A blast! A quirky and original series of reports on subjects both profound and bizarre. But with a literate eye and a graceful tone that is engaging and riviting. These are terrific essays and together, they comprise a dazzling read.
As good as it gets.

I had never read Ron Rosenbaum before I purchased this book and while I don't love everything I've read so far, I do have a great deal of respect for Rosenbaum as a journalist. To put it simply: he's brilliant. It's so refreshing to read his work. He's one of the best journalists I've ever read and am so glad that amazon brought him to my attention.

My problem with the book was that many of his essays just didn't grab me. The synopsis described several topics which I was sure would interest me but when I actually read them I found the writing style a bit dense and bogged down. I don't ever expect to like everything I read in collections. I particularly liked "The Great Ivy League Nude Posture Photo Scandal," as well as "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer Hoax." This is the kind of compilation which I would not recommend attempting to read in one sitting. Smaller portions worked best for me. This is a wonderful collection of Rosenbaum's work, and while I haven't read them all yet, so far, so good.

That's how long it would take for me to fully explore every subject Ron Rosenbaum so expertly and adroitly takes on in this hefty volume. Rosenbaum is blessed with a wonderful gift...his writing makes even the most prosaic subject suddenly fascinating. Not that he often tackles prosaic subjects...Hitler, underground cancer cures, his cat Stumpy (okay, maybe that qualifies), Bill Gates' "compound," the Dead Sea Scrolls, Kim Philby, on and on...Ron hits them all and he does an amazing job of bringing them to glittering life. I keep a dictionary at hand whenever I open this book...I don't want to miss a single nuance of this remarkable journalist's craft. I don't often give a 5-star rating...in fact, this may be the first. Ron Rosenbaum deserves it. Bless you, Ron, for turning me onto a lifetime of further discovery and knowledge. Now where do I find that Fountain of Youth???

To the non-Holocuast scholar unfamiliar with the enormous amount of research on Hitler, this book provides a valuable framework that enables the reader to understand and place in the appropriate school of contemporary thought the controversial debates that swirl around Hitler. However, because Rosenbaum analytical gaze remains tightly fixed on Hitler the man, and not Nazism or the German people , he regretfully neglects accounts, such as William Shire's, which use socio-historical forces, to explain Hitler's catastropic emergence. Instead, he explores explanations, mostly Freudian, which concentrate primarily on personality factors such as Hitler's childhood traumas, his relations with women, with the possibility that he had a congenital, genital defect, his Macbethian obession with tainted blood, and so on. The riveting protraits of the "explainers" themsevles and their "off the record comments"- Hitler scholars such as Goldenhagen, Bauer, Stiener, Dawidowicz, Micheels, Maccoby and film maker Lanzman-make alone make this book worthwhile. Also of great worth is the enlightening discussion of how Hitler and the Holocaust have influenced modern conceptions of good and evil. All in all, this is not a perfect book, but an excellent book nevertheless, which is well worth anyone's time who wants to know more about the most important and disturbing subject of recent history.

This book is a great introduction to the ways the world's thinkers, philosophers, historians and conspiracy enthusiasts have taken hold of the enigma of Hitler and projected about every theory on to him that the lecture circuit will tolerate.
It pays homage to the brave early dissenters in Germany who payed for their lives while trying to alert a comatose public to the dangers of this cartoon devil with a microphone and an army.
The second half of the book shows some of the arrogance of the researchers who felt a need to claim the holocaust as their personal property and decide what is ethical discussion and what is blasphemy. I applaud Mr Rosenbaum for his courage to point out that nothing is gained by making Hitler a unique devil, the very symbol of evil, without probing the root causes because then we do put ourselves in danger of ignoring the sad but undeniable truth that he could be duplicated just like any other human menace and madness and cruelty can reoccur. I found the controversy about whether it is tasteful to put his baby picture on the cover very telling because it shows how uncomfortable people are with the truth that behavior is made and facilitated and encouraged, even the most diabolic edges of human impulse, and it is not inborn. Adolf Hitler looks like every other baby and that in itself should be our warning sign.

Mr. Rosenbaum states very early in EXPLAINING HITLER that "throughout his life, wherever he went, Adolph Hitler was always a Mysterious Stranger". Following from this statement, and from the title of the book, we would naturally expect Mr. Rosenbaum to definitively shed some light on this enigmatic person. To the extent that he does not, we can be justifiably disappointed in the book.

But wait a minute. The task at hand is immense - there are scores of biographies written on Hitler, some dating back to before the war. Furthermore, this book was intended to shine a light on the origins of the man's evil (which it does); hoping however, to fully illuminate that darkness, is a vain hope indeed. Also, EXPLAINING HITLER was not intended to be a historiography of Hitler biographies - for that check out John Lukacs' THE HITLER OF HISTORY. Mr. Rosenbaum offers instead a sythesis of historical explanations of Hitler's evil, specifically as manifested in his rabid anti-semitism. The author is clear in stating that his interest is in what this says about the historians themselves, their views of human nature, and how they see evil - in Hitler and mankind in general. On this score Mr. Rosenbaum delivers as promised.

One of the techniques used by Mr. Rosenbaum (an investigative reporter by training) is interviews with these various Hitler historians. Incisive and revealing, especially when the question that is explored is whether one sees Hitler's evil as something unprecedented in history or as a sign of the malevolence of human nature. The assumption being that how one answers indicates perspective. There are two camps of Hitler historians; those that see him as patently evil and individually responsible for the attrocities of the Nazis, and those that see other forces (societal or psychological) at fault.

Mr. Rosenbaum is at his best when providing a sythesis of the various schools of thought on Hitler. We see that within the group that sees evil and responsibility residing in Hitler, the focus is on the connection with his anti-semitism. They are constantly in search of documentary proof; some key turning point; a statement from him initiating the 'Final Solution'; any clear indicator of his turn toward evil. Mr. Rosenbaum calls this the "Lost safe-deposit syndrome". More well developed are the views that qualify as belonging to the Societal/Psychological school of thought. Strange bedfellows are to be found here. Daniel Goldhagen of HITLER's WILLING EXECUTIONERS fame would be shocked to be grouped with a Hitler apologist such as David Irving but so be it; both find explanations for Nazi attrocities that excuse Hitler. Some of the more pernicious explanations - those that portray Hitler as a victim - are also on offer in this group. Amazingly, some see Jews at fault. The Doctor who treated (or mistreated it is argued) Hitler's mother, failing to prevent her painful death from breast cancer; thus breeding resentment in young Adolf. Mr Rosenbaum explores others such explanations, examples of what he calls the "Menendez defense". Naturally, if we are going to apply the metaphor of modern legal defenses to Hitler histories we should expect to find versions of two of todays most popular legal appeals on display here. Yes, there are Hitler histories that are examples of the insanity plea and the sexually abused childhood defense. Certainly plausible in general but they make us distinctly uncomfortable when applied to Hitler.

Perhaps that is the larger point of this whole analysis of Hitler histories. What do they say about how we view ourseves and culture as a whole? As the author says "Hitler explanations are cultural self-portraits; the shapes we project onto the inky Rorschach of Hitler's psyche are often cultural self-portraits in the negative. What we talk about when we talk about Hitler is also who we are and who we are not".