The History Book Club discussion

G wrote: "His memoirs were written while he was awaiting execution. I think this is a sad attempt to justify himself. And further in the chapter, he tries harder in his attempt to place a balm on his legacy. For example on page 67, his quote begins "I could not summon up the courage…"

I agree G. There were several moments when I got the "revisionist history" feel from some of his statements. I wonder if there are any other sources especially in reference to his early years. I'll have to pop over to the Q&A thread later.

Bentley wrote: "True - Brian and some very compelling examples - but would he have ever met Himmler if he had not signed up to be an SS member to manage the stable of the SS's horses for his boss? What came first..."
He did meet Himmler earlier. In 1921 at General Ludendorff's home, and later at the Artamanen league convention in 1930. They both had served in the Freikorps and both enjoyed farming. If they were not friends, they were at least close acquaintances when the met at the general inspection in June 1934.

Yes that is true Brian so they were bumping into each other in their circles. Thank you for the reminder - Himmler came before the horses. Hard for me to fathom why anybody would be impressed with Himmler.

G wrote: "On another note about this book, page 54 had several statements that rankled, at least for me: (National Socialism)..would be the end of Jewish supremacy. Supremacy in what way? What gave him tha..."

Stocky (smile) - I have no idea - maybe she was a big woman - but her photo with Rudolf did not indicate to me that she was a woman built for hard work. Maybe she was not willowy or fragile looking - hard for me to interpret. You might want to ask Thomas what he was trying to say (smile).

G wrote: "Yes, thank you Bentley. As someone who no longer practices Christianity, but still believes in its basic philosophy, I find Pope Francis compelling. As it relates to this book, I found his statem..."

Interesting play on words. Apt interpretation.

Bryan I agree - checking my dates - I have to say that Himmler was working his magic on Rudolf. And Rudolf was like a sponge.

Helga wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Discussion Topic

The discussion topic is about a newsworthy item which is quite timely for our discussion:



Pope at Yad Vashem: Never again, Lord, never again!

Rather than menti..."

Yes Helga but even Netanyahu indicated that Christians were being discriminated against as well. There is a lot of Christian hate too.

I think what bothers me is that there seems to be a rise in the level of intolerance in a lot of areas and folks do not appear to empathetic or charitable in their regard of anybody who is different from who they are or believe in things that are different than what they believe in or look or act different than the way that they look or act. They strike out at anything foreign or unfamiliar and with a lot of ferocity. It is a scary time.

There seems to be an atmosphere of intolerance and a lack of charity in society towards their fellow man. I see a lot of rigidity of thought and inflexibility of approach in this world, in politics and in handling problems in general.

Yes, you are so right. There is just too much hate in the world. Many Christians are hated in many Islamic countries especially.

So, is the intolerance for Christians the reason that the catholic priests were imprisoned in Dachau? This is the first I've heard of priests in concentration camps.

wow it was great to Learn more Rudolf and I think he only married Hedwig to cover up what he done and for hanns I think he should not been looking out the window to see if the apartment was being targeted bthatbjust made him more nervous

My take was that they were considered influential along with the other political prisoners and were presenting opposition to what the Nazis called their "ideals". The Catholic Church refused to print Nazi propaganda in their newspapers and many of the priests including the Jesuits were considered the intelligentsia

A quote from Martin Bormann:

As Martin Bormann put it: "All Polish intelligentsia must be exterminated . . . Polish priests will preach what we want them to preach. If any priest acts differently, we will make short work of him. The task of the priest is to keep the Poles quiet, stupid, and dull-witted."

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/DachauS...

http://www.catholictradition.org/Prie...

I think that one thing that has been forgotten - is that at Auschwitz - the focus seemed to be on the extermination of the Jewish people.

However, Dachau was focused on the extermination of the intelligentsia and the majority of prisoners at Dachau were Christians, including Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox clergy and lay people, German Communists, Social Democrats, and other political opponents of the Nazi regime.

Dachau also served as the central camp for Christian religious prisoners. According to records of the Roman Catholic Church, at least 3,000 religious, deacons, priests, and bishops were imprisoned there.

The number of Jewish prisoners at Dachau rose with the increased persecution of Jews and on November 10-11, 1938, in the aftermath of Kristallnacht, more than 10,000 Jewish men were interned there. (Most of men in this group were released after incarceration of a few weeks to a few months.)

http://www.antiochian.org/souls-aflame

(Sources for the above - The Jewish Virtual Library
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/j... and Scrapbookpages.com and www.catholictradition.org/Priests/dac... and Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America.)

Cameron wrote: "wow it was great to Learn more Rudolf and I think he only married Hedwig to cover up what he done and for hanns I think he should not been looking out the window to see if the apartment was being t..."

