Volume 12, Tome I: Kierkegaard's Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art: The Germanophone World (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources) [1 ed.] 9781409456117, 1409456110

Citation preview

KierKegaard’s influence on literature, criticism and art tome i: tHe germanoPHone World

Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources Volume 12, Tome I

Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources is a publication of the søren Kierkegaard research centre

General Editor Jon steWart Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Editorial Board finn gredal Jensen Katalin nun Peter ŠaJda Advisory Board lee c. barrett maría J. binetti istvÁn czaKÓ HeiKo scHulz curtis l. tHomPson

Kierkegaard’s Influence on literature, criticism and art tome i: the germanophone World

Edited by Jon steWart

First published 2013 by Ashgate Publishing Published 2016 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business Copyright © Jon stewart and the contributors 2013 Jon stewart has asserted his right under the copyright, designs and Patents act, 1988, to be identified as the editor of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data stewart, Jon (Jon bartley) Kierkegaard’s influence on literature, criticism and art. tome i. – (Kierkegaard research ; v. 12) 1. Kierkegaard, Søren, 1813–1855 – Influence. 2. Philosophy, german – 19th century. 3. art and philosophy. 4. literature – Philosophy. 5. criticism (Philosophy) i. title ii. series 198.9–dc23 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Kierkegaard’s influence on literature, criticism, and art / edited by Jon Stewart. p. cm.—(Kierkegaard research ; v. 12, t. 1) includes index. ISBN 978-1-4094-5611-7 (hardcover) 1. Kierkegaard, Søren, 1813–1855—Influence. 2. Kierkegaard, søren, 1813–1855—literary art. 3. criticism. i. stewart, Jon (Jon bartley) b4377.K5124 2012 198’.9—dc23 2012026885 isbn 9781409456117 (hbk) cover design by Katalin nun

contents List of Contributors Preface Acknowledgements List of Abbreviations alfred andersch: reading søren Kierkegaard as flight to freedom Alina Vaisfeld

vii ix xv xvii

1

thomas bernhard: a grotesque sickness unto death Stefan Egenberger

15

Hermann broch: “nennen’s mir an bessern” Steen Tullberg

31

friedrich dürrenmatt: a swiss author reading and using Kierkegaard Pierre Bühler

43

theodor fontane: a Probable Pioneer in german Kierkegaard reception Julie K. Allen

61

max frisch: literary transformations of identity Sophie Wennerscheid

79

theodor Haecker: the mobilization of a total author Markus Kleinert

91

franz Kafka: reading Kierkegaard Nicolae Irina

115

vi

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

rudolf Kassner: a Physiognomical appropriation Steen Tullberg

141

Karl Kraus: “the miracle of unison”—criticism of the Press and experiences of isolation Joachim Grage

157

thomas mann: demons and daemons Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

171

robert musil: Kierkegaardian themes in The Man Without Qualities David D. Possen

195

rainer maria rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living Leonardo F. Lisi

213

martin Walser: the (un-)certainty of reading Sophie Wennerscheid

237

Index of Persons Index of Subjects

249 257

list of contributors Julie K. Allen, university of Wisconsin-madison, department of scandinavian studies, 1302 van Hise Hall, 1220 linden drive, madison, Wi 53706, usa. Ingrid Basso, c/o Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre, Farvergade 27 D, 1463 copenhagen K, denmark. Pierre Bühler, institut für Hermeneutik und religionsphilosophie, universität zürich, Kirchgasse 9, cH-8001 zürich, switzerland. Stefan Egenberger, stadtkirche glückstadt, rheinhörn 3, d-25348 glückstadt, germany. Joachim Grage, albert-ludwigs-universität freiburg, skandinavisches seminar, Platz der universität 3, d-79085 freiburg, germany. Nicolae Irina, York university, department of Philosophy, s428 ross building, 4700 Keele st., toronto, on, m3J 1P3, canada. Markus Kleinert, max-Weber-Kolleg für kultur- und sozialwissenschaftliche studien, universität erfurt, am Hügel 1, d-99084 erfurt, germany. Leonardo F. Lisi, the Humanities center, Johns Hopkins university, gilman Hall 216, 3400 n. charles st., baltimore, md 21218, usa. David D. Possen, Whitney Humanities center, Yale university, 53 Wall st., P.o. box 208298, new Haven, ct 06520–8298, usa. Elisabete M. de Sousa, Centro de Filosofia da Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de letras, alameda da universidade, 1600–214 lisbon, Portugal. Steen Tullberg, søren Kierkegaard research centre, farvergade 27 d, 1463 copenhagen K, denmark. Alina Vaisfeld, the new school for social research, department of Philosophy, 79 fifth avenue, new York, nY 10003, usa. Sophie Wennerscheid, institut für nordische Philologie, Westfälische Wilhelmsuniversität münster, robert-Koch-straße 29, d-48149 münster, germany.

Preface While Kierkegaard is primarily known as a philosopher or religious thinker, his works have also been used extensively by literary writers, critics, and artists. this use can be traced in the writings and art of major cultural figures not just in Denmark and scandinavia but also in the wider world. there are a number of reasons why his works have attracted the interest of writers and artists. the richness and special form of Kierkegaard’s writing has clearly played an important role in the development of his popularity in this large branch of the history of reception. His works represent something that defies simple explanations or traditional categories. They are not always easy to define with respect to genre, and this has been the cause of some of the controversy between, for example, theologians and philosophers about who are his rightful heirs. While works such as The Concept of Irony or the Concluding Unscientific Postscript have the look of something vaguely resembling an academic treatise in philosophy, and books such as Practice in Christianity and Christian Discourses seem straightforwardly theological, other works such as Either/Or, Repetition, Prefaces, or Stages on Life’s Way are much more difficult to pin down. Some scholars have referred to some of these works as Kierkegaard’s “novels.”1 but all of these categories break down to some degree when the works are subject to closer inspection. any attempt to characterize Kierkegaard’s writings with traditional genre designations must be accompanied with some careful qualifications and caveats. later literary writers and thinkers have been attracted to Kierkegaard’s corpus not just due to his creative mixing of genres but also due to his complex use of pseudonyms, by means of which he is able to distance himself from what he writes. He gives voices to a series of different pseudonymous authors and then brings them into dialogue by having one critically discuss the work of another. this feature of his writing has been seized upon by scholars of literary theory who see in Kierkegaard a forerunner of the postmodern dogmas of the death of the author or the constant deferral of meaning.2 according to this view, Kierkegaard is consciously rebelling against traditional forms of philosophical and theological writing, which demand a clearly defined thesis and clearly developed arguments to support it. But by writing under pseudonyms who all have their own voices but yet are very different from one another, Kierkegaard is implicitly saying that we need to abandon the idea of any 1 see aage Henriksen, Søren Kierkegaards Romaner, copenhagen: gyldendal 1954. see also f.J. billeskov Jansen, Studier i Søren Kierkegaards litterære Kunst, copenhagen: rosenkilde & bagger 1951. 2 see, for example, roger Poole’s well-known Kierkegaard: The Indirect Communication, charlottesville and london: university Press of virginia 1993.

x

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

final discursive truth or meaning. These are, it is claimed, simply outdated prejudices of the past, and this is what Kierkegaard is making his readers attentive to. He urges us to give up the idea of authorial authority and to enjoy the plurality of perspectives afforded by the different pseudonyms. according to this interpretation, it is absurd and misguided to ask what Kierkegaard himself really thought, since this was exactly the kind of thing that his authorship was designed to undermine. but this use of pseudonyms is only a single aspect of his writing. it would be a mistake to think that his idea of the pseudonymous authorship is something as straightforward as saying that each pseudonymous author represents a single discrete and identifiable position. Instead, he frequently makes use of different voices and figures in his works to create different kinds of dialogues and explore different positions. He creates intricate stories embedding one pseudonym within the work of another. Kierkegaard regarded socrates as a kind of model, and he saw the didactical advantages of the dialogue form. thus, it has been pointed out that many of his texts contain hidden dialogues, where he simply allows different views and perspectives to come forth and enter into discussion.3 Kierkegaard was also very much interested in literary criticism. He read closely the german literary critics and aesthetic writers such as lessing (1729–81), Hamann (1730–88), solger (1780–1819), and Hotho (1802–73). He closely followed the literary debates of the age, especially in denmark, and a large part of his critical encounter with Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791–1860) concerned precisely this field. He himself wrote works of criticism such as From the Papers of One Still Living and A Literary Review of Two Ages, both book reviews of contemporary danish authors. moreover, the second part of The Concept of Irony contains elements of literary criticism with respect to the works of the german romantic writers. in works like Prefaces he demonstrates an acute awareness of the literary scene in copenhagen with the institution of reviewing books. some scholars have also been interested in Kierkegaard’s rhetoric and literary style, his use of rich images, parables, and allegories. one of Kierkegaard’s many uses for his journals and notebooks was to jot down key turns of phrase, pregnant dramatic scenes or idiosyncratic figures and characters that he had read in the works of other writers or had hit upon himself. in this way he could go back to them and incorporate them into his own works as needed. as a result, his texts are full of allusions and references to a manifold of different authors; indeed, his use of these other authors is in some cases so extensive that it is very difficult if not impossible to understand his texts without the use of detailed commentaries. Kierkegaard was an avid reader, and he enjoyed different kinds of literary works. as is well known, he was a regular visitor to the royal theater, but he also liked to read dramatic works and took great pleasure in dramatists such as shakespeare (1564–1616), molière (1622–73) goethe (1749–1832), sheridan (1751–1816), schiller (1759–1805), and scribe (1791–1861) as well as his danish favorites Holberg (1684–1754), Wessel (1742–84), oehlenschläger (1779–1850), and Heiberg. Dramatic figures such as Erasmus Montanus, Jeppe of the Hill, 3 see Helle møller Jensen’s article, “freeze! Hold it right there,” Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2000, pp. 223–39.

