| |
In
response to the article above, I wish to offer a
few observations and then let the matter rest.
First, I wish to compliment Nash on his tenacity
in researching this issue. He has certainly come
a long way from his earlier "extensive
research in the CARL," the Combined Arms
Library at the Command and General Staff College,
Fort Leavenworth. By seeking primary source
information this time, instead of relying solely
on secondary-source library materials, I believe
he has presented a more effective defense of
"Guy Sajer" but not for the
authenticity of The Forgotten Soldier. To
state my view succinctly, I will quote Dr.
Richard Swain (author of "Lucky War':
Third Army in Desert Storm) on this matter
"It is authentic bad history? But it's okay
because Sajer, whoever, was a real guy!" (Excuse
the pun.)
Regardless of how "autobiographical"
are the experiences which the author relates, he
did not create a true autobiography. "Sajer,
wrote, as many soldiers before him have done,
what in literary terms is known as a roman a clef
a novel based on real persons and events. In this
regard, it is similar to Siegfried Sassoon's Memoirs
of an Infantry Officer or Erich Maria
Remarque's All Quiet On the Western Front. Although
these deal with the First World War, both novels,
like The Forgotten Soldier, are powerful
evocations of their respective authors'
experiences in the cauldron of combat. Both,
especially Sassoon's Memoirs, place incidents
and events experienced by their respective
authors into a prose narrative which traces the
wartime experiences of their central characters.
Many of the events and experiences described are
based on fact. The Battle of the Somme, for
example, definitely occurred, and Siegfried
Sassoon participated in it as a young British
subaltern. As such, these novels are therefore,
authentic. What the novels are not, however, are
autobiographies, regardless of how authentic they
may seem and despite their authors' participation
in the historical events which provided them with
inspiration for their narratives.
The roman ā clef is a powerful
literary form, based upon actual events, which
permits the author the literary license to, for
example, create characters for dramatic effect,
move events forward or backward in time, assign
the experiences of several individuals to one
central character, or disguise the identity of
the novel's principal character by using an
assumed name. All of these, in one degree or
another, are found in The Forgotten Soldier.
I reiterate my point: The Forgotten Soldier is
a great book and I have nothing personal against
"Guy Sajer." I enjoy his book immensely
and see value in it, but I don't use it for
validating serious historical research. I believe
that Nash has become so emotionally attached to
this work that he is unable to objectively
separate fact from fiction, to analyze the
information and discern what is true and what is
not. Nash's admiration for Sajer and The
Forgotten Soldier has led him to rationalize
its errors and discrepancies by the most
imaginative methods possible. Nash implies the
errors are minor, they are critical and undermine
the credibility of the book.
Nash's correspondence with Grossdeutschland
veteran Hans-Joachim Schafmeister-Berckholtz
is a classic case of not seeing the forest for
the trees. Interestingly Herr Schafmeister-Berckholtz
has a phenomenal memory, according to Nash, who
writes that Schafmeister-Berckholtz now recalls
the famous "Sajer"---the same "Sajer"
who uses the nom de plume "Guy Sajer"
to protect his anonymity. Schaftmeister-Berckholtz
says to Nash, "At the mention of the name
Sajer, my ears pricked up, because we did have a
Sajer in the 5th Company, lst
Grenadier Battalion." Wait a minute. Doesn't
"Sajer" himself say that the name
"Guy Sajer" was not his name but only a
cover? I think attorneys consider this "coaching"
the witness. In other words, Schafmeister-Berckholtz
now remembers the famous "Sajer" as a
member of his unit when he is prompted with the
name.
Nash's current research is more scholarly than
his original work, but some of the most important
pieces, the analyses, are still flawed. I can
only agree with a few of his points
regarding the destruction of German records, the
inability to remember some facts by veterans. and
"Sajer's" wish to remain anonymous.
However, it's the quantity of errors taken in
toto and the lack of corroborating specific
information that make the book suspicious. It is
replete with errors of fact. I contend that it is
still a great novel based on history. Only the
most recent publisher has claimed it is an
autobiography, the others knew better. Any good
writer with access to open-source archival
material on the Grossdeutschland could do
what "Sajer" has done--- match many
real dates, places, and units to known historical
events. This has been done before. (Michael
Shaara's The KillerAngels is my favorite
example). I don't deny there is a possibility
"Sajer" really served in the German
Army, maybe even in the Grossdeutschland, but
when does using incorrect facts pass for "autobiography,"
or more importantly, history?
Nash's interpretation of my articles seems to
indicate that I think that everything in The
Forgotten Soldier is wrong. Not so. The use
of Le Breton's weak argumentum ad hominem adds
nothing of substance to Nash's thesis in this
regard. There are some things that are right. But
enough blatant misrepresentations mid incorrect
information occur to cause me serious concern for
its use as a legitimate historical reference.
Notwithstanding the publishers' editorial errors
in my Army History and Military Review articles
regarding this subject, I have never denied that The
Forgotten Soldier is interesting and
good reading dealing with the human dimension of
war.
"Sajer's" refusal to answer my
correspondence only makes my suspicions more
acute. Somehow Nash has broken the code in
corresponding with "Sajer." I was
unsuccessful, not because I did not try, but I
did not approach "Sajer", in the same
corroborative manner as did Nash. I simply wanted
honest answers to questions that might prove the
veracity of The Forgotten Soldier, none of
which would have violated "Sajer's"
privacy or revealed his true identity. I never
received a reply to any of the requests through
the different publishers. This sent me a fairly
negative and unequivocal message.
Nash's efforts in researching "Sajer' are
commendable. He has certainly gone to great
efforts to achieve his goal. I would caution him,
however, not to let his significant emotional
involvement cloud his reason as a professional
soldier. I sincerely hope that, Sajer, is a real
German Army veteran because I like the story he
tells. I wish that there weren't so many errors
in the book that make it implausible as a
historical "autobiography." I
will not, however, throw out my first edition,
hardback version of the book because of its
faults. My challenge on The Forgotten Soldier is
aimed at professional soldiers. They should
question supposed "autobiographies" (or
"histories") with honest skepticism and
curiosity until they are proven authentic. The
problem with The Forgotten Soldier is that
we cannot be certain if it is not fiction. The Forgotten
Soldier is great literature and has been
recognized as such, but it is neither an official
history of the Grossdeutschland Division
nor an autobiography of "Guy Sajer."
Nash's arguments am getting better, but they are
still flawed. My friend, the author and former Grossdeutschland
officer. Helmuth Später, has not abandoned
his position, despite what Nash implies.
Therefore, long live Grossdeutschland veteran
Guy Sajer, and his outstanding novel, The
Forgotten Soldier!
|
|