A marriage of convenience - interesting Cameron. I guess when you are the age that Hanns was and had enjoyed so much privilege and so much good fortune and had traveled in the admired circles that his father had been in - it had to be extremely difficult to see what you thought you knew about humanity and your fellow countrymen turned upside down by the Nazis. It had to be devastating to the Alexander family and many others who had served Germany as his father had done in World War I. All that had placed them in this situation was their religion. I think I might have been looking out the window as well wanting to be alerted to anything else that might have been brewing.

Bentley wrote: "G wrote: "On another note about this book, page 54 had several statements that rankled, at least for me: (National Socialism)..would be the end of Jewish supremacy. Supremacy in what way? What ga..."

No need to bother Thomas. It was just my vestigial feminist memory poking in when the statement caught my eye.

I had a family priest on my grandmothers side, a Jesuit incarcerated at Dachau concentration camp to never return.

I understand G.

Helga - that is a shame.

And let us not forget that Gypsies, homosexuals, and physically/mentally disabled people were also targeted for the death camps. The Nazis were determined to exterminate any group of people who did not fit in the "pure Aryan" category. It is rather ironic to look at the Nazi leadership and compare them to the "pure Aryan".

I agree with Bentley, that Rudolf has psychological problems, among other things. I do think that the turning point for Rudolf was his decision to go to Dachau at Himmler’s request. On page 61 we learn that Rudolf and Hedwig do not have the funds to buy their own farm and they decide that their dream could be realized at a later date after Rudolf gains some financial success through swift promotion. We can liken that to one who wants to “climb the corporate ladder” to become successful and maybe retire early. I think that, once in, Rudolf was influenced by several factors in his actions with the SS, including killing his friend. He was driven to be successful to fulfill a need to provide for his growing family and to realize his dream of owning his own farm. He was driven by a need to feel accepted and liked by his superiors filling a void left by his father. I believe that in his mind that killing his friend was in part a case of the “ends justify the means”. He had to do that in order to appear strong and be seen as a man that the SS could count on to follow orders. This all obviously foreshadows what is about to happen. I loved the last line of the chapter on page 71 that leaves us hanging like a Dallas cliff-hanger, “His next move would be career-defining.”

I haven’t developed a real opinion yet of Hanns. He seems like a typical child and twin in an affluent and loving home. I suspect that now that he has gone through his bar mitzvah, we will start seeing the things that shape him as a Jewish adult.

Helga wrote: "I had a family priest on my grandmothers side, a Jesuit incarcerated at Dachau concentration camp to never return."

That is very tragic, Helga.

Teri wrote: "I agree with Bentley, that Rudolf has psychological problems, among other things. I do think that the turning point for Rudolf was his decision to go to Dachau at Himmler’s request. On page 61 we..."

Excellent comments, Teri but unlike the tv series Dallas, this will not turn out to be a dream....would that it were!!!!

Jill wrote: "...but unlike the tv series Dallas, this will not turn out to be a dream....would that it were!!!! "

Oh so true!

I like that the reading was the same year for the two different men. It tends to give a nice perspective of how the history of the era unfolds for each of them.

Their lives and families are different, but you can see their personalities developing as they make choices.

Teri wrote: "I agree with Bentley, that Rudolf has psychological problems, among other things. I do think that the turning point for Rudolf was his decision to go to Dachau at Himmler’s request. On page 61 we..."

Just a comment on "killing his friend"....

I think in this age of Facebook etc the word "friend" has become very diluted.

This fellow was an acquaintance - not a friend. How many "friends" do you have? - If the number is more than 10 I think your definition is different than most.

Maybe I am wrong but ten is a lot of true friends.

It is just astounding to me that this modern western society would be able to change (I void to us the word decline) so quickly.

Vince wrote: "Teri wrote: "I agree with Bentley, that Rudolf has psychological problems, among other things. I do think that the turning point for Rudolf was his decision to go to Dachau at Himmler’s request. ..."

Fair enough, Vince. I do agree that the term friend can be defined differently by everyone, especially in this day and age of social media. I was speaking specifically to the term that Harding used in his sentence on page 71 speaking of the incident. "Rudolf considered him a friend...When his friend collapsed..." My guess is that Rudolf had very few true friends, if any, and anyone that spent enough time with him to chat over lunch was the closest thing he had to a friend.

yeah that true but I think looking out the window would have made then feel worse because knew what was going on

I came away from these two chapters still feeling as if most of the details presented have been on Rudolf…although more has been revealed about young Hanns there are still many questions to be answered on his makeup, beliefs, and in general what makes him tick. Without looking ahead, I have a sense that Hanns is about to get very interesting.

I agree with Bryan’s earlier statement about the created disconnect; I think this became even more prominent with his transfer to Sachsenhausen. I’m not sure that having the same financial background as Hanns would have made a difference…more of Rudolf not having a rudder.

