Melissa Wells
JRNL 2285
Professor Leff
Research Area IV
“The Zookeeper’s Wife”
Based on the New York Times best-seller by Diane Ackerman, the life of Antonina and Jan Żabiński’s heroics are commemorated in the film “The Zookeeper’s Wife”. The novel, published in 2008, depicted the true tale of this Polish couple who saved over 300 Jews by hiding them in the Warsaw Zoo. The film adaptation, released March of 2017, follows Antonina’s journey over the course of those six years.
Set entirely in Poland, the movie begins with a surreal scene of tranquility in the summer of 1939. Flourishing under Jan’s stewardship and Antonina’s care, the Warsaw Zoo is an enchanted paradise. However, on the first of September 1939, Antonina’s idyllic bicycle ride through her blossoming zoo is interrupted by the roar of planes overhead. In one of the few graphic scenes in the film, the subsequent bombing of Warsaw introducing the German invasion of Poland utterly shatters the pristine haven the Żabińskis have built. There is an emphasis on displaying the gruesome deaths of the Żabiński’s animals in front of Antonina and her son as a way of announcing Nazi arrival; this depiction is the first indication of the film’s misplaced focus on animals rather than the true victims of the Holocaust. Despite fleeing to the train station, Antonina, Jan, and their son Ryszard return to their destroyed home to face their new reality: Nazi-occupied Poland.
It is important to note that two days after this initial invasion, Britain and France declared war on Germany. A mere fifteen days later, the Soviet Union invaded eastern Poland. Alongside many other bombings not seen in the film and the implied fact that the Polish army is defeated within weeks of invasion, Warsaw’s surrender to the Germans would lend to Polish Jews being rounded up and forced into what would become the Warsaw Ghetto. Jan and Antonina are obligated to report to the Reich’s newly appointed chief zoologist, Lutz Heck – someone they had considered a friend prior to the invasion. With their zoo under Nazi control, Lutz Heck takes the best of the remaining animals for safekeeping in his Berlin Zoo and informs Antonina that her zoo is to be liquidated. With both this and the escalating situation of the Jews in mind, Antonina and Jan make the risk-filled decision to hide their Jewish friend Magda in their home.
Unlike many Nazi-occupied locations across Europe, the Germans considered any sort of aid to Jews – from providing extra food to smuggling them out of the ghetto – to be a capital offense punishable by death in Poland. As Jan described in the film, “We can’t even give [them] a glass of water. We can be shot for a glass of water.” In fact, Polish gentiles who helped Jews were not only risking their lives, but the lives of their loved ones as German soldiers would massacre whole families associated with a single person committing this offense.
As it becomes clear that Jews are starving in the Warsaw Ghetto, Antonina and Jan covertly begin working with the Resistance to smuggle and rescue Jews from the ghetto. For this plan to work, they use their friendship with Lutz Heck to save their zoo from liquidation by converting it into a pig farm to feed German soldiers and house Heck’s genetic project. Placed into the high-ranking position of a Nazi officer, Lutz Heck’s irrational obsession with the idea of recreating an extinct species of ancient European cattle and horses (the tarpan) through genetic experiments comes to fruition through both the war, “which gave him the opportunity to rob Eastern European zoos of every specimen he needed” (Oleksiak), and the Warsaw Zoo, where he could conduct these experiments meanwhile it served to feed Nazi troops.
As for the pig farm the Warsaw Zoo is converted into and the role that it has in saving the Jews: The pigs themselves would eat the garbage of the ghetto, allowing Jan to access the ghetto with his truck and smuggle Jews out in the pig trough. From there, they would hide in the Żabiński villa and in empty animal cages – children first, then adults, soon whole families. What viewers are unaware of is that in reality, “such a simple trick would never work as the ghetto was heavily guarded and the guards did much more than look casually under the blankets” (Oleksiak).
Moreover, the film depicts Jan smuggling out more Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto through the Labor Bureau with the help of a German insider – Ziegler. Ziegler, in fact, is someone Antonina admits in her own diary as someone who’s role was a mystery to her. It is true that Ziegler was an amateur entomologist mesmerized by Jan’s childhood friend Szymon Tenebaum’s bug collection, thus granting Jan the document that allowed him to freely pass in and out of the ghetto. However, it is unlikely he was aware of what Jan was doing or would have helped; Ziegler was in charge of the Arbeitsamt, “a cruel institution which was responsible for sending hundreds if not thousands of people to death” (Oleksiak).
But, as shown in the film, of the Jews the Żabińskis could save – the risk did not end once they were taken out of the Warsaw ghetto. As seen in the film, there were German patrols during the day so that was when the Jews slept. Antonina’s piano was essential as a signal for the Jews. When a Nazi soldier got too close for comfort, Antonina would play an operetta on the piano to signal the approaching danger; “The stowaways would then rush through an underground tunnel or hide in a double-sided wardrobe” (JNi.Media). But once she played at night, it was safe for the Jews to come out.
