History of the History of the White Rose: 1990-1995
These six short years brought us the worst of White Rose "scholarship," along with the best (Siefken, Lill, Fürst-Ramdohr, Linder, Stadtarchiv Ulm). Which have you read?
If we have reviewed the book in question, you can click on the hyperlink to read that review. Books or essays with no hyperlinks? A review has not yet been uploaded. All book reviews are collected here.
Special note: For anthologies, each author is listed separately. However, links in the bibliography will take you to the book review page for the entire anthology.
1990-1995:
The 1990s provided us with a mixture of good and poor scholarship, with a new and welcome “twist” – collections of essays by various writers, usually unified under a specific topic related to White Rose history.
The first publication from this period related to the 90th anniversary of Wilhelm Geyer’s birth. The city of Böblingen held an exhibit of Geyer’s works to commemorate that anniversary. Dr. Gisela Linder penned the short biography that introduces the exhibit’s paintings and sketches. The book is entitled Wilhelm Geyer: 1900-1968, with her essay called “Eine Erinnerung an Wilhelm Geyer” [A Remembrance of Wilhelm Geyer].
Linder captured Geyer’s personality well. Her balance between his strong Catholic faith and his willingness to question it in light of the era he inhabited – it’s who he was. She barely mentioned his association with White Rose friends, choosing to describe his prison sketches while waiting for the third White Rose trial merely as having been created while a prisoner of the Gestapo.
We can see Geyer’s personality, his creative Being, his desire to bring people together in Linder’s portrait of the man. This little book is a worthy beginning to the understanding of Geyer’s significance to the White Rose circle.
The second publication in 1991 came from the revered historian and professor, Dr. Hinrich Siefken of the University of Nottingham. As far as I know, Siefken was the first in academic circles to recognize the value of White Rose resistance as pedagogical tool. His book entitled Die Weiβe Rose: Student Resistance to National Socialism 1942/43, Forschungsergebnisse und Erfahrungsberichte [Research Findings and Reports Regarding Experiences] brought together an assortment of writers – some survivors and family members of those friends, some historians who addressed specific, and generally limited, topics related to the friends’ resistance.
Our book review covers each essay independently. Here, I will simply mention the writers in alphabetical order: Bernhard Hanssler, Hans Hirzel, Ian Kershaw, Marie Louise (sic) Schultze-Jahn, Hinrich Siefken, Kurt Sontheimer, J.P. Stern, and Hildegard Vieregg. Note that articles are listed in bibliography below by author, along with cite for the book itself.
While not all essays are worth citing by contemporary historians (see review for more information), the book in general is. Siefken’s notion that we can and should learn from White Rose, that this is a good topic for college undergraduates, is one worth celebrating. We are richer for his having taught and worked during our lifetime.
The other 1991 publication deserves much wider circulation. If you are teacher, professor, librarian, researcher, historian, or journalist, and you do not already have a copy of Zeugnisse zur Geschichte der Juden in Ulm [Witnesses to the History of Jews in Ulm], beg, borrow, or steal one. The stories of Jewish citizens from Ulm, telling in their own words what life was like during the Third Reich, should convince you of my arguments against Inge Scholl’s philo-Semitic fairy tales about their family.
In addition to the accounts from those families, the Stadtarchiv (city archives) in Ulm collected and reproduced signs, photographs, newspaper articles, proclamations, all related to clear evidence of the destruction of Jewish life in the city of Ulm.
It is a gripping book. The “witnesses” spared no one’s feelings. Many spoke for the first time as they put awful memories to paper. Some chose to recall happier days, before Adolf Hitler destroyed their world. Their fathers had fought in World War I as proud German soldiers. Their grandfathers – and in some cases, great-great-multiple-great-grandfathers – had contributed to German society as chemists, medical doctors, jurists, merchants, bankers, day laborers, shopkeepers, factory owners, soccer stars. They had lived as Germans. In a flash, that life had been stolen from them.
Many more expressed bitterness at the “day late, dollar short” aspect of the 1988 reunion, writing – as Andrew Einstein did – that “the memories of the abysmal evil in mankind will continue to gnaw at the picturesque façade” of his grandfather’s and father’s hometown.
