What do you think?
Rate this book
Rumkowski and the Orphans of Lodz
Literary Nonficiton. Jewish Studies. With Rebecca Fromer. RUMKOWSKI AND THE ORPHANS OF ŁÓDŹ is a chilling account of a young woman's experiences in the notorious Łódź Ghetto. The ghetto was lorded over by Chaim Rumkowski, Nazi-appointed Jewish Elder of Łódź and former head of the orphanage. Many have long hailed Rumkowski as a hero who did the best he could leading his community through the worst of circumstances. Now Lucille Eichengreen shares, with firsthand evidence, how Chaim Rumkowski flouted his authority through collaboration, corruption, and the abuse of its children.
144 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 1998
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
Read
August 6, 2017non voto questo libro per rispetto all'esperienza spaventosa narrata, ma è scritto proprio male. Narrazione legnosa, linguaggio sciatto, incredibile a dirsi poco coinvolgente. Molto migliore IMO "Gli spodestati" di Sem-Sandberg, sempre incentrato sulla storia del ghetto di Lodz
March 25, 2025
Lucille Eichengreen's book is often praised, but a closer look reveals it to be unreliable and misleading, full of contradictions and unfounded accusations. Most worrying is the way her testimony has changed over time. The author of the book "My Jewish Soul Does Not Fear Judgment Day: Mordechai Chaim Rumkowski - Truth and Lie," has shown that Eichengreen's original account of her time in the Łódź ghetto omits the graphic accusations she later introduced. If the events she describes actually happened, why did she not mention them at first?
Moreover, Eichengreen introduces fictional characters to support her claims. For example, Sergei, an alleged political figure in Łódź, is completely invented and there is no historical record of his existence. Eichengreen also claims that Sergei investigated Rumkowski's alleged crimes, but offers no documentation. Other figures, such as Szlomo Berkowicz, are similarly unverifiable and do not appear in any Łódź ghetto records.
Eichengreen's claim that Rumkowski exploited children in Helenówek is not supported by contemporary sources. Critics of Rumkowski, such as Jakub Poznański and Dawid Sierakowiak, who documented life in the ghetto, made no mention of such behaviour. If these allegations were true, why didn't his detractors mention them? The likely answer is that they are false.
In stark contrast, Edward Klein, a boy adopted by Rumkowski, survived the war and reported that he was treated with kindness. If Rumkowski were really the monster described by Eichengreen, Klein would probably remember abuse.
As well as being an authoritarian leader, Rumkowski was known for his violent temper and heavy-handedness. He wasn't universally popular, and any suspicion of sexual misconduct would have been used by his many enemies to bring him down. The various political factions within the ghetto, which did little more than oppose him at every turn, would have been eager to use such allegations to discredit him. Figures like Dawid Gertler, who battled Rumkowski for power in the ghetto's later years, never made such claims. Why? Perhaps because there was no evidence to support them?
The Nazis had informers in the ghetto, even in Rumkowski's administration. If the allegations against him were true, the Nazis - who benefited from the Jewish population directing their anger at Rumkowski rather than at their real oppressors - would have been happy to exploit them to further undermine him, but no credible accusations surfaced, indicating a lack of evidence.
Nevertheless, history unfairly vilifies Rumkowski. Many overlook the fact that he was a prisoner in the ghetto who suffered beatings, assassination attempts and ultimately died trying to save others. Now he's being labelled a monster and a deviant, not on the basis of fact, but to fit a dominant narrative - a shameful distortion of the truth.
Rumkowski's genuine efforts to help vulnerable groups such as children and the elderly are largely ignored. He set up orphanages, feeding programmes and medical care in the Łódź ghetto, in contrast to the almost non-existent social services in the Warsaw ghetto. Instead of recognising this, some are portraying him as a predator and distorting his actions in a disgraceful manner.
It's easy for today's "lounge historians", who have never faced the horrors of that time, to judge these decisions. If Rumkowski had resisted the deportation of children and the elderly, the Nazis would have acted with even greater brutality, resulting in even more deaths. His aim was to delay the inevitable and save as many lives as possible. Whether his decision was right is debatable, but to judge him as if he had a choice in a time of peace is misleading and absurd.
