A very interesting record of Munich and the role the city played in the birth of Nazi Third Reich. David Ian Hall has obviously done his research well which is not surprising considering his MA specialist subject. He shows us how the Bavarian past helped shape the ideas and the programs of the Nazi party and the central role it played in the maintaining the image of being German’s ideological and cultural heart.
There are however some issues here as well. To start there is a very detailed, perhaps too detailed description of Hitler’s life before Munich. 40 pages out of 240 in total are dedicated to Hitler before Munich. There is point to be made of Hitler and his ideology being shaped by his experiences in Vienna, that is true, but there was no need to go into so much detail.
But, even if we reject this criticism there are two more that impede the reader from enjoying this book. (Perhaps “enjoying” is too positive a word, but I’ll stick to it). The first one is a slight problem that I often notice – that is the need of the author to repeat statements and facts they already covered in previous chapters. This book doesn’t seem like one a reader might read just one chapter of, it’s too short to limit yourself, so there is no need for that. For example the fact that Hess calls Hitler “The Tribune” is explained twice, and in addition to the explanation, the origin is stated with the second explanation. The Vienna part of the book spends PAGES on explaining Hitler’s fascination with Wagner’s opera Rienzi. There is really no need to go into that again. We the readers haven’t forgotten.
The second, more serious criticism is the jumping around, or lack of clear chronology. The book is structured to follow a strict chronological flow, so I was really surprised, and even confused when at times I had no idea what year we were on. As I read nonfiction books, I always keep written notes, and I did this time too, but despite that I was confused and had to resort to Google for clarification. I didn’t appreciate that.
And to finish off on a strange note, there was a moment where I feel like the editor simply didn’t notice a problem. When the book starts taking about the immediate aftermath of Nazi coming to power and how they dealt with their political and ideological opponents, we first find out that they were gathered up by Himmler’s police force and sent to Dachau for “protective custody” and then PAGES later we read about the establishment of the Dachau as a camp for “protective custody.” I really don’t like when books do that, and I’m sure a more detailed reading by the editor would have noticed that and it would have been fixed.
All in all, if you are interested in an OK record of Munich in the 20s, 30s and 40s of 20th century, then go ahead, read this book. If, however, you are interested in a slightly better account of the same time and topics there are other books I (as a lay reader) could recommend, and a historian could give you even more.