If you choose to wrestle with this volume, carve out some quality time.
In 1992, Christiane Moll presented her findings regarding the files of the German prosecutors that she had re-discovered in Berlin after the fall of the Wall. Her essay, entitled “Acts of Resistance: The White Rose in the Light of New Archival Evidence,” was published in Resistance Against the Third Reich: 1933-1945, edited by Michael Geyer and John Boyer, translation by Betsy Mayer and Michael Geyer.
It is a nice summary of 5,000 pages of Gestapo interrogation and trial transcripts. However, those primary source documents are in our Microsoft Access database. We therefore used the actual documents in our research.
If you are unaware of the value of the primary sources, Moll’s article is a good place to start. It is valuable as a description of how she re-found the archival material after the Wende.
Additionally, anyone who undertakes a full-fledged historiography of White Rose research should include Moll’s words. We take the Protokolle for granted in 2023. In 1992, her work was revolutionary. Pun intended.
Harald Steffahn should have waited a few years before publishing his history of the White Rose, so he could take full advantage of the transcripts re-discovered by Christiane Moll. Uwe Naumann, his editor at Rowohlt, should have insisted. Steffahn did seem to have looked at, and included, information from selected documents. For example, he used information about the student soldiers having been officially removed from military service so they could be tried in a civilian court (instead of being court-martialed). When Jürgen Wittenstein tried to argue that point with Steffahn and Naumann, Steffahn pointed Wittenstein to the transcripts.
However, both Steffahn and Naumann seemed willing to allow Steffahn’s book to become an extended rehash of Inge Scholl’s little book, with additional material that only muddied the water. Steffahn deferred to Inge by wrongly portraying the White Rose as the Scholl movement.
One of the funniest results of the publication of Steffahn’s 1992 White Rose history: His and Naumann’s extended correspondence with Jürgen Wittenstein, battling over minutiae. I will give Steffahn this. In almost every case where Wittenstein challenged Steffahn’s “facts,” Steffahn and his editor were able to prove Wittenstein wrong. This demonstrates that Steffahn knew the documents he worked with for this book. He simply unnecessarily limited the scope of his research. A pity.
When Wittenstein gave me a complete set of the manic correspondence (manic from Wittenstein’s side), it was all hush-hush, ‘only for you,’ ‘so you can better understand what I [Wittenstein] have been up against all these years.’ Only it turned out that Wittenstein had given a copy of his Steffahn-Naumann correspondence to practically everyone who contacted him, apparently including the Institut für Zeitgeschichte in Munich. So much for exclusivity!
Nevertheless, the correspondence came in handy when writing Evolution of Memory: Historical Revisionism As Seen in the Words of George J. (“Jürgen”) Wittenstein (2011). Every time Steffahn had been correct, Wittenstein later would adjust his storytelling to match. Steffahn’s White Rose history – entitled simply Die Weiβe Rose - was but one of Wittenstein’s pivots.
In 1993, a most extraordinary book was published. Please, take a seat. I am preparing to write something positive about Inge Aicher-Scholl. Or at least about her book.
That year, S. Fischer Verlag released Sippenhaft: Nachrichten und Botschaften der Familie in der Gestapo-Haft nach der Hinrichtung von Hans und Sophie Scholl [Imprisoned Under the Kinship Laws: News and Tidings in Gestapo Custody Following the Execution of Hans and Sophie Scholl]. Where Inge had published her little White Rose book under her maiden name, Inge Scholl, she edited this collection of letters under her married name.
I purchased this while in Ulm (April 1995), fully expecting it to be more of the Scholl mythology. Despite the error in its name (Scholls were not imprisoned under Sippenhaft laws, which would not be official until 1944), for once Inge authored something that failed to paint the Scholl family wearing haloes, standing on marble pedestals, spouting democracy. She allowed her family members’ words after February 22, 1943 to be read, although being Inge, she littered the book with deep edits and ellipses... continuing her censorship.
Frankly, I wonder if she realized just how much she was divulging about her family’s dysfunction. If these letters and prison Kassiber [secret messages] are indicative of the documents in the Scholl Archives that remain censored and off limits, it’s clear that there are far too many buried secrets. Read the full review to better understand what I mean.
