Ranked a Top 25 Canadian Book Blog
Twitter: @DCYakabuski
Facebook: Doreen Yakabuski
Instagram: doreenyakabuski
Threads: doreenyakabuski

Sunday, November 25, 2018

Review of THE TATTOOIST OF AUSCHWITZ by Heather Morris

2.5 Stars
I don’t understand why the story of Lale and Gita was not written as non-fiction.  Why tell a fictionalized version?  This latter approach leaves the reader wondering what is true and what is the creation of the author’s imagination.

In 1942, Ludwig Eisenberg (Lale), a Slovakian Jew, is taken to Auschwitz and becomes its tattooist, tasked with numbering each new inmate upon arrival at the concentration camp.  It is love at first sight when Lale tattoos the arm of a new arrival, Gita Furman.  What follows is the story of how they strive to survive their time in Auschwitz; their wish is to be together after the war.  

Lale’s portrayal makes him almost too good to be true.  As the Tätowierer, he has a rather privileged, position in both Auschwitz and Birkenau.  He has a private room, is given extra food, and has freedom of movement within the camps.  He always shares his extra food, and any black market items he manages to procure are used for the benefit of others.  He always responds “with words of encouragement, trying to turn their fear into hope” and when faced with abuse, “he tries to shrug the words off and meet the glares with a smile.”  He befriends people who immediately risk much to help him.  Because of these acquaintances who see him as “someone worth saving,” he survives typhus and evades execution.  He even manages to manipulate Baretski, his sadistic SS guard, into doing favours for him?  By his own definition, he is a hero because “’Choosing to live is an act of defiance, a form of heroism.’”

So much is left unexplored in this novel.  For instance, Lale says, “’I can only hope I am not one day judged a perpetrator or a collaborator.’”  Certainly there are ambiguities in Lale’s protected position:  is he doing just what he needs to do to survive or is he facilitating the functioning of the camps?  This theme of forced collaboration deserves more than just a mention, especially since one inmate who has much less choice than Lale is eventually convicted as a Nazi conspirator and sentenced to fifteen years of hard labour.  Lale experiences no survivor’s guilt?

So much about this book feels flat.  There is certainly a lack of emotional depth.  When Lale learns that thousands of Romany, many of whom are his friends, were sent to the gas chamber, the author describes his reaction:  “Lale is seeing red.  He is out of control.”  The romantic scenes between Lale and Gita are reduced to romance novel clichés.  The plot follows a he-did-this and then-this-happened structure.  Coincidences abound.  

The author, in a note at the end, writes about how she became close with Lale, visiting him two or three times a week for three years.  I think the problem is she became so close to him that she could not portray him objectively.  There is also the impression that she embellished his story in a way that makes it less convincing.  I know British prisoners of war played football in a camp adjacent to Auschwitz, but would SS officers really play soccer against prisoners in Auschwitz, prisoners who would have been emaciated and exhausted?  

I think Lale and Gita’s story is worth telling; unfortunately, it is not well told here. 


No comments:

Post a Comment