Preface

xi

desdemona, and Hamlet appear constantly in his writings. Kierkegaard also enjoyed works of prose fiction by authors such as Cervantes (1547–1616), Thomasine gyllembourg (1773–1856), steen steensen blicher (1782–1848), carsten Hauch (1790–1872), and Hans christian andersen (1805–75). in his works he often draws on figures that appear in the prose genre such as Don Quixote, Till Eulenspiegel, and gulliver. Kierkegaard also read lyric poetry including the works of byron (1788–1824), shelley (1792–1822), and the danes, ewald (1743–81), baggesen (1764–1826), and christian Winther (1797–1813). in addition to danish literature, he was a great lover of german letters as represented by writers such as Jean Paul (1763–1825), friedrich von schlegel (1772–1829), tieck (1773–1853), achim von arnim (1781–1831), eichendorff (1788–1857), schiller, and goethe. He found in the works of these writers many elements that he adopted and transformed in his own writing. it can be argued that a part of what constitutes Kierkegaard’s unique genius is his ability to draw from so many diverse sources and transform them in different ways for use in his own context. given this, it is little wonder that Kierkegaard’s rich corpus has inspired and fascinated many subsequent writers, poets, and artists, even those who have only a fleeting interest in his religious views. The goal of the present volume is to document this influence in the different language groups and traditions. The first tome explores Kierkegaard’s influence on literature and art in the germanophone world. Just as with the theological and the philosophical reception of Kierkegaard, the literary reception has been especially strong in the germanspeaking countries. Kierkegaard was an important influence on the German writers such as theodor fontane (1819–98), thomas mann (1875–1955), rainer maria rilke (1875–1926), alfred andersch (1914–80), and martin Walser (b. 1927). the german writer theodor Haecker (1879–1945), through his many translations, did much to disseminate Kierkegaard’s thought in the germanphone world. Kierkegaard’s influence was particularly strong in Austria during the generation of modernist authors such as rudolf Kassner (1873–1959), Karl Kraus (1874–1936), robert musil (1880–1942), and Hermann broch (1886–1951). due presumably in part to the german translations of Kierkegaard in the austrian cultural journal Der Brenner, Kierkegaard continued to be used by later figures such as the novelist and playwright,thomas bernhard (1931–89). His thought was also appropriated in switzerland through the works of the novelists and dramatists max frisch (1911–91) and friedrich dürrenmatt (1921–90). the famous czech-born author franz Kafka (1883–1924) identified personally with Kierkegaard’s sad love story with Regine Olsen and made use of his reflections on this and other topics. the second tome is dedicated to the use of Kierkegaard by later danish writers. almost from the beginning Kierkegaard’s works were standard reading for these authors. danish novelists and critics from the modern breakthrough movement in the 1870s were among the first to make extensive use of his writings. These included the theoretical leader of the movement, the critic georg brandes (1842–1927), who wrote an entire book on Kierkegaard, and the novelists Jens Peter Jacobsen (1847–85) and Henrik Pontoppidan (1857–1943). the next generation of writers from the turn of the century and up to World War i also saw in Kierkegaard important points of inspiration. these included ernesto dalgas (1871–99) and Harald Kidde

xii

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

(1878–1918), who used elements of Kierkegaard’s thought in their novels. modern danish writers such as Karen blixen (1885–1962), martin a. Hansen (1909–55), and villy sørensen (1929–2001) continued to incorporate Kierkegaard into their works. thus, there can be no doubt that Kierkegaard, even if he never had a philosophical or theological reception, has indelibly stamped his name on danish literature. the third tome investigates the works of swedish and norwegian writers and artists who have been inspired by Kierkegaard. due to the closeness of the swedish and norwegian languages to danish, these authors had more or less the same access to Kierkegaard’s texts as their danish contemporaries and thus their reception was not reliant on translations or secondhand appropriations of others. this is an important fact in understanding why the swedish and norwegian reception of Kierkegaard took place earlier than even the germanophone reception. in sweden the novelist victoria benedictsson (1850–88) made use of Kierkegaard during the period of the modern breakthrough in denmark. similarly, the great swedish playwright august strindberg (1849–1912) found inspiration in Kierkegaard. later swedish writers right up to our own day have continued to draw on Kierkegaard as a source of inspiration. This includes figures such as Selma Lagerlöf (1858–1940), lars ahlin (1915–96), lars gyllensten (1921–2006), and carl-Henning Wijkmark (b. 1934). the norwegian reception of Kierkegaard also began remarkably early and was shaped by the leading names in norwegian cultural life. the famous norwegian dramatist and poet Henrik ibsen (1828–1906), despite his coy responses to questions about his relation to Kierkegaard, clearly seems to have been inspired by the dane in famous works such as Brand. the other great norwegian national writer and poet Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson (1832–1910), who was influenced by the modern breakthrough movement, was also deeply inspired by Kierkegaard. finally, the celebrated norwegian artist edvard munch (1863–1944) closely studied key Kierkegaardian concepts such as anxiety, and this influence is notable in some of his iconic paintings such as The Scream. The fourth tome examines Kierkegaard’s surprisingly extensive influence in the anglophone world of literature and art. Kierkegaard’s presence has been especially strong in the united states. His thought appears in the work of the novelists Walker Percy (1916–90), James baldwin (1924–87), flannery o’conner (1925–64), William styron (1925–2006), don delillo (b. 1936), and louise erdrich (b. 1954). He has also been used by the famous and prolific American literary critics, George steiner (b. 1929) and Harold bloom (b. 1930). the american composer samuel barber (1910–81) has made use of Kierkegaard in his musical works. Kierkegaard has also exercised an influence on British and Irish letters. The English-born poet W.H. auden (1907–73) made use of Kierkegaard in his poetic works, and the contemporary english novelist david lodge (b. 1935) has written a novel Therapy, in which Kierkegaard plays an important role. cryptic traces of Kierkegaard can be found in the work of the famous irish writer James Joyce (1882–1941). Finally, the fifth tome treats the work of a heterogeneous group of writers from the romance languages and from central and eastern europe who have made use of Kierkegaard in their writings. Kierkegaard has been important for spanish literature. the argentine writers Jorge luis borges (1899–1986), leonardo castellani (1899–1981), and ernesto sábato (1911–2011), the mexican writer carlos fuentes

Preface

xiii

(b. 1928), and the spanish essayist and philosopher maría zambrano (1904–91) were all inspired to varying degrees by Kierkegaard. the dane also appears in the works of authors writing in other romance languages. the romanian writer max blecher (1909–38) discovered and made use of Kierkegaard during the period between the wars. the Portuguese writer fernando Pessoa (1888–1935) was almost certainly inspired by Kierkegaard’s use of pseudonyms. Kierkegaard has likewise been read by very diverse authors from central and eastern europe. He appears in the novels of the contemporary Hungarian authors Péter nadas (b. 1942) and Péter esterházy (b. 1950). With regard to the slavic languages, the famous russian writer, thinker, and literary critic, mikhail bakhtin (1895–1975), was inspired by Kierkegaard, as were the Polish writer Witold gombrowicz (1904–69) and the czech novelist ivan Klíma (b. 1931). the Polish-born israeli novelist Pinhas sadeh (1929–94) was interested in Kierkegaard’s treatment of the story of abraham and isaac in Fear and Trembling. this rich gallery of novelists, playwrights, poets, literary critics, painters, and composers testifies to the enormous influence that Kierkegaard has had on the corresponding fields. His thought and writings have appealed to people in many different countries in quite varied circumstances. moreover, his reception in these fields has been enduring, starting with the generation immediately after his death and continuing to this very day. it is the goal of the present volume to begin the mammoth work of providing a systematic account of Kierkegaard’s influence in these diverse cultural areas.