And while I strongly recommend this book for any White Rose researcher, that recommendation comes with a caveat: Ask questions around every name (Google for starters). Ask questions around every ellipsis (what did she censor?). Ask questions around every annotation (self-serving). If you repeat her words without questioning, you’re part of the problem.
George J. (“Jürgen”) Wittenstein re-emerged in 1993, evidently cashing in on 50th anniversary White Rose memorials. In June 1993, he spoke at Siena College, a private Franciscan college in Loudonville, New York. Wittenstein himself provided me with a copy of the speech.
When viewed in the context of the evolution of Wittenstein’s speeches and essays, this Siena speech appears to be a turning point in his storytelling. He had absorbed what he “learned” from Inge Scholl, Harald Steffahn, and Hermann Vinke, and his words reflected that new knowledge. Because the sources of his information were badly flawed, his story is as well.
Wittenstein added new or expanded legends to the White Rose mythology in this speech, for example, his introduction of Hans Scholl and Alexander Schmorell, cementing his place in White Rose work. The demonstration in Munich in 1941, protesting the firing of Prof. Dr. Fritz-Joachim von Rintelen. His joint service with Hans, Willi, Alex (no mention of Hubert or Raimund) on the Russian front. His presence at gatherings in November 1942 when the friends discussed more intensive work. His “membership” in the Freiheitsaktion Bayern [Operation Freedom Bavaria], or FAB.
All legend, mythology. When no one challenged Wittenstein after he debuted these new stories or new versions of old stories, the stories continued to grow. Part of the historiography. Part of what must be corrected. For details, see the full book review.
One month later, Wittenstein would again catapult himself into the White Rose spotlight. He spoke at the memorial service for Prof. Dr. Kurt Huber in Munich, on the 50th anniversary of his execution. (He himself gave me a copy of the speech.) The speech was entitled, “Kurt Huber: Erinnerungen eines Doktoranden” [Kurt Huber: Memories of a Doctoral Student].
Wittenstein repeated many of the same errors from his speech at Siena College. In his tribute to Huber, he retold the Rintelen story, although he provided no evidence whatever that the two men liked or even knew one another. Huber was anything but religious, so although he too was Catholic, he would not have traveled in Rintelen’s circles.
Three things distress me about Wittenstein’s July 1993 speech.
First, he planted himself front and center in the group of White Rose friends, a position he did not enjoy in real life. “When I stand before you as a member of the White Rose and as a former pupil [Schüler] of Kurt Huber, I am filled with awe, sorrow, and gratitude.
“Awe before those who gave their lives for their convictions. Sorrow, not only for the personal loss my closest friends suffered, but also sorrow above all because their ideals met with such little response. Gratitude for that which my close ties to these people, and especially to Professor Huber, meant. Gratitude also that several of us survived this horrendous era and therefore as eyewitnesses can convey to the contemporary generation an image of life under a diabolical, absolute dictatorship.”
By including himself in their circle of honor, he dishonored their memory.
Second, he claimed to have been the only “member of the White Rose” who had Kurt Huber as Doktorvater. I have yet to see any proof that Wittenstein even took a class with Prof. Huber, much less that Huber was his Doktorvater. If anyone knows of such proof, outside Wittenstein’s postwar assertions, please contact me. I would genuinely like to know if this claim is true.
I doubt it, because Katharina Schüddekopf was a PhD candidate under Prof. Kurt Huber. That much is known. The open question regarding Käthe’s studies: Had she begun her PhD work under Huber while he was in Berlin? She studied at that university while Huber held his position there. The fact that Wittenstein seemed oblivious to Käthe raises questions about his own graduate work.
Third – and this point holds true in general for everything Wittenstein has written or said – there is no sense whatever in this speech that Wittenstein knew Huber as a person. Instead of a traditional book review, my review of this speech focused on the lack of personal glimpse into Huber’s life, personality or work. To better understand the larger Wittenstein problem, this review is a good place to start. Wittenstein even quoted Hans Scholl instead of Kurt Huber as part of his speech. Anyone else would have been embarrassed.
