One Voice Speaks for Six Million
The uses and abuses of Anne Frank's diary.
By Lawrence Graver
Reprinted with permission from The Yale Holocaust
Encyclopedia (Yale
University Press).
By the late 1950's, Anne Frank had become a legend: known
around the world not only as the author of a vivid, life-affirming book, but
also as the prime symbol of the sufferings of innocent victims of Nazi
genocide. "One voice speaks for six million," the Russian writer Ilya
Ehrenburg wrote, "the voice not of a sage or a poet but of an ordinary
little girl."
In Her Honor
Streets, schools, youth villages and forests were soon named
in her honor; paintings and statues perpetuated her image; poems and songs were
composed in her memory; and--as Alvin Rosenfeld has observed--"public figures
of every kind, from politicians to religious leaders, regularly invoke[d] her
name and quote[d] lines from her book. In all of these ways, her name, face,
and fate [were] kept constantly before us."
In 1957, Otto Frank had further memorialized his daughter by
helping to establish the Anne Frank Stichting in Amsterdam, a foundation whose
original aim was "to repair and renovate the property at 263 Prinsengracht
and especially to maintain the building's back annex, as well as to propagate
ideals left to the world in the diary of Anne Frank." In May 1960, the
Anne Frank House opened as a museum, and the foundation supported youth
conferences, lectures and exhibitions designed to combat anti-Semitism and
racism. Activities soon expanded. A specialized library brought together a
collection of books, newspapers and magazines about discrimination and threats
to the rights of minorities; and the educational department developed programs,
courses, and teaching aids to be used in schools and other settings.
In 1985 the traveling exhibition "Anne Frank in the
World: 1929-1945" was organized by the Foundation and has since been seen
(and will continue to be seen) in hundreds of cities and towns across Europe,
North and South American, and Asia. The number of visitors to the Anne Frank
House has grown from about 9,000 in 1960 to more than 600,000 each year in the
1990's, making it something of a shrine, as well as one of the most popular
museums in Europe. Anne Frank Centers were also established in New York and other
cities, and at this writing one is planned for Berlin. In Basel, the ANNE
FRANK-Fonds oversees matters related to copyrights andn reprint permissions,
and also supports educational and philanthropic projects. (See Anne Frank
House: A Museum with a Story. Amsterdam, 1992.)
Such has been the phenomenal fame of Anne Frank's life and
diary, and so often has she been invoked as the Holocaust martyr--symbol
of the murdered, guiltless six million Jews--that critical reactions were and
continue to be inevitable. As early as the late 1950s, neo-Nazis--in their
efforts to prove that accounts of German genocide were exaggerated or even
fabricated--claimed that the most famous Holocaust document, the diary itself,
was a forgery. These frequently repeated charges led to several lawsuits and in
the 1980's to an exhaustive scholarly and forensic study by the Netherlands
State Institute for War Documentation to authenticate Anne Frank's writings.
The result was the authoritative The Diary of Anne Frank: the Critical Edition,
which proved beyond a doubt that the diary was genuine and that the neo-Nazi
allegations were groundless.
Published first in the Netherlands (1986) and then in
Germany, France, Italy and America, the Critical Edition is now
recognized as the most reliable source for the text and history of the girl's
writings. (See Deborah Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust, New York, 1993.)
Revised and expanded editions of the diary for general readers followed; and in
this new form the book again became an international best-seller. (Anne
Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl, edited by Otto H. Frank and Mirjam
Pressler, newly translated by Susan Massotty, New York, 1995.)
Credible Critiques
Other, more creditable critiques of the so-called
"mythologizing of Anne Frank" followed in the 1970s and afterwards.
Although people continued to revere the girl and to treasure her book,
commentators questioned the many, often bizarre uses to which her name and
image had been put. Frequently quoting Hannah Arendt's 1962 remark that the
adoration of Anne Frank was a form of "cheap sentimentality at the expense
of great catastrophe," critics argued that an adolescent Dutch girl could
not possibly be "the voice of the six million"; no single person
could.
