WHEN shrink-turned-war criminal Radovan Karadzic was captured in Belgrade in 2008 posing as a doctor of alternative medicine and looking like a cross between The Grateful Dead's Jerry Garcia and The Big Lebowski's Dude, the world learned an important lesson.
Genocidal maniacs will look not at all as you expect them to when they are finally run to ground after time on the lam.
Which brings us to American make-up artist Eddie Senz and a little post-D Day commission given to him by the Office of Strategic Services, forerunner of the CIA. "Could you," they asked, "imagine how Adolf Hitler might look if he tries to escape Germany disguised as James Joyce, DH Lawrence or Leon Trotsky?"
They didn't actually put it like that, and besides those men were all dead by 1944 so pretending to be them would have been dumb even for Hitler. But you get the drift. Senz was being asked to draw up photographic likenesses of the Nazi leader with as many combinations of facial hair and tonsorial stylings as was plausible in the mid-1940s. (This was before the advent of designer stubble and pony-tails for men.)
The pictures were to be distributed among US forces in Europe. But, of course, the mass murderer spoiled what would have been a terrific game of Catch The Fuhrer! by shooting himself in his bunker. That meant Eddie Senz's mock-ups remained under lock and key until last week when they were released by the US National Archive in Washington and the world was given a glimpse of what might have been.
A question, though: would the monster seem as terrible today had he been captured in Argentina in 1949 looking like Jerry Garcia from The Grateful Dead? Or would the 1960s have just seemed an awful lot weirder?
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article