White Rose Histories

June 18 - June 28, 1942.

Summary:

Alexander Schmorell mails a copy of Leaflet I to his uncle in Aachen, Franz Monheim. Monheim owned the Trumpf Chocolate Factory in that city. [Yes, I recognize the current-day humor in the name of that chocolate factory.] The Gestapo believes Monheim was Jewish and tries to discredit his Aryan certification.

Christoph Probst explains his relationship to his former teacher, Heinrich Ellermann. Ellermann had been mentor, inspiration. Christl is now alienated from this teacher by Ellermann’s pro-Nazi views. Christl also explains why he dislikes the readings of Paul Claudel’s Satin Slipper. First, the readings center on Ellermann. Second, Christl dislikes the “eroticism interpreted as transcendentalism” of the book. He cannot see why Hans and Sophie like the readings.

Fritz Hartnagel writes Sophie about the unpleasant daily association with his brother-in-law, Dieter Daub. He had expected that Dieter would share the political sensibilities of his brother, Rudi Daub, who is firmly in the anti-Nazi camp. Instead, Dieter runs around with German officers. Fritz finds little in common with him.

Mail finally arrives on the Russian front and Fritz finds four letters from Sophie. Sophie has written him about their fun excursions. She does not mention the people in her life. But these will be the last letters that Sophie writes Fritz that describe happy times in Munich.

Fritz tells Sophie about a disturbing scene he witnessed. “It was alarming, the cynical coolness of my C.O. as he told of the slaughter of all the Jews of occupied Russia. At the same time, he is completely convinced of the justice of this course of action. I sat there, my heart beating wildly. Oh, how happy I was when I once again was lying on my tent bed and could escape to you and to prayer.”

[In the auto-generated transcription of this part of the narrative, Substack omits the first sentence about the slaughter of all the Jews of occupied Russia. I corrected, and that caused the transcript to crash. I regenerated the transcript and the same sentence was missing.]

Fritz describes a pleasant experience he’d had. He reviewed a five-month prison sentence for a member of his unit who had gone AWOL. Fritz believes the sentence is too harsh, asking, “Do we as humans even have the right to judge others?”

Why This Matters:

* Our teachers and professors wield outsized influence on our intellectual and emotional growth, perhaps second only to parents and our circle of close friends. When a teacher or professor who has long stood for justice and doing what’s right suddenly abandons his or her position, it’s disconcerting at best, unsettling and disillusioning at worst.

* This segment contains so many big ideas, life lessons, but one tiny detail strikes me: The candlestick holder that Fritz’s aide-de-camp makes for him, recognizing that Fritz Hartnagel is deemed “Other” by his own C.O. and unit. Sometimes in our quest for justice, we overlook the little things that can change a person’s life or outlook.

Have you experienced a professor, teacher, or mentor who has changed course? How did that affect you? If it was a negative change, how did you grow through it? And, what can you do today to positively impact someone’s life? Talk about it in the comments!

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 79-82.

Notes and references available only to paid subscribers.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

June 26, 1942 - June 28, 1942.

Summary:

Willi Graf struggled with his second abscessed tooth. Despite the pain, he still visited Hans Friedmann in the hospital and joined friends at the Siegfriedstrasse to prepare for Sunday’s Mass.

Hans, Sophie, Alex, and Christl get the first leaflet out the door. They target intelligentsia and academics, although they also send Leaflet I to innkeepers and tavern owners, hoping those two “groups” would talk about the content of the leaflet with their guests.

Hans Scholl later told the Gestapo that he believed the intelligentsia had failed Germany, both from 1918-1933, as well as in 1933. He therefore was compelled to consciously commit treason, althoug he would have rather mobilized positive forces within Germany to fight for a national form that was worth striving for.

When Hans Hirzel received Leaflet I, he recognized a debate over the “wheel of history” that he had had with Hans Scholl in January 1942. Only in the leaflet, Hans Scholl argued the point that Hans Hirzel had made at that time. That made the younger boy feel heard. Hans Scholl had reversed course based on their conversation!

The four students, working alone in Alexander Schmorell’s bedroom, knew that what they were doing was treason. It was not “patriotism” or courage of their convictions. They worked, knowing that in the eyes of the law, they were traitors.

As Hans Scholl would later say, “I knew what I took upon myself and I was prepared to lose my life by so doing.” He spoke for all of them.