Her diary, which ended before she knew about or experienced
German genocide, did not convey the horrific actuality or meaning of an
unprecedented historical disaster in which millions of individuals and much of
their culture were obliterated in camps built and operated by one of the great
nations of Europe. Her book could not and should not be described as the
representative Holocaust text. To focus solely on Anne Frank as a symbol of the
victims of the Holocaust is, critics argue, to turn an enormous calamity into a
story of an assault on fugitives and innocent children rather than of a
systematic effort to eradicate an entire people and culture.
Another aspect of the ongoing controversy about the Anne
Frank legacy concerns the Jewish specificity of the diary. The best-known
adaptations (the Goodrich and Hackett play and the George Stevens film)
minimized the Jewish content in order to achieve a greater universality and
hence consolation and commercial success. For years after the premiere of the
play and film, the heroine was widely perceived not only as a symbol of the
Holocaust but as a ubiquitous emblem of hope, a persecuted victim whose
utterance "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really
good at heart" encapsulated her inspirational message to the entire world.
That Anne Frank was Jewish and killed for that reason only
became less significant than the comforting image of her as the ardent child
who, during a barbaric time, never lost faith in the basic goodness of human
beings. In the diary itself, however, Anne writes powerfully of the suffering
of European Jews and ponders the reasons for their persecution. Also neglected
in the Broadway/Hollywood account of the girl who kept faith is the fact that
she wrote the much-quoted sentence before she was arrested and condemned to see
mass murder and before she herself died wretchedly in Bergen-Belsen. As
Lawrence Langer has said, the acclaimed sentence (yoked from context and used
as the uplifting curtain line of the Goodrich and Hackett play) "floats
over the audience like a benediction assuring grace after momentary
gloom," and is "the least appropriate epitaph conceivably for the
millions of victims and thousands of survivors of Nazi genocide."
Other controversies have swirled around the name "Anne
Frank," some of which provoked bitter quarrels and law suits. During Otto
Frank's lifetime, he was frequently involved in litigation against the
individuals and groups who charged that his daughter's diary was a forgery; and
in recent years disputes have arisen between the Anne Frank Stichting in
Amsterdam and the ANNE FRANK-Fonds in Basel over copyrights, the uses of money
generated by the vast sales of the diary, and other matters related to
ownership of the child's name, image and book, and to the question of how her life
and death should be memorialized. Survivors of the camps and others have also
expressed indignation and sadness at what they see as the exploitation of an
Anne Frank cult.
Persistent efforts, however, have also been made to counter
the most sentimental and misleading aspects of the "Anne Frank
mystique." Two school curricula were designend to place her story more
accurately in context: Karen Shawn's The End of Innocence: Anne Frank and
the Holocaust (New York, 1989, 1994); and Alex Grobman's Anne Frank in
Historical Perspective (Los Angeles, 1995). Alvin H. Rosenfeld's valuable
essay, "Popularizaton and Memory: The case of Anne Frank," appeared
in Lessons and Legacies (Northwestern, 1991); and Robert Alter has
usefully warned of the false consolation involved in trying to clutch
"eternal hope from the heart of hell."
Yet despite some of the questionable uses to which the Anne
Frank legend has been put, her book and legacy remain of permanent value. The
diary itself is a profoundly moving testament to the fine observational powers
and the swift growth of a quicksilver young girl, and to the pathos of her
brutally abbreviated life. If read as the first (and not the only, the last, or
the definitive) book about people persecuted by the Nazis, it can fairly serve
as an unforgettable reminder of what Phillip Roth once called "the
millions of unlived years robbed from the murdered Jews."
Lawrence Graver is Professor Emeritus at Williams College, and author of
An Obsession with Anne Frank, Beckett: Waiting for Godot,
and other books.