We have one more top-notch anthology, published in 1993. It more than offsets the Wittenstein legends.
Dr. Rudolf Lill edited the 1993 book entitled Hochverrat? Die “Weiβe Rose” und ihr Umfeld [High Treason? The “White Rose” and Its Context]. The insights gleaned from the various writers were so deep, so thought-provoking, that I often cited them in my own work. As with the Siefken anthology, in this post I will merely list the authors alphabetically. Please read the review for details. Good quality work, without exception.
Wolfgang Altgeld, Gerda Freise, Hans Hirzel, Michael Kissener, Anneliese Knoop-Graf, Rudolf Lill – these writers deserve recognition for strong texts and sound scholarship.
Rounding out the offerings from 1993: First, Die Weiβe Rose, the official fiftieth anniversary handout of the Weiβe-Rose-Stiftung in Munich. Its primary value: The additional, rarely published photographs of people such as Carl Muth, Werner Bergengruen, and Theodor Haecker. Otherwise, it is basically a rehash of the Inge Scholl story, slightly upgraded by Christiane Moll’s contribution from the Bundesarchiv.
It has distressed me to see people cite this handout as if it is scholarly research, instead of digging into the primary sources themselves. It’s not necessarily bad, except in its portrayal of White Rose as a Scholl organization, with everyone else apolitical. And with acceptance of Jürgen Wittenstein as “member” of the White Rose. Apart from that, it’s just a museum guide.
And yet, published the same year, Michael Schneider and Winfried Süβ did exactly that. Their little book entitled Keine Volksgenossen: der Widerstand der Weiβen Rose (the White Rose) quotes and cites from the Stiftung’s handout. This won’t be the last time someone threw together a document very quickly to cash in on an anniversary, nor will it be the last time that the university in Munich put its name behind such a publication.
I cannot grant them a pass, as I did with Petry. First, Schneider and Süβ quoted Petry, and Wittenstein, and Scholl, and the handout. They also quoted and cited the Protokolle that had been discovered by Christiane Moll. In other words, they conflated primary source documents with mythology, not bothering to apply even a scintilla of historical process or methodology.
Before moving on to 1994, I would like to highlight a publication of Verlag der Jugendbewegung [Publisher of the Youth Movement]. First, a general compliment. Everything I have read from the Verlag der Jugendbewegung has been high quality and was reliable. Especially relevant for White Rose research: Their series of Puls [Pulse] booklets.
In October 1987, Puls volume 15 focused on the life and resistance of Helle Hirsch, a German-Jewish-American youth who was part of a 1936 plot to bomb a major NSDAP building in Nürnberg. Brandeis University dedicates a part of its Web site to Helle Hirsch. In the section about his resistance and death, they highlight this Puls publication.
In November 1993, Puls 21 – written by Irmgard Klönne – covered the topic of Jewish bündische groups in Germany. Entitled Deutsch, Jüdisch, Bündisch, the 47-page booklet documents Jewish youth groups, both Orthodox and liberal. Klönne collected songs, photographs, notices, weaving them all together in a coherent narrative.
When reading and viewing pictures, it is hard to remember that these same young people would be murdered only a few years later, simply for being Jewish. Their bündische traditions were identical to those of d.j.1.11. and others. One photograph could be Hans Scholl, because in 1927, Hermann Gerson was showing off almost exactly as Hans would six or seven years later. They formed their own bündische clubs as antisemitism reared its ugly head in Germany and Austria in the early 1900s. Where localities remained friendly, Jewish students simply stayed within the German groups where they felt at home.
Highly recommended.
Early 1994 brought a bombshell to the world of White Rose scholarship and memory. Hans Hirzel declared his candidacy for president of Germany as member of the far right-wing Republikaner party. Susanne Hirzel publicly backed her brother. The Weiβe-Rose-Stiftung kicked them out. Newspapers all over Germany carried the bulletins.
A long-time friend in Stuttgart was coworker of the youngest Hirzel son Roland. They were working together on a project when the news came over the radio. My friend said Roland Hirzel turned white as a sheet, and said, ‘How could he? He was part of the White Rose!’