I found it interesting and disturbing that Rudolf was able to develop an on/off switch when it came to his personal life and camp life. His actions and thoughts remain consistent with his thoughts in prison in Chapter 3; he abhors what he considers to be pointless and illogical violent actions, but is ok with violence when he sees logic in it. The execution of his friend showed that although he still had some misgivings (the shaking of his pistol hand), it is evident at this point that those misgivings are dropping away.

Lastly, there was a sentence in the last paragraph on page 71 that sent a chill down my spine...and by far is the most perfect way to sum up Rudolf; ”He had become a hardened instrument of blind loyalty.”

Vince wrote: "Teri wrote: "I agree with Bentley, that Rudolf has psychological problems, among other things. I do think that the turning point for Rudolf was his decision to go to Dachau at Himmler’s request. ..."

I think the word friend was used in the book - but maybe Thomas has more information on the closeness of the relationship.

Teri wrote: "Vince wrote: "Teri wrote: "I agree with Bentley, that Rudolf has psychological problems, among other things. I do think that the turning point for Rudolf was his decision to go to Dachau at Himmle..."

Agreed Teri based upon what the author wrote. He could always be asked about this relationship in a bit more depth - we do have the Q&A remember.

Cary wrote: "I came away from these two chapters still feeling as if most of the details presented have been on Rudolf…although more has been revealed about young Hanns there are still many questions to be anew..."

Cary I felt the same way - I think that is because Rudolf revealed a lot more through his memoirs I suspect. I do believe that next week's chapters help us get to know Hanns more. And you are right he should get more interesting rather quickly and that transition in the book felt rather abrupt because the comparisons between Hanns and Rudolf were not timeline comparisons in the truest sense. So the reader has to be careful. But I think the revelations in terms of how Rudolf thinks has been more forthcoming sooner - so that might be why you feel you know more about Rudolf because you do.

I wonder whether the shaking of even his pistol hand had more to do with him than with his friend. He had already made the distasteful decision to kill him - horrible - yet maybe he was shaking because he did not know if he was as much of a monster as the act demonstrated and feared he would break in front of the others. I have felt right along that he was a coward and did cowardly deeds and made cowardly decisions. Bravery would have been doing something to save his friend or deflect the heartfelt decision that his friend made in allowing the man to say goodbye to his family (despite the escape).

Blind loyalty - yes - he would do whatever he was asked to keep proving himself to others over and over and over again. The sky was the limit.

The problem was what was he proving to himself. He really to me has become robotic. Take a look at the video of him testifying at the Nuremberg Trials - he was even robotic then when he practically recited his testimony with zero emotion or animation. Absolutely no soul left - a total vacuum.

Cameron wrote: "yeah that true but I think looking out the window would have made then feel worse because knew what was going on"

I think being observant has been one of the first clues that we have had about Hanns' nature and his pure instincts. Another thought - when I look at his photos - he reminds me of a panther or a cougar watching and waiting. I think he was a very observant individual and checked the crowd climate when he was watching.

Bentley and everyone - thanks for the information about catholic priests and others who were caught up in the concentration camps. I guess my education was neglected.

Carey wrote "I found it interesting and disturbing that Rudolf was able to develop an on/off switch when it came to his personal life and camp life. ". I found this really disturbing too. It's scary that somebody can distance the self from the very things they fear and inflict pain on others. I agree with the group, I think we're watching Rudolph lose it here. It's also interesting to see how his choices have impact on things getting worse for him. (But I don't think he sees it as things getting worse because he keeps getting promoted.)

I, too, want to learn more about Haans.

Yes - being promoted would appear to him in his mindset as a good thing. Robyn do not be hard on yourself - a lot of folks do not realize the true extent of what happened and where.

And you are welcome.

Cary, I think you raise a good point: logic. I wonder...Rudolf can understand violence if it makes some logical sense: war, enemies of the state, etc. It feeds into his view on antisemitism, a more scientific view.

A guy who kills a farm family...doesn't make sense, Rudolf does not like it.

Bentley wrote: "Cary wrote: "I came away from these two chapters still feeling as if most of the details presented have been on Rudolf…although more has been revealed about young Hanns there are still many questio..."

Great observation on the cowardice and shaky pistol hand moment...that one did not occur to me. You are correct...a true hero would have stood by a friend, even if it meant sacrificing himself in the process.

I agree with Jill that Himmler's persuasiveness had a major impact on Rudolf. A lack of money kept Rudolf and his wife from buying the farm that they wanted to purchase. However, Himmler devotion to Hittler was one of the main reasons why Rudolf became a solider again. I think that if Rudolf had never met Himmler, he would have been content to concentrate on farming and building his farm life.

Interesting comments all

I still have the feeling that regardless of his love for horses and his desire for farm and family life that he would still have ended up in the SS due to his craving for the comraderie, discipline and hierarchy of military life and structure.

