Boy Who Loved Anne Frank

Ellen Feldman has developed a niche in the genre of 'mixed' or 'blended' history and fiction. In 2003, she published Lucy which focused on the love triangle of President Rooseelt, Eleanor and Lucy Mercer. This novel skilfully wove history and fact and the result was a powerful tale answering the 'what if' questions. Now, in The Boy Who Loved Anne Frank, the author explores the question: what if there was a survivor from the annex and what if the survivor lived to tell a tale but chooses not to...Anne Frank is a historical character grounded in the horrible reality of the holocaust. Ellen Feldman creates the character of Peter van Pels who survives but moves to America and denies his past and his Jewish heritage. Through the character of Peter, the reader enters the world of a survivor whose traumatic experiences take on a surrealist quality as he is forced to encounter his past even though he spends much time creating a new identity for himself. The novel is a powerful read as despite the fictitious world, Feldman deals with issues of the memory, the psychological effects of trauma and the Holocaust experience. It is quite a risk to develop imaginary worlds around historical figures but Feldman does this remarkably well. A compelling read though as Peter confronts his past and ghosts of the past there is the desire that he could be stronger and faster. This of course may be just our natural urge for quick solutions which may not hold true or be valid for intense trauma. For readers who enjoy games that fiction plays, this novel challenges one as we watch a 'real' person Peter van Daan from Anne Frank's story become Peter van Pels (Feldman's character) who reinvents himself and then embarks on rediscovering himself. A journey of denial, deceit, truth and confrontation - where history and fiction are blended.

This is the story of Peter van Pels, known as Peter van Daan in Anne Frank's Diary, and what might have been had he actually survived the death camps. Feldman takes the idea and gives Peter a life in America, a life in which he attempts to deny his Jewishness by pretending he is a lapsed Christian. He marries and has children, explaining his time in the prison camp as his being part of the Resistance movement. But try as he might, Peter is swept back into his old life of hiding as Anne's Diary is published by her father. Both longing for and repulsed by his own history, Peter tries to lead his life as he'd hoped he would but finds himself feeling righteous anger at how the movie and play based on Anne's book portrays his father. His years long journey into self-discovery is well-played by Feldman's expert imagination. I could absolutely believe that Peter did in fact survive, and I still wish it had turned out to be so. Feldman has invented a wonderfully tragic tale that is sure to stay with you a very long time. Excellent storytelling. Recommended!

In view of full disclosure I will lead with the following comment: I am a bit of an amateur scholar of all things Anne Frank and so I am disposed towards liking something along the lines of a novel like this. That being said, if you accept the premise of this novel, then I think it is a very good one. Of course, anyone familiar with the Anne Frank story will know the premise is based on an inaccuracy: that Peter van Pels survived the war and made his way to America. It is well established that Peter van Pels died in Mauthausen concentration camp in May 1945. So that puts this novel firmly in the genre of alternate history. But if you can allow yourself the suspension of disbelief over this one point The Boy Who Loved Anne Frank is an interesting one. What made the novel enjoyable for me after leaping that first big hurdle is that the "Peter" Ms. Feldman gives us is a realistic one. I found him to be a convincing character. His struggles with denial and anger, atheism and Judaism, episodes of madness, as well as his desire to just live a normal life in the wake of his experiences all came across as very authentic. And, of course, Peter's story is heightened by the growing fame of Anne Frank and her story from the 1950's on. His reactions to Anne's diary and its subsequent dramatizations for stage and screen seem real. This leads me to what I think is the other brilliant part of this novel: it accurately tells the story of the rise of the Anne Frank story in American and world consciousness through the publication of the diary and then the production of the stage play and movie. Peter never interacts directly with the results of Anne's developing fame (despite a few attempts) so he becomes a great observer of the actual historical unfolding, including some of the lesser known events like Meyer Levin's lawsuit against Otto Frank and the debate over inaccuracies in the diary. Most importantly, however, it is simply a good read. The story is a fascinating one and is handled well. It is interesting for those of us who are very familiar with Anne's diary and will open the eyes of those who may only have peripheral knowledge of Anne's story. It is well worth reading.

Like a previous reviewer, I was so involved in this novel I could not put it down, excusing myself from a household of guests to finish reading it in another room! The novel is based on the supposition that Peter, the boy Anne Frank loved when they were hidden away from the Nazis in a house in Amsterdam for two years, did not die in the camps but lived. He has come to America and denied being a Jew; he has told no one about his past and has made himself a successful man in business with a loving, beautiful wife and two little children. But when he finds his wife reading the newly published "Diary of a young girl" one night and sees the child Anne's picture gazing out from the cover, he goes into such shock he loses his voice. From that time on the physical book haunts him; it becomes the most real presence in his life. He can neither keep it or destroy it; in one of the many incredibly moving scenes, he tries to throw it away and rushes back to retrieve it by flashlight in the dark from the railroad tracks. "The flashlight swept up one track and down the other, skittered across the ties, climbed the sides of the platform, crept slowly back, and came to rest inches from where I stood.The black eyes stared up at me. Where have you been, Peter? I have been waiting for you. I stooped to the book. The dirt and cinders felt gritty between my fingers as my hand curled around it..." Clumsily and secretly, Peter finds a poor little synagogue but can't stay there long enough to really pray. The past he had put behind him is so vivid once more he believes the Nazis have come for him when it is only a suburban volunteer organization knocking on the door for donations. His wife who knows nothing of his past is puzzled and frightened by his strange behavior. But when he tries to reclaim his past he cannot. The world has made an impossible idol of the dead Anne Frank (he realizes had she herself lived, the diary would not live). People quibble bitterly about the depiction of the characters in the diary, the play and the movie and even the survivors from that time have grown so protective of the dead girl they have created that they have no interest in a man who claims to be the real Peter. Returning to the house in Amsterdam where he hid for two years, he finds not the terrible silence but rooms crowded with tourists. Somehow Peter must claim his past at least to those who are willing to hear him and to himself; he must claim it so he can continue to live. The words on the page became rooms from that hiding place; the world of Peter in his present and his past so vital and real that the pages shimmer with life. Peter is so real that I expect to open my apartment door and find him in my hallway. I am recommending this book to everyone. What an original and moving story! Don't invite a houseful of guests over when you're in the middle of reading it. They'll have to wait for you.