If you are working on a White Rose, Hirzel, or historiography project, this “event” may not be overlooked. It shook up everyone connected to White Rose, whether scholar, friend or family member, or journalist. When we were in Germany in 1995, researching White Rose for 3-1/2 months, this subject invariably came up.
Because Hans Hirzel renounced his participation in White Rose resistance after February 1994. Both he and Susanne Hirzel blocked access to their Protokolle in the Bundesarchiv. They likely blocked access solely to protect Hans Hirzel’s new radical right-wing image, because those Protokolle contradict most of his public statements from 1994 on. Note: We have full copy of both sets, legally, and will be publishing them in English translation within the next year.
Otherwise, 1994 was filled with more of the same. Good work first.
Michael Kessler edited a beautiful collection of Wilhelm Geyer’s pastels and watercolors entitled Wilhelm Geyer: Ein Bündnis schloss ich mit meinen Augen [Wilhelm Geyer: I Made a Covenant with my Eyes]. The title, taken from the book of Job, is not incidental to Kessler’s narrative or Geyer’s biography. Geyer identified with Job and completed an extensive series of sketches based on the tribulations of Job.
This “covenant” had become Geyer’s mantra once Nazis came to power. He focused his energy on all that was good and positive, raising his children that way in an era in which “positive” was hard to find. Geyer did not ignore the evil, but he did not allow it entrance into his home or soul.
Hinrich Siefken edited another pedagogical text. In this 1994 publication, the “anthology” consisted of documents penned by Catholic scholars who were important to White Rose friends: Carl Muth, Theodor Haecker, Johannes Maaβen. If I have one complaint about this book, it is that Siefken wasted a much-needed book about the intersection of religion and White Rose thinking by focusing solely on Catholic theologians.
On the positive side, he did include Johannes Maaβen, who was read primarily by Willi Graf and his friends, not Hans Scholl. Siefken also parsed the leaflets in a manner similar to that used by Dr. Richard Harder in 1943, but from contemporary perspective.
If you use this book to learn more about Haecker’s Schöpfer und Schöpfung, or Tag- und Nachtbücher; or Muth’s Schöpfer und Magier; or Maaβen’s editorials from Junge Front, good! But let the text serve to point you to their larger scope of literature. And if you are writing about White Rose in general, please keep going to the other faith traditions that influenced these friends (traditional Lutheranism, mystic Lutheranism (Sophie Scholl’s obsession at one point), Buddhism, Eastern philosophy, atheism-agnosticism, and anthroposophy). Not reviewed.
By far the best publication of 1994, if not one of the best overall: The edition of Willi Graf’s letters and diary entries. Willi Graf: Briefe und Aufzeichnungen [Willi Graf: Letters and Notes]. This book does what the edition of letters and diary entries from Hans and Sophie Scholl should have done – it presents Willi Graf’s words without censorship. Nothing off limits. Dr. Inge Jens told me in April 1995 that Anneliese Knoop-Graf flung open her archives with the words, ‘If you find anything negative about Willi, publish it!’ And Jens did so.
This is the most beat-up and used book in my library. Not only are the letters priceless, but we learn from them the agony that Willi knew upon his arrival in Munich in May 1942. The horrors of war, the brutality of the German war machine, Warsaw before the wall enclosed the nightmare of the ghetto – he poured his heart out to friends in Bonn and Saarbrücken, convinced he would never find friends in Munich who could understand.
Jens’ endnotes came chiefly from her research, not from propaganda shoved down her throat by the sibling of the featured person. When she did rely on Knoop-Graf to explain a person or place referred to in Willi’s letters, there’s no camouflage that tries to transform them into anti-Nazis. The family is who the family was. This opens up the complexity and difficulty of life during the Third Reich, where beloved family members stood outside one’s circle of confidantes, because they chose to follow Hitler.
Most of all, Willi Graf’s diary entries “ruled” when we wrote our White Rose Histories. Because his diary was maintained daily – with entries at most one or two days later – it is more accurate than diaries of others who would write reams covering 10-14 days at a time (e.g., Scholls).
To learn more about Willi Graf’s letters and diary entries, read the full review.