acknowledgements in order to increase the scholarly level of this series, in the present volume (as in the other volumes of the “sources” and “reception” parts of this series), an attempt has been made to use the original publications of the works of the figures under examination and not later reprints or translations. in many cases the authors themselves did not always have access to these materials, and so it has required the cooperation and hard work of a large group of people to locate these older texts and articles and copy them for use of the individual authors. the scholarly value of the individual articles has been raised enormously due to the efforts of this group. For their labor and sacrifices in this regard, I would like to extend my thanks to Joseph ballan, lee c. barrett, elisabetta basso, ingrid basso, maria binetti, Patrizia conforti, istván czakó, manuela Hackel, markus Kleinert, ulf olsson, anne rachut, Peter Šajda, Jeanette schindler-Wirth, gerhard schreiber, Heiko schulz, françoise surdez, curtis thompson, and Karl verstrynge. also, as with the other volumes of the “reception” part of this series, the bibliographies were compiled by the individual authors based on extensive bibliographies that were provided to them by Peter Šajda. all of the authors and readers of this series owe him a great debt of gratitude for this outstanding preliminary work. once again i would like to thank Katalin nun for doing the enormous electronic editorial work for the articles in this volume. I am grateful to Finn Gredal Jensen for finding time to do the preliminary proof-reading for this volume and to Philip Hillyer for doing the final proof-reading before typesetting. a great many people have been involved in the production of various aspects of this volume. i cannot begin to express my gratitude to them for all of the selfless sacrifices that they have made in order to help this volume attain the highest possible scholarly standard.

list of abbreviations Danish Abbreviations B&A

Breve og Aktstykker vedrørende Søren Kierkegaard, vols. 1–2, ed. by niels thulstrup, copenhagen: munksgaard 1953–54.

Bl.art.

S. Kierkegaard’s Bladartikler, med Bilag samlede efter Forfatterens Død, udgivne som Supplement til hans øvrige Skrifter, ed. by rasmus nielsen, copenhagen: c.a. reitzel 1857.

EP

Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer, vols. 1–9, ed. by H.P. barfod and Hermann gottsched, copenhagen: c.a. reitzel 1869–81.

Pap.

Søren Kierkegaards Papirer, vols. i to Xi–3, ed. by Peter andreas Heiberg, victor Kuhr and einer torsting, copenhagen: gyldendalske boghandel, nordisk forlag, 1909–48; second, expanded ed., vols. i to Xi–3, by niels thulstrup, vols. Xii to Xiii supplementary volumes, ed. by niels thulstrup, vols. Xiv to Xvi index by niels Jørgen cappelørn, copenhagen: gyldendal 1968–78.

SKS

Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter, vols. 1–28, vols. K1–K28, ed. by niels Jørgen cappelørn, Joakim garff, Jette Knudsen, Johnny Kondrup, alastair mcKinnon and finn Hauberg mortensen, copenhagen: gads forlag 1997–2013.

SV1

Samlede Værker, vols. i–Xiv, ed. by a.b. drachmann, Johan ludvig Heiberg and H.o. lange, copenhagen: gyldendalske boghandels forlag 1901–06. English Abbreviations

AN

Armed Neutrality, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1998.

AR

On Authority and Revelation, The Book on Adler, trans. by Walter lowrie, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1955.

ASKB

The Auctioneer’s Sales Record of the Library of Søren Kierkegaard, ed. by H.P. rohde, copenhagen: the royal library 1967.

xviii

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

BA

The Book on Adler, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1998.

C

The Crisis and a Crisis in the Life of an Actress, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1997.

CA

The Concept of Anxiety, trans. by reidar thomte in collaboration with albert b. anderson, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1980.

CD

Christian Discourses, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1997.

CI

The Concept of Irony, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1989.

CIC

The Concept of Irony, trans. with an introduction and notes by lee m. capel, london: collins 1966.

COR

The Corsair Affair; Articles Related to the Writings, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1982.

CUP1

Concluding Unscientific Postscript, vol. 1, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1982.

CUP2

Concluding Unscientific Postscript, vol. 2, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1982.

CUPH Concluding Unscientific Postscript, trans. by alastair Hannay, cambridge and new York: cambridge university Press 2009. EO1

Either/Or, Part i, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1987.

EO2

Either/Or, Part ii, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1987.

EOP

Either/Or, trans. by alastair Hannay, Harmondsworth: Penguin books 1992.

EPW

Early Polemical Writings, among others: From the Papers of One Still Living; Articles from Student Days; The Battle Between the Old and the New Soap-Cellars, trans. by Julia Watkin, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1990.

EUD

Eighteen Upbuilding Discourses, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1990.

List of Abbreviations

xix

FSE

For Self-Examination, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1990.

FT

Fear and Trembling, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1983.

FTP

Fear and Trembling, trans. by alastair Hannay, Harmondsworth: Penguin books 1985.

JC

Johannes Climacus, or De omnibus dubitandum est, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1985.

JFY

Judge for Yourself!, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1990.

JP

Søren Kierkegaard’s Journals and Papers, vols. 1–6, ed. and trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, assisted by gregor malantschuk (vol. 7, index and composite collation), bloomington and london: indiana university Press 1967–78.

KAC

Kierkegaard’s Attack upon “Christendom,” 1854–1855, trans. by Walter lowrie, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1944.

KJN

Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks, vols. 1–11, ed. by niels Jørgen cappelørn, alastair Hannay, david Kangas, bruce H. Kirmmse, george Pattison, vanessa rumble, and K. brian söderquist, Princeton and oxford: Princeton university Press 2007ff.

LD

Letters and Documents, trans. by Henrik rosenmeier, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1978.

LR

A Literary Review, trans. by alastair Hannay, Harmondsworth: Penguin books 2001.

M

The Moment and Late Writings, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1998.

P

Prefaces / Writing Sampler, trans. by todd W. nichol, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1997.

PC

Practice in Christianity, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1991.

PF

Philosophical Fragments, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1985.

xx

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

PJ

Papers and Journals: A Selection, trans. by alastair Hannay, Harmondsworth: Penguin books 1996.

PLR

Prefaces: Light Reading for Certain Classes as the Occasion May Require, trans. by William mcdonald, tallahassee: florida state university Press 1989.

PLS

Concluding Unscientific Postscript, trans. by david f. swenson and Walter lowrie, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1941.

PV

The Point of View including On My Work as an Author, The Point of View for My Work as an Author, and Armed Neutrality, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1998.

PVL

The Point of View for My Work as an Author including On My Work as an Author, trans. by Walter lowrie, new York and london: oxford university Press 1939.

R

Repetition, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1983.

SBL

Notes of Schelling’s Berlin Lectures, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1989.

SLW

Stages on Life’s Way, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1988.

SUD

The Sickness unto Death, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1980.

SUDP

The Sickness unto Death, trans. by alastair Hannay, london and new York: Penguin books 1989.

TA

Two Ages: The Age of Revolution and the Present Age. A Literary Review, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1978.

TD

Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1993.

UD

Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1993.

WA

Without Authority including The Lily in the Field and the Bird of the Air, Two Ethical-Religious Essays, Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays, An Upbuilding Discourse, Two Discourses at the Communion

List of Abbreviations

xxi

on Fridays, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1997. WL

Works of Love, trans. by Howard v. Hong and edna H. Hong, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1995.

WS

Writing Sampler, trans. by todd W. nichol, Princeton: Princeton university Press 1997.

alfred andersch: reading søren Kierkegaard as flight to freedom alina vaisfeld

Surprisingly little has been written about Søren Kierkegaard’s influence on Alfred andersch (1914–80).1 one of the reasons for this dearth of research is surely that andersch himself mentions Kierkegaard but rarely and sporadically.2 moreover, at least in Andersch’s work of fiction,3 the Dane’s influence, as might be expected, is hidden and unassuming, surfacing in subtle allusions or permeating the work as a whole rather than consisting in direct references, quotations, or explicitly stated ideas. our task, then, is to retrace andersch’s quiet gestures towards Kierkegaard, whilst also paying attention to the more direct references, few, but significant, that andersch makes to the philosopher’s work.4 In her extensive study of Kierkegaard’s influence on Andersch, Anne Raabe makes the helpful suggestion that Kierkegaard’s philosophy, and especially his understanding of the different existential stages of human life as described, for instance, in Either/Or,5 serves as an explicatory model for many characters in 1 a most noteworthy exception is anne raabe, Das Wort stammt von Kierkegaard. Alfred Andersch und Sören Kierkegaard, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1999, an extensive and thorough discussion of Kierkegaard’s influence on Andersch, which I have found very helpful and informative. As Raabe herself notes, it is primarily Jean-Paul Sartre’s influence on andersch that has been the subject of great interest. for an elaboration of andersch’s relationship to sartre, see ingeborg drewitz, “alfred andersch oder die Krise des engagements,” Zeitverdichtung, vienna: europaverlag 1980, pp. 134–43. 2 for further discussion on this lack of research, see raabe, Das Wort stammt von Kierkegaard, pp. 9–17. 3 even though the breadth and width of his interests and activities, spanning from journalistic work to radio programs and travelogues, greatly contributed to andersch’s important role in postwar Germany, I will focus on his works of fiction, which are not only the most readily available but also form the most widely known part of his oeuvre. 4 by “more direct” references, i am still referring to some rather implicit moments. by name, andersch mentions Kierkegaard almost never—which might not come as a surprise because Andersch is, first and foremost, a writer of fiction. Yet, I believe that it is precisely the sudden gestures towards Kierkegaard on which i will focus in my article that attests to the Dane’s influence on Andersch. 5 My emphasis upon the influence of Kierkegaard’s Either/Or should not blind us to the fact that, as raabe argues, andersch was also familiar with Kierkegaard’s A Literary Review, Fear and Trembling, Repetition, Philosophical Fragments, The Concept of Anxiety,

2

Alina Vaisfeld

andersch’s books.6 indeed, i will suggest that Kierkegaard’s concepts of the aesthetic and the ethical stage of existence in particular form the philosophical backdrop against which to read and interpret the figures populating Andersch’s oeuvre, for whom oftentimes Judge William’s dictum holds that “either a person has to live aesthetically, or he has to live ethically.”7 Yet Kierkegaard’s influence on Andersch seems of even more encompassing scope. Not only did his reading of Kierkegaard flow into the being and becoming of his fictional protagonists, but it also propelled forward Andersch’s thinking on flight and escape, which could justifiably be designated as the leitmotiv of his entire work. The changes that Andersch’s notion of flight into freedom undergoes—from a notion of freedom as the dream of absolute self-determination to a more socially grounded understanding of freedom—can, to my mind, be understood with even greater clarity when mapped onto the development from the aesthetic to the ethical sphere as identified by Kierkegaard. I. Life and Work on february 4, 1914, alfred Hellmuth andersch was born in munich into a modest middle-class background.8 andersch’s father fought during World War i and was severely injured. at an early age, alfred andersch rejected his father’s political sympathies, which continued to be nationalistic and reactionary, especially after the defeat and the collapse of the german empire. after the war, his father’s injury and a gradually advancing diabetes led to the social decline of his family, which was worsened by the death of his father in 1929. andersch was given a traditional education in a humanistic gymnasium. His headmaster was the father of Heinrich Himmler, who was to become Hitler’s chief of the state police and minister of the interior, an episode andersch would later describe in Der Vater eines Mörders.9 He abandoned his education at the age of 14 and was Concluding Unscientific Postscript, and The Sickness unto Death. see raabe, Das Wort stammt von Kierkegaard, p. 15. What remains obscure are the precise sources of andersch’s knowledge of Kierkegaard. andersch who left school at the age of 14 did not have any kind of formal training in philosophy or related subjects. What is likely, i believe, is that andersch, who shows some familiarity with existentialist philosophy, become acquainted with Kierkegaard through the works of existentialists such as Jean-Paul sartre and Karl Jaspers. andersch, however, remained an autodidact—and i would suggest that the bulk of his knowledge on Kierkegaard is not drawn from any secondary sources, but rather stems from his own engagement with Kierkegaard’s works. 6 raabe, Das Wort stammt von Kierkegaard, pp. 9–17, see especially p. 12. 7 SKS 3, 164 / EO2, 168. As Raabe amongst others points out, there is only one figure in andersch’s work that could be ascribed to the religious sphere: Pastor Helander in andersch’s Sansibar oder Der letzte Grund. see raabe, Das Wort stammt von Kierkegaard, p. 138. 8 for a detailed account of andersch’s life and work, see stephan reinhardt, Alfred Andersch. Eine Biographie, zurich: diogenes 1996. for a shorter version with a strong emphasis on his work, see volker Wehdeking, Alfred Andersch, stuttgart: metzler 1983. 9 alfred andersch, Der Vater eines Mörders. Eine Schulgeschichte, zurich: diogenes verlag 1980.

Alfred Andersch: Reading Søren Kierkegaard as Flight to Freedom

3

apprenticed to a small bookseller and publishing firm. During his apprenticeship, andersch became a member of the labor union’s Youth organization, from which he was excluded because of his “left-wing opposition.” subsequently, he joined the communist Youth league, in which he became increasingly active. following Hitler’s seizure of power in January 1933 and the banning of the KPd (communist Party of germany), andersch was arrested by nazi security agents during the roundup on communist functionaries in march 1933. He spent over two months at the Dachau concentration camp. Having briefly been rearrested, he moved for his own safety to Hamburg. at least in part because of his disappointment about the lack of resistance to Hitler’s rise to power, andersch decided to end his activities for the communist Party and to devote himself henceforth to the arts and to literature.10 called up in 1940, he served intermittently during the war and in 1944 deserted on the italian front, an experience he would later recount in Die Kirschen der Freiheit. Ein Bericht. He spent his period as prisoner of war in camps in the usa, where he served, amongst other things, on the editorial staff of the camp newspaper, Der Ruf (the summons), forerunner to the journal with the same name that andersch would start in collaboration with the writer Hans Werner richter (1908–93) upon his return to germany at the end of 1945. the fate of the german Der Ruf was relatively short-lived: after 16 issues, the american military government revoked their printing license due to the journal’s extensive nihilism. andersch turned to other projects, such as helping richter to found the literary circle Gruppe 47, a loose association of german-speaking writers, which grew to become one of the most powerful forces on the literary scene in postwar germany. the group raised questions about suppressed issues of guilt and punishment, of responsibility and individual courage, and the possibility of a truly new beginning, concerns which andersch would continue to pursue throughout his work. 10 in his “between the devil and the deep blue sea,” W.g. sebald draws a very critical picture of andersch’s “internal emigration,” his withdrawal from public life into the realm of art, as well as of andersch’s marriage to and subsequent divorce from angelika albert in 1942, which left angelika, who was half-Jewish, thus exposed to great dangers. see W.g. sebald, “between the devil and the deep blue sea,” in On the Natural History of Destruction, trans. by anthea bell, new York: random House 2003, pp. 105–42. in his Die Kirschen der Freiheit. Ein Bericht, Frankfurt: Frankfurter Verlags-Anstalt 1952, we find what could be read as andersch’s confessional commentary on his at least initial conformism, or lack of open resistance to the nazi regime, in a scene depicting the feeling of shame and remorse that befalls the protagonist after he has cheered for adolf Hitler: “[W]hen i saw his whitish, puffy face, with that black strand of hair down his forehead and wearing the cowardly, smiling expression of a con-man, the face of a pale, worn sewer rat, i too opened my mouth and cried ‘Heil!’ and when the crowd dispersed and i was again in the open, with free open space about me, i thought then what i think today: You cheered a sewer rat.” andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit. Ein Bericht, pp. 35–6. (english translation: The Cherries of Freedom: A Report, trans. by michael Hulse, new milford, connecticut: toby Press 2004, p. 27.) for a brief response to sebald’s argument and a comment on andersch’s “moral shabbiness,” see michael Hulse’s foreword to andersch, The Cherries of Freedom, pp. 2ff.

