Man’s Search for Meaning: Experiences in a Concentration Camp Summary & Analysis

Frankl begins by telling the reader that his book is a compilation of his experiences and observations rather than an objective history. Instead of generally describing what happened at concentration camps, Frankl wants to tell the reader about the everyday problems he and his fellow prisoners faced while living within them. His ultimate goal is to explain how the prisoners’ minds were affected by these experiences.

Further, instead of writing about heroes in the camps, Frankl focuses on the common prisoner, and on his enormous sacrifice and struggle. He notes that it is impossible for those who were not in the camps themselves to understand the relentless struggle he and his fellow prison mates undertook just to survive.

Frankl uses a story about gas chambers to illustrate this struggle. Often, when camps announced lists of prisoners to be transported to other camps, the prisoners on the list ended up being taken to gas chambers instead. Camp rules required that the number of prisoners listed equal the number of prisoners rounded up for “transport”—however, the guards did not care if the prisoners they collected were actually the prisoners whose names were listed. Frankl observed that in this situation, every prisoner fought to keep himself and his friends from being taken, even though everyone knew that for every person kept off the transport convoy, another human had to take his place.

Frankl notes that generally, the prisoners able to survive were the ones who were willing to do anything, no matter how savage, to hold onto life. The cruelest prisoners were chosen to be Capos, or prisoners appointed to be guards. Brutality was so necessary in the camps that Frankl says everyone who survived a camp knows that “the best of us did not return.”

Frankl then sets out two goals for his book: to explain to camp survivors what happened to them psychologically, and to explain to others the psychological difficulties of returning to life after surviving the camps. Frankl questions whether he achieved the detachment necessary to conduct accurate observations of camp prisoners while he was a prisoner himself, but tells the reader that in this situation, someone truly detached could never fully understand what was going on.

Frankl continues by noting that while he originally intended to write his book anonymously, he realized that an anonymous book would seem cowardly, so he decided to publish the book under his name. He dislikes revealing intimate details of his life to the general public, but feels it is necessary for him to do so. Frankl clarifies that he only served as a true doctor at the camps for a few weeks. For most of his time there, he was a common prisoner and was made to lay railroad tracks and perform manual labor.

According to Frankl, the prisoners who were ultimately liberated passed through three phases during their time in the camps: the arrival at camp, the absorption into camp routine, and the release from camp. The first of these phases is associated with shock.

Frankl gives a personal example of the shock that he felt by telling the reader about his own arrival at the concentration camp. He and fifteen hundred other people rode for many days in extremely cramped train cars. When they neared a sign for Auschwitz, they panicked, because the camp was already known for torture and executions. But the next day, having noticed that the prisoners welcoming them seemed to be in good shape and healthy, the new arrivals all felt a sense of relief.

Frankl attributes this relief to a phenomenon known as “delusion of reprieve.” A man sentenced to die, for example, becomes convinced that he might be set free just before his execution. Unfortunately for the newly arrived prisoners, their welcoming squad turned out to be a carefully selected group who were in much better health than the common prisoner. But as they were stripped of their clothing and belongings, Frankl and his travel mates remained convinced that their situation was not doomed.

Each of the new prisoners was made to pass in front of a guard who sorted the prisoner to the right or the left. At the time, they did not know what was going on, but they would later learn that everyone sent to the left—about 95% of them—were immediately executed in a crematorium. The SS guards tricked these prisoners by giving them each a bar of soap, walking them to a building labeled “bath,” and then gassing them to death.

Those sent to the right, including Frankl, then had their possessions looted or destroyed by the guards. Frankl tried to save his scientific manuscript that he was carrying with him, but was forced to surrender it. This proved to be a psychological turning point in his life.

After giving up their belongings, the prisoners were then shaved from head to toe. Frankl notes that at this point, all they owned was their own “naked existence.” And yet, he and the other prisoners tried to make light of the situation, and Frankl found himself to be incredibly curious about what awaited him. This curiosity characterized the prisoners’ first few days in camp. They were constantly curious about what would happen if they went without sleep or stood for hours in the cold, and constantly surprised that they were able to do so many things they once believed to be impossible. Frankl writes that there is much truth in Dostoyevsky’s definition of a human as a being able to grow accustomed to anything.

As the reality of their situation set in, Frankl and his prison mates all considered committing suicide, even if only for a short time. This was done by running into the electrical wire surrounding the camp, but Frankl promised himself that he would never commit such an act. He decided that since his chances of surviving were so low that there wasn’t much point in killing himself. Frankl observes that the newly arrived prisoner is so shocked that he does not fear death.

Later in life, Frankl’s friends told him that they were shocked when he was able to smile on his first full day in camp. He tells the reader that his smile was due to a visit from an old friend, and now fellow camper. This friend gave Frankl and his prison mates important advice about how to keep from being sent to the crematorium: always shave and never walk with a limp. Essentially, he told them to avoid looking like a “Moslem”—someone who is sick and can no longer do manual labor. If they maintained their appearance, they wouldn’t be gassed. The friend then joked to the other inmates that Frankl was the only one with anything to worry about—a joke that made Frankl smile.

Frankl says that psychologists consider an unusual reaction to be normal in an unusual situation. As a result, while the concentration camp prisoner’s state of mind was far from normal in the context of everyday life, under the circumstances it could be considered normal, or even typical. After the initial shock of arriving at camp, prisoners passed into a new mental state of indifference and “emotional death.”

Frankl notes that in addition to shock, the new prisoner also felt extreme grief over the loss of their family and freedom and horror at the cruelty of the camps. Initially, prisoners looked away when their fellow inmates were beaten, or recoiled when excrement was splashed in their faces. Prisoners in the second stage, however, no longer displayed any sort of emotional reaction to these events. Instead, they became completely numb to feeling “disgust, horror, and pity.”

Frankl himself became numb to the horrible situation around him. When he was working as a doctor for inmates with typhoid at the end of his time in the camps, he was completely unfazed by the dead bodies that surrounded him, and felt nothing even at the sound of a corpse’s head bumping down the stairs as a “nurse” dragged it to another part of camp. The man had died only two hours before. Frankl says he only remembers the event because he was shocked at his own emotional detachment—not because of the actual horror of the situation.

Frankl’s prison mates grew to be so apathetic that they did not even react to the guards’ frequent beatings. Frankl recalls that in his own experience, he was often hurt more by the injustice of the beatings than the physical pain they caused. While he did not react to many of the guard’s blows and taunts, from time to time they treated him so inhumanely that he could not stop himself from reacting. For example, after a guard called him a “pig” and accused him of never having done work, Frankl could not resist telling him that he had spent most of his life as a doctor for impoverished patients. He was severely punished for this comment.

Frankl was lucky to be in the unit of a slightly less brutal Capo. The Capo liked Frankl because he gave him advice on his marriage problems, and in return, the Capo helped Frankl avoid doing some of the worst and hardest labor. The Capo also held Frankl a spot at the front of the line to walk to the worksite, which saved Frankl a great deal of pain. Since all of the prisoners suffered from edema (swelling in their tissues), walking was difficult, and inmates frequently fell down on the way to work. Those standing behind a fallen man would then need to run to catch up to the rest of the line once the man was back on his feet. Running was extremely painful, but in the front of the line, Frankl never had to do it. He credits this Capo with saving his life.

Frankl observes that to a certain degree, the prisoners needed to become apathetic to their situation, as this apathy helped them stay alive. But by pushing away all of their emotions, the prisoners also “regressed” to a more “primitive” state, in which they constantly dreamed of good food and warm baths. Frankl wonders if this dreaming was good for them, since every morning they would wake up and have to again face reality. Frankl once heard a fellow inmate having a terrible nightmare and went to wake him up. Just before he touched the man, however, he decided to let him sleep, because he was sure any nightmare was better than the reality in which they lived.

