Most Helpful Customer Reviews
16 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Persevering With Himmler, March 16, 2002
This review is from: The Strange Death of Heinrich Himmler: A Forensic Investigation (Hardcover)
Hugh Thomas, as we know, writes a good story. Here he argues that the guy caught by the British and buried (later cremated) after committing suicide in May 1945 may not have been Heinrich Himmler but a near look-a-like Heinrich Hitzinger. The Himmler of this book is not the Hitler sychophant but a scheming, power hungry warlord who accepted the war was lost as early as 1943 and laid plans to succeed his master by treachery if necessary. Thomas argues that the devious Himmler, who amassed a huge personal fortune via SS income, would not have been so stupid as to fall into the hands of the British so soon after hostilities ceased. The chapters range far and wide and include discussion of the goings-on in the British legation in Stockholm as well as the part played by spies such as Philby and Blunt. It's interesting stuff, but is it convincing? This reviewer does not think so. Sometimes Thomas actually misleads. Thus he argues that Himmler during the war never wore the horn rimmed spectacles seen in the presumed death photographs after he swallowed poison. This is patently untrue. You have only to flick, for example, through Martin Mansson's pictorial chronicle of the Reichsfuhrer for lots of wartime photos of him with hornrimmed glasses. Another problem is that some of the key source material in Thomas' book is not verifiable, being unpublished theses or private information or rumours from published secondary sources. The author casts doubt on the dental charts from the first British autopsy, claiming they are not Himmler's, but the argument is not proven. The British records on Himmler's death will not be publicly released until 2045 which allows Thomas to smell a conspiracy. And that's the point. If you enjoy conspiracies, you're gonna love this book. But whether it's fiction or non fiction is another matter. Never mind, it's a brisk and enjoyable read.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
15 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Poor Sensationalist Fiction, February 18, 2004
This review is from: The Strange Death of Heinrich Himmler: A Forensic Investigation (Hardcover)
I received the "Himmler conspiracy" book as a gift and struggled through most of it; my only surprise was that it is even worse than I had imagined. The book is poor research, poor forensic science, and not even very good conspiracy pulp. There are numerous sources on Himmler's death that the author has failed to mention, obviating the troublesome necessity of refuting them. Even a cursory glance at the debriefings of Himmler's SS assistants who were with him shortly before his arrest, for example, attest to his intent to take his own life if made prisoner. The author similarly ignores myriad statements from British and German individuals, military and civilian, who were present at the various stages of Himmler's arrest, suicide, and eventual internment. Beyond the weak "research"-- much of it apparently relying on translations rather than primary source materials since the author does not read German (?)-- is the central question of motivation. Why would the British or the Allies acquiesce in such a ruse? To avoid embarassment at having "negotiated" with Himmler during the war's final stages? Rubbish! The Western Allies used plenty of ex-Nazis to counter the Soviet threat, from the technicians of Werner von Braum's shop to intelligence assets like Himmler's erstwhile svengali Walter Schellenberg. Some of these associations were unsavory, but neither London nor Washington has ever been overly reluctant to acknowledge them given the uncertain and dangerous period in which they were forged. Himmler had nothing to offer the Allies after the war. He would have been far more useful in the prisoner's dock at Nuremburg than as an intelligence asset. And to suggest that Himmler took up captaincy of an Odessa-like werewolf organization pushes the bounds of credulity to the limit. For readers interested in leading Third Reich personalities who did escape justice and went on to lead interesting and unusual lives, try bios of Josef Mengele, Adolf Galland, Otto Skorzeny, or maybe the Flemish Nazi leader, Leon de Grelle. But as for Himmler-- not really the most interesting Nazi in any case-- leave the conspiracy theories well enough alone!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
8 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Tiresome rehashing and an X-Files style conspiracy, January 21, 2004
This review is from: The Strange Death of Heinrich Himmler: A Forensic Investigation (Hardcover)
At least the first 25 or 30 pages of this book are spent 'examining' the personality of Heinrich Himmler. The author offers no new insights into the Reichsfuhrer, he falls back on old suppositions and translations of books. Most notably he relies on the translations of Himmler's diaries. Personally, I have no respect for a 'serious' researcher who likes to state as fact something that he hasn't translated for himself. His portrait of Himmler's personality is the same old 'brilliantly scheming monster' that we've all seen before. It is dull and uninteresting, and falls back on old legends and anecdotes about Himmler without really touching on what kind of person he may have been. Granted, this isn't a biography, but still, a more objective presentation might have been a reasonable alternative. My biggest problem, though (and this is with just the first 30 pages) is the fact that the author basically shoots himself in the foot right from the start. He runs hot and cold between Himmler being not especially intelligent, then decides that the man WAS intelligent, then goes back and decides that he wasn't, and so forth. Clearly Himmler was an organizational genius, but if the author isn't willing to give Himmler credit for being at least semi-bright, how in the world does he expect the reader to believe the level of quick thinking and long-term planning that he goes on to describe? Beyond that, for a forensic expert, the author certainly has some antiquated ideas of post-mortem physiological happenings. I was initially very excited to pick up this book, but I lost my appetite before I even hit a double-digit page number, and was ready to throw the book into the street before I hit a three-digit page number. Ultimately, the reader will have to decide for his or herself whether or not the book is good, but I wouldn't recommend it unless you're very, very bored and are ready to have to swallow poor writing and research and half-baked theories and evidence.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