4

Alina Vaisfeld

In 1948, Andersch published his first book, Deutsche Literatur in der Entscheidung. Ein Beitrag zur Analyse der literarischen Situation,11 followed by a representative selection of essays by international authors entitled Europäische Avantgarde (1949).12 These works were the beginning of his influence on West german cultural development, not least through his radio work. andersch instituted the “evening studio” of radio frankfurt, a program of analysis and discussion. in addition, he was supervising editor of feature broadcasts that were co-produced by radio stations in frankfurt and Hamburg, and he edited a book series, “studio frankfurt,” that published progressive new literature. from 1955 to 1957, he edited a literary journal, Texte und Zeichen, in which a great variety of intellectuals, writers, and poets, for example, theodor adorno, Paul celan, and günter grass, were represented, as well as foreign writers, among them ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, and Albert Camus, all of whom influenced his own thought and writing. in 1958 andersch relinquished his positions and settled in berzona, switzerland, acquiring swiss nationality in 1972. amongst his reasons for leaving West germany was the beginning of rearmament and remilitarization that was undertaken under adenauer’s chancellorship. He remained a critical commentator on germany’s political and literary development such as in his poem “artikel 3 (3),” published in 1976, in which andersch strongly rejects the anti-radical decree (Radikalenerlass) issued by the West german chancellor Willy brandt as response to terrorism by the red army faction.13 andersch died on february 21, 1980 in berzona. the same year saw the publication of his unfinished story Der Vater eines Mörders. In Andersch’s work, flight into freedom and withdrawal into the artistic world are dominant themes, and the author’s personal experiences are the source of inspiration for much of his fiction. Even if his protagonists—anti-heroes, disillusioned, ironically broken Hamlet figures—dream up, envision, or carry out visions of flight that are very different, these dreams of escape are tied together by the idea that an individual is entitled to such flight. In his work, Andersch continuously emphasizes the individual’s freedom and right to say “no”—to liberate herself from totalitarian dominion, to shed social constraints, and to make a radical new beginning. literature, for andersch, plays an important role in securing this realm of individual freedom because literature is the place of dwelling for possibility and freedom, experimentality and uncertainty.14 as an existential form of self-encounter and self-liberation, literature and art carry within themselves the possibility of alfred andersch, Deutsche Literatur in der Entscheidung. Ein Beitrag zur Analyse der literarischen Situation, Karlsruhe: volk und zeit 1948. 12 Europäische Avantgarde, ed. by alfred andersch, frankfurt: verlag der frankfurter Hefte 1949. 13 under the decree, people considered to have radical views were excluded from serving as civil servants and other public sector occupations. see alfred andersch: “artikel 3 (3),” in empört euch der himmel ist blau. Gedichte 1946–1977, berlin: aufbau 1980, p. 107. 14 for a detailed exposition of andersch’s understanding of literature’s role and responsibility in the defense of the individual, see stephan reinhardt, “Ästhetik als Widerstand—andersch als bürger und engagierter schriftsteller,” in Alfred Andersch. Perspektiven zu Leben und Werk, ed. by irene Heidelberger-leonard and volker Wehdeking, opladen: Westdeutscher verlag 1994, pp. 32–41. for an elaboration of his own thought on the 11

Alfred Andersch: Reading Søren Kierkegaard as Flight to Freedom

5

breaking away from political and private situations that are difficult to bear, even if just in imagination, and they thereby enable individuals to disentangle themselves from falsity and repression and to develop alternatives and possibilities. offering the possibility of self-determination and freedom, literature becomes the accomplice of flight, whilst never being escapist.15 to perform their task as a seismograph of society and as those who offer alternatives to the mainstream development, writers, as solitary individuals, free themselves from social conventions and leap into the wilderness, the radically new. standing on the margins of society, their role consists in preserving the sphere of the non-identical and the penumbra in order to counter the collapse into self-sameness and conventionality. many understood andersch’s “strategy of withdrawal,” his emphasis upon the freedom and at least not direct political involvement of the writer, as a lack of engagement with social and political realities.16 in particular his second book, the novella Die Kirschen der Freiheit. Ein Bericht, published in 1952, was seen as a testimony to the de-politicization of andersch himself. recounting his experience as a soldier in World War ii and his subsequent desertion in italy, the book describes freedom—the freedom of the individual, the freedom of desertion—as a “feeling of wilderness.” equated with the dream of absolute self-determination, freedom is anarchistic, not political. others, such as stephan reinhardt, have argued that Die Kirschen der Freiheit remains an eminently political book: its publication coincided with the beginning of West german rearmament followed by West germany’s incorporation into nato in 1955.17 Publishing a book in defense of the individual’s decision to desert as a form of self-encounter and self-liberation was a form of indirect critique of an affluent West German society, where a collective focus on consumerism in the wake of an era of political restoration and rapid economic recovery swept aside concerns existentialist role of literature, see alfred andersch, “deutsche literatur in der entscheidung,” in Das Alfred Andersch Lesebuch, ed. by gerd Haffmans, zurich: diogenes 1979, pp. 111–34. 15 it is in this non-escapist, realist vein that the boy’s statement in Sansibar oder Der letzte Grund should be read: “the right thing was to go away but you had to have somewhere to go to. You couldn’t act like father, who simply sailed aimlessly out into the open sea. if you had no other goal than the open sea, you always had to come back again. You’d have only got away, thought the boy, when you reached land beyond the open sea.” alfred andersch, Sansibar oder Der letzte Grund, olten: verlag otto Walter 1957, p. 7. (english translation: Flight to Afar, trans. by michael bullock, london: toby Press 2004, pp. 1–2.) 16 amongst andersch’s critics was günter grass, who sharply attacked andersch in his georg büchner Prize acceptance speech in 1965 for andersch’s lack of political engagement and direct support for Willy brandt, the social democrats’ candidate for the chancellorship. grass’ critique is interesting because, for grass, as for many others, the notion of the free and independent writer, as Andersch endorsed it, is but a fiction and an evasion. In his reply to grass (and to other critics), which was printed in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in the same year, andersch argued that his critique of society and state is embodied in his personal and literary journey and his work rather than in his engagement with a particular party. see reinhardt, Alfred Andersch, pp. 410–12. 17 see reinhardt, “Ästhetik als Widerstand—andersch als bürger und engagierter schriftsteller,” pp. 32–41.

6

Alina Vaisfeld

about coming to terms with the national socialist past and its crimes, and obscured questions of individual and collective guilt and responsibility. The theme of flight and freedom recurs in Andersch’s first novel, Sansibar oder Der letzte Grund (1957), which is often viewed as the most significant of his works. Sansibar recounts the story of a group of people gathering in a small coastal german village in 1938, thrown together at random and linked by their common desire and mutual interdependence in escaping from nazi germany. the leitmotiv of escape into self-fulfillment is continued in Andersch’s second novel, Die Rote (1960),18 where the female protagonist, Franziska, flees from personal conflict and social pressures to venice, where she decides to make a new beginning, and in his Efraim (1967),19 a novel purporting to be the autobiographical account of a Jewish journalist deciding to break away and to free himself from the burdens of his former life. andersch’s last, partly documentary novel, Winterspelt (1974),20 has been viewed as his attempt to transpose the notion of the ever-present human possibility to make a new beginning to the level of history—to portray a notion of history not as describing or following a teleological path, but as fundamentally changeable by human activity and the actualization of possibility.21 II. die Kirschen der freiheit. ein bericht (1952) Die Kirschen der Freiheit, perhaps andersch’s most explicitly Kierkegaardian work, is his first work of fiction. In the book, Andersch recounts a young German’s childhood and youth up to his experience as a soldier in World War ii, and his subsequent decision to desert.22 retrospectively, the protagonist’s desertion on the italian front in 1944 is seen as the point of culmination of a string of dreams, visions, and short episodes of freedom and escape experienced in childhood and youth. the decision to desert, to break away from one’s old way of life and to leap into the new, thereby becomes the moment of precipitation of an individual self, in spite of external alfred andersch, Die Rote, olten and freiburg: Walter 1960. alfred andersch, Efraim, zurich: diogenes 1967. 20 alfred andersch, Winterspelt, zurich: diogenes 1974. 21 see, for instance, gary schmidt’s characterization of Winterspelt “as a kind of thought experiment, an attempt to imagine what could have been had the germans not blindly followed the führer to the bitter end. the plot centers on the plan of a german Wehrmacht officer, Major Dincklage, to desert with his entire battalion to the Americans on the Belgian front in late 1944.…as a narrative, Winterspelt challenges a view of history as a chronology of events that could only have happened precisely as they did. Winterspelt thus constitutes the antithesis of the deterministic chain of causality.” gary schmidt, The Nazi Abduction of Ganymede: Representations of Male Homosexuality in Postwar German Literature, new York: Peter lang 2003, pp. 227–8. 22 The first-person narrator tends to be interpreted as Andersch himself and the novel to be read as a kind of autobiography. such a connection is, however, never explicitly spelled out. I therefore hesitate to collapse the distinction between author and fictional narrator. moreover, i believe that notwithstanding its autobiographical aspects, the novella should and ought to be read as a parable of general applicability, rather than as account of an exceptional occurrence. 18 19

