I picked up this book because I loved the movie, which I saw without knowing anything about it. While I’m glad that I went into the viewing experience with absolutely no preconceptions, it was a punch in the gut to realize at the very end of the movie, that it had actually *happened*.
To an old sea dyke like myself (and by old, I mean I’ve been out for 14 years, which is rare for someone my age, even though I’m just past my twenties), having grown up seeing no lesbian representation outside of the film RENT, the movie checked every box for me: the self-discovery that comes with living through extraordinary events, a hero who is unapologetically herself facing life-threatening circumstances she must overcome, a solid coming out story, a woman in a straight society shedding her gender role joyfully, desperate and rapturous love letters, a tragic ending, Lilly’s almost ascetic refusal of love after Felice’s death. It had it all.
When I found out that the movie was based on a true story, my relationship to and understanding of it changed. It became weightier. Aimee and Jaguar’s story became even more moving given that their virtues and flaws were based on reality and not on the wishful thinking of its writers and directors.
For instance: watching the movie a second time with the knowledge that it is based on a true story, I was skeptical that Lilly’s parents had accepted her relationship to a Jewish woman so readily. I thought that the movie’s makers had created this acceptance out of a desire to give the main characters much-needed support or from some misguided attempt to provide a “good” German with which to sympathize. You see this ingenuous comfort all the time in movies based on true stories involving minorities. (For example: in Stonewall, an offensively inaccurate depiction of the event, trans women of color who instigated the protest are replaced by a white, cis-gendered gay dude. In Hidden Figures, Katherine Johnson’s white boss is seen destroying the “Whites Only” sign outside of the women’s bathroom in a sign of solidarity, which never happened and was only added to reassure white audiences that #notallwhitepeople were like that at that time. While of course not all white people were horribly racist, any sympathies they may have held for people of color pale in comparison to the discrimination and violence people of color faced. Such liberties also obscure current issues, leading many white viewers to believe that these issues have been solved. Inserting this fiction into the narrative degrades the efforts of people of color for self-liberation by creating a white savior paternalistically “taking care” of those “under” his charge. But I digress.) That’s why I was surprised to learn that Lilly’s parents, were, in fact, pretty supportive of their relationship, especially given the times. These snapshots remind us that, like now, societies are always comprised of a boggling variety of people. The way history is written makes us forget this fact.
Details of daily life paint a vivid picture of what Berlin must have been like at the time. Both the movie and the book do an admirable job of illustrating the desperation of the Germans as the Allies closed in, the mundane terror of the constant bombings, the distrust rampant among Germans who didn’t know who was trustworthy and who was an informant, the hunger, the stress caused by the constant threat of being murdered or carted away...the list goes on.
Against this backdrop, some flashes of humanity remain: Felice gifting Lilly a red apple upon their first meeting, a luxury at the time, the feeling of liberation provided by the extremities of war, Felice’s straight friends accepting her sexuality, the cross-dressing, the drama that can come with close groups of friends, the smoking, the parties, the relationship Felice develops with Lilly’s children, the marriage vows, and other scenes, some remarkable, some quotidian, make history *live.*
Lilly and Felice become painfully real to us, especially in the book. While Lilly’s letters, interviews with her friends and family, and Fischer’s research generally support Lilly’s story, Fischer does an excellent job of viewing Lilly as a flawed but brave person instead of solely a romantic martyr. In her blunt and incisive epilogue, she argues that Lilly’s claim of ignorance about the Holocaust is hard to believe, given how politically aware those around her were. She also takes issue with Lilly’s insistence on painting herself as a victim:
“It was hard for me to accept her collective *we.* She imposed herself on the Jews, her son Bernd had said to me. *I* did not accept it. Her matter-of-fact assumption of a closeness to Jews was something I countered with an abrupt silence. I do not grant her the status of victim. I guard the line that runs between her and Felice, my Jewish mother, and myself obdurately, protective of my small piece of identity. She tried again and again to cross that line, sending greetings to my mother, using Jewish expressions, glorifying Israel and such, as if she had nothing to do with her own land of Germany.”
Fischer does not extend the same critical eye to Felice, who remains encased in a heroic and tragic historic amber. It’s one of the books few flaws. The only other quibble I have has to do more with the translator, who insisted on translating Felice’s poems so that they rhymed. I always feel cheated when I see that.
I think the spirit of the quote below captures my fascination with the story: I’m not sure if Felice ever said the following, but I think the movie’s quote likely does justice to her memory:
"’God created the world, Felice. You didn't.’ That's what my father always said to me. My sister, my mother... they all agreed: ‘Felice is crazy.’ And do you know why? Because for me nothing can be taken for granted. No God. No car that picks me up, no Ilse to help me, and no ‘thank you’ I have to tell her every day. You want something special, Ilse. And I'm not. I'm ungrateful and desperate for admiration. Say whatever you like. But don't make me a victim, because it's my goddamned mediocre little right to be free. As long as I can.”
The brilliance of these lines lies in Felice’s insistence on her right to live her life on her terms, to the extent that the times permitted. Fischer says that Jaguar would have broken up with Aimee. That may have been so, but it’s irrelevant. Both women were denied the opportunity to find out, to live their lives, a right that everyone should have whether they do mediocre or remarkable things.
Lilly and Felice’s love letters after Jaguar’s deportation are hard to read. The against-all-odds, love-conquers-all tone is colored by their underlying knowledge that they likely won’t see each other again. What got to me was not the grandiose declarations of love but rather their small acts of kindness toward each other: Felice leaving a love poem in a coffee cup for Lilly to find; Felice’s dogged and feigned optimism in her letters to Lilly; her appreciation of the care packages Lilly sends and the descriptions of their contents just breaks your heart. What made me tear up was when Felice asked Lilly, in a post script: “Have you developed the film from August 21?’ The photos she referenced, and which are included in the book, are sweet but saddening; the rare glimpse of lesbians pre-1960s is thrilling, but the knowledge that they were taken mere hours before Felice was abducted make them so, so sad to contemplate.
Reading about these women also reminds me of the importance of representation. When I realized I was gay when I was 14, I viewed lesbianism as something of a modern invention, a logical result of this mysterious period called the 60s where all the rules were thrown out the window and people just did whatever the hell they wanted. This misapprehension caused me to doubt whether I actually was gay—maybe the right-wingers were correct and I was just raised “wrong.” Learning about lesbian history helps us realize that we’ve always been around.