Of all their “guests” (as Antonina called them), viewers only know the name of three prominent figures: Magda, Urszula, and Maurycy. This is despite the presence of a family that remains unnamed yet stays with the Żabińskis until the very end of the film. This is also in spite of the fact that Urszula is not mentioned in Antonina’s diary or in Diane Ackerman’s novel – thus, likely a fictional character. This is disappointing, as she is another figure that adds to the depiction of the Holocaust. “The character of Urszula…a barely pubescent girl raped by German soldiers, is one of the few who seems truly stained by the savagery of war” (Guzmán).
That said, “The Zookeeper’s Wife” accurately portrays that no rescue operation like the one the Żabińskis carried out could have been done successfully without the support of countless individuals. In fact, it has been determined by scholars that in order to save a single Jew in occupied Europe, the cooperation of an estimated ten individuals was required. The case of the Żabińskis further validates this assessment: “From the men who drove the Jews from the Zoo to other safe houses across occupied Poland, to the women who made counterfeit documents in the back of a bakery, a whole underground network of operatives, part of the Polish Home Army, was involved in helping the Jews rescued by the Żabińskis” (Stefanski).
Soviet forces would occupy eastern Poland until the summer of 1941. In the case of Warsaw, mass deportations to Treblinka would begin in the summer of 1942. The depiction of these deportations is one of the only accurate and moving scenes of the film. It is when Jan tries to urge Janusz Korczak to come with him instead of board the train, unbeknownst to them, headed to Treblinka. The Polish-Jewish pediatrician, educator and writer was deported to with the Warsaw orphanage he directed in August of 1942. “Korczak is largely remembered today for having turned down several opportunities to be spared deportation and insisting on accompanying his children to the end” (Green) – as seen in his refusal to Jan’s pleas.
By January of 1943, Heinrich Himmler would order for the removal of the remaining 60,000 Jews from the ghetto by February 15th. By April of 1943, only 60,000 of the initial 400,000 Jews were left in the Warsaw Ghetto. The Jews in Warsaw would resist for 28 days in what would become known as the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. Since many of the fighters hid in buildings and bunkers, the Germans leveled the ghetto systematically. April 19th – Passover – was the final extermination of the Warsaw Ghetto. The portrayal of this day in “The Zookeeper’s Wife” is arguably the most poignant scene in the film and one of the only scenes that provide any real depiction of the Holocaust. As ash fills the air, Antonina comes to the realization that the Nazis are burning the ghetto; Urszula haunting singing dictates alternating scenes of the rescued Jews celebrating Passover hidden in the Żabiński villa with powerful imagery of Nazi officers burning down buildings with Jews inside.
On the first of August in 1944, the Polish Underground Home Army launched the Warsaw Uprising – the largest underground operation in all of World War II. This is followed by the birth of the Żabiński’s second child, Teresa. Jan is shot soon after and captured while working with the Home Army. The Warsaw Uprising would end with the Polish Home Army’s surrender in October of 1944.
Prior to Soviet troops’ capture of Warsaw, Antonina’s strength in protecting the Jews in her home and her own two children by herself following her husband’s capture is overshadowed by a scene in which Antonina confronts Lutz Heck in an attempt to locate her husband. Not only is this not true, but having Antonina go to Lutz Heck and undress as if to offer herself in exchange for information about Jan’s whereabouts taints the image of the heroine Antonina Żabińska was. As stated in a review by Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, “Entertainment counts for more here than the memory of the Holocaust or the brave acts of the Żabińskis…”
Furthermore, there is an unhealthy focus on interactions between Lutz Heck and Antonina throughout the film that inaccurately insinuates an affair between the two. The idea that Antonina indulged in Lutz’s infatuation with her to distract him from their operation is not only inappropriate, but fictitious. “The only sentence that could suggest any affection between the two can be found in Antonina’s diary, where she wrote that Lutz Heck was always exceptionally kind to her…” (Oleksiak). Jealous spats between Lutz Heck and Antonina’s husband translate into marital stress between the couple that overshadows the more pressing toll of what they are doing.
At the end of this suggestive scene between Heck and Antonina (in which he sexually assaults her only to stop when she reveals her disgust for him), Lutz begins to question what the Żabińskis have really been up to. Antonina rushes back under the impression that her underground rescue operation is compromised and Germans were preparing to search the zoo. After quickly evacuating the Jews to a safe location, a climactic confrontation ensues between Antonina and Lutz Heck as he searches their empty villa. After finding evidence of the Jews through drawings on the walls made by Urszula and the other children, Antonina convinces Heck not to kill her son in retaliation. With Jan presumed to be dead, Antonina, Rys, and baby Teresa proceed to flee their home when Heck lets them live.
