Joachim C. Fest. Plotting Hitler's Death: The Story of German Resistance. New York: Metropolitan Books., 1996. ix + 419 pp. $30.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-8050-4213-9. Reviewed by Nathan Stoltzfus Published on H-Soz-u-Kult (July, 1998) From the former East Germany to the coun‐ writes. All the numerous accounts to date have tries of the former Soviet Union, a paramount lacked a "comprehensive view" and thus have challenge in the 1990s for democracy generally -- "eroded the legacy of the German resistance." and for German unification specifically -- is the Scholars, writing to "the limited number of ex‐ growth of individual courage and sense of social perts in the feld," have tended to write narrow responsibility which provide the backbone of civil accounts, lacking proper context and thus a prop‐ society. Despite a chorus of western voices calling er rendering. Fest acknowledges that "most read‐ for the growth of civil society within eastern Eu‐ ers" are "quite familiar" with the July 20, 1944 rope since the fall of the Berlin Wall, Germany plot, but he wants to bring attention to the fact continues to commemorate an attempted "coup that well before then, "a substantial number of d'etat" by an elitist institution as "The Resistance" Germans had come to despise Hitler and his poli‐ to the Nazi dictatorship, even though other cases cies" (2-6). Thus on the occasion of the fftieth an‐ of opposition better exemplify the civilian niversary of the conspiracy, Mr. Fest published courage of healthy democracies. "Staatsstreich: der lange Weg zum 20. Juli" Joachim Fest, the famed German journalist (translated and published in English in 1996) in and moderate conservative who has written one order "to provide a full understanding of the con‐ of the best biographies of Adolf Hitler (1973) and a spirators and their actions." book portraying Hitler's closest henchmen (1963), This is certainly a worthy goal, for as the his‐ has now written a history of the German conspir‐ torian Fritz Stern has written, "despite all the ob‐ acy to kill Hitler. The attempted assassination on jections we could possibly raise, we cannot and July 20, 1944 by groups of the elite led by an ele‐ should not withhold our admiration from these ment of the German military, had been "largely men and women [of July 20]." Fritz Stern, suppressed" in Allied countries and "never suffi‐ "Dreams and Delusions: The Drama of German ciently appreciated" by the German public, Fest History" (New York: Knopf, 1987), p. 191. The fail‐ H-Net Reviews ure of internal German resistance was a tragedy, time are the most interesting ones Mr. Fest's book especially for those caught in that hideous raises, although the book is also subject to the predicament, and Mr. Fest, a respected public in‐ usual types of criticism. Can an author who claims terpreter of Germany's past, provides a masterful to present a "comprehensive view" of such com‐ synthesis of what we know. Keeping a focus on plex events remain uncriticized for not citing a the characters of resistance as much as on events, single archive? Mr. Fest sometimes cites no he places the history of the conspirators within a sources -- or no relevant ones -- in making debat‐ conventional narrative of political and military able statements, many of which aim to portray the history of the Third Reich, but begins the story of military conspirators in the best possible light. For German resistance with the rise to power of Hitler example, he denies that Count von Stauffenberg and the Nazi Party. led the parade at Bamberg celebrating Hitler in Mr. Fest has succeeded admirably in reaching January 1933, although this contradicts the ac‐ out to a broad audience, and in shining more light counts of leading historians. He also states that all on a major event in Nazi and postwar history. senior officers "more or less felt" that Hitler was Whether he has added anything to our overall un‐ "ordinaer" -- "vulgar, hucksterish" (37). Then there derstanding of the murder plot and its signifi‐ is the matter of secondary literature. Mr. Fest cance is more questionable, however. For it is not draws well on the "eulogistic" or "monumentalist" a larger context Mr. Fest gives to the story so strand of scholarship. With these conclusions he much as a context chosen for a specific purpose -- has no quarrel. Yet he does not refute, or even ac‐ to cast the conspirators and their motives in the knowledge, the revisionist challenges to this best light possible. In doing so, Mr. Fest eclipses or scholarship. He omits reference even to Martin even eliminates other perspectives on German re‐ Broszat, not to mention other relevant German sistance, sweeping aside the "many [German re‐ historians such as Detlev Peukert, Peter Stein‐ sistance] organizations" and "all the various [Ger‐ bach, Michael Krueger-Charle, and Christof man] resistance groups" in order to focus exclu‐ Mauch (the majority of whom