Why This Matters:

* When we try to change our country, change political direction, advocate for civil and human rights, protest on behalf of causes we deem just and right, it can be difficult to correctly identify the target audience that will listen and take our message to heart.

* If we take someone’s words to heart and revise or update our message to reflect their insights, it will make them feel seen, feel heard. Knowing that Hans Scholl had not only grasped his argument about the “wheel of history,” but changed his mind and written that into Leaflet I? Hans Hirzel may not have overcome his addiction or insecurities, but it gave him renewed hope and purpose.

Has someone you look up to ever revised or updated their message based on an argument you’ve made? If so, how did it make you feel? And when you feel strongly about a cause - whether at your high school, university, or in a public forum - how do you determine your best target audience? Talk about it in the comments!

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 77-79.

Notes and references available only to paid subscribers.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

June 25, 1942.

Summary:

Heated discussion at the literary soiree held at Alexander Schmorell’s home. Hans Scholl took center stage, immediately steering the discussion to two topics:

* Germany’s conduct in the war.

* Sound forms of government.

This evening, essentially Kurt Huber and Heinrich Ellermann faced off against their students. Neither teacher disagreed with Hans Scholl’s assessment that Germany needed “peace at any price.” Both men, however, affirmed the NSDAP platform and grew uncomfortable, almost hostile, as the student-led conversation centered on the topic of resistance. Ellermann especially believed that resistance of any sort was inappropriate, since Germany was at war.

The students did not allow their respect for their teachers to diminish their political convictions. And for the first time, we get a hint of the political divisions among the students, divisions that at this time were swept under the carpet, but that would become irreparable in February 1943. Christoph Probst championed a return to the monarchy, while Traute Lafrenz argued that citizens had to earn their government’s support. Hans Scholl’s statements alternated between Communistic ideas and support for a non-Communist, socialist, religious form of government.

The soiree ended badly, with disagreements unresolved and harsh words spoken.

Willi Graf wrote his sister Anneliese later that evening, ideas from the evening still consuming him. He wished for “undisturbed peace,” but understood that if he genuinely wanted to do something to change his Germany, his path would be anything but peaceful.

Why This Matters:

* All too often, we underestimate the critical thought processes of students and so-called Gen-Z. Give them credit! Just as Kurt Huber and Heinrich Ellermann clearly thought they could exert the prestige of academic rank to force their opinions on these students, only to be proven unmistakably wrong, so we too write off the opinions and input of our youngest voters, precisely when we should be listening to them.

* Willi Graf’s struggle with wanting “undisturbed peace” and knowing he could not have that if he did something? That is a dilemma and choice we face in our era as well.

Has anyone tried to pull rank on you to discount your opinions? And, if you had to choose between undisturbed peace and changing our world, which would you choose? Discuss in the comments! Thanks!

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 74-77.

I figured out today (June 16, 2024) that I can correct the transcriptions you can read along with as you listen to the podcast. So I cleaned up this transcript and will also do so going forward.

Notes and references available only to paid subscribers.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

June 21 - June 24, 1942.

Summary:

Sophie Scholl ponders musings from a discussion earlier in the week, whether Nature requires redemption. Sitting in a beautiful, sunset-filled valley, she decides it most certainly does not.

A larger group of friends meet to read Paul Claudel’s Satin Slipper aloud. Sophie, Traute, and Hans walk home late at night, through the English Gardens. The conversation initially focuses on gossip and trivia, but Sophie introduces her thoughts about Nature into their discussion. She concludes that possibly Nature will have to be destroyed, before the war can end.

Hans turns their talk to resistance, stating that nothing would ever change until people did something. Sophie adds, “Even if someone only writes something on the street at night so that people see it the next morning.”

Traute questions Hans and Sophie about the effectiveness of leaflets and graffiti. Is that enough to sway the general public?

Alexander Schmorell faces the same doubts, which he takes to Lilo. He stands in the middle of her room, almost incoherently telling her what they have started. Lilo is stunned, only able to ask, “Alex, don’t you realize the consequences of what you are doing?” He admits he knows it may be an unnecessary risk, but he owes it to Hans.

Lilo promises Alex that no matter what, she is there for him, offering her support and friendship. That seems to be all Alex needs to hear. He sits at her grand piano, playing his heart out. She realizes he has already recovered, found his joy in living.

Alex has also planned a literary soiree at his parents’ home, in their absense. Professor Kurt Huber is coming. As is Willi Graf!