Books that sensationalise rather than seek historical truth mislead readers. Eichengreen's work is not a valid memoir; it's historical fiction masquerading as testimony. To truly understand the Łódź ghetto, one should read serious historical literature and the diaries of those who lived through it, recognising that even these sources can be subjective. Only then can the complex realities of this tragic period be appreciated without succumbing to false narratives.
Moreover, Eichengreen introduces fictional characters to support her claims. For example, Sergei, an alleged political figure in Łódź, is completely invented and there is no historical record of his existence. Eichengreen also claims that Sergei investigated Rumkowski's alleged crimes, but offers no documentation. Other figures, such as Szlomo Berkowicz, are similarly unverifiable and do not appear in any Łódź ghetto records.
Eichengreen's claim that Rumkowski exploited children in Helenówek is not supported by contemporary sources. Critics of Rumkowski, such as Jakub Poznański and Dawid Sierakowiak, who documented life in the ghetto, made no mention of such behaviour. If these allegations were true, why didn't his detractors mention them? The likely answer is that they are false.
In stark contrast, Edward Klein, a boy adopted by Rumkowski, survived the war and reported that he was treated with kindness. If Rumkowski were really the monster described by Eichengreen, Klein would probably remember abuse.
As well as being an authoritarian leader, Rumkowski was known for his violent temper and heavy-handedness. He wasn't universally popular, and any suspicion of sexual misconduct would have been used by his many enemies to bring him down. The various political factions within the ghetto, which did little more than oppose him at every turn, would have been eager to use such allegations to discredit him. Figures like Dawid Gertler, who battled Rumkowski for power in the ghetto's later years, never made such claims. Why? Perhaps because there was no evidence to support them?
The Nazis had informers in the ghetto, even in Rumkowski's administration. If the allegations against him were true, the Nazis - who benefited from the Jewish population directing their anger at Rumkowski rather than at their real oppressors - would have been happy to exploit them to further undermine him, but no credible accusations surfaced, indicating a lack of evidence.
Nevertheless, history unfairly vilifies Rumkowski. Many overlook the fact that he was a prisoner in the ghetto who suffered beatings, assassination attempts and ultimately died trying to save others. Now he's being labelled a monster and a deviant, not on the basis of fact, but to fit a dominant narrative - a shameful distortion of the truth.
Rumkowski's genuine efforts to help vulnerable groups such as children and the elderly are largely ignored. He set up orphanages, feeding programmes and medical care in the Łódź ghetto, in contrast to the almost non-existent social services in the Warsaw ghetto. Instead of recognising this, some are portraying him as a predator and distorting his actions in a disgraceful manner.
It's easy for today's "lounge historians", who have never faced the horrors of that time, to judge these decisions. If Rumkowski had resisted the deportation of children and the elderly, the Nazis would have acted with even greater brutality, resulting in even more deaths. His aim was to delay the inevitable and save as many lives as possible. Whether his decision was right is debatable, but to judge him as if he had a choice in a time of peace is misleading and absurd.
Books that sensationalise rather than seek historical truth mislead readers. Eichengreen's work is not a valid memoir; it's historical fiction masquerading as testimony. To truly understand the Łódź ghetto, one should read serious historical literature and the diaries of those who lived through it, recognising that even these sources can be subjective. Only then can the complex realities of this tragic period be appreciated without succumbing to false narratives.
April 18, 2025
i'd rather kill myself than rape kids because i was under too much stress
November 14, 2007
Chaim Rumkowski was not only the author of the infamous "Give us your children!" speech delivered in the waning days of the Lodz ghetto; he was also a child-molester and abuser who exploited those same children he told parent they should sacrifice for the good of the Nazi quota. This eyewitness account by Lucille Eichengreen freezes the blood as it reveals the terrible truth: this head of the Judenrat may have been Juden, but he was also a rat.
February 24, 2012
Depressing as hell, good read though over all.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews