Anne Frank-The Diary of a girl masturbating in the Annex.

The Diary of Anne Frank is a literary production written after the war.
After the attacks on its credibility regarding ball point pen, after a period of several years, an expanded version, i.e. a so-called original version was given to the Netherlands State Institute for War Documentation, which duly verified it.

This expanded version has been published as the "Critical Edition" of the Diary.
It is readilly aparent to any who read this edition, that it is not the musings of a thirteen year old.

I was struck by the mention of correspondence education allegedly taking place in the Secret Annex, surely a huge risk for detection.

But there it is on page 651 of the Critical Edition, (takes place around May 18 1944)

Quote:
What the "Secret Annex" family is interested in.
(Systematic survey of subjects being learned and reading matter).....

Mrs v.P.: learns English by correspondence, likes to read fictional biography and some novels.
....
Mrs Fr.: learns English by correspondence, reads everything except detective sotires.
....
Margot Fr.: Learns English French, Latin by correspondence, english shorthand, German shorthand, Dutch shorthand, Mechanics, Trignometry, Solid Geometry, Physics, Chemistry, Algebra, Geometry, English literature, French literature, German literature, Dutch literature, Bookkeeping, Geography, Modern History, Biology, Economics, reads everything, preferably on religion and medicine.


Very impressive, I wonder what the correspondence schools that were operating at such time.

Clearly the Germans didn't keep tabs on the post office.

It is fascinating to read this expanded draft to see the longeurs and the anachronistic attitudes that can be found.

Chief amongst these is a number of extended passages where Anne Frank describes her genitalia in some detail.

Now while woman's genitalia has not altered, the attitudes of young female teenagers to it has greatly. Although to be honest young teenagers to still tend to be quite uncomfortable about such matters. Such a lengthy description would be rather unlikely in a modern diary let along back in the prudish 1940s.

And the anatomically correct naming also seems rather unlikely.

From page 566-567

You can see exactly what a naked man looks like from photographs or pictures, but you can't with a woman. With them the sezual parts or whatever they are called are further between the legs. He probably hasn't seen a girl from so close to, to be hones I haven't either....

With us it's all pretty much divided, before I was 11 or 12 years old I didn't realise that there were two inner lips as well, you couldn't see them at all. And the funniest thing of all was that I thought that urine came out of the clitoris.

When I asked Mummy once what that stub of a thing was for, she said that she didn't know, she still pretends to be ignorant even now!

But when the subject comes up again how in heaven's name will you be able to explain what things are like without using examples? Shall I just try it out here in the meantime? Well then get on with it! From the front when you stand up you can see nothing but hair, between your legs there are things like little cushions, soft, with hair on too, which press together when you stand up so that you can't see what's inside. When you sit down they divide and inside it looks very red and ugly and fleshy.

At the top, between the big outer lips there is a little fold of skin which turns out to be a kind of little bladder on closer inspection, that is the clitoris. Then come the small inner lips, they are also pressed against each other just like a little pleat. When they open, there is a fleshy little stump inside, no bigger than the top of my thumb. the top of it is porous, there are different little holes in it and that's where the urine comes out. The lower part looks as if it's nothing but skin, but that is where the vagina is. There are little folds of skin all over the place, you can hardly find it.

And so on and on.

It all seems heavily influenced by feminist consciousness raising sessions in the 70s where women were encouraged to inspect themselves in detail with mirrors and write down what they saw.

But rather unlikely for a thirteen year old in the 1940s to suddenly find the need to record such things in her diary.

Given that Robert Faurisson's excellent research as already established the original diary was a post modern literary invention, it should be no surprise to learn that the "draft" version was an even later post modern literary invention of a "draft of a teenage girl". Amazingly this post modern draft itself because the object of extended literary exegesis.

The fun never stops.