Hans and Traute accompany Professor Huber from downtown Munich to Harlaching. They try to discern what Huber thinks of the leaflet. He is tight-lipped. Hans goes sour on Traute, forging ahead to the Schmorells’ home. That gives Traute the opportunity to ask Professor Huber about the leaflet. He admits he received it. But also makes it clear he does not wish to talk about it.

Why This Matters:

* Alex’s friendship with Lilo was touching and meaningful. She kept her promise of friendship and support. Friends like that are most critical in a time of trouble - whether political upheaval, death of a loved one, or crises of any sort. And, it survived Alex. Erich and Hertha Schmorell stayed close to Lilo until their deaths. They were the ones who said, “Read her book!, it’s the best one there is!” Genuine friendship has that lasting effect on people.

* We often falsely assume that we have the support of someone who is either silent when we express our opinions, or who says one thing to us and something else when not in our presence. That the friends in this circle missed all the signs that Professor Huber did not support their work? That they heard only what they wanted to hear? Damaged them in the long run.

Do you have a friend you’d like to acknowledge for their constant support and care? Mention them in the comments!

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 71-74.

Notes and references available only to paid subscribers.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

June 18 - June 21, 1942.

Summary:

Despite friction in their relationship, Hans Scholl wants Traute Lafrenz’s opinion of Leaflet I. She tells him, “This must have been written by a person of superior intelligence.”

Professor Huber does not share Traute’s opinion. He takes the leaflet to Dr. Karl Alexander von Müller, who is not interested in what the leaflet said. Rather he wants to know who produced it. They discuss possible groups in town, never suspecting it came from students, much less from Hans and Alex.

Willi is excited about a second meeting he is supposed to have with Hans Scholl. His anticipation makes him agitated, irritable, as he waits for Hans Scholl to show up at his room on Friday, June 19.

But Hans Scholl is a no-show. Upset, Willi visits an army buddy. It’s a pleasant enough evening, but he wants more.

Apparently Adalbert Grundel (Bertl) has recently arrived in Munich. One of Willi Graf’s closest friends, Bertl lends Willi a bicycle. While serving in the Black Forest as medics in 1940, Bertl had joined Willi Graf and Hubert Furtwängler’s circle. Bertl’s nickname among friends was “The Revolutionary,” as he was obsessed with the topic, Immunity Against the Nazis.

On Sunday, June 21, Willi bikes out to Pasing to visit his cousins Martin and Mathilde Luible. From this day forward, he relies more and more on these cousins for emotional support. Martin is also a doctor and had been editor of an academic journal banned by the Nazis. Willi finds real friendship with these cousins.

Willi bicycles back to his room around 10 pm that Sunday, feeling contented and optimistic.

Why This Matters:

* We’ve missed out on so much by Inge’s excision of Traute Lafrenz from the inner circle of friends. It’s clear that although she did not type envelopes or turn the crank on the duplicating machine in June 1942, the four friends who did do so valued not only her input, but her. This will become clearer as the story progresses. For the next five months until she becomes actively involved in late November 1942, Traute plays the same role with the friends as Thaddeus Stevens did for Abraham Lincoln. She holds their feet to the fire. - This is critical for us today. We should not be satisfied with superficial news reporting. Expand the frame, move the microphones. Who else should be in the picture?

* It may be a small thing, but Hans Scholl’s unreliability denied the group of four friends the opportunity to have Willi Graf in a role similar to Traute’s. Had Hans showed up for that appointment on June 19…

Have you worked on a project - political or otherwise - that has been positively affected by a silent, unseen member of the group? Or that has been negatively impacted by a person in leadership who does not follow through? Talk about it in the comments!

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 69-71.

Notes and references available only to paid subscribers.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

Mid-June 1942 (before June 25, 1942).

Full leaflet text.

Nothing is more shameful to a civilized nation than to allow itself to be “governed” by an irresponsible clique of sovereigns who have given themselves over to dark urges – and that without resisting. Isn’t it true that every honest German is ashamed of his government these days? Who among us can imagine the degree of shame that will come upon us and upon our children when the veil falls from our faces and the awful crimes that infinitely exceed any human measure are exposed to the light of day?

