The list

As the Soviet army advances and the camps begin to be emptied — with many prisoners sent onward to Auschwitz — Schindler makes his boldest move. He persuades officials to let him relocate his entire workforce to a new factory far from the front, in Brünnlitz. To do it, he and Stern draw up a careful list of names: the workers to be moved and, in effect, saved. It becomes known simply as "Schindler's list." Getting it approved, and keeping everyone alive once they arrive, costs him nearly everything he owns — spent entirely on bribes, favours and false paperwork.

When Germany surrenders, Schindler — a Nazi Party member and now, in the Allies' eyes, a wanted man — must flee westward with nothing. Before he goes, his workers present him with a ring, made from gold they had pooled together, engraved with a line from Jewish tradition: "Whoever saves one life saves the world entire." Around 1,100 people who had been named on that list survived the war.

Quick check — answer from memory, then reveal:

1. What does Schindler arrange as the Soviet army approaches, and what does it cost him?

2. What do the workers give Schindler before he flees, and what does its inscription mean?

1. He arranges for his workforce to be moved to a new factory in Brünnlitz, drawing up a list of names to save; it costs him almost his entire fortune.

2. A ring engraved with a Jewish saying meaning that whoever saves even one life has, in effect, saved an entire world.

Discuss:
  • The man who arrived only to profit ends the story having spent his entire fortune protecting others. What do you think finally changed him — one moment, or many small ones added together?

Grammar — participle clauses

Schindler's transformation happens in stages, and English has a neat tool for linking two connected ideas into one flowing sentence without repeating the subject: the participle clause. There are three forms, and each carries a slightly different meaning.

The three forms:
• present participle (-ing) — an action happening at the same time as, or causing, another; the subject is doing the action: "Realising what was coming, he drew up a list."
• perfect participle (having + past participle) — one action fully finished before another: "Having made a fortune, Schindler began spending it to save lives."
• past participle (-ed / irregular) — a passive meaning: the subject receives the action rather than doing it: "The workers named on the list survived." (the workers were named, by someone else)
Feel the difference:
• -ing = the subject is actively doing something, often at the same moment as the main verb: "Watching the ghetto being cleared, he understood."
• having + past participle = the first action is completely finished before the second starts: "Having lost almost everything he owned, he felt strangely free."
• -ed / past participle = the subject is on the receiving end — something is done to them: "Bribed with gifts and money, the officials looked the other way."

1. Present, perfect or past participle? Choose the form the meaning needs

Read the meaning in brackets and complete the sentence.

1. (arrive) in Kraków with nothing but ambition, Schindler saw the war as a business opportunity. (happening at the same time as he arrived)

2. (witness) the brutality of the camp with his own eyes, he began to see his workers differently. (completed before the change in him)

3. (choose) for the new factory, a worker's name could mean the difference between life and the camp. (the worker receives the action — passive meaning)

1. Arriving (present participle — simultaneous with the main action)

2. Having witnessed (perfect participle — finished before the change)

3. Chosen (past participle — passive meaning)

2. Fix the form

Each sentence has the right idea but the wrong participle form. Write the corrected form.

1. Understand the risk he was taking, Schindler nevertheless kept bribing officials.

2. Have spent almost everything he owned, Schindler left the war a poor man.

3. Protect by Schindler's factory, hundreds of workers avoided the camps altogether.

1. Understanding (present participle)

2. Having spent (perfect participle)

3. Protected (past participle)

3. Complete the story — mix all three forms

Fill each gap with a present, perfect or past participle. Read it aloud when you're done.

(arrive) in occupied Poland, Schindler first saw only profit in the chaos around him. (grow) close to his Jewish workers over the following years, he slowly began to change. (horrify) by what he had seen at Płaszów, he started spending his own money to protect them. By 1944, (draw up) a list of almost 1,100 names, he had turned his factory into a place of safety. The workers (save) by that list would call themselves the Schindlerjuden for the rest of their lives.

Having arrived · Growing · Horrified · having drawn up · saved

Notice the pattern: an action finished before another uses having + past participle; an action happening alongside another uses the -ing form; and a subject receiving an action uses the past participle.

Carry these into the Speak tab — Schindler's whole story can be told as a chain of participle clauses, one change leading quietly into the next.

The Real Story — how much of this is true?

Schindler's List is based on real people and real, documented events. The film is adapted from Thomas Keneally's 1982 historical novel Schindler's Ark (published in the United States, and later everywhere, as Schindler's List), which Keneally wrote after a chance meeting with a Schindler survivor, Leopold "Poldek" Pfefferberg, in Los Angeles. The book won the Booker Prize.