Alfred Andersch: Reading Søren Kierkegaard as Flight to Freedom

7

pressures and constraints. desertion becomes the turning point, the existentialist vote for life and freedom and against totalitarian dominion. the individual’s right to say “no” to a regime requiring unconditional obedience and demanding to be placed above the individual’s rights and decisions is not only one of the guiding themes of all of his work, but also its perhaps most Kierkegaardian streak. through his decision to desert, the protagonist accomplishes the instant of freedom that has been foreshadowed in his visions and dreams of escape.23 making the decision to desert is akin to the redemption of a promise for a different life that had been given to him in these hasty glimpses at freedom and independence. in his notion of human freedom as the possibility and the necessity to choose oneself and one’s way of life, andersch highlights the importance of individual choice and decision for individual becoming. Desertion becomes the protagonist’s first step in becoming the person that he is and that he has the right to be. further, the decision to desert comes to define the soldier, both who he was in the past and who he will be in the future. decision reveals the kind of person that one is to become. it thereby plays a double role: it becomes the litmus test for designating the kind of person that is also only formed in the very act of deciding. When emphasizing the revelatory function of the act of decision, andersch espouses a viewpoint close to Kierkegaard’s Judge William, who in Either/Or poses the question: “are you not aware that there comes a midnight hour when everyone must unmask; do you believe that life will always allow itself to be trifled with; do you believe that one can sneak away just before midnight in order to avoid it?”24 in this vein, the decision to desert becomes “the axle around which the wheel of [his] existence revolved”;25 it becomes the “personal and subjective truth” of his existence.26 such a decision, however, has to be taken and carried out in solitude. andersch’s protagonist knows of the togetherness of decision and solitude. thus he ponders: “a night will come…when i shall be on my own and will not have to wait for anyone. alone for good. alone and free.”27 only when on his own will he be able to decide on a course of action, and to carry out his plan of escape. thus he pretends having to stay behind to repair a puncture in his bicycle tire and tricks a fellow soldier into leaving him alone. When in solitude, he immediately wonders whether he should have persuaded his comrade to flee with him. This process of self-questioning is resolved by an ever-stronger appeal to the importance of making one’s own decision. “the fact is that i would have been prompting him to a course of action that was not his. it would have been a course of action borrowed from me.”28 thus it would have already as an adolescent, he seeks out moments of freedom when undertaking solitary bike and hiking trips. these trips pry open his eyes to the manifold possibilities that life holds for him—despite the destitution and deprivation of his family life. as he himself puts it: “i always went on these excursions on my own, and i intuitively sensed the possibility that life held, knowing that beyond the life i was leading at that moment there were a thousand other lives awaiting me.” andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, p. 34. (The Cherries of Freedom, p. 26.) 24 SKS 3, 157 / EO2, 160. 25 andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, p. 73. (The Cherries of Freedom, p. 52.) 26 ibid. 27 andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, p. 62. (The Cherries of Freedom, p. 45.) 28 andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, pp. 72–3. (The Cherries of Freedom, p. 52.) 23

8

Alina Vaisfeld

been an absurdity: for no one but me can make the decision concerning my existence. in matters of existence, one cannot persuade people, andersch’s protagonist puts forth: “all one can attempt is to show them the possible alternatives they can choose from.”29 the decision that one makes, the way that one chooses to ask and to answer the question that is one’s life, is entirely personal.30 the freedom that the individual strives for is something to be achieved and not to be granted. it is also something that essentially belongs to the individual because the individual is essentially free. freeing himself is, for andersch’s protagonist, the act of laying claim to a fundamentally human entitlement. “i planned to desert,” he says, “because it was a way of regaining the right to make conditions i had established a title to in the past, a title that had almost lapsed and which i intended to revive.”31 in his voice, we can hear resonate that of Kierkegaard’s anti-climacus who writes in The Sickness unto Death: “the self is freedom.”32 achieving freedom is of paramount importance to the protagonist of Die Kirschen der Freiheit because it is the fullest actualization of his potential to be. Yet freedom is rare, a fragile and fleeting good.33 it inhabits “that tiny fraction of a second that precedes the moment of decision, when the absolute freedom which man potentially possesses actually is….We are free only in moments. Precious moments.”34 freedom dwells in decision, or rather, freedom is decision, because the latter is the taking possession of man’s potential to be absolutely free. in Die Kirschen der Freiheit, freedom is a hasty gasp between two extended periods of unfreedom: life as a german soldier and life as the american war prisoner that andersch’s protagonist would soon become. even if freedom is but the no-man’sland “between the captivity i was coming from and that i was going over to,” it is a precious instant worth striving for: the redemption of the fundamental human entitlement to become the free individual that one has the potential to be.35 andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, p. 73. (The Cherries of Freedom, p. 52.) the very same belief in the impossibility and undesirability of convincing someone about existential matters also stands behind the overall writing of this book, Die Kirschen der Freiheit. the protagonist reasserts that he does not want to convince anyone by writing his book: “my book merely aims to show that, following an invisible course, at a certain moment i chose to act in a way that gave meaning to my life, and from that time on that action became the axle around which the wheel of my existence revolved. this book aims to tell nothing but the truth, a wholly personal and subjective truth.” on the other hand, he does believe in the instructive character of portraying such a personal truth: “but i am convinced that any personal and subjective truth, if it is genuinely true, contributes to the recognition of the objective truth.” andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, p. 73. (The Cherries of Freedom, p. 52.) 31 andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, p. 83. (The Cherries of Freedom, pp. 59–60.) 32 SKS 11, 145 / SUD, 29. 33 andersch’s emphasis on the momentary character of freedom, and the preciousness of the instant seems rather Kierkegaardian. in particular, i have in mind vigilius Haufniensis’ statement that “the moment is not properly an atom of time but an atom of eternity.” in SKS 4, 391 / CA, 88. 34 andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, p. 86. (The Cherries of Freedom, p. 61.) 35 for a further discussion of the eminent role of individual freedom in andersch’s Die Kirschen der Freiheit, see gerhard Hay, “die Kirschen etruriens in der faszination von 29

30

Alfred Andersch: Reading Søren Kierkegaard as Flight to Freedom

9

in his emphasis upon the role of freedom and decision and their inextricable intertwinement for the formation of the self, andersch undoubtedly displays a Kierkegaardian influence in his Die Kirschen der Freiheit. as noted earlier, the novella’s depiction of freedom as “wilderness”36 and radical self-determination was met with criticism for a supposed lack of concern with social realities and issues. even though andersch continues to defend the individual right to soar above the demands of society and state, he revisits his notion of freedom at least in part, such as in his discussion of freedom in his novel Sansibar oder Der letzte Grund, to which i will turn in the following section. as i will surmise, this development, too, can be understood in Kierkegaardian parameters, as a movement out of the aesthetic and into the ethical sphere. III. sansibar oder der letzte grund (1957) often viewed as the most important of his books, Sansibar oder Der letzte Grund also takes up the theme of flight and escape, albeit in a slightly modified way. It recounts the story of a group of people haphazardly thrown together in a small coastal village in germany in 1938. What ties together this eclectic group is the common desire to escape from nazi germany. as they soon discover, their individual plans of escape hinge upon each other. To carry out their individual flights, they must cooperate. both this interdependence as well as the author’s emphasis upon individual freedom and decision become manifest in andersch’s stylistic technique, which makes use of montage, simultaneity, and flashbacks. The story is told as an interweave of different voices and perspectives, which complement each other, whilst also being radically separate. the plot only becomes a meaningful whole as a conglomerate of individual voices, which must be grasped in both their interconnectedness and their separation. the group consists of gregor, a young man formerly dedicated to his work for the communist Party, who has come to doubt the meaningfulness of his political activity and is now on the run. Gregor seeks to convince Knudsen, the fisherman, to take the group to sweden aboard his cutter. equally disillusioned with the communist Party, Knudsen at first refuses to get involved—he has chosen the path of inner emigration, a withdrawal from public life. eventually, however, he feels unable to refuse his aid. Knudsen’s apprentice, the Boy, as Andersch only calls him, dreams of a flight à la Huckleberry finn,37 a life in wilderness far away from the tedium of daily life. the boy will revisit his plans of escape when he realizes that Knudsen’s safety depends sartres appell zur entscheidung,” in Zu Alfred Andersch, ed. by volker Wehdeking, stuttgart: Klett verlag 1983, pp. 13–21, see p. 19. 36 andersch, Die Kirschen der Freiheit, p. 113. (andersch, The Cherries of Freedom, p. 76.) 37 the boy wants to get away from the narrowness and the tedium of his small-town life, where he is confronted with memories of his father who died at sea. He dreams of zanzibar, a land far away: “He had to leave Rerik, firstly because there was nothing doing in Rerik, secondly because rerik had killed his father, and thirdly because there was zanzibar, zanzibar far away, zanzibar beyond the open sea, zanzibar or the last of the reasons.” andersch, Sansibar, p. 110. (Flight to Afar, p. 94.)