If the German nation is so corrupt and decadent in its innermost being that it is willing to surrender the greatest possession a man can own, a possession that elevates mankind above all other creatures, namely free will – if it is willing to surrender this without so much as raising a hand, rashly trusting a questionable lawful order of history; if it surrenders the freedom of mankind to intrude upon the wheel of history and subjugate it to his own rational decision; if Germans are so devoid of individuality that they have become an unthinking and cowardly mob – then, yes then they deserve their destruction.

Goethe speaks of the Germans as a tragic nation, like Jews and Greeks. But these days, Germans appear more like a shallow, irresolute herd of opportunists who have had all the marrow sucked from their bones. Now that they have been robbed of their essence, they are willing to be pursued to their destruction. This is how it appears, but it is not so. Rather, every individual has been jailed in an intellectual prison after having been slowly, deceptively, and systematically raped. Only as he lies there in chains is he aware of his doom.

A few recognized the pending perdition [for what it was]. The reward for their heroic exhortations was death. There is more to say about the fate of these people.

If everyone waits till someone else makes a start, the messengers of the avenging Nemesis will draw incessantly closer. And then the last sacrifice will have been thrown senselessly into the jaws of the insatiable demon. Therefore in this last hour every individual must arm himself as best he can, aware of his responsibility as a member of the Christian and western civilization. He must work against the scourge of humanity, against fascism and all similar systems of an absolute State.

Offer passive resistance – resistance, wherever you may be, prevent the continuation of this atheistic war machine before it is too late, before the last of our cities lie in ruins like Cologne, and before the last of the youth of our people have been bled to death by the hubris of a subhuman.

Do not forget that every nation deserves the government that it endures.

From Friedrich Schiller, “The Legislation of Lycurgus and Solon.”

“… When contrasted to its actual purpose, the legislation of Lycurgus is a masterpiece of political science and anthropology. He wanted a powerful, indestructible State that was completely self-reliant. Political strength and permanence were his goals.

“He achieved this goal as much as was possible, given the circumstances. But if you compare the goals that Lycurgus had for himself with the goals of humanity, hearty disapproval replaces the amazement that had been one’s first impression of [Lycurgus’s accomplishment].

“Everything may be sacrificed for the good of the nation, except for those things for which the State itself serves as a means. The State itself is never an end in itself, it is merely important as a condition under by which humanity’s goals may be realized.

“And humanity’s goals are never anything other than development of all of mankind’s powers, or progress. If the constitution of a nation denies development of all the powers of which mankind is capable; if it prevents the progress of the spirit, then it is reprehensible and injurious, no matter how well-thought-out and complete it may be in its own way. Its very permanence then becomes reproach instead of glory. It is nothing more than a prolonged evil. The longer it exists, the more injurious it becomes.

“…Political profits are then achieved at the expense of all moral emotions and all energies are dedicated to that end. In Sparta, there was no matrimonial love, no maternal love, no filial love, no friendship – there was nothing but citizens. There was no virtue but civic virtue.

“…Legislation turned inhumanity to slaves into a duty. These unfortunate victims of war were cursed and abused by mankind. The legal codes of Sparta preached the dangerous principle that men are to be seen as means and not as ends – and in so doing, the very fundament of natural law and morality was legally torn asunder.

“…In contrast, the rugged warrior Caius Marcius provides a far more pleasing spectacle in his encampment before Rome when he sacrificed vengeance and victory, because he could not bear to see the tears of a mother!

“…Lycurgus’s nation can endure under only one condition, namely that the spirit of the nation comes to a stand-still. In other words, he can only succeed when he misses the highest and only goal of national existence.”

From Goethe’s “The Awakening of Epimenides,” second act, fourth scene:

Spirits ….. 

That which has arisen bravely from the pitCan conquer half the globeWith a pitiless destiny,But return it must to the abyss.Monstrous fears are threatening now,In vain will he resist!And all those who cling to himWill follow him to ruin.

Hope

Now I meet my good menWho have gathered in the nightTo keep silence, not to sleep.The lovely word of freedomIs spoken lisping and stammeringUntil in unaccustomed newnessWe stand upon our temple stepsAnd cry anew enraptured:

(Loudly and with conviction) Freedom!(Moderately) Freedom!(Echoing from every side and corner) Freedom!----- 

We ask that you copy this document, making as many carbon copies as possible, and pass it on!

Why This Matters:

When I translated this - prior to 9/11/2001 - I thought the text was powerful, moving. In mid-June 2024, the text has gone from powerful and moving, to relevant and urgent.