One publication from 1994 serves as bridge between good and bad. In 1994, University of California at Santa Barbara (UCSB) held a conference related to a White Rose exhibit held on campus. One single example of how nothing from this conference should be taken seriously: Wittenstein lectured about the Verhoeven movie after it was shown. Since that movie essentially “corresponded with” his memories at the time – there was not enough scholarship for his memory to have improved substantially – he was not critical about the distortions and mythology of that film.
Wittenstein also contributed an essay to UCSB’s annual anthology on the subject of White Rose – pages 39-42 of Soundings; the article was entitled “The White Rose: Questions and Reflections.” Please read the full review online.
Note that I am not reviewing the essays contributed to 1994 Soundings by Elizabeth Witherell, Marla Berns, David Clay Large, Harold Marcuse, Ursula Mahlendorf, Bernhard Witkop, or Ruth Klüger. I assume that in the past almost-30 years, they will have understood the superficiality and errors of Wittenstein’s words.
Closing out 1994: One of the worst all-time White Rose histories. It may in fact be the single worst book ever written about the White Rose. Anton Gill’s An Honorourable Defeat: A History of German Resistance to Hitler, 1933-1945 could have been excused same as Richard Hanser’s, had it been written prior to 1989.
But it was not. Gill’s book was published in 1994.
Henry Holt & Company tends to have a good reputation. They published Robert Frost’s poetry, Robert Louis Stevenson’s novels, and fiction that was well-received. Henry Holt has published Stacey Abrams and Elizabeth Warren, Noam Chomsky and Edward Snowden. One expects a certain level of competence from a publishing house with that track record.
I do not care how famous Anton Gill was as actor and director before he decided to write “nonfiction,” among those Honourable Defeat. I would automatically discount any nonfiction on his list, strictly on the basis of this book. There is nothing worse on the market.
There will not be a review of this book. Henry Holt should request that any library and used book dealer destroy all copies of this book. Alternately they could list it as historical fiction. It is anything but nonfiction. And I figured that out long before my database was complete!
This is one of those books that, when cited by a “scholar,” immediately discredits that “scholar” in my estimation.
The year 1995 again brought us a mixed bag, but at least there is nothing worthy of the garbage can.
Dr. Rupprecht Gerngross published a fairly comprehensive little book about the activities of his translators’ company in April 1945. Entitled Aufstand der Freiheits Aktion Bayern 1945 – “Fasanjagd” und wie die Münchner Freiheit ihren Namen bekam [Revolt of Operation Freedom Bavaria 1945 – Pheasant Hunting and How Münchner Freiheit Got its Name], Gerngross documented what his small band of translators accomplished. — Pheasants were Nazi bigwigs. Inside joke.
As noted in the 1945-1979 article in this series, Freiheitsaktion Bayern should not be considered a resistance movement in the normal sense of that term. Their primary goal was to protect the infrastructure of Munich and environs. Wittenstein claimed to have been part of the FAB. This claim is more easily disproved than others, since he was in Italy at the end of the war, when FAB was active. Gerngross knew – and apparently liked – Wittenstein in the 1940s, before the end of the war. They traveled in similar circles.
Even Gerngross did not insert Wittenstein into this story. None of Wittenstein’s later stories – “I provided them with weapons!” – made it into Gerngross’ 1995 narrative.
The FAB and Harald Dohrn’s involvement with this group will be part of White Rose History Volume III – Fighters to the Very End. 10/13/1943-05/09/1945. Since that volume is at least two years off, look for posts here on Substack later this year. We can only understand how critical Christoph Probst’s father-in-law Harald Dohrn, and Dohrn’s children and stepchildren were to Christl’s development and his contribution to White Rose considerations. Because make no mistake, Christoph Probst’s ethics, morality, and backbone made the difference within that circle of friends.
Also in 1995 – keep in mind this was the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II – newspapers, magazines, and organizations began to recognize non-Scholl individuals in a more concrete manner, and more often. Süddeutsche Zeitung featured an article about Alexander Schmorell. Written by Patrizia Steipe, “Alexander Schmorell – privat” covered his life.
