What do you think?
Rate this book
The Auschwitz Kommandant: A Daughter's Search for the Father She Never Knew
Detailing an uncommon upbringing of relative wealth and comfort in World War II Poland, this record spotlights the childhood of a prominent Nazi’s daughter. Depicting her father’s ascension to command Auschwitz, the most infamous of all concentration camps, the author reveals his relationship with his family, his unceasing love for his mistress, and the very separate life he led as a senior officer of the S.S. Chronicling his capture at the end of the war, this narrative also documents his imprisonment at Dachau and Nuremburg, his sentencing at the Auschwitz Trial in Krakow, and his subsequent execution. Recounting a shocking tale with clarity and without judgment, this riveting autobiography embodies one woman’s unwavering mission to resolve her own past.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published May 1, 2009
19 people are currently reading
187 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
September 23, 2014
The Auschwitz Kommandant: a daughter’s memoirs about Arthur Wilhelm Liebehenschel
Arthur Wilhelm Liebehenschel is often contrasted to Rudolf Höss, to indicate that he was the “good” or “more humane” Commandant of Auschwitz, who ruled the notorious concentration camp from December 1943 to May 1944. His daughter from his first marriage, Barbara Cherish, does everything to exonerate her father’s tarnished image and to confirm a rosier picture of his deeds in her memoir, The Auschwitz Kommandant: A Daughter’s Search for the Father She Never Knew (United Kingdom: The History Press, 2009). There is no doubt that Liebehenschel was widely regarded as less brutal than Höss. Once he took over Auschwitz concentration camp from Höss, he eliminated the notorious “standing cells”, where prisoners were punished by standing for days without food and water in rooms smaller than a closet. He also put a stop to the selections for regular prisoners who were already in the concentration camp. While the sadistic punishment of inmates, particularly of Jews, was (at the very least) tolerated by Höss, Liebehenschel took steps to discourage the severe punishments and forms of torture of camp inmates. According to Hermann Langbein, a prisoner in the Auschwitz infirmary, “in general one could establish that even those SS members who were very bloodthirsty before became a bit more reserved because they realized that their fanaticism would not necessarily be tolerated anymore”.
Perhaps Liebehenschel’s reputation for relative “leniency” played a role in his transfer from Auschwitz in the spring of 1944 and replacement with the previous commandant, Rudolf Höss. Known for his callousness and efficiency, Höss was called back to Auschwitz to facilitate the extermination of nearly 500,000 Hungarian Jews deported to the concentration camp during the spring and summer of 1944. Liebehenschel was put in charge of the Majdanek extermination camp (outside Lublin) in May of 1944. Although initially a labor rather than a death camp, Majdanek was transformed into an extermination camp of enormous proportions once Operation Reinhard (October 1941-November 1943), which stipulated the mass murder of all Jews in occupied (General Government) Poland, was put into effect. At the end of WWII, Liebehenschel was arrested by the American Army and imprisoned for a short while in Dachau (under conditions he himself described as humane). He was then extradited to Krakow to stand trial for crimes against humanity. Like Höss, the other Auschwitz Commandant, he was found guilty and sentenced to death by hanging on January 28, 1948. Evidently, the law didn’t distinguish between his crimes and those of Höss. Should we?
For me, reading the obviously biased memoirs of a daughter in search of her own identity by exploring her father’s dark past, raises the following question: is there a real difference between men like Rudolf Höss and men like Arthur Liebehenschel; between “harsh” and “more humane” SS leaders? Although this memoir is meant to raise such a question in its readers’ minds, in my opinion, the answers it provides won’t be that satisfying. Exonerating her father, making apologies for his murderous deeds and, to some extent, even covering up the outright lies he tells the court in Krakow—testifying during the trial that he didn’t know about the crematoria in either Auschwitz or Majdanek and wasn’t in any way involved in either--this memoir offers an extremely partial version of the facts and a deeply flawed moral perspective. There really was no way one could be a so-called “humane” Auschwitz commander. This is a contradiction in terms. There was nothing humane about life in a Nazi concentration camp.