One notion that Hans Scholl and Alexander Schmorell expressed here has plagued the German nation since 1945, namely, “Who among us can imagine the degree of shame that will come upon us and upon our children when the veil falls from our faces and the awful crimes that infinitely exceed any human measure are exposed to the light of day?” [Emphasis mine.]

Blindness to injustice in 2024 will also result in shame upon us and upon our children.

What parts of this leaflet speak to you in this year? What will you do to take action? Please drop your thoughts in comments.

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 67-68.

Thank you for reading Why This Matters. This post is public so feel free to share it.

Notes and references

One sentence was clearly written by Hans Scholl. Both he and his father consistently wrote the German word for “scourge” as Geisel. But Geisel means hostage. “Scourge” is Geissel.

The original text from Goethe’s “The Awakening of Epimenides” rhymes ABABCDCD.

Text for Leaflet I: ZC13267, Volume 5.

The seven White Rose leaflets can be purchased as a single printed document here. All seven leaflets are also available on the Web site of the Center for White Rose Studies.

Photo is of facsimile of actual copy of Leaflet 1 together with facsimile of an envelope used to mail it - facsimile from RGWA I361K-1-8808. Alexander Schmorell: Gestapo Interrogation Transcripts. Edited by Dr. Igor Khramov, Orenburg Charity Foundation, 2005. - Franz Monheim was brother-in-law of Alexander Schmorell’s stepmother Elisabeth Schmorell nee Hoffmann. Monheim owned the Trumpf Chocolate Factory in Aachen.

Igor translated these documents into Russian. I translated them into English. We have a strong bond over these words.

Finally: You are reading or listening to these words on or about June 24, 2024. The 81st anniversary of their writing and beginning of the work.

Podcast © 2024 Denise Elaine Heap. White Rose History, Volume II, Chapter 05 and leaflet translation © 2002 Denise Elaine Heap and Exclamation! Publishers. Please contact us for permission to quote.

This podcast is a project of WHY THIS MATTERS, a newsletter of Center for White Rose Studies, that explores the reasons that voices silenced more than eighty years ago still speak to us today.

To order digital version of White Rose History, Volume II, click here. Digital version of White Rose History, Volume I is available here.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

June 16 - June 25, 1942.

Summary:

Alexander Schmorell, Christoph Probst, Hans Scholl, and Sophie Scholl decide that Hans and Alex would each generate a leaflet draft. They would then meld the documents into a single manuscript. The ultimate in collaborative writing!

Alex borrows an American-made Remington typewriter from his neighbor, Karl Pötzl, telling him he had started writing poetry. Alex also buys an inexpensive, hand-cranked Greif duplicating machine. They run off 100 copies of the first leaflet - four pages long! Alex pays for all supplies out of his allowance. They borrow his father’s telephone directory and work in his room.

The friends choose the White Rose symbol as their image or “brand” (in 21st century terms). Lilo’s friend Fritz Rook had written her a letter about white roses in which he said that death, love, and youth are all the same. Drawing on old Germanic notions of white roses and death, Fritz Rook spoke of the white rose’s fragrance and “fragile purity.” The friends call this: Leaflets of the White Rose. I.

The Leaflets of the White Rose therefore point the reader to the well-known literary symbol, not to the people writing the words. This is critical to remember as the story progresses.

This first leaflet draws heavily on German literature, especially words penned by Goethe and Schiller. Although long, the document is clear. These students do not let fellow citizens off with indifference or inaction. They emphasize that Germans are getting the government they deserve, that unless they take action, they will be subject to shame when “the awful crimes that infinitely exceed any human measure are exposed to the light of day.”

Unsure of themselves, they send up two test balloons before the mass mailing goes out. First they mail one to Professor Huber. And second, Hans Scholl gives a copy to Traute Lafrenz.

2007 update, Fritz Hartnagel has moved from in-town quarters in Mariupol to a tent in the Donbas. Despite decreeing that he and his men do not have to wear uniforms (they wear “track clothes” instead), he is miserable. Rampant alcoholism makes his job as C.O. unpleasant.

Why This Matters:

* It is beyond difficult to keep going when we see no results from our efforts. Alex’s statement about the reception to this first leaflet, even among their trusted friends, underscores the discouraging nature of “good trouble,” of doing what is right.