Anneliese Knoop-Graf was invited more frequently to talk about memories of her brother. She gave me an undated copy of one such speech: “…Er übertrug mir das Vermächtnis, sein Andenken und Wollen aufrechtzuerhalten und weiterzutragen” [… He Bequeathed (the Responsibility) to Me to Preserve and Continue his Memory and Wishes] accurately portrayed her feelings of duty to ensure her brother’s legacy lived on. It was never about herself. Her speeches and essays centered on Willi Graf, as well as her long-time confidante Angelika Probst.
It is appropriate that in the same post that identifies the White Rose book I evaluate as worst of all time, I should also be able to point to the White Rose book that I deem the best of all time. Lieselotte Fürst-Ramdohr’s memoirs, Freundschaften in der Weiβen Rose [Friendships in the White Rose], were published in 1995.
Fürst-Ramdohr’s book accurately portrayed the group as friends first and revolutionaries second. Her insights into group dynamics were priceless. Hers is also one of the few stories that have not changed from the first time she jotted down simple notes in 1946, to the appearance of this book. (The others are Wilhelm Geyer, Eugen Grimminger, and Traute Lafrenz.) This lends credibility to her story.
Does that mean Fürst-Ramdohr made no mistakes on these pages? Of course not! She was writing down her memories of life from 1933-1943 – three years after the war. She had not kept a regular diary, so had little other than her memory to work from.
Exclamation! Publishers still intends to publish her memoirs in English translation. Domenic! Let’s talk! When we do, you will understand why Erich and Hertha Schmorell, and Herta and Micha Probst, told me: If you read one and only one book about the White Rose, this is it!
Lilo’s words are the polar opposite of Wittenstein’s. You are there with her. There’s genuine anger, anguish, laughter, hilarity, wonder, awe, weariness, joy. Lilo brewed countless cups of tea for her dearest friends, Alex, Hans, Christl, Willi, but most especially for Alex, her Schurik. You feel her fear in your bones when Alex is experimenting with creation of a template to paint Down With Hitler on Munich’s walls. When Alex disappears into the night and she screams inside herself after him, you cannot hold back tears. This is reality. Because when Lilo narrated her stories about these friends, they were friends. Friends.
It's not for nothing that Wittenstein belittled and ridiculed her book.
As with Clara Geyer’s biography of her husband, Lilo’s words will make you understand why I am not content with the mythology. The real people – including the real people named Hans and Sophie Scholl – jump off the page. When Alex gave Lilo the book that Sophie had just given him as a present, because Sophie’s attentions made him exceedingly uncomfortable, it’s funny. All the way around. (Lilo showed us a copy of the book. As with Anneliese Knoop-Graf and the Geyers, Lilo can back her stories up with things she treasured and kept. Including the broom closet where Alex would store extra leaflets.)
The last 1995 publication is the second in our library by Dr. Silvester Lechner. Die ‘Hitlerjugend’ am Beispiel der Region Ulm / Neu-Ulm [‘Hitler Youth’ Using the Ulm / New Ulm Region as an Example] adds another layer of understanding to the lives of the friends who were raised in Ulm.
In 1994, students at the ‘junior college’ in Ulm interviewed Ulmer who were both members and non-members of Hitler Youth. This modest book is the result. As with everything Lechner produced, Hitlerjugend is worth having if you are researching White Rose, especially the students from Ulm.
We’ve now reached the point that White Rose literature had attained when we took that first research trip to Germany in 1995. Our histories would be released in 2002, and we did acquire a ton more primary and secondary resources between 1995 and 2001 when the database was finalized the first time around.
Next couple of posts, I will take a break from this historiography and tell a few more of their stories. When this series picks up, I will cover 1996-1999. As would be expected, there are more and more publications with each passing year.
If you are curious about supporting documents for any of these Substack posts, check out our White Rose Histories (Volume I, 1/1933-4/30/1942, and Volume 2, 5/1/1942-10/12/1943), along with primary source materials. As always, if you have questions or private comments, please contact us. If you find errors, or if we missed a publication, please contact us, or post a comment below.
Publication information for books and essays mentioned in this post (paid subscribers only):
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Why This Matters to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.