What’s the irony on the day I finally decide to write about this book that it would be announced that this story is being created as a series on Peacock (link)? Before I go into my thoughts about this book and some “controversy,” first, here is the synopsis:
In April 1942, Lale Sokolov, a Slovakian Jew, is forcibly transported to the concentration camps at Auschwitz-Birkenau. When his captors discover that he speaks several languages, he is put to work as a Tätowierer (the German word for tattooist), tasked with permanently marking his fellow prisoners.
Imprisoned for over two and a half years, Lale witnesses horrific atrocities and barbarism—but also incredible acts of bravery and compassion. Risking his own life, he uses his privileged position to exchange jewels and money from murdered Jews for food to keep his fellow prisoners alive.
One day in July 1942, Lale, prisoner 32407, comforts a trembling young woman waiting in line to have the number 34902 tattooed onto her arm. Her name is Gita, and in that first encounter, Lale vows to somehow survive the camp and marry her.
A vivid, harrowing, and ultimately hopeful re-creation of Lale Sokolov’s experiences as the man who tattooed the arms of thousands of prisoners with what would become one of the most potent symbols of the Holocaust, The Tattooist of Auschwitz is also a testament to the endurance of love and humanity under the darkest possible conditions. (Amazon link)
I kept seeing this book on recommended lists. I love historical fiction, especially WW2 historical fiction; however, sometimes, I have to step away from this genre which I have done that past year. However, recently, I noticed this novel on Amazon’s Prime Reading so decided to read it over spring break.
I really liked this book. It was slow at first; however, many books are when characters and the storyline are being developed. About 1/3 way into the novel, though, I couldn’t put it down. I have been a social studies teacher for 23 years. I love history! When teaching about the Holocaust, I would teach about genocide in general and all the other genocides which have happened since the Holocaust (even when the U.S. said “never again”). Saying all that, I guess I never really read much about the details of life inside a concentration camp. I have been to the Holocaust Museum (in D.C.) twice and still didn’t grasp exactly the communities that were created within. That is what I appreciate about this novel. It gives one a visual about the inner-workings of what happened once someone arrived at the camp.
Second, I thought the love story between these two (and afterwards) is inspirational. In a culture that seems to not prioritize commitment, this love story is an example of one relationship that survived the depths of hell.
Now for the “elephant in the room” – the apparent historical inaccuracies of the novel. With any historical fiction novel, I always google to find out more about the novel. What I found through my search were some who lambasted this novel for the inaccuracies. When I began reading various sites and the issues they had with this novel, I realized I do not have any issue with these inaccuracies. None of the issues took away from life within the concentration camp nor the love story. For example, in the novel, the author mentioned the use of penicillin. Apparently, penicillin was not readily available during this time, especially within the camps. One site I looked at did say it was available in 1942 and was mass produced by 1945 (link). In my opinion, this is not a “story-stopping” inaccuracy. Ok, so she got that part wrong. Should we skewer the book because of that? Nope. Second, apparently one of the main character’s tattoo number was wrong in the novel. There was a clarification of this at the back of my book. Anyway, I am not an excerpt in tattoo numbers. I don’t know one person who would have known the discrepancy. Therefore, in my opinion, this is not an issue. Again, it does not take away from the love story nor life in the camps. Third, there was a plot about women sneaking explosives into the camp by hiding explosive material under their fingernails. Apparently this was not correct. Again…it does not take away from the plot.
Heather Morris states this NOVEL is based on a TRUE STORY…not “this is a nonfiction, 100% historically accurate book that you need to use to write your research paper.” Readers know that anything that is nonfiction or based on a true story will possibly have some “ad-lib” in it. I just read a great nonfiction book (Maude), but I knew the book was told through the stories of the granddaughter heard. No one can possibly know what exactly happened behind closed doors unless there is clear documentation/evidence. For any novel that is based on a true story, I would understand that to be the same. If there were blatant inaccuracies that gave someone credit for something that was not true, then we can talk about it. These inaccuracies, though, are not ones that take away from what really happened in the camp nor the sweet love story.
So, should you read this book? Absolutely. I think you should read anything that gives a voice to those who survived this awful time in history. So, happy reading!
Resources – includes the controversies but also includes pictures of the couple
CBC article (about the story…more pictures)
BBC article (life in the camps and the love story)