* I relish the discomfort caused to Professor Richard Harder as he tries to define how ‘the author’ knew about failed resistance movements, without disclosing that he - Professor Harder - also listened to foreign broadcasts. A sweet reminder that more Germans knew what was really happening, than would own up to that knowledge after the war. ——- And this was the primary point of the leaflets!

When you have undertaken a tough task, what have been the roadblocks you’ve encountered? How did you get past them? Please post in the comments!

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 60-66. Yes, this was longer than usual, because there wasn’t a natural “break” in the narrative.

Notes and references available only to paid subscribers.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

Mid-June 1942.

Summary:

Alexander Schmorell embraces his “Otherness,” especially regarding Russian immigrants in Munich. This part of his life is all but off-limits to his White Rose friends.

Otl Aicher hears about a major German victory in Kharkiv. He goes to the battlefield to see if it measures up to his father’s tales of his adventures in the first World War, or to his teachers’ lessons about the sanctity of war and the glory of death on the battlefield. What he finds disgusts and revolts him. His description is gruesome, although PG-rated.

At the same time Otl views Kharkiv, Heinrich Himmler wraps up the annihilation of the Jewish population in the Crimea. His June 17, 1942 report to Berlin details the execution of Heydrich’s 1941 directive. 65,000 Jews and 6,000 Krimchaks were murdered in cold blood.

Manfred Eickemeyer tells the students in Munich of the atrocities he’s aware of from his position in Cracow. His account makes them angry enough to finally take action.

In the second half of June 1942, Christoph Probst, Alexander Schmorell, Hans Scholl, and Sophie Scholl take that anger and turn it into concrete plans to write, duplicate, and distribute leaflets. They know they must inform the right people about the atrocities, they must convince people in power to alter course, and they had to figure out how to generate a leaflet that people would read.

Why This Matters:

* We cannot and should not assume that just because people know the truth about crimes against humanity, that they will take action.

* Otl Aicher’s contemplations regarding war grow ever more relevant.

In your own political development, can you point to a single thing that pushed you over the edge and made you determined to get involved? Please share in the comments.

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 58-60.

Notes and references available only to paid subscribers.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

This is the first “podcast” or serialized audiobook segment that is for paid subscribers only. To our free subscribers: I truly hope you have enjoyed the taste of this moving historical record. We’d love to have you join us on the rest of the journey.

If you’re a student, or retired, or otherwise struggling financially and wish to keep listening, please contact us. We’ll work something out. If you have a surplus in your budget and wish to make it possible for us to widen the circle, please contact us. We’re all in this together.

June 16, 1942.

Summary:

During rehearsal breaks, Susanne Hirzel’s string quartet discusses active opposition to the regime. They consider themselves true patriots, good Germans, yet want Germany to lose the war - treason. Susanne said they were unaware of (failed) resistance efforts through the years and wondered how that knowledge would have affected them.

Summer concerts become important recruiting grounds for White Rose friends. Introductions are made, prospects evaluated. Willi Graf among them.

Meanwhile, Willi Graf finds ever more solace and enjoyment in Munich’s Bach Chorale. His new group of friends in that place share his thoughts regarding their government and obligatory military service, although none is willing to work to effect the needed changes.

Wolf Jaeger, new friend to Willi Graf because of Bach Chorale, slowly moves into the White Rose circle. He remains a minor player, but critical as sounding board.

Alexander Schmorell’s friendship with Lilo Berndl nee Ramdohr deepens. Her poem about youth in Germany expresses their common passion to create art, to leave a legacy of beauty. Alex shares similar thoughts with Angelika Knoop nee Probst.

Sophie’s schoolgirl crush on Alex continues, much to his chagrin. She travels twice a week to the Schmorells’ villa to sketch while he sculpts.

Lilo relates how Alex seeks out humble places where humble people gather. He sketches blue-collar laborers, bearded Bavarians, and soaks in their stories, later relating them to her. [Her comment referencing Friedemann Bach and “gypsies, hoboes, and beggars” may sound un-PC in 2024. In 1942 it was not only Friedemann Bach’s words, but also those of the Nazi regime.]

Personal note re chapter title: I have a soft spot for Meredith Willson’s Music Man, especially the song Till There was You (song starts around the 1-minute mark). Which contains the famous phrase, “And there was music, and there were wonderful roses.” Beatles thought it was a good song too. They covered it.