However, I do believe that just as there were differences in attitude and behavior among the SS officers at the camp—some of whom did their “job” with relish and sadism in punishing the prisoners, others who tried to avoid or minimize the punishments—the same can be said about the differences between Höss and Liebehenschel. This doesn’t in any way excuse the mass murders committed by either man. If we draw a distinction between the two Auschwitz commandants it’s to better understand Hannah Arendt’s notion of the “banality of evil,” which plays a big role in our attempts to understand Nazi behavior. Unlike Arendt, however, I believe that there was nothing commonplace or “banal” about the evil of men like Eichmann, whom she uses as her main example of this concept in Eichmann in Jerusalem, or of men like Höss. These two Nazi leaders exemplified extraordinary evil, going far and beyond the call of duty. Both, in fact, played a big role in masterminding the deportation and extermination of almost half a million of Hungarian Jews during a time when it was evident Germany had already lost the war.
In my estimation, the concept of the banality of evil” as described by Arendt applies much better to ordinary men such as Arthur Liebehenschel. His daughter’s claims that Liebehenschel didn’t like to see death and violence, learned mostly second-hand from her correspondence with Anneliesse, her father’s second wife, are corroborated to some extent by Auschwitz survivors’ testimonies. At the same time, the Auschwitz Kommandant still oversaw the deaths of thousands of innocent human beings, who spent their last days in conditions that were, in themselves, sheer torture even if actual physical torture was discouraged.
Furthermore, according to Cherish’s own account, Liebehenschel was a loyal German and a fervent Nazi: without these qualities he couldn’t have risen in the ranks of the SS. In different times, Arthur Liebehenschel could have played a role in better causes. In Nazi Germany, however, his ambition and misplaced loyalty to Hitler’s regime led him to play a significant role in “the banality of evil”: namely, in committing gravely immoral acts against tens of thousands of innocent human beings, without any particular hatred for the victims or zest for violence.
Claudia Moscovici, Holocaust Memory
Arthur Wilhelm Liebehenschel is often contrasted to Rudolf Höss, to indicate that he was the “good” or “more humane” Commandant of Auschwitz, who ruled the notorious concentration camp from December 1943 to May 1944. His daughter from his first marriage, Barbara Cherish, does everything to exonerate her father’s tarnished image and to confirm a rosier picture of his deeds in her memoir, The Auschwitz Kommandant: A Daughter’s Search for the Father She Never Knew (United Kingdom: The History Press, 2009). There is no doubt that Liebehenschel was widely regarded as less brutal than Höss. Once he took over Auschwitz concentration camp from Höss, he eliminated the notorious “standing cells”, where prisoners were punished by standing for days without food and water in rooms smaller than a closet. He also put a stop to the selections for regular prisoners who were already in the concentration camp. While the sadistic punishment of inmates, particularly of Jews, was (at the very least) tolerated by Höss, Liebehenschel took steps to discourage the severe punishments and forms of torture of camp inmates. According to Hermann Langbein, a prisoner in the Auschwitz infirmary, “in general one could establish that even those SS members who were very bloodthirsty before became a bit more reserved because they realized that their fanaticism would not necessarily be tolerated anymore”.
Perhaps Liebehenschel’s reputation for relative “leniency” played a role in his transfer from Auschwitz in the spring of 1944 and replacement with the previous commandant, Rudolf Höss. Known for his callousness and efficiency, Höss was called back to Auschwitz to facilitate the extermination of nearly 500,000 Hungarian Jews deported to the concentration camp during the spring and summer of 1944. Liebehenschel was put in charge of the Majdanek extermination camp (outside Lublin) in May of 1944. Although initially a labor rather than a death camp, Majdanek was transformed into an extermination camp of enormous proportions once Operation Reinhard (October 1941-November 1943), which stipulated the mass murder of all Jews in occupied (General Government) Poland, was put into effect. At the end of WWII, Liebehenschel was arrested by the American Army and imprisoned for a short while in Dachau (under conditions he himself described as humane). He was then extradited to Krakow to stand trial for crimes against humanity. Like Höss, the other Auschwitz Commandant, he was found guilty and sentenced to death by hanging on January 28, 1948. Evidently, the law didn’t distinguish between his crimes and those of Höss. Should we?
For me, reading the obviously biased memoirs of a daughter in search of her own identity by exploring her father’s dark past, raises the following question: is there a real difference between men like Rudolf Höss and men like Arthur Liebehenschel; between “harsh” and “more humane” SS leaders? Although this memoir is meant to raise such a question in its readers’ minds, in my opinion, the answers it provides won’t be that satisfying. Exonerating her father, making apologies for his murderous deeds and, to some extent, even covering up the outright lies he tells the court in Krakow—testifying during the trial that he didn’t know about the crematoria in either Auschwitz or Majdanek and wasn’t in any way involved in either--this memoir offers an extremely partial version of the facts and a deeply flawed moral perspective. There really was no way one could be a so-called “humane” Auschwitz commander. This is a contradiction in terms. There was nothing humane about life in a Nazi concentration camp.