Sarah you might be right - he did have a yen for structure and order and seemed to be needy in terms of looking for a father figure.

Interesting points from Bryan above. And similarly, he was appalled by the disciplinary caning of a prisoner - the blows and screams - but not so agitated by witnessing the first execution later on.

I keep seeing pride as a common driver of some of Rudolf's behavior. He was too stubborn to admit that perhaps giving up his farming plans was the wrong choice. He could not appear "soft" or "weak" and did what he had to do to avoid being considered as such.

And then of course this closely correlates with his growing loyalty to the Nazi Party - the very basis of which is national pride in the extreme.

One thing we have not heard about is power. You wonder if there is a underlying need to gain power for Rudolf.

Hitler was consumed by it and so were many of his followers.

I wonder if Rudolf saw power as an end, or simply as a means to an end. Probably a bit of both.

Bentley wrote: "Chapter Four is the second chapter that we have read in the book about Hanns. However, like the chapter before - the chapter does not focus on the thoughts and the internal decisions that young Han..."

It appears the two men grew up differently. I'm still not sure this is the root of Rudolf's dark side. I'm sure more will be revealed as the book continues.

I don't believe money played a factor with Rudolf at all.

The book seems to tell a tab bit more of Rudolf at this juncture but I'm sure Hanns will have equal time.

Bentley wrote: "Discussion Question:

Does anybody else sense that Rudolf is like a boat without a rudder and that Hanns' rudder was his father Dr. Alexander? Or do you feel differently?

Also Happy Memorial Day ..."

I feel Rudolf is like a boat without a rudder. He lost his fellow military mentor and admittedly he felt the tremendous loss. I'm sure this was the beginning of compartmentalization and other factors leading to his dark side.

Bentley wrote: "One major difference between Rudolf and Hanns is love - Hanns loved and respected his father and I think it is clear even at this juncture that Rudolf did not. Rudolf felt himself "alone" - when y..."

Rudolf exhibits signs of being an introvert. I'm sure his upbringing contributed to his 'alone' and detached persona. Once again he masters the art of compartmentalization. No doubt many factors lent a hand in Rudolf's very flawed character. He is probably wired all wrong - poor upbringing or not.

Cary wrote: "I came away from these two chapters still feeling as if most of the details presented have been on Rudolf…although more has been revealed about young Hanns there are still many questions to be answ..."

Harding seems to be keeping to chronological comparison. At this point in time. Hanns is still immersed in the carefree life of childhood. It is a life of privilege. His father is a respected physician in a beautiful home where celebrities often visit. Rudolf by contrast has started a family, and works on a strict farm collective. He does not have the money to buy his own farm. He gets an invitation to be apart of a group who makes him feel proud. There is a stark difference.

A quote on page 54 puts this difference in an interesting perspective; "He was 'firmly convinced that our ideas would find a welcome in all countries, would be adapted to the nature of their peoples, that would be the end of Jewish supremacy.'"

Boy - am I missing something?

I don't see comparison I only see stories of how they grew up and acted presented next to each other but not as comparisons.

A book like Crazy Horse & Custer is a comparison

Stephen E. Ambrose

Just my point of view.

Actually I meant the act of looking at them side by side. And you are right if comparison means strictly "being like". Because they are nothing like. So perhaps the more correct word is contrast. My point is I like the way Harding has us look at these two men side by side, in his construction of the book. It makes me consider deeply this appalling chapter of the story of human behavior.

Vince - I think there is a contrast developed between the two different men and their different choices and lives. There is not an exact timeline - but nevertheless there is a comparison of sorts and that is why the book I guess is called Hanns and Rudolf.

At this point in the book I definitely see how different these two people obviously are in all ways. But what I find most interesting is how matter of fact Rudolf is in retelling his life with the quotes he gives. Even he seems fully aware of his own compartmentalization of his horrific actions. He states in quote on pg 71 how he can hardly hold the gun steady while shooting his friend but then in the extended quote following that quote states so matter of factly or directly to the point that he feels the wretchedness but has to just get over it. Since I do believe this Rudolf quote is him looking back after the war it almost makes me wonder because it is so directly stated if he truly felt this way or was just trying to gain sympathy or leniency. Although he seems to be intelligent enough to know that he would never receive either after all that had occurred. Since on pg 3 it states that he was the first to describe in detail the true nature of the horrible atrocities and his role it makes me wonder about this man and how he could do these things that he says bother him so much and then later retell them so candidly since most people would downplay or rewrite their role trying to remember themselves as a better person . Makes me want to read ahead of the discussion

Sherry wrote: "Cary wrote: "I came away from these two chapters still feeling as if most of the details presented have been on Rudolf…although more has been revealed about young Hanns there are still many questio..."

Excellent point.

Sherry good points, Heather - try to just keep the pace.