Why This Matters:

* Too often, we become so obsessed with our political or social or community causes, that we forget to live. I love Willi Graf’s example of overcoming his utter loneliness by fencing, joining the Bach Chorale, remaining open to new friends met at concerts. These outlets gave him the strength to persevere in the causes that mattered most to him.

* Alexander Schmorell stands out among the White Rose friends. While others were noble indeed, and sacrificed their lives, Alex took time to care about the downtrodden, about those cast off by the Nazi regime. This association alone could have cost him his life, even if he’d never been involved with White Rose resistance. Our work, our strivings should not overlook those who are marginalized, regardless of the “cause” of that marginalization. Because ultimately, the “cause” is political, for political ends, for political power.

Have you written a poem or song or art about the cause you are passionate about? Share it in the comments, if you feel comfortable doing so…

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 55-58.

Notes and references available only to paid subscribers.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.

June 6 - June 15, 1942.

Summary:

Sophie Scholl’s “reminder” letter, asking her parents to send her bicycle, does not contain much cheery news. She will not be able to gain an exemption for munitiions work in August. Seems to withdraw from her family.

Willi Graf takes the advice he gave his younger sister and accepted his friends in the Siegfried Strasse as they were, with lower expectations. He no longer expects them to listen to his nightmares from the Russian front. As a result, he regains those people and that place as “safe haven” from Nazi thought.

June 13, 1942, first meeting between Hans Scholl and Willi Graf. Willi notes it in his diary. No fanfare, just a new friend.

Schneiderhan concert, violin concertos. Since Willi played in a string quartet, this music speaks to him, especially Beethoven violin concerto.

Willi also reconnects with another person from New Germany named Sigi Östreicher. Sigi allows Willi Graf to talk and talk. They read Guardini together. Sigi is willing to debate the issue of whether it is proper to become an officer in the Wehrmacht. This topic had bothered Willi Graf for months.

Traute Lafrenz and Hans Scholl break up. She recognizes that she still loves him, but it’s unrequited. She blames herself for Hans’ inability to connect, for his inattention, for the times he would “forget.” Despite the unpleasant break-up, she cannot stay away, because Alexander Schmorell, Christoph Probst, Sophie Scholl, and Hans were her safe haven.

2007 update, Alexander Schmorell: We learn that by mid-June they had developed the leaflet strategy. Specifics still had to be ironed out, but they knew what they were going to do. Alex is as frustrated as Sophie about the inaction.

2007 update, Fritz Hartnagel and Sophie Scholl: Fritz is still stationed in Mariupol, but had to travel to Kharkiv in a Fieser Stork aircraft. They were installing communication equipment on the front lines in anticipation of the next German move in the war. Fritz enjoys the aerial view of Ukraine, but struggles with his position as an officer. He tells Sophie that he feels like he belongs somewhere else.

Why This Matters:

* Willi Graf’s acceptance of his friends as they were and willingness to let them be? Good example for us in 2024. Unlike Hans Scholl, Willi did not associate with known Nazis. His problem with Fritz Leist and Emil Martin had been that they would not take action against the Nazis. He knew they hated Hitler as he did. Once he quit pushing them, they began to open up — a little — and were more receptive to his conversation.

* I am struck every time I work on this material how little world power dynamics change. In 2024, we are right back in the middle of things in Mariupol and Kharkiv and the Dnieper River. The historical bases of conflict in the region seem to be ignored as we seek solutions.

Have you ever chosen to accept close, trusted friends where they are, without trying to change them? What was your experience?

White Rose History, Volume II, pages 51-54.

Notes and references

Sophie Scholl:

* Jens, Inge (Ed.). At the Heart of the White Rose: Letters and Diaries of Hans and Sophie Scholl. Translation by J. Maxwell Brownjohn. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., 1987.

* NJ1704, Volume 7. 2/27/43 interrogation of Kurt Huber.

Willi Graf - Siegfriedstrasse friends, 6/13/1942 meeting with Hans Scholl, Wolfgang Schneiderhan concert, Sigi Östreicher discussion re officer status:

The Knoop-Graf/Jens book includes Willi’s diary entries only from this date forward. Jens observes that Willi Graf probably knew Hans Scholl before that date. However, both she and Knoop-Graf maintain that June 13, 1942 marked the first day that Willi and Hans got to know one another well enough for Willi to ascertain Hans Scholl’s political mindset.

Eckhard Holler interviewed Hans Böhler and does not believe that Hans Böhler ever made the connection between his old bündische leader Hans Scholl and New Germany friend Willi Graf.