10

Alina Vaisfeld

upon his decision. Judith, who is also part of the group, is a young Jewish woman who is forced into exile by the political situation. The fifth person is Pastor Helander who does not himself intend to flee, but tries to protect a modern statue from his church, ernst barlach’s Young Monk Reading.38 the statue is deemed degenerate and is to be destroyed by the nazis.39 on the one hand, then, Sansibar continues the theme of escape. in particular, the individual right, even duty, to escape from situations of unfreedom and political coercion is upheld. “a delightful country,” says gregor, “people queue up in front of foreign ships in order to leave it.”40 at the same time, the novel also represents a marked departure from the notion of solitary, or anarchical freedom and borderless self-determination sketched in Die Kirschen der Freiheit. Each protagonist finds himself or herself on the cusp of making a crucial decision that is two-fold: it entails not only the question of whether or not to stay, but also whether or not to support the other in her plan of escape. To be sure, the decision to flee or not to flee requires a space of isolation and solitude that individuals have to carve out for themselves. this movement is mirrored in the very structure of the novel, where the protagonists retreat into inner monologues and realms of self-questioning, from which they emerge with a decision made. the decision that is formed in passion and solitude is, however, oftentimes a decision to overcome this egoic sphere and to enter the ethical realm by taking on roles of responsibility and reliability. this interplay between isolation and a decision to be for the other is philosophically underpinned by a statement made by Judge William in Kierkegaard’s Either/Or: The first form the choice takes is complete isolation. That is, in choosing myself, I separate myself from my relations to the whole world, until in this separation i end in an abstract identity. since the individual has chosen himself according to his freedom he is eo ipso [precisely thereby] acting. Yet his action has no relation to anything in the surrounding world, for the individual has completely exterminated this and is only for himself. the life-view that appears here is, however, an ethical view.41

as mentioned before, raabe, amongst others, points out that Pastor Helander is the only one of Andersch’s figures that could be situated in Kierkegaard’s religious sphere. Helander decides to soar above social conventions and to openly resist the political regime. He sends away the statue knowingly risking his life and will indeed be killed for his resistance. see raabe, Das Wort stammt von Kierkegaard, pp. 132ff. 39 under national socialism, ernst barlach’s work was indeed deemed “degenerate” and subversive, and the sculptor was forbidden to work. andersch indirectly tells us what he views to be the danger that the statue represents to a regime of political coercion and domination. it is the monk’s independence of mind and thought that astounds gregor when he first sees him: “Isn’t he reading one of his sacred texts, then?...Isn’t he like a young monk? Is that possible—to be a young monk and not allow oneself to be overwhelmed by the texts? to take the cowl and nevertheless remain free? to live according to the rules without putting the mind in chains?” andersch, Sansibar, p. 56. (Flight to Afar, p. 51.) 40 andersch, Sansibar, p. 80. (Flight to Afar, p. 72.) 41 SKS 3, 229 / EO2, 240. 38

Alfred Andersch: Reading Søren Kierkegaard as Flight to Freedom

11

With this in mind, we could say that the new notion of freedom that andersch gestures towards in Sansibar indicates the choice to move from the aesthetical to the ethical sphere. In this respect, his revisited understanding reflects freedom’s individual and solitary aspects as well as its social components, that is, the ties of interpersonal reliability and dependence that undergird it, which Sansibar’s protagonists come to accept reluctantly, yet gradually. such a decision to come to terms with one’s dependence upon the other goes hand in hand with the realization that the responsibility resulting from this mutual dependence might entail the necessity to relinquish one’s own plans of escape. this will be gregor’s decision, who resolves not to leave on board the cutter because he knows that Knudsen would then refuse to take Judith with him. in a similar vein, the boy returns to Knudsen’s cutter after having escaped from it because he is aware of the difficulties that Knudsen would encounter if he were to return without the Boy. consequently, the freedom that is to be gained in Sansibar is of a rather different mold than the anarchical striving for self-determination that is at stake in Die Kirschen der Freiheit: it is also the freedom of freeing oneself from the immediacy of the aesthetical sphere, which comes with an acceptance of one’s duty. a hitherto unknown feeling of tranquillity and calmness pervade both gregor and the boy after they have resolved to become responsible to the other, to Judith and to Knudsen. the acceptance of the duty to the other becomes the very expression of one’s freedom because freedom is the decision fully to choose oneself. such an idea about the inseparability of freedom and duty is, for instance, expressed in the section “the balance between the esthetic and the ethical in the development of the Personality” in Kierkegaard’s Either/Or, where Judge William states: My intention…was rather to throw some light on the absolute significance of duty, the eternal validity of the duty-relationship for the personality. that is, as soon as the person in despair has found himself, has chosen himself absolutely, has repented of himself, he then has himself as his task under an eternal responsibility, and in this way duty is posited in its absoluteness. but since he has not created himself but chosen himself, duty is the expression of his absolute dependence and his absolute freedom in their identity with each other.42

in Sansibar, then, andersch foregrounds a notion of freedom as inextricably intertwined with an idea of responsibility and duty. at the same time, he continues to uphold the paramount role of individual decision, passion, and solitude. no one but the individual can in a passionate act of decision choose himself or herself as the person that he or she has the potential to be. no one but the individual can choose the kind of freedom he or she strives for—the unbound self-determination of andersch’s Die Kirschen or the more socially anchored freedom of mutual responsibility that andersch portrays in Sansibar. in this article, i have argued that andersch’s reading of Kierkegaard forms the philosophical backdrop against which to read and to interpret the protagonists of Die Kirschen der Freiheit and Sansibar, which would lead to a deeper understanding of these figures. Moreover, it has been suggested that bearing in mind Kierkegaard’s 42

SKS 3, 257 / EO2, 270.

12

Alina Vaisfeld

influence on Andersch would enable one to trace with greater clarity the more global development of Andersch’s thinking on flight and escape as a movement from the aesthetical into the ethical realm. even if the form that andersch’s engagement with Kierkegaard takes is primarily indirect and associative, his reading of Kierkegaard permeated his most important works as well as his life-long concern with the theme of flight—not as an act leading out of the world, but leading straight into it.

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Andersch’s corpus “die leidenschaft der unterscheidung,” Der Ruf, vol. 1, nos. 4 and 8, 1946–47 (no page numbers). “deutsche literatur in der entscheidung,” Horizont, vol. 3, no. 7, 1948, pp. 3–4. Die Kirschen der Freiheit. Ein Bericht, frankfurt am main: frankfurter verlagsanstalt 1952. Sansibar oder Der letzte Grund, olten: verlag otto Walter 1957. “die blindheit des Kunstwerks,” in Die Blindheit des Kunstwerks und andere Aufsätze, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1965, pp. 21–32. Efraim, zurich: diogenes 1967, pp. 336–7. “Ästhetische denkobjekte,” in Ein neuer Scheiterhaufen für alte Ketzer. Kritiken und Rezensionen, zurich: diogenes 1979, pp. 55–60. “deutsche literatur in der entscheidung,” in Das Alfred Andersch Lesebuch, ed. by gerd Haffmans, zurich: diogenes 1979, pp. 111–34. II. Sources of Andersch’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard undetermined. III. Secondary Literature on Andersch’s Relation to Kierkegaard Koch, manfred, “der westdeutsche roman,” in Deutsche Gegenwartsliteratur. Ausgangspositionen und aktuelle Entwicklung, ed. by manfred durzak, stuttgart: reclam 1981, pp. 204–33, see especially pp. 209ff. müller, gerd, “erzählprosa der 50er Jahre,” in Geschichte der deutschen Literatur vom 18. Jahrhundert bis zur Gegenwart, vols. 1–3, ed. by Viktor Žmegač, Weinheim: beltz-athenäum verlag 1979–84, vol. 3.2, pp. 492–540, see especially pp. 507–10. raabe, anne, “Das Wort stammt von Kierkegaard.” Alfred Andersch und Sören Kierkegaard, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1999. reinhardt, stephan, Alfred Andersch. Eine Biographie, zurich: diogenes verlag 1996, pp. 65–6; pp. 153–6; pp. 487–8; pp. 525–55. Wehdeking, volker, Alfred Andersch, stuttgart: metzler 1983, pp. 161–5.

