h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: 'Schtonk' - the FIlm and the Hitler Diaries - A776126
Author: SchrEck Inc. - U120894

Dear Reviewers,

I humbly submit this entry to PR, hoping for a mild judgement.

SchrEck Inc.

Have to admit I liked this one, it's well written and informative etc. Just one (nitpicking) point, how long was it before the diaries were actually discovered to be forgeries? would you be able to mention that in the section on why they were forgeries?

though well done

Thanks Zed, for your kind review. The forgery was discovered quite soon after the presentation, in fact it took less than two weeks. I've updated the article.

No problem thanks for updating it, I can't see anything else wrong with this one at all, but I'm not an expert on the topic at all! so who knows.

A big thumbs up there!

I've seen the movie and I've been there when the 'Stern' thought they had their biiiig $$$-story, with all the plans of exhibitions, reviews, spinoff stories and whatnot. They believed it too eagerly, and it went and well, the rest is Schadenfreude

[Note to Mod: 'Schadenfreude' is explained at A287255 ]

Thanks Bossel!

Great, super, smashing....

I wonder if it would be worth changing the title to "The Hitler Diaries Hoax", because I think that story is probably more interesting than the film. I don't think you'd have to change much of what you've written, just a bit of "re-pointing" perhaps. The film is definitely worth a mention as part of the story...

What does everyone else think?

Otto.

Depends on what type of public is going to read the entry. If the film made it outside the borders of Germany (which, guessing from your comment, it didn't) then the title would catch people, otherwise a title change might be justified.

How's about " 'Schtonk' - the Film and the Hitler Diaries Hoax" as a catch-all ?

I thought this was a thoroughly good entry. Interesting, informative, about the right length.

Thumbs up from me as well, ShrEck!

Thanks folks...

About a title change and the subject of the entry: I was thinking about this myself, as the entry as it is now is more about the hoax than about the film (initially I planned it to be more on the film, btw). I think I'll put it the other way round and change the title to 'The Hitler Diary Hoax and 'Schtonk' - the film'. OK with that?

SchrEck Inc.

OK, now, title changed and also a quote added...

Definitely an article worthy of H2G2, IMHO.

There was a book and TV series in England too, "Selling Hitler". The series had alternative comedian Alexei Sayle as the forger. I did a quick search for it and found this, slightly odd, synopsis:

"Based on a true story, this British miniseries explores the fraud committed by Konrad Fischer (Alexei Sayle) in 1981. Fischer claims to have discovered the lost war-time diaries of Adolf Hitler. Major newspapers and historians are duped, but diligent reporter Gerd Heidemann (Jonathan Pryce) is suspicious. A fascinating look at one of the twentieth century's most controversial hoaxes."

Hmm, did they re-assess Heidemann's role then??

The book, by Robert Harris who also wrote the bestsellers Fatherland and Enigma, was excellent if I remember correctly (read it many years ago).

A customer review on Amazon says:

"Proof that truth is funnier than fiction. Harris's 'Selling Hitler' is one of the funniest books you'll ever read. A brilliantly written account populated by amazing characters and astounding stupidity which must bring many other scholastic theories and historical research into question. The story is so well told in simple narrative form and the scale of the breathtaking fraud is steadily built up into epic proportions. It's cry out loud funny in places; you really can't believe how such an inept counterfeiter could escape detection for so long although you are really rooting for him by the end. Hilarious, fascinating and challenging in turn, this is a joy to read and always reminds me of Mel Brooks' film 'The Producers'."

Could this book and TV series be included in the entry?

Hi Dan,

thanks for your review. I've also seen the 'Selling Hitler' synopis, and it is mostly inaccurate regarding the true story of the incident. In fact, Konrad Kujau said to the Stern that he acted under the false name of Konrad Fischer in order to get the diaries out of East Germany. In that TV series, they seem to have used 'Fischer' for whatever reason.

I think I'll ad the reference to Harris' book, but I rather leave the TV series out, for the reasons stated above.

Thanks again for your comments.

SchrEck Inc.

I've updated the article; now 'Selling Hitler' is mentioned, but I've also added a sort of conclusion to the entry. Happy reading!

Hi Schreck,

Great piece,

A good read and a fine subject for the EG, where it will undoubtedly end up.



one or two details for you:

"nearly nobody" sounds a little odd to me - how about "practically nobody"

-------

"After Kujau went out of prison, he enjoyed somewhat of a publicity"

- 'was released from' rather than 'went out of' prison

- 'enjoyed considerable public attention' perhaps? In any case 'somewhat of a' is a no-no.

----------

"it was necessary to let out some of the things he learned of the hoax,"

- 'It has been suggested that he left out some of his discoveries' ? and no comma before 'because' (you might prefer 'on the grounds that')

-----------

"In the following"

- either add 'scene' or 'The expert goes on to recount...'

--------

"Knobel then has the sudden idea to produce more of Hitler's estate"

- Well, how about 'In a flash of inspiration, Knobel decides to...'

or something like that. It's 'has the sudden idea to produce' that is the problem.



Hope this is helpful,
and once again for a great read

seeya
spiff

Hey Spiff,

thank you very much for your most helpful suggestions. The entry now reads much better...

SchrEck Inc.

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

Now it's your turn to determine whether the above posting has been forged