However, I do believe that just as there were differences in attitude and behavior among the SS officers at the camp—some of whom did their “job” with relish and sadism in punishing the prisoners, others who tried to avoid or minimize the punishments—the same can be said about the differences between Höss and Liebehenschel. This doesn’t in any way excuse the mass murders committed by either man. If we draw a distinction between the two Auschwitz commandants it’s to better understand Hannah Arendt’s notion of the “banality of evil,” which plays a big role in our attempts to understand Nazi behavior. Unlike Arendt, however, I believe that there was nothing commonplace or “banal” about the evil of men like Eichmann, whom she uses as her main example of this concept in Eichmann in Jerusalem, or of men like Höss. These two Nazi leaders exemplified extraordinary evil, going far and beyond the call of duty. Both, in fact, played a big role in masterminding the deportation and extermination of almost half a million of Hungarian Jews during a time when it was evident Germany had already lost the war.
In my estimation, the concept of the banality of evil” as described by Arendt applies much better to ordinary men such as Arthur Liebehenschel. His daughter’s claims that Liebehenschel didn’t like to see death and violence, learned mostly second-hand from her correspondence with Anneliesse, her father’s second wife, are corroborated to some extent by Auschwitz survivors’ testimonies. At the same time, the Auschwitz Kommandant still oversaw the deaths of thousands of innocent human beings, who spent their last days in conditions that were, in themselves, sheer torture even if actual physical torture was discouraged.
Furthermore, according to Cherish’s own account, Liebehenschel was a loyal German and a fervent Nazi: without these qualities he couldn’t have risen in the ranks of the SS. In different times, Arthur Liebehenschel could have played a role in better causes. In Nazi Germany, however, his ambition and misplaced loyalty to Hitler’s regime led him to play a significant role in “the banality of evil”: namely, in committing gravely immoral acts against tens of thousands of innocent human beings, without any particular hatred for the victims or zest for violence.
Claudia Moscovici, Holocaust Memory
June 22, 2020
I first read about the controversial Auschwitz Kommandant Liebehenschel in H. Langbein’s study, “People in Auschwitz.” According to Langbein’s personal observations and the testimonies he gathered from other inmates, Arthur Liebehenschel was “the humane Kommandant,” who immediately put a stop to the standing cells practice in Auschwitz, prohibited the beatings, actively fought with the camp’s political division, and tried to stop systematic gassings and selections. I need hardly add, I was intrigued. Naturally, as soon as I came across Liebehenschel’s daughter Barbara’s memoir/biography, I just knew I had to pick it up and I wasn’t disappointed.
Barbara’s memoir is basically a search for a father she never knew (he left his first wife and their four children in 1944 when Barabara was still a very small child and therefore, she has virtually no memories of him). It’s always a challenge for a family member, and particularly a child, to paint an objective picture of their parent and to her credit, Barbara did a great job in this respect. Meticulously piecing together the memories of her own siblings and Liebehenschel’s second wife whom she interviewed for this book, survivors’ witness testimonies, transcripts of interrogations, and Liebehenschel’s own journals, she paints a portrait of an essentially soft-hearted man who pledged his allegiance to the regime he had later grown severely disappointed in (just to name one incident: during a party given at his house, Liebehenschel got drunk and threw an empty glass of champagne at the portrait of Hitler in front of his guests - an act of defiance, for which he was later placed under house arrest by Himmler and later transferred to Auschwitz in punishment). It was actually uplifting to read about a Kommandant, who was firmly against beatings and torture and forbade the SS and Kapos to physically abuse the inmates while he was in charge; who personally tasted the soup in the kitchen and spoke to the inmates about the matters that concerned them the most and tried to help them as much as he could. He was eventually removed from his post for being too soft prior to the so-called Hungarian Aktion and replaced by Höss once again, who had no such qualms concerning the inmates or their extermination.
Was he an innocent man? Of course, not. But he is not your typical callous, brutal SS officer either. In the end, my personal opinion of him and his sentence is pretty much the same as Dr. Danimann’s, an Auschwitz survivor: “It is my belief that Arthur Liebehenschel’s death sentence was probably historically and legally a just verdict but because of his diverse and positive initiatives, which helped many prisoners, he should have been given an amnesty.”