Willi’s meeting Christl or Alex at Master Knapen’s fencing is unlikely, since Willi Graf said Hans Scholl introduced him to Christoph Probst at a concert. However, that may have been a cover to distract attention away from fencing activities, since most of Willi’s friends in Bonn shared that pastime.

Fun fact about Wolfgang Schneiderhan: He re-introduced the concept of vibrato to the Vienna Philharmonic when he joined in 1937. – Willi had good taste. After the war, Schneiderhan became most famous for his performances of Beethoven’s violin concertos.

Inge Scholl censored all of Hans Scholl’s correspondence between May 5, 1942 and July 27, 1942 – the entire Summer Semester 1942. Not one letter from that period was included in the Jens Scholl book (not Inge Jens’ decision). We know nothing about Hans’ thoughts when he met Willi Graf, much less about his correspondence and diary entries as White Rose work began. This story may change a great deal once access to his letters and diaries is no longer blocked.

* Cowan, Rob. “To Tremble or Not to Tremble? Giving up bad vibrations.” In The Independent (Online Edition), August 2, 2002, retrieved from http://enjoyment.independent.co.uk/ music/features/ story.jsp?story=320594. Wolfgang Schneiderhan.

* Holler, Eckard. “Die Ulmer ‘Trabanten’: Hans Scholl zwischen Hitlerjugend und dj.1.11.” Puls (22). Stuttgart: Verlag der Jugendbewegung, 1999.

* April 1995 interview with Dr. Inge Jens at her home in Tübingen.

* Jens, Inge (Ed.). At the Heart of the White Rose: Letters and Diaries of Hans and Sophie Scholl. Translation by J. Maxwell Brownjohn. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., 1987.

* May 1995 interview with Anneliese Knoop-Graf at her home in Bühl.

* Knoop-Graf, Anneliese and Jens, Inge (Eds.). Willi Graf: Briefe und Aufzeichnungen. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag GmbH, 1994.

* “Leading Violinist Dies.” News Limited (Australia). Retrieved from www.news.com.au/ common/story_page/0,4057,4366%255E13781,00.html. Wolfgang Schneiderhan.

* Vielhaber, Klaus. Gewalt und Gewissen: Willi Graf und die “Weisse Rose.” Würzburg: Echter-Verlag, 1963.

* NJ1704, Volume 1, part 3. 2/26/1943 interrogation of Willi Graf.

Traute Lafrenz and Hans Scholl:

* Lafrenz, Traute. “Bericht.” Letter to Inge Scholl, dated February 21, 1946. Unpublished.

* ZC13267, Volume 6. 3/25/1943 interrogation of Traute Lafrenz. Publication in 2024/2025.

2007 update, Alexander Schmorell:

* RGWA I361K-I-8808. 2/25/1943 interrogation of Alexander Schmorell.

2007 update, Fritz Hartnagel and Sophie Scholl:

* Bredow, Wolfgang. Lexikon der Flugzeuge. Retrieved from www.bredow-web.de/ Luftwaffenmuseum/Historisch/Fieseler_Storch.

* Hartnagel, Thomas (Ed.). Sophie Scholl, Fritz Hartnagel: “Damit wir uns nicht verlieren”: Briefwechsel 1937-1943. Frankfurt am Main: S. Fischer Verlag, 2005.

This is the last FREE podcast (serialized audio book), except for occasional segments that need a wider audience, such as the three White Rose trials.

I will continue to post a free, very short excerpt with each segment. Also, free subscribers will be able to read the segment summary and Why This Matters, but not the bibliography.

Please join our work! We need every single reader! You may not realize how you fuel our work…

Podcast © 2024 Denise Elaine Heap. White Rose History, Volume II, Chapter 04, © 2002, and 2007 update © 2007, Denise Elaine Heap and Exclamation! Publishers. Please contact us for permission to quote.

This podcast is a project of WHY THIS MATTERS, a newsletter of Center for White Rose Studies, that explores the reasons that voices silenced more than eighty years ago still speak to us today.

To order digital version of White Rose History, Volume II, click here. Digital version of White Rose History, Volume I is available here.

Why This Matters is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. - All subscription funds are deposited directly to the account of Center for White Rose Studies, a 501(c )(3) nonprofit. Ask your tax accountant if your subscription is tax deductible.