After the war, less than six percent of the population in Warsaw remained; Warsaw had been devastated by German, and then Russian forces (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum). Still, Antonina and her children returned to their abandoned zoo. Jan returns following his own liberation from a prison camp; the scene of his emotional return is the happy ending the film finishes with. It is revealed in the ending credits that of over 300 “guests” hidden in the Warsaw Zoo and Żabiński villa during the German occupation, all but two survived. Two decades later, Antonina and Jan Żabiński were recognized as “Righteous Among The Nations” by Yad Vashem in Israel, an honor bestowed upon non-Jewish individuals who fought to protect Jews during the World War II. Although the Żabińskis died in the 1970s, the Warsaw Zoo remains open to this day.
Both the depiction of the Holocaust and the heroics of the Żabińskis is undermined by fiction rather than fact. “The Zookeeper’s Wife” is “Hollywood-esque” rather than “Schindleresque”. If art both reflects and affects American understanding of the Holocaust, the film adaptation of “The Zookeeper’s Wife” fails to do either in a meaningful way.
It is important to talk about both director Niki Caro and executive producer/lead actress Jessica Chastain’s intended impact of the film as it is indicative of the film’s failures. In fact, the impact director Niki Caro hoped the film would have had very little to do with the Holocaust at all. With the backdrop of the recent presidential election and subsequent Women’s March on Caro’s mind, she sought out to make a “consciously feminine” film showcasing the political power of sexual aggression highlighted in the election cycle and is, as Niki Caro believes, historically overshadowed by the “drama of mass death” (Sims).
“To be feminine and strong isn’t usually the case in Hollywood films. Here was an opportunity to contribute to the Holocaust genre in a way that felt comfortable and natural, in a setting that was exotic and domestic – that most women can relate to” (Fox-Bevilacqua). Although Caro is well-intentioned, this very statement reflects the disillusionment present throughout her film. There is nothing about the Holocaust or Nazi-occupied Poland that reflects an “exotic” setting, nor should the Holocaust be used to create a film in which women can relate to it in a “comfortable” or “natural” way.
Scathing reviews and assessments of the film validate this statement: “‘The Zookeeper’s Wife’ is a thoroughly Hollywood treatment of the Holocaust: well-intentioned, sensitive and just a little too pretty” (Guzmán). While Jessica Chastain may have been Niki Caro’s “Holocaust heroine”, articles from the Atlantic to NPR saw the film for what it was: “a staid tale of holocaust heroism” and “caged by noble intentions”. Jewish Week went as far as to say the film lacked bite, instead merely “another wartime romantic suspense film [that] just happens to be about somebody saving Jews from the Nazis.”
The topic of violence in the film, on the other hand, sparked debate – raising questions concerning the impact of graphic imagery of the Holocaust today. Stephen Holden’s New York Times review was slammed by Algemeiner.com for complaining about the lack of violence in the film – arguing it made it too “sanitized” to be influential. The Algemeiner.com article rebuked: “Perhaps it’s reasonable of the Times to complain that…[it] is too much of a whitewash. But in making the complaint, the Times risks setting up an ideal that goes too far… The Holocaust was bad enough without adding the further indignity of a Times movie critic demanding graphic and gripping cinematic replays.”
So, what defines graphic imagery being too sanitized as it is in this film or too graphic in a way that could equally fail to portray the Holocaust in a meaningful way? A New Republic review of the film battled with this question and how Caro’s use of violence against animals took away from the backdrop of the Holocaust and its victims:
Perhaps it is because the genre of the Holocaust film has become tired, or because we live in a world so bathed in violent images, that our society is no longer inspired to vigilance by the dangers of our own resurgent and popular neo-fascism. But Caro snaps us out of the world we know…If many have become inured to human violence in movies, violence towards animals is less familiar. Instead of seeing Jews murdered in the ghetto, we get Nazis shooting camels and elephants.
Unfortunately, the large scale of murder waged against human beings during World War II is the topic at hand; human beings a couple took on the task of saving – a story perhaps lost in translation. As Jewish Week expressed: “…Shoah movies can easily become little more than a subgenre of the WWII combat film, but with the violence and vigor of the best of those replaced by a stifled nobility of purpose that does a disservice not only to the audience but to the memory of the victims and resistors.”
That said, the story of Antonina and Jan Żabiński is both true and important. “The Zookeeper’s Wife” highlights the kindness and compassion of Antonina Żabińska as she fought to provide sanctuary for Jewish victims while her husband fought in the Resistance. But if there is anything American audiences should take away from this film, it is the importance of celebrating the 300 people who survived under extraordinary circumstances, the importance of commemorating Antonina and Jan Żabiński for placing their lives at risk to save Polish Jews, and finally – the importance of continuing to honor the millions who died in the Holocaust.