I read it as part of the research for my own project but I would definitely recommend it to everyone interested in the history of WWII and the Holocaust.
Barbara’s memoir is basically a search for a father she never knew (he left his first wife and their four children in 1944 when Barabara was still a very small child and therefore, she has virtually no memories of him). It’s always a challenge for a family member, and particularly a child, to paint an objective picture of their parent and to her credit, Barbara did a great job in this respect. Meticulously piecing together the memories of her own siblings and Liebehenschel’s second wife whom she interviewed for this book, survivors’ witness testimonies, transcripts of interrogations, and Liebehenschel’s own journals, she paints a portrait of an essentially soft-hearted man who pledged his allegiance to the regime he had later grown severely disappointed in (just to name one incident: during a party given at his house, Liebehenschel got drunk and threw an empty glass of champagne at the portrait of Hitler in front of his guests - an act of defiance, for which he was later placed under house arrest by Himmler and later transferred to Auschwitz in punishment). It was actually uplifting to read about a Kommandant, who was firmly against beatings and torture and forbade the SS and Kapos to physically abuse the inmates while he was in charge; who personally tasted the soup in the kitchen and spoke to the inmates about the matters that concerned them the most and tried to help them as much as he could. He was eventually removed from his post for being too soft prior to the so-called Hungarian Aktion and replaced by Höss once again, who had no such qualms concerning the inmates or their extermination.
Was he an innocent man? Of course, not. But he is not your typical callous, brutal SS officer either. In the end, my personal opinion of him and his sentence is pretty much the same as Dr. Danimann’s, an Auschwitz survivor: “It is my belief that Arthur Liebehenschel’s death sentence was probably historically and legally a just verdict but because of his diverse and positive initiatives, which helped many prisoners, he should have been given an amnesty.”
I read it as part of the research for my own project but I would definitely recommend it to everyone interested in the history of WWII and the Holocaust.
October 28, 2013
I gave this book a '5' rating, i.e. an 'excellent', because of what it represents rather than its' literary standards. i.e. Ms Cherish embarked on a very fraught and daunting journey into her dark and troubled past, and emerged a better person for having had the courage to come face to face with, and rationalise, the awful reality of her fathers' part in the SS machine. She also, as an 'amateur', then set about building her account, which is both harrowing in places, and evocative in others, into a readable book which became more readable as I realised the depth and courage of her story. Yes, I did indeed find the book lacking in what might be termed as 'normal' authorship skills, and sometimes a bit hard to follow due to 'backwarding & forwarding' during the story, however by the time I reached the end I had decided that this was entirely forgiveable as she clearly wanted to precisely set down what she had found, and her own thoughts, without the meddling of a 'professional'. I noticed in the book, near the end, that one of the 'sympathetic' camp survivors asked her 'whom did she think would read her book', and I sense it brought her up with a jerk. Then she realised the wisdom of the question, but persisted anyway, and again I give her top marks for courage. She has not been retiscent in acknowledging the part her father played in the overall horror of the SS, and their treatment of all it's victims especially the jews, however she does so, thankfully, without endless agonising over something she had no part in.
I borrowed the book from our local library and noted, with surprise, that between Aug '09 and Jun '12, up to 16 persons had already loaned it, and that does not include anyone that has borrowed it since then using the 'electronic' loan system. My surprise stems from the fact that I had, like the ex-inmate, a lurking doubt in my own mind as to who would be interested. It was also enlightening to note that one of her own friends had, in essence, said that nothing could excuse the Nazi SS especially not a heart-tugging book. But that view is narrow, and blinded to the fact that little in life is really black-and-white. In any case, as I said, Barbara Cherish's book is candid, harrowing, evocative, and interesting all in one. But it won't appeal to anyone who has either a closed mind, or has not the stamina to wade through a lot of archive material, plus some plainly emotional supposition and/or recollection, in order to see how Ms. Cherish finally emerged from her journey of discovery. She clearly was, and is, quite a lady! And all credit to her adoptive parents.
I borrowed the book from our local library and noted, with surprise, that between Aug '09 and Jun '12, up to 16 persons had already loaned it, and that does not include anyone that has borrowed it since then using the 'electronic' loan system. My surprise stems from the fact that I had, like the ex-inmate, a lurking doubt in my own mind as to who would be interested. It was also enlightening to note that one of her own friends had, in essence, said that nothing could excuse the Nazi SS especially not a heart-tugging book. But that view is narrow, and blinded to the fact that little in life is really black-and-white. In any case, as I said, Barbara Cherish's book is candid, harrowing, evocative, and interesting all in one. But it won't appeal to anyone who has either a closed mind, or has not the stamina to wade through a lot of archive material, plus some plainly emotional supposition and/or recollection, in order to see how Ms. Cherish finally emerged from her journey of discovery. She clearly was, and is, quite a lady! And all credit to her adoptive parents.