The real Oskar Schindler and the Schindlerjuden

Oskar Schindler really did run an enamelware factory, "Emalia," in Kraków, and really did employ Jewish forced labourers — a workforce that grew from around 150 in 1940 to roughly 1,100 by 1944. As conditions worsened, he really did bribe officials to move his workers to a new factory in Brünnlitz rather than let them be sent to Auschwitz, and a real list of names was drawn up to make that move possible. Around 1,100 Jews were saved this way; they came to be known as the Schindlerjuden — the "Schindler Jews."

It is worth being honest about who Schindler really was: not a natural hero, but a flawed man — a war profiteer, a heavy drinker, and, yes, a member of the Nazi Party, who came to Poland purely to get rich. That he nonetheless risked his life and spent his entire fortune protecting others makes the rescue more remarkable, not less.

Amon Göth was a real commandant — and faced real justice

Amon Göth, the SS commandant of the Płaszów camp shown in the film, was a real person. After the war, he was tried by the Supreme National Tribunal of Poland in Kraków in 1946, convicted of the atrocities committed under his command, and executed by hanging in September 1946 — at a prison in the same city where his crimes took place.

How the film tells it: black-and-white, and the girl in the red coat

Spielberg shot almost the entire film in black-and-white, deliberately echoing the look of historical newsreel and documentary footage from the period. The one famous exception is a small girl in a red coat, glimpsed briefly during the ghetto's clearance — filmed in colour and then treated frame-by-frame so that only her coat keeps its colour. She marks the moment the film's makers intend as Schindler's true turning point: a single, visible individual amid mass suffering, impossible to look away from.

The ring given to Schindler by his workers, inscribed with the line "Whoever saves one life saves the world entire," is a real Talmudic saying (from the Mishnah), and reflects genuine gratitude from survivors. In 1993, Yad Vashem — Israel's official Holocaust remembrance authority — formally recognised Oskar and his wife Emilie Schindler as "Righteous Among the Nations," its highest honour for non-Jews who risked themselves to save Jewish lives. Schindler died in poverty in 1974; at his own request, he is buried in Jerusalem, the only former Nazi Party member laid to rest there.

Take these into the discussion:
  • Before this lesson, did you know the story was based so closely on real events and real people?
  • Does it change how you feel about Schindler to know he was genuinely flawed — a profiteer and a party member — before he became a rescuer?
  • What do you make of the idea, inscribed on that ring, that saving even one life is like saving an entire world?

Speak

This is the heart of the lesson — do it all out loud. The timer keeps you going; fill the time with detail, and treat the subject with the seriousness it deserves.

Useful language: reach for today's grammar to link Schindler's story into flowing sentences — present participle ("Arriving in Kraków, he saw only opportunity"), perfect participle ("Having witnessed the horror, he could not look away"), and past participle ("Protected by his factory, hundreds survived"). For opinions: "What's striking is…", "You could argue that…", "On one level… but on another…".
Time remaining: 4:00
Task A · Tell the story (4 minutes)

Tell the story of Schindler's List in your own words, as if to someone who has never seen it. Move through the arc: a businessman arrives to profit from war → he witnesses the horror of the ghetto's clearance and the Płaszów camp → he begins bribing officials to protect his workers → he spends his whole fortune drawing up "the list" and moving them to safety → he flees, and around 1,100 people survive.

Work in at least five key words (profiteer, coerce, plight, testimony, ruthless, liberation, atrocity, unscrupulous, redemption, reckoning), and use at least one participle clause of each type when you reach the turning points of the story.

Task B · Does the motive matter? (4 minutes)

Schindler began purely out of self-interest and ended up risking everything to save others. Build an argument: does it matter why someone does good, as long as the outcome is real — or is help that begins selfishly somehow less admirable than help that was always selfless? Bring in other examples you know of people, companies or governments whose motives were mixed.

Task C · Ordinary people, extraordinary choices (4 minutes)

Very few people in Schindler's position acted as he did; most looked away. What do you think allows some ordinary people to take enormous personal risks to help others, while most do not?

Stuck for an idea? Pick one of these and run with it:

  • A time in your own life when you had to decide whether to speak up or stay silent.
  • Someone you know, or have read about, who took a real risk to help another person.
  • Whether history remembers rescuers fairly, or focuses too much on the perpetrators.
  • What you think you would have done in Stern's position — quietly protecting people from within the system.
  • Why "Whoever saves one life saves the world entire" might be a useful idea to live by.
  • A film, book or documentary about a real historical rescue that affected you.

To finish — the bigger questions

  1. The film's title is a list of names — the most ordinary of documents — and yet it stands for around 1,100 saved lives. Why might something so plain carry so much weight?
  2. Schindler died in 1974, largely forgotten and in financial difficulty. Do you think history has judged him fairly, now that his story is so widely known?
  3. Is it right for a film about the Holocaust to be told partly through one rescuer's story, rather than only through the experience of the victims? What are the risks and the value of that choice?
  4. Before you go — from memory: give one sentence with a present participle clause, one with a perfect participle clause, and one with a past participle clause, all about Schindler's story.