While other inmates spoke frequently of the food they wished to eat, Frankl felt that detailed descriptions of delicious food were harmful to the prisoners’ spirits. Everyone in the camps was extremely malnourished—they lived on nothing but a piece of bread, thin soup, and maybe a small bit of cheese or butter each day. It was easy to calculate how long a prisoner would survive by how much fat remained on their bones. Frankl argues that the prisoners wanted good food so badly not because they cared deeply about eating good food, but because the second they had food, they would be able to stop thinking about it and dreaming off it.

Frankl tells the reader that anyone who has not starved him- or herself cannot possibly understand the mental agony brought on by intense hunger. The prisoners spent much time debating whether it was best to eat their rations all at once and feel fine for a little while, or try to stretch them out for as long as possible but be hungry all day. The worst part of each day, Frankl says, was waking up and facing everything that lay ahead of them. He found that saving a small piece of bread from the night before to have in the morning brought him some comfort.

Frankl notes that the intense hunger from which everyone suffered likely accounted for the lack of sexual urges among the men. In fact, the prisoners rarely even dreamed about sex or women. Because staying alive was so difficult, the prisoners were no longer able to appreciate anything that did not serve that purpose. For example, when Frankl was being transferred from Auschwitz to a camp affiliated with Dachau, the train passed the street on which he grew up. He begged the inmates standing near the window of his train car to let him look out as they passed, but they refused to help him.

Frankl also notes that there was what he calls a “cultural hibernation” at camp. The only cultural topics that were discussed were religion and politics. While the political talk was mostly based on rumors, the religious beliefs of many of the prisoners were genuine and intense. People often prayed in the corners of cells and train carts.

A typhoid outbreak struck the camp in the winter and spring of 1945, and many succumbed to delirium brought on by the disease. Frankl’s close friend deliriously imagined that he was on the brink of death, and he badly wanted to pray, but he was so sick that he was unable to think of the words to do so. Frankl tried to keep his own mind busy and active by trying to rewrite his manuscript on scraps of paper.

The religious fervor of some prisoners was so intense that Frankl was once invited to attend a séance. During the séance, a man was given a pencil but agreed he would not use it to write anything. Nevertheless, he ended up writing “VAE V.” Since this man did not know Latin and had never heard the phrase vae victis, or “woe to the vanquished,” the attendees felt that a spirit must have moved him to write these letters, which they chose to interpret as a sign that the end of the war was near.

According to Frankl, those accustomed to a life of the mind before coming to camp fared poorly physically, as they were accustomed to reading and writing all day, but they often fared better spiritually and emotionally. Frankl suggests that prisoners who used to be professors or rabbis were better able to retreat into their own imaginary world, and thus were able to tolerate the camps more easily.

One day, while walking to a worksite, another inmate said to Frankl that he wished his wife could see him working so hard, and he hoped that she was doing better than he was. At that moment, Frankl was overcome by a vision of his own wife looking more beautiful than ever, and he writes that he realized then “that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire.” He says that he finally understood the secret lesson of poetry and art: “The salvation of man is through love and in love.”

Frankl discovered that he could still experience bliss, even in the worst possible situation. While he did not even know if his wife was still alive, he felt he could converse with her, and he learned that “love goes very far beyond the physical person of the beloved.” He loved his wife’s inner spirit so much that it ultimately did not matter if she was still alive. He tells the reader that had he known she was dead, her image would have inspired him just as much, and he quotes a Bible verse that reads, “Set me as a seal upon thy heart… love is as strong as death.”

Frankl writes that memories of the past offered a refuge for the prisoners, and they often escaped into their own minds and memories of their previous lives. He notes that the stronger the prisoner’s “inner life” became, the more beautiful art and nature seemed. These men came to appreciate the beauty of the sunsets they saw on their deadly marches to work each morning. For Frankl, this beauty was evidence that life has “an ultimate purpose.”

While there was little art in the camps, there was an occasional performance. Many prisoners attended these shows with the hope of laughing a little, despite the fact that they had to miss their meal to do so. Frankl says that these performances only came close to being true art in the contrast they provided to the inmates’ terrible realities. Once, when Frankl heard a beautiful piece of music, he wept not for the music’s beauty, but for his wife, who turned twenty-four that day.