appear in a collec‐ sively on the July 20 conspiracy. In seeking to tion Fest cites repeatedly, Steinbach and raise high these "martyrs," Fest belittles other ef‐ Schmaedeke's "Der Widerstand gegen den Nation‐ forts, referring to some as "events like the idealis‐ alsozialismus"). Is Fest primarily interested in tic and reckless actions of the White Rose" (3). putting these events in their proper light, or in a This brings to mind a paraphrase of the comment particular, exclusive political light? by the American statesman Charles Pinckney to If this is the case, it would hardly be new. The French Foreign Minister de Talleyrand-Perigord search for a "usable past" -- selective memory for in 1797: "millions for defense, but not one cent for didactic purpose -- has beset the history of the re‐ tribute," i.e., millions for the story of July 20, but sistance. Used frst to legitimize the West German none for histories that record and compare other armed forces in the 1950s, the July 20 conspiracy opposition efforts. Relative to the support for representing "The German Resistance" has proven Hitler, of course, there was not that much resis‐ useful ever since to represent a thread of anti-fas‐ tance. But the excluson of other important acts of cism that has blossomed into robust democracy opposition in order to focus on just one, the better throughout the country. July 20 was the act most to make it stand out as illustrious and alone, hard‐ easily understood as resistance, a warlike act ly makes for the best history. which through massive destructive power intend‐ The problems related to eulogizing the July 20 ed to reverse overnight the political leadership, conspiracy in this exclusive way at this point in rooted though it was in social and economic pro‐ 2 H-Net Reviews cesses that had been establishing themselves for tance should be defined more by the social and years. political impact of actions than by the motivations Notably, the incident which Hitler's followers behind them. This opened the way to his effort to used to represent the greatest challenge to his document a wide range of actions of noncon‐ power from within does not reflect the fundamen‐ formism and dissidence identified as resistance. tal principle which Hitler used to gain and main‐ More recently, the eulogizing and revisionist tain power. Scrupulous attention to domestic pop‐ treatments of the July conspiracy have led to syn‐ ular support -- or the appearance of it -- coincid‐ theses of these earlier schools. At the same time, ing with the rejection of a military coup was es‐ eulogizers have mounted a retort, spurred on by sential to Hitler's successes. This consideration did social and political changes that have been associ‐ not permit Hitler (at least since the mid-1920s) to ated primarily with German unification, which is think he could reverse the political direction of seen as raising obstacles to Mr. Fest's aim of get‐ Germany overnight. It was the fact that the July ting Germans generally to appreciate the July 20 conspiracy had been unsuccessful even in killing conspiracy more fully. This effort has raised im‐ Hitler, however, that helped to shape a postwar portant insights from scholars, including the his‐ definition of resistance emphasizing motivations, torian Hans Mommsen, who has argued that re‐ a slippery if critical element of human history sistance as indicated by the July conspiracy en‐ that soon proved to be as useful in questioning as tailed a "Lernprozess", a developing awareness in supporting the conspirators' pedestaled posi‐ that led painfully and courageously from support tion as "The German Resistance". to opposition, and that political resistance re‐ Especially with the rise of "Alltagsgeschichte" quired political compromise, represented by an during the 1970s, historians challenged the eulo‐ image of the military conspirators supporting the gistic treatment of the July 20 resistance, and the regime on one shoulder while preparing for its definition of resistance constructed around it. demise on the other. Hans Mommsen, comment Martin Broszat, a leading German critic of eulo‐ for panel titled "The German Resistance Against gizers, characterized the motives of the military Hitler: New Perspectives," 1997 German Studies conspirators as somewhat self-interested rather Association Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., than ideologically pure, while others who did not September 28, 1997. See also Mommsen's essay criticize their motives as harshly did characterize "Widerstand und Politische Kultur in Deutschland their political judgment as poor. Most if not all of und Oestereich" (Vienna: Picus Verlag, 1994). the conspirators of 1944, like most Germans, at If Mr. Fest's "comprehensive" treatment of the first supported Hitler without protest. Military July 20 conspiracy adds something to the work of leaders largely shared Hitler's hatred of bolshe‐ other scholars, it also detracts.