In The Garden Of Beasts by Erik Larson (2011)
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️(Very Good)
What I love most about history is that so often it is wild beyond mere fiction, and for a historian to really shine, I mean really standout, he or she has to be a good storyteller. Has to be. That is one of the barometers for being an excellent historian in my eyes. Are you a good storyteller? Do you not only have your facts right, but can you make it engrossing? We live in a time where simple facts are dull. Can you give me spicy facts? Spice it up. Erik Larson is one of the best at this currently.
I confess this is not the first time I have read this book, but every time I reread something, I try to look at it through a new lens. In this reread, I wanted to submerge myself with William Dodd into 1930's-era Berlin, and let Larson take me on a journey along the city. What I came away with is a snapshot of basically a single year or two (1933-1934) in which a carrier of the American ideals (Dodd) is tasked with observing the transformation of the picturesque, famed European city (Berlin) to that of a tense, paranoid, fanatical monstrosity under the tyranny of Chancellor Adolf Hitler. And for asking a downtrodden country to, um, please pay back your debts to America (during the Depression lol). Anyway, in these few years Dodd was able to witness the rise of the Gestapo, the coup of the stormtroopers, the transformation of German society to scared, maniacal fanatics, political backstabbing in the Nazi party, and progressively worse persecution of the Jewish population. A snapshot. Just a window into a few years of interactions with the terrors of 20th century history- Goring, Goebbels, Himmler, Diels, Streicher, Rohm, Rosenberg, and of course Hitler- men he would meet and rub elbows with at lavish parties, then later despise. It is well written, well told, and provides the sense of dread many Jews and Germans felt who were not aligned with the Nazi party themselves.
William Dodd and Berlin's transformation make this book. Dodd is kind of an oddball for a diplomat. He is a history professor from Chicago who carries the ideals of the Jeffersonian Democrat. He isn't real skilled at statecraft. He lives frugally, and is a nerd. He isn't so sympathetic to Jewish persecution, but it is disheartening to read that there were a lot of Americans who weren't, who believed America too had a "Jewish problem". But Dodd is sensible and rational and stood on business in a country that had become feverishly irrational and illogical. His rented home on the Tiergartenstrasse is routinely mentioned as a safe haven for dangerous thoughts and ideas deemed radical by the Nazi regime. And Dodd was not a coward. His personal interactions with Hitler, Papen, Goring and so forth are incredible and saved his reputation despite routine sabotage from wealthy government snobs back in the U.S. Seriously, his interaction with Vice-President Papen was so fucking awesome. Read it.
Where the book lacks a bit for me is the tales of Martha Dodd, William's daughter. She is obviously advertised as a main part of the story, her chapters often alternating with her father's. And there is some valuable history to be gleamed through her. But her chapters feel odd mixed in with the overall mood of the book. She is naive, flaky, thrillseeking, flirtatious- and I respect that about this woman especially in Germany, especially in the 1930's. But her character didn't really grab me, and I often felt semi-irritated by her behaviors and decisions on so grand a stage. A thrillseeking, love addicted woman in the 30's is fine, and I am more of a "get in where you fit in" type person. But, on such an intense political stage, her trysts with actual Nazi officials was repulsive regardless if she was being naive. And they truly hurt her father politically. I couldn't root for her. Her views from her relationships with Boris, Putzi, and Diels are valuable, but I just couldn't vibe with her.
The description of The Night of the Long Knives is well done here by Larson. Again, regardless of how many times I've heard the story, if it can be retold in a thrilling manner then I want to hear it again and again. The scene of Hitler arresting a drunken Rohm, and kicking down the hotel doors of stormtrooper leaders (and in some cases their gay lovers) is just unimaginable horror. How Rohm is killed is very, very dramatic. The assaults on Americans for failing to heil, the outrageous parties thrown by Nazis and attended by Dodd, the paranoia generated by the Gestapo… the ridiculousness that is Hermann Goring (he would be so damn funny if he wasn't a terror). The Reichstag arson case- another thrilling moment. It is overall very well done by Larson, and worth reading and recording a timeline of events as I like to do.
One other complaint: the tale of Anna Rath in Nuremburg. If true, this tale is vulgar and tragic to a degree where words cannot do it justice. HOWEVER, I have read a few critiques that claim this story didn't happen, and Larson put it in this book for flare. I myself couldn't find much on Anna Rath besides references to this book. If that is the case, then I take (imaginary) points away. While I want quality storytelling in my history books, I still want accuracy. Accuracy still matters, as does the truth. I won't accuse Larson overtly of conjuring up false narratives in all his books, and this book would have been excellent even without this scene. Regardless, if this story is not true I will call that out here, and advise to take the Anna Rath episode with a grain of salt.
by Keaton126