Frankl imagines that the reader must be surprised to hear that there was any art at all in the concentration camps, but he assures the reader it was possible to find comedy as well. Frankl sees humor as a tool for self-preservation because it enables people to “rise above any situation.” He and a surgeon friend filled their time by imagining what it would be like if the friend returned to his practice and brought some of the habits from camp with him.

Frankl says that trying to see the humor in things is a necessary part of “the art of living.” He argues to the reader that it was possible to practice this art in a concentration camp, despite the suffering the practitioner was surrounded by. While most people will never experience pain like the prisoners in concentration camps did, Frankl believes that pain is like a gas. A gas will completely fill any room, no matter how big the room is, just as pain completely takes over a human, no matter how big or small his or her injury might be.

While a small amount of pain can consume a person, a trivial thing can also spark true joy in someone, even in a terrible situation. For example, when Frankl was taken from Auschwitz to the camp affiliated with Dauchau, he and his inmates became increasingly worried they were being taken to Mauthausen, a camp with a reputation for being particularly brutal. When the train passed Mauthausen, they danced with joy and were relieved to arrive at the Dauchau camp.

Frankl and the other inmates were further relieved—even elated—when they learned that this camp did not have a gas chamber, so Moslems were not taken straight there, and instead waited for a sick transport. Despite being made to stand outside, soaking wet and freezing, for the entire night, they were thrilled to be out of Auschwitz. The prisoners envied those assigned to good jobs—jobs that were still so horrible, they never would have dreamed of doing them before coming to a camp—and considered themselves lucky that they were not in a worse camp.

Frankl describes the relief that even the most trivial things brought as “negative happiness.” While the prisoners were not truly happy, they were happy that something worse was not happening. Frankl once made a list of the truly happy moments he experienced at camp and discovered there had only been two. One such moment was when he received soup from a prisoner-cook who distributed the potatoes and peas in the soup fairly among the prisoners instead of saving it for his friends. Frankl writes that he did not judge the other cooks who were not impartial, because he might have done the same thing in their position.

Frankl recalls seeing a photograph many years later of concentration camp prisoners staring up at the photographer from their bunks. The person who showed the picture to him was horrified by it, but Frankl could not understand her reaction. Instead of provoking horror, the picture made him think of one of the better times in camp during which he was sick and thus was relieved from a few days of work in the cold. He explained his reaction to the person with the picture, who then understood that the people in the photo might not have been nearly as unhappy as she believed them to be.

Frankl says that when he was asked to volunteer as a doctor in the sick unit, his friends strongly warned him against doing so because the position would increase his exposure to disease. But Frankl was certain he would die if he continued to do hard labor in the cold, so he decided he would rather in the sick tent where he could do meaningful work.

Frankl writes that it was easy for the prisoners to lose their sense of self and value as an individual while in the camp. They were often herded around like sheep and made to feel as inhuman and insignificant as possible. Frankl observes that prisoners desperately wanted a moment of solitude or privacy, which Frankl was able to find only once he was taken to a “rest camp.” Every so often, he was able to duck into a small tent for a few moments and be alone with his thoughts. This was a peaceful moment for Frankl, despite the fact that the tent in which he was “alone” was filled with insect-ridden corpses.

Frankl explains that those who did not experience the camps cannot understand how little human life was valued there. Sick people were literally thrown onto carts and dragged through snowstorms to new camps, and all of the inmates were treated as nothing more than numbers. The prisoners felt as though they had no control over their lives and were nothing more than “the playthings of fate.”

Frankl tells the reader about his nerve-racking transport to the rest camp, where he was sent to attend to the sick. Many in the camp thought that the convoy was actually going to take the sick patients straight to a gas chamber, or to a new worksite to get a few more day’s labor out of them. A guard offered to have Frankl’s name removed from the list, but Frankl insisted on following fate’s course. Before leaving, he made his friend Otto memorize his will: first, to tell his wife he talked about her everyday; second, to tell her that he loved her; and third, to tell her that even though their marriage was short, it was far more significant for him than the time he spent in camps.

