The Great Escape, a non-fiction book by Paul Brickhill that was released by WW Norton & Company in 1950, describes what it was like to live in a German POW camp during World War II. The author was an Australian fighter pilot and became a prisoner of war, which means he had first-hand experience, but after WWII, he returned to journalism. Hundreds of POWs were rounded up through numerous episodes and held in the camp Stag Luft III, but the process and finished at other facilities (Brickhill, 1950). The book is successful because it does not bore people with information and instead reads like a fictional adventure tale. Readers are given the impression that they are in the same room as the captives and their oppressors, including Roger Bushell and the “Artful Dodger” (Brickhill, 1950). The prisoners make numerous efforts to escape during their journey, including cutting through the barbed wire and creating numerous tunnels. The POWs’ evasive strategies eventually succeed, and the book details their rescue and suffering under the appalling German methods of torture used on prisoners who were recaptured. The book has no specific thesis since it is an insider’s account.
An insider’s description of the massive evacuation of British and Commonwealth airmen from the German POW camp Stalag Luft III is provided by Paul Brickhill. He joined in the escape plan while a prisoner at the camp, but he and three or four others were prevented from making the actual getaway due to claustrophobia. The notion that a sizable section of the compound’s occupants had little involvement in the escape was among the less heroic elements of the tale that Brickhill had removed by the time of the 1950 book.
The escape was as brazen, bold, and gutsy as it was brave. POWs have to put themselves in grave physical danger and take risks without knowing the outcome in order to thrive in this endeavor. For instance, numerous detainees were asked to get along with German guards who had shown displeasure with the Nazi dictatorship (Brickhill, 1950). The convicts could never be sure that the men’s outward displays of disapproval were genuine, despite the fact that this appeared sincere and had to be interpreted literally. The men’s escape strategies also exhibited bravery since they understood from the start that, while they were trying to gain freedom, they were also essentially sacrificing themselves for the success of the fight on the front lines. The achievement was unlikely since, even if they were able to escape the prison, they would have to navigate a country that was steadfastly allied with the Nazis and its Gestapo operatives and heavily penetrated by them.
Although the escape was exciting and adventurous in the setting of a narrative, it was also a success of the strategy and the officers’ planning abilities. A number of reconnaissance trips were carried out with the goal of “capturing” the escapees so they could return to the camp and share their findings (Brickhill, 1950). Building a network of convicts and allies was necessary for success. Each man was employed to the fullest extent of his abilities, and the escape from the camp was planned precisely as a military operation was prepared. The goal was to use as many German troops and resources as possible in the hunt for the escaped prisoners, and the breakout was also employed as another tactic for winning the war.
The way the Germans broke the conventions and agreements regulating the mistreatment of prisoners of war is a recurring issue in the book. There was a contract between the Germans and the Allies that promised government soldiers, or captured soldiers, would be treated decently and not be executed upon capture, even though there was no Geneva Convention to safeguard these. The German’s breaking of these commitments is repeatedly mentioned in the book (Brickhill, 1950). The crucial moment comes after the Germans capture the defectors and release them into a pasture; they then murder them and later allege that they were attempting to flee. Even when they are enemy combatants who, by tradition, were meant to be kept in terrible circumstances and alive, the German desire to kill is evident throughout the entire book.
The impact of the book on my understanding is that ideologies, such as Nazism, are inherently shallow, making its believer easy to deceive. The author writes: “when you got them in a bunch they were all Nazis (they had to be),” indicating the ideology’s forced collective nature (Brickhill, 1950, p. 124). He further states: “they didn’t have any morale underneath. Inside, they seemed naked and defenseless” (Brickhill, 1950, p. 124). The author was not a researcher, which means there is no research to summarize. For the relevant scholarship, it can be stated that the manhunt reallocated the Nazis’ resources, which meant fewer Germans fighting in the war, highlighting its overall success, not as an escape but diversion operation (Macdonell, 2017). The key strength of the writing is its ability to cohesively merge a first-hand account with storytelling paying attention to details, but its weakness is the author’s dismissal of the greater objective.
To summarize, non-fiction novels usually make me bored, but I really like this one. I was eager to learn about the next stage of the operation because it reads like a novel. The individuals who are organizing the operation are standing next to the reader. The book offers the author’s insights into the operation and the characteristics of the other participants because he was one of the POWs. Less is said about the German viewpoint, but this is to be expected. Readers must have some knowledge of the historical background of the novel.
References
Brickhill, P. (1950). The great escape. WW Norton & Company.
Macdonell, G. A. (2017). England, Their England (Pan 70th anniversary). Oleander Press.