August 7, 2016
I found this a really interesting book. It was repetitive in places and disjointed in others though, hence not giving it 5 stars. I appreciated that the author had a need to find out as much as she could about her father and wanting to share what she found with the world. I felt conflicted by the end. Sympathy for her never being able to have a relationship with him, but also, surprisingly, some sympathy for him. I never thought I'd say that about anyone connected to the Holocaust. On the one hand, he wasn't forced to join the Nazis or become a member of the SS Death's Head Unit, he did that presumably of his own free will, so must have known what he was getting into. But on the other hand, this book and others I've found him mentioned in, have said how 'soft' he was on the prisoners and how things at Auschwitz were much easier for the prisoners for the short time that he was in command. The author herself has found surviving prisoners who say he was very lenient; no executions took place while he was at the camp because he refused to obey Himmler's mass execution orders. He was punished for his 'softness' by being sent away from Auschwitz. Yet he received a death sentence anyway and I'm not completely convinced that he should have because I can't say for definite what he knew and didn't know. If you have any interest at all in the second world war then this book should be on your 'to read' list because it tells a very personal story from a much different viewpoint than any other books I've read on this topic, backed up by sections of transcripts from his trial, official letters and personal journal entries.
August 28, 2013
loved every minute of this book,what a journey this lady had excellent book.
February 11, 2015
excellent book
November 28, 2017
Very emotional ... detailed .. a cry in anguish of a child for her father
January 16, 2023
The Auschwitz Kommandant: A Daughter’s Search for the Father She Never Knew is by Barbara U. Cherish with a forward by Melissa Muller. This is a very interesting book but definitely can be seen as controversial. However, Barbara DOES NOT set out to either PROVE OR DISPROVE her father’s actions during World War II nor decide whether or not the verdict of the court was right or wrong in finding him guilty of “Crimes Against Humanity” and sentencing him to death. Instead, she is looking for the man she should have been able to call “Papa”.
Barbara (Barbel) was born as the last of four children to Arthur and Gertrud Baum Liebehenschel. She had an older brother Dieter and two older sisters, Brigitte and Antje. Nine months after her birth, her father left his wife and “other children” to be with his mistress, Anneliese Huettemann, a secretary at work. She would later present him with a son, Hans-Dieter. After about twelve years as a single mother dealing with hardships during World War II and after, his wife, Gertrud, succumbed to paranoid schizophrenia leaving the children as orphans. Deiter had been taken prisoner by the Russians, Brigitte and Antje both were working and living on their own, which left only Barbel who needed a home. Luckily for her, she lived with two wonderful foster families until she found a permanent home with the third foster family she was placed with. They adopted her and brought her to the United States where she finally had a steady life.
After a divorce upset her life, Barbara realized it was time to find out who her father was. She knew he had been a Nazi and at one point the Kommandant of Auschwitz and that he had been hanged. But who was he as a man, as a husband, and a father? Did he regret leaving and not getting to know his third daughter? She realized that she could end up finding undeniable evidence that he was definitely guilty or was innocent. She knew she would have to be very objective in what she wrote; but she also knew that she wasn’t looking for that. She wanted to know her “Papa”.
Barbara takes us through her search for her father and accepts the good with the bad. She also tells her own story and that of her sisters and brothers as she delves into their past as well. She keeps them informed all the way through and is even with her sister Antje when she visits Auschwitz. I can’t imagine the emotions they felt as they went through Auschwitz. It is hard enough to go through it and Birkenau when you don’t have any direct connection with anyone who was there. To go through the two camps knowing that your father was not only there; but in charge of it for the winter in unimaginable.
The book is well-written and her descriptions of the various places she lived and visited are very detailed and so well done that you can easily imagine being there yourself. Having been to Nuremberg, Salzburg, Berlin, Berchtesgarden, and Auschwitz-Birkenau, and Dachau, her words took me right back there- emotions and all.