Frankl and the patients were taken to a true rest camp, and a few months later, they learned that their previous camp had suffered a famine and that some prisoners had turned to cannibalism. Frankl compares this situation with the story of “Death in Tehran,” in which a servant tells his wealthy Persian master that he has just run into Death. The master gives the servant a horse so that he can flee from Death and ride to Tehran. The master himself then meets Death and asks him why he scared his servant. Death replies, “I did not threaten him; I only showed surprise in still finding him here when I planned to meet him tonight in Tehran.”

While Frankl often let fate guide his actions, he also considered taking control of his situation and trying to escape from camp. Often, the opportunity for escape presented itself for only a few moments, so Frankl and his fellow inmates had to make this important decision very quickly. When Frankl’s opportunity appeared, he hurried to collect some provisions and gather his manuscript scraps before fleeing. He made the rounds with his patients for a final time, but in doing so, he encountered a fellow Austrian who had lost all hope. Frankl was then overcome with unhappiness, and Frankl told his friend with whom he was planning to flee that he needed to stay in the camp. This decision brought Frankl more peace than he had ever experienced before.

On what would turn out to be Frankl’s last night in camp, he again had the opportunity to escape. The moment he was getting ready to leave, however, a Red Cross truck broke through the camp gates. Frankl felt safe, so he remained in camp, but later that night, an SS guard brought an order to take some inmates to Switzerland to be exchanged for prisoners of war. The guards were friendly, and Frankl and his friend were annoyed to be left out of the trip. The next morning, a white flag was hung over the camp. Frankl learned later that everyone who went with the friendly SS guards was taken to a new camp and burned to death. Once again, Frankl remembered Death in Tehran.

Frankl writes that while apathy amongst the prisoners was a defense mechanism, it had other causes as well. A lack of sleep and food contributed to this apathy, as did an “inferiority complex” from which most of the prisoners suffered. While the prisoners had felt important in their previous lives, they were now nothing more than a number. Frankl notes, however, that prisoners who were promoted to being cooks or Capos did not feel degraded—instead, they felt fortunate and important. There was a great deal of tension between these two groups.

While serving as a doctor, Frankl was in charge of making sure that the sick hut passed an inspection for cleanliness. The cleanliness required, however, was not so much the type of cleanliness that would have actually benefitted the patients, but the type that required endless amounts of straightening and rearranging to make everything look tidy. Frankl felt that this inspection was a form of torture, as it certainly was not designed to improve the patients’ wellbeing. Often, patients in the hut were so apathetic about their life and surroundings that Frankl had to scream at them to keep their areas neat.

Frankl tells the reader that his description of the mental state of concentration camp inmates may have led the reader to believe that that human beings are completely determined by their surroundings. He asks a number of rhetorical questions about whether humans have free will, and then tells the reader that man does have control over his own life. Even in the most horrible circumstances possible, man can exercise a small amount of freedom. The one thing that cannot be taken away from a man is his ability to choose how he reacts to any given situation.

Frankl writes that in the camps, every moment offered the chance to choose whether or not one would follow the path of the normal inmate and become apathetic. Frankl argues that while the prisoner’s circumstances certainly affected his character, who he was and how he behaved was ultimately the product of “an inner decision.” Frankl says than in every possible situation, man has the power to control his mental and spiritual fate.

While in the camps, Frankl thought frequently of a Dostoyevsky quote that reads, “There is only one thing I dread: not to be worthy of my suffering.” Frankl became determined to make his suffering worthwhile by seeing it as an opportunity to exercise his last remaining freedom. When viewed this way, suffering became an “achievement” instead of something forced upon him. Frankl writes that it is this freedom that makes our lives valuable and meaningful.

According to Frankl, there is meaning in creating and appreciating the creations of others, but meaning can also exist in a place devoid of beautiful creations. He writes, “If there is meaning in life, there must be meaning in suffering.” To Frankl, suffering is an important—even fundamental—part of the human experience. Each time man chooses how to bear his suffering, he makes his life more meaningful. A man’s reaction to suffering determines whether he is worthy of his suffering or not.

Frankl tells the reader that because everyone suffers, everyone has the opportunity to make a meaningful life. His philosophy applies to people in everyday situations as much as it does to prisoners in concentration camps. He says, for example, that those with terminal illnesses have a similar opportunity to choose how they will respond to their own death.

When Frankl was still in a concentration camp, he encountered a woman who knew she was going to die in a matter of days. She told Frankl she was grateful for what had happened to her because in her life before the camp, she did not value spiritual growth. The woman pointed to the tree outside her window and told Frankl that this was her only friend in the world. She spoke to it often, and the tree responded to her, “I am here—I am here—I am here—I am life, eternal life.”

Frankl explains that in psychological terms, life in the camps could be referred to as a “provisional existence of unknown limit.” This meant that the prisoners had no idea how long they needed to survive or when the war would be over, and thus it was difficult for them to hold on to hope. Further, because there was no end in sight, it was extremely difficult for the inmates to set goals for themselves.

Those who were not able to hold on to a dream for the future often occupied their time with nostalgic thoughts of the past. In some cases, as discussed previously, thinking about the past helped the inmates escape from their horrible present lives. Frankl argues, however, that those who spent too much time dwelling in the past lost sight of the present, and thus missed opportunities to exercise their freedom to choose a meaningful life. In believing that the best things in life were behind them, these men missed the chance to better their mental and spiritual selves.

Frankl tells the reader that any attempt to counteract the effects of the camps had to revolve around giving the inmates a sense of the future. He remembers being at camp and feeling fed up with thinking about things as trivial as how he was going to tie his shoes, when suddenly he felt as if here transported into a lecture room with a large audience. Frankl then realized that all of his experiences could benefit science, and that he wanted to deliver lectures on psychology within concentration camps. Once he had this goal, he could more easily cope with his situation.

Frankl tells the story of a fellow inmate who dreamed that he was granted one wish, and he wished to know when he would be free. The voice in his dream told him that his suffering would end on March 30, 1945. When the camp did not seem like it was going to be liberated on March 29, the man fell ill, and then died the next day. While death ultimately fulfilled his dream and brought his suffering to an end, Frankl suspects that his crushed hopes brought about his death. The man no longer felt he could hope for the future. Frankl notes that the death rates in the camps between Christmas and New Years were higher than at any other time of year, likely because people hoped to be home for the holidays and gave up when they realized they would not be.

Frankl quotes Nietzsche to the reader to explain the prisoners’ situation: “He who has a why to live for can bear almost any how.” Frankl came to understand that he needed to stop expecting something better from life, and instead ask himself “what life expected from us.” In other words, he believed that he owed it to life—to the fact that he had born and was still on the Earth—to make himself the best person possible. He writes that the ultimate meaning of life can be found by taking responsibility for one’s actions and making use of opportunities to better oneself.

According to Frankl, every person has a unique destiny, and it is impossible to compare one person’s destiny with another’s. Further, each situation in which an individual finds himself is unique and calls for a new and different response. In some cases, man must act, while in others, he must contemplate his life or accept his fate and suffering. Frankl is certain that in every situation, there is “only one right answer” to any given problem.

The unique task of the prisoners was to accept their suffering. Those who were able to see that their task was to suffer could then embrace this task—instead of distracting themselves from their suffering, they turned to face it bravely. Twice, Frankl was able to talk men out of committing suicide by helping them find something external for which to suffer. In one case, this external reason was the man’s daughter, while in the other, it was his unfinished series of scientific publications. Both men felt important and valuable when they realized that only they could accomplish these tasks. Frankl writes that love can help one bear suffering because when one is in love, one is responsible to someone other than oneself.

At one point, the senior warden, a promoted prisoner, asked Frankl to give his fellow inmates some therapy and advice. He told the prisoners that theirs was not the worst possible situation, and that most of them had not suffered too many truly irreplaceable losses. He said that since everyone there had survived so much, they absolutely had reason to hope for the future. Frankl’s fortune changed so many times in camp that he told them they could not predict what might lay just an hour or day ahead of them. Thus, they needed to maintain hope and live for that moment.

Finally, he told the prisoners that “the hopelessness of our struggle did not detract from its dignity and meaning.” Frankl knew many of them would die before they were liberated, but he also believed that those deaths would be meaningful. He told the prisoners that someone in the world, whether it be God or their wife or children, hoped that they were “suffering proudly” instead of giving in to apathy. He encouraged them to see their deaths as sacrifices in which they could find value.

Frankl writes that before analyzing the third and final stage through which the liberated prisoner must pass, he wants to talk briefly about the psychology of the guards and how they were able to be so cruel. He says that some guards were true sadists, and he does not try to explain their behavior. But for many of the guards, their sensitivity to cruelty had been dulled by being exposed to it for such a long time. These men did not participate in sadistic acts themselves, like refusing an inmate the right to warm his hands just to see his disappointment, but they also did not do anything to stop these acts from happening.

Frankl also notes that some guards showed some sympathy for the prisoners. For example, after being liberated, Frankl learned that the commander of his camp had spent a great deal of his own money on getting medicine for his inmates. Frankl writes that there are “two races of men in this world, but only two—the ‘race’ of the decent man and the ‘race’ of the indecent man.” There is no “pure” group, and decent and indecent men could be found among the guards and among the prisoners.

Frankl then turns to discussing the final stage of the inmates’ mental development: life after the camps. He says that after hoping for freedom for such a long time, the word had lost its meaning for all of them, and they could not comprehend what was happening when they were being liberated. The prisoners passed a beautiful field on the way out of camp, but none felt anything. They had “literally lost the ability to feel pleased and had to relearn it slowly.”

The psychological term for what was happening to them is “depersonalization,” in which everything seems dreamlike and unreal. The prisoners had confused their dreams with reality so often in the camps that they now could not differentiate the two. While their bodies trusted their new situation—they ate for days on end—their minds had trouble accepting that their new lives were real.

A few days after liberation, Frankl walked through a field and looked up at the sky. He fell to his knees and thought, “I called to the Lord from my narrow prison and He answered me in the freedom of space.” This moment, Frankl says, marked the beginning of his slow journey towards becoming human again.

Frankl warns the reader not to think that once the prisoners accepted their new lives, they could smoothly transition back into them. Instead, he says that the newly liberated prisoner had the psychological equivalent of “the bends” (decompression sickness from coming up to the surface too quickly when diving). In other words, it could be dangerous to be relieved of so much emotional and physical pressure so quickly.

When some of the prisoners were freed, they used their horrible experiences as license to do anything they wanted, and they become oppressors themselves. For example, Frankl went on a walk with a friend who went out of his way to stomp on young crops simply because he could. Frankl asserts that “no one has the right to do wrong, not even if wrong has been done to them.” He did his best to help these men understand that they needed to break out of the cycle of oppression.

In addition to this violence, freed prisoners also typically felt bitterness and unhappiness with their new life. The bitterness came from the fact that when these men returned home, they often encountered people who felt that even though they had not been in concentrations camps, they had suffered a great deal during the war, too.

Frankl says that the liberated prisoners’ disillusionment came from the fact that they felt they had suffered as much as humanly possible, only to be freed and discover that there are no limits to human suffering. Often, the people these men had been determined to live for while in camp were not alive to greet them when they were freed. While none of them expected to be happy after all that they had experienced, they certainly did not expect to be unhappy after being freed. Frankl sees this disillusionment as a challenge that psychologists must help the former prisoners overcome.

The final transition out of the prisoner’s mindset is the moment when a man thinks back to his time in the camps and cannot understand how he was able to withstand the experience. Just as freedom was nothing but a dream for the inmates, imprisonment eventually comes to seem dreamlike, too. The best part of being freed for any prisoner, Frankl writes, is “the wonderful feeling that, after all he has suffered, there is nothing he need fear anymore—except his God.”