I was hesitant in wanting to read this book because it is taking a real person who lived a tragic life and giving them a fantastical edit, and said person is not ancient history and there's a lot of sensitivity surrounding the Holocaust, but I think this novel was more than tastefully done. I read the Diary of Anne Frank, like most, as a child in middle school and always liked Peter, particularly through adolescent eyes, and so refreshing my memory of Anne's harrowing life, and even the movie that I most definitely watched in that very class, with context and a mature lens, now that I'm significantly older... It all hits in another tragic lighting, and particularly with the horrors of today and the shift in opinion--like, this is a small note of appalling fact in comparison to other travesties mentioned in this book--but yeah it is F**ked up that a Nazi actress portrayed Mrs. Frank. In this novel, Peter is coping with trauma and deep scars and I thought the portrayal of hi hiding his religion, his past, was poignant and made sense. The novel addressing things like the play/movie/trial was interesting. Less understandable was the decision to mirror Anne and her sister both liking Peter with having Peter date one girl then marry her sister.... Not sure we needed that mirror.

I have very much enjoyed the novels of Feldman's which I have read to date, but was a little disappointed by The Boy Who Loved Anne Frank. Whilst the idea behind it - that Peter, of diary fame, survives the Holocaust and emigrates to New York - was inventive and quite original, it was neither as absorbing nor as engaging as I was expecting it to be. It did not plunge into the emotional depths which I was expecting, and I did not feel as though Peter's voice was authentic enough. He was not a likeable character, certainly. There were rather a lot of flaws within the novel, and it did not strike the chord which I expected it to.

Not a bad book, necessarily, but I didn't care for it.

This is a very moving novel, affecting as a narrative about survival and the lasting effects of trauma, and as a portrait of immigration, identity, and the nuclear family in mid-century America. As the title indicates, it borrows some of its power to move from an association with Anne Frank's Diary, the most famous historical document of the Holocaust. It also promises a glimpse at something that many readers of the Diary yearn for - an additional perspective from another young person who shared Frank's fate. Peter's struggles with memory and his brushes with insanity make a compelling story. His feelings of guilt and shame are heartbreaking.

There is an irony, I think, in the use of Peter van Pels as a character in a drama that culminates in a critical examination of the uses to which Anne Frank's Diary (and especially its various adaptations) has been put. As Peter complains about grown men putting words in the mouth of a dead girl, the reader can't help but be aware that Ellen Feldman is by necessity putting those words into the mouth of a dead boy, to whom she has a ascribed a whole life that wasn't really his. She does so with compassion, and the sensitivity due to a victim of an unspeakable trauma, and is very clear in the afterward in establishing the historical fact of Peter's death at the hands of the Nazis. But this is a survivor's narrative, and Peter did not survive the Holocaust. Is it alright to imagine that he did, and then write it all down in a book? One wonders what either Peter, historical or fictional, would have had to say about it. But wondering is how we came upon the question in the first place.

Didn’t love this book due to the plot was all over the place. I do love the character of Peter and his wife and sister

One minute he couldn’t talk as he saw his wife read Anne frank, then he didn’t know what real or fake

Why did he lie to his wife for so long why didn’t he choose to lie to everyone around him? Especially to your partner you work with or a old flame

A beautifully crafted story. She tells an amazing tale on the simple premiss of a single "What If." What if Peter Van Pels had survived the Holocaust? I loved the story and how she intertwined excerpts from the diary into it using them as Peter's memories. It also shows us a lot about memory and how what we remember may not necessarily be the truth. Peter's journey is one I soon won't forget. He says at the beginning of the story that he has moved on and does not want to live in the past but what the author does with the story shows that in reality it takes him years to accept the past and what part it plays in his life. I reccommend this story very highly to anyone who loves literary fiction, historical fiction and World War 2. It is a must read for those who love The Diary of Anne Frank.

I did enjoy this book more than I thought I would but I still feel like I didn't really like have to read this book. "Anne Frank the Diary of a Young Girl" was a way better book. This book just kind of tells us Peter's life after he was with Anne and also how he reacts to the falsehoods and just the movies about Anne's diary and Anne's diary itself. To conclude, this book was meh.

This was an interesting and creative story. It is a bit of "alternate history." Peter van Pels, who was in hiding with Anne Frank and probably died in May of 1945, is alive and living in the United States. He denies that he is Jewish and reinvents himself. (In Anne's diary he DOES tell her that he would do this if he survived the war.) This Peter is successful and married and non-religious. When Otto Frank publishes the edited version of Anne's diary and it becomes a successful movie and Broadway play Peter has flashbacks and terrible survivor's guilt. It was a pretty implausible story overall but a decent read. I taught The Diary of Anne Frank to middle schoolers for a number of years so I knew the story quite well. It helps to have a working knowledge of the characters who were also in hiding with Anne.

Thoroughly enjoyed, it comes to a point where you think it is true, that Peter did survive. loved it!

This book was recommended to me so I decided to try it out. I think the title of the book is misleading, to start. There is no romance or anything close to that happening between Peter and Anne Frank. I do appreciate the research Feldman put into this. Much of the time while reading I was confused during the interaction between Peter & the doctor. I was confused while reading Peter's internal dialogue at times and didn't understand what was going on. If you are interested in reading about psychological trauma and WW2, you may enjoy this.

Well, I haven't read The Diary of Anne Frank in about 20+ years but I don't think it mattered. There are enough allusions to Diary that you feel caught up with what's going on, which is this in a nutshell: Peter has created a new life for himself in America becoming Christian (in words only), changing his backstory, not telling a soul, not even his wife who plainly adores him, what his life was like during the War. He absolutely, positively does not think about the past. Unfortunately, Peter has PTSD and survivors guilt and he struggles mightily when things cause repressed memories to occur. Especially when the Diary is published and it's not true to what actually happened in that attic apartment.

I would rate this book is 3.5 stars. I really did enjoy the book. It was well written, engaging and the author does an excellent job developing the characters in the story. I felt committed to Peter's story and his recovery from the atrocities he experienced during the Holocaust. My only critique would be that the book lacks the elements that qualifies it as a historical fiction book,in my opinion. Peter does in fact die three days prior to the day that the camp was liberated in May of 1945. His wife, his children, his in-laws, his business partner, and his story after the war has ended and are all in fact fictional. Each chapter opens with something about Anne Frank, a quote for example, but Anne Frank is not an integral part of this story. The only historical connection is the mention of the actual "Diary of Anne Frank", the play, the movie and the lawsuit that came after.