thomas bernhard: a grotesque sickness unto death stefan egenberger

austrian author thomas bernhard (1931–89) started his literary career with his religiously inspired book of poetry Auf der Erde und in der Hölle in 1957. He had his literary breakthrough in 1963 with the publication of his novel Frost. it was at this point that he found his unmistakable style and topics, which would distinguish him henceforth. from now on, his work would consistently center on sickness, death, failure, madness, decay, and disintegration. bernhard’s protagonists actively prepare their downfall—which either consists of madness or suicide. the reality within which they live is always portrayed as either disintegrating or corroding. this becomes particularly apparent in his grotesquely exaggerated rants against austria—which in turn resulted in him being accused as a traitor to his fatherland. despite his reference to real people and places, bernard by no means intends a naturalistic form of narration. instead, with bernhard’s oeuvre, we enter a highly artificial and stylized world of prose. bernhard depicts the failure of his heroes’ longings within the framework of a poetry of reflection. His stylistic devices consist of endlessly convoluted quotations, repetitions, redundancies, variations, polarities, hypertrophic enhancements, and exaggerations, as well as peculiar newly created words. bernhard’s language—dominated by its circular syntax and the stylistic device of a hyperbole—exerts a strange fascination upon the reader. in his convoluted, and equally meandering sentences that leave behind them the spheres of logic and consistency a world of reflection becomes apparent which has “no convictions, no securities nor even the fixedness of meanings.”1 from 1970 onwards, bernhard published—next to his prose—a series of theater plays in quick succession. These plays can be classified as comedies or tragic comedies: the pathos of despair succumbs to the laughter of the audience. His autobiographical works, Die Ursache. Eine Andeutung (1975), Der Keller. Eine Erziehung (1976), Der Atem. Eine Entscheidung (1978), Die Kälte. Eine Isolation (1981), and Ein Kind (1982), reflect decisive stages of his childhood: the early deaths of his father, mother, and grandfather, the latter of which had been like a father to him, his school days in the national-socialist education system, the bombing of salzburg by the allied forces as well as a spell of sickness, which extended over four years and necessitated various hospital stays and sojourns in recreational homes, which are described as existentially trying. franz eyckeler, Reflexionspoesie. Sprachskepsis, Rhetorik und Poetik in der Prosa Thomas Bernhards, berlin: erich schmidt verlag 1995, p. 232.

1

16

Stefan Egenberger

Were one to ask about Bernhard’s connection to Kierkegaard, the difficulty of constructing such a connection would become apparent immediately. after all, one is dealing with a writer who never explained his position on Kierkegaard explicitly or in any detail. there is only slight direct reference to Kierkegaard and his work.2 furthermore, he does not approach Kierkegaard in a matter-of-fact way but rather— as is typical for bernhard—wreaking with irony. in Über allen Gipfeln ist Ruh’, for instance, Kierkegaard is given the title of “the liszt amongst philosophers” and further described as a “thorough wrestler of the north.”3 And finally, there is his hero in Auslöschung, franz-Josef murau, who contemplates on the day before his parent’s funeral whether to read The Sickness unto Death “in order to while away the time.”4 Yet, despite it also being a stylistic feature to treat Kierkegaard in such a polemical way, the terminology and thought processes clearly point towards Kierkegaard. it is particularly in the novel Auslöschung, in which the hero seeks relaxation in the perusal of The Sickness unto Death, that the concept of the “mortal illness” arises— in close connection with the terms of “interest” and “passion,” which are two concepts of fundamental importance to Kierkegaard.5 the present article will follow and explore such terminological analogies, which are supported by similar thought processes.6 Principally, the focus will lie on one topic both authors have in common: the salvation of a radically jeopardized existence. I. Walking—Thinking—Existing in his autobiographical novel Der Keller bernhard explains the reason why he writes. He wants to “clarify existence, not merely by penetrating it, but rather by explaining in Über allen Gipfeln ist Ruh’ the publisher says to author moritz meister: “there is a Kierkegaard inside you / and perhaps you are not aware of it / indeed a Kierkegaard.” (“Es steckt ein Kierkegaard in Ihnen / und vielleicht wissen Sie das gar nicht / tatsächlich ein Kierkegaard.”) thomas bernhard, Über allen Gipfeln ist Ruh’, in Stücke 3, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, p. 275; cf. p. 266. Alte Meister contains a life motto of Kierkegaard (cf. thomas bernhard, Alte Meister, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, p. 7) and in Der Theatermacher an imaginary theater play is mentioned in which Kierkegaard carries goethe out of the parlor (cf. thomas bernhard, Der Theatermacher, in Stücke 4, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, p. 46). reference is made to Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling and Either/Or in bernhard’s narration Zwei Erzieher (cf. thomas bernhard, Zwei Erzieher, in Erzählungen, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, p. 61) and The Sickness unto Death in Auslöschung. Ein Zerfall, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1986, p. 586 (in english as Extinction: A Novel, london: vintage 2011). 3 bernhard, Über allen Gipfeln ist Ruh’, p. 266: “Liszt der Philosophen,” “ein derartiger im Norden Ringender.” 4 bernhard, Auslöschung, p. 586: “die Zeit…zu vertreiben.” 5 ibid, p. 55: “Todeskrankheit”; cf. thomas bernhard, Frost, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1963, p. 229; Die Jagdgesellschaft, in Stücke 1, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, pp. 201–4; Korrektur, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1975, pp. 120–24. 6 An additional difficulty—one that cannot be resolved satisfactorily at this point— lies in the fact that different themes prevalent in bernhard’s work cannot be traced back to Kierkegaard exclusively, but to other authors, as well—the german romantics in particular, who in turn influenced Kierkegaard greatly. 2

Thomas Bernhard: A Grotesque Sickness unto Death

17

it to the utmost degree possible.”7 there is no reason not to apply this quotation to bernhard’s work in general. in his theater plays, too, for instance, bernard chooses “the one, who does not / cannot come to terms with his existence” as his protagonist.8 bernhard’s invention of the term Existenzüberbrückung, for example, “tiding over one’s existence,” describes both the reason and the aim of his writing: to come to terms with the lifespan between one’s birth and one’s death.9 it is, however, more than the mere obsession with existence as such that brings bernhard close to Kierkegaard. it is rather that bernhard rolls up existence from a similar starting point as Kierkegaard—namely, starting from the premises of failure. no doubt he does so quite differently than Kierkegaard. and yet it is tempting to interpret the negative anthropology expressed by Kierkegaard in The Concept of Anxiety which he later on completed with The Sickness unto Death10 as a theoretical background to Bernhard’s prose. Fear and despair—in other words that mortal illness—are identified by bernhard as the human condition. could not the following utterance taken from Die Jagdgesellschaft just as well have been put forward by Kierkegaard himself? “[T]here is a mortal illness in everyone / and a small, sometimes negligible injury, which often is not even acknowledged / expresses this illness.”11 and, at a different point: “A human being / is a desperate human being / anything else is a bunch of lies.”12 What becomes very clear in bernhard’s writing, as it does with Kierkegaard’s, is that despair is an active deed. bernhard’s heroes, for instance, almost compulsively seek out locations that are life-denying: so, for example, they go to the lime works in the narrative of the same name. and Konrad, the hero in Das Kalkwerk, essentially knows from the very beginning what these lime works mean for him: “our destination were [sic] the lime works, our aim was death, by the lime works.”13 it is in this context, that we encounter terminology, which somberly reverberates Kierkegaard: “[the lime works] would be bound to lead to despair, then to

7 thomas bernhard, Der Keller. Eine Erziehung, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1976, p. 108: “die Existenz klarmachen, sie nicht nur durchschauen, sondern aufklären bis zu dem höchstmöglichen Grad.” 8 bernhard, Über allen Gipfeln ist Ruh’, p. 228: “der sich mit der Existenz nicht abfindet / nicht abfinden kann.” 9 bernhard, Auslöschung, p. 611. 10 cf. michael theunissen, “Kierkegaard’s negativistic method,” in Kierkegaard’s Truth: The Disclosure of the Self, ed. by Joseph H. smith, new Haven and london: Yale university Press 1981 (Psychiatry and the Humanities, vol. 5), pp. 381–423. 11 bernhard, Die Jagdgesellschaft, p. 204: “[I]n einem jeden ist eine Todeskrankheit / und eine kleine oft ganz unbedeutende ja oft gar nicht wahrgenommene Verletzung / bringt sie zum Ausdruck.” 12 ibid., p. 221: “Ein Mensch / ist ein verzweifelter Mensch / alles andere ist die Lüge.” in this context bernhard describes the lack of interest—which Kierkegaard took as a sign for the aesthetic stage—as a result of the mortal illness; cf. ibid., pp. 241–3. 13 thomas bernhard, Das Kalkwerk, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1973, p. 176: “Unser Ziel ist das Kalkwerk gewesen, unser Ziel ist der Tod gewesen durch das Kalkwerk.” (in english as The Lime Works: A Novel, trans. by sophie Wilkins, london: vintage 2010.)

18

Stefan Egenberger

numbness of spirit and emotion, then to sickness and then to death.”14 usually, the obsession with despair is staged in a grotesque manner, as is the case with the onearmed general in Die Jagdgesellschaft. the fact that the general decides “suddenly, truly suddenly” to fell a tree