The story of Anne Frank is a well-known and simple one. It is not this historical story that I will be examining in this post. Instead, I will be examining the concept of identity and self-representation in “The Diary of a Young Girl”. Unlike Rigoberta Menchú, Malala Yousafzai, and Olaudah Equiano’s autobiographies, “The Diary of a Young Girl” was published posthumously. This meant that Anne Frank herself had no say in which manner she wanted to be portrayed in her own memoirs.
Diaries – The Most Authentic Form of Self-Representation?
Anne Frank’s autobiography, “The Diary of a Young Girl”, as the title suggests, takes the form of diary entries, which recorded both the musings of her daily life as well as her innermost thoughts and dreams. In her first diary entry, Anne Frank writes:
“I hope I will be able to confide everything to you, as I have never been able to confide in anyone, and I hope you will be a great source of comfort and support” (Frank)
It is clear that for Anne, the form of a diary provides a platform for her to record and reflect her true feelings, thoughts, and expressions, with no underlying motive or purpose. Diaries might be seen as the most authentic form of self-representation, as it is addressed to the self and a highly personal object.
Yet this is not the absolute case for Anne Frank’s diary. In 1944, following a request on the radio for diaries written during the war to be kept and published after the war, Anne decides to rewrite her diary. This results in two versions known as A-Version, the original diary of writings up till her last one in 1 August 1944, and B-Version, Anne’s rewrite that consists of multiple edits, omissions, and additions that she made up till March 1944 (Stichting).
From this, we can see that Anne Frank had engaged in self-editing and censorship in anticipation of being viewed as a writer. She wished to be seen as a more mature writer and to hide the more emotional, childish side of her that A-Version represented.
For instance,
“in the A-Version Anne tells about a psychological wound her mother inflicted on her several years ago. It still hurts, when she thinks of it. In the B-Version she eliminates the whole episode” (Stichting).
This challenges the original idea of a diary as the most authentic form of self-representation, as by rewriting her diary, Anne herself selectively chooses how she wishes to be represented in her book. As such, we can say that A-Version was the most genuine version of Anne at the time of writing, while B-Version was the version which Anne wished for the world to view her. However, that does not necessarily mean that A-Version is the absolute true version and B-Version was a falsity, but rather two different versions of different time periods of the same person; after all, who is to say Anne Frank, the child of the past, was “truer” than Anne Frank, the writer of the present?
More Versions and More Complications
The idea of multiple versions of Anne Frank is further complicated by the text which the world first comes to know her. After all, “The Diary of a Young Girl” was published posthumously by Otto Frank, Anne’s father. More importantly, Otto Frank had created a new version, known as C-Version, from the two texts, A-Version and B-Version, that he had in his possession (Stichting). By carefully selecting parts of each text, Otto Frank had effectively added a level of mediation and created a new identity of Anne: Not an emotional child, or a maturing writer, but a daughter he lost whose complex feelings he was trying to comprehend. And it is this identity that the world first meets Anne, and loves and empathises with.
Some might argue that this makes Otto’s compilation the truest version of Anne, for after all this was the version which first gained widespread popularity. Yet this brings up issues of authenticity, especially in the case of the Anne Frank Fonds listing Otto Frank as a co-author (Carvajal). While largely a copyright move, this suggests that “The Diary of a Young Girl” was not the work of Anne Frank alone (Tricoire). And if that were true, then it would no longer be possible to suggest that this was an accurate representation of Anne herself, and calls into question the authenticity of the diary as a medium of self-representation.
Final Thoughts
If Anne Frank had been alive at the publishing of her own diary, which version would she have used? It becomes obvious that she would have mostly used B-Version, seeing as those were written with the intent of publishing in mind. Perhaps she would have made further edits after the war. But more importantly, would this identity of a mature, budding writer have gained the international fame and touched so many hearts as the identity of an innocent, hopeful girl as curated by Otto Frank that we have all learnt to love and empathise with?
In the end, perhaps the true story of Anne Frank is best interpreted by reading all three versions to understand not only how she felt at the time of writing, but also her hopes of becoming a writer, and her father’s ideal image of the perfect daughter that he lost.
References:
“Anne Frank – Anne Frank”. Annefrank.ch. N.p., 2016. Web. 17 Sept. 2016.
Biography.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.
Amazon.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.
Carvajal, Doreen. “Anne Frank’S Diary Gains ‘Co-Author’ In Copyright Move”. Nytimes.com. N.p., 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2016.
Frank, Anne et al. The Diary Of A Young Girl. Print.
Stichting, Anne. “Anne Frank’s Hostpry: The Different Versions Of Anne’S Diary”. Anne Frank House. N.p., 2016. Web. 17 Sept. 2016.
Stichting, Anne. “The Story Of Anne Frank: Anne Frank’s Diary Is Published”. Anne Frank House. N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.
Stichting, Anne. “The Story Of Anne Frank: Reception Of The Diary Of Anne Frank In America”. Anne Frank House. N.p., 2016. Web. 17 Sept. 2016.
Stichting, Anne. “The Story Of Anne Frank: Taken Seriously As A Writer?”. Anne Frank House. N.p., 2016. Web. 17 Sept. 2016.