Barbara (Barbel) was born as the last of four children to Arthur and Gertrud Baum Liebehenschel. She had an older brother Dieter and two older sisters, Brigitte and Antje. Nine months after her birth, her father left his wife and “other children” to be with his mistress, Anneliese Huettemann, a secretary at work. She would later present him with a son, Hans-Dieter. After about twelve years as a single mother dealing with hardships during World War II and after, his wife, Gertrud, succumbed to paranoid schizophrenia leaving the children as orphans. Deiter had been taken prisoner by the Russians, Brigitte and Antje both were working and living on their own, which left only Barbel who needed a home. Luckily for her, she lived with two wonderful foster families until she found a permanent home with the third foster family she was placed with. They adopted her and brought her to the United States where she finally had a steady life.
After a divorce upset her life, Barbara realized it was time to find out who her father was. She knew he had been a Nazi and at one point the Kommandant of Auschwitz and that he had been hanged. But who was he as a man, as a husband, and a father? Did he regret leaving and not getting to know his third daughter? She realized that she could end up finding undeniable evidence that he was definitely guilty or was innocent. She knew she would have to be very objective in what she wrote; but she also knew that she wasn’t looking for that. She wanted to know her “Papa”.
Barbara takes us through her search for her father and accepts the good with the bad. She also tells her own story and that of her sisters and brothers as she delves into their past as well. She keeps them informed all the way through and is even with her sister Antje when she visits Auschwitz. I can’t imagine the emotions they felt as they went through Auschwitz. It is hard enough to go through it and Birkenau when you don’t have any direct connection with anyone who was there. To go through the two camps knowing that your father was not only there; but in charge of it for the winter in unimaginable.
The book is well-written and her descriptions of the various places she lived and visited are very detailed and so well done that you can easily imagine being there yourself. Having been to Nuremberg, Salzburg, Berlin, Berchtesgarden, and Auschwitz-Birkenau, and Dachau, her words took me right back there- emotions and all.
December 18, 2020
Extreme trivialisation by the daughter of a Nazi death camp kommandant of her father’s role in the Nazi SS machine for which, on the strength of significant evidence hardly touched upon in the book, he received the death penalty
June 23, 2024
It’s taken me yeeears to finish this book! So long that I had to approximate the start date. It was interesting but heavy going with detail and a pretty small font. Typically read in the summer outside with good daylight!
August 12, 2018
With no consistent order of events, this made for a really frustrating read
March 1, 2015
Very frustrating read, but intriguing at the same time. Her father kept claiming he knew nothing...this is where I got frustrated. He signed this and that document not knowing what they meant? I am sorry. He knew. If not specifically, perhaps vaguely. No matter the hardships they had in the war, it was nothing compared to the millions of people that were murdered by the Nazis. Whole families, generations, wiped out. Her father is not innocent at all...he worked within the system for far too many years. I hardly ever write a review but felt compelled to do so with this book. I felt at times the author was trying to convince me of her fathers innocence and good. I know that all Nazis weren't bad and that many did not like what Hitler was doing. But this man was the kommandant of Auschwitz...there is no good in that.
Read
December 3, 2014Barbara vyrůstala v zámožné rodině, otec zastával vysoké postavení v SS. V roce 1943 se stal velitelem koncentračního tábora Osvětim. Autorka popisuje otcův příběh nezaujatě, líčí jeho vztahy s rodinou, neuhasitelnou lásku k milence i odlišný život, který vedl jako vyšší důstojník SS. Na konci války byl zajat americkou armádou a uvězněn v Dachau a v Norimberku. V Krakově byl odsouzen v rámci "osvětimského procesu"a v lednu 1948 byl popraven. Ačkoliv kniha představuje jedinečný náhled do srdce třetí říše, jde také o poutavý příběh rozvrácené rodiny, který otevře oči i nejsečtělejším historikům.
January 4, 2011
Cherish deftly combines primary sources with auto-biographical anecdotes/history (a form of pastiche really) to create a special and thought provoking work. An initial concern I had was whether Cherish could maintain an unbiased and objective viewpoint throughout her research - after a few pages it become apparent that this was a journey of self exploration rather than an attempt to establish her father in a more positive light.
September 3, 2013
Fascinating jaunt into the children of prepretators of the Holocaust and the struggle to balance personal 'family' of how a person is known and their public/ how the world saw them; left me chilled and disturbed. I think that was the point.
March 26, 2013
Wow..a must read. Gives a whole other perspective. I like that this is part memoir, part history..well done. Liked all the photos at the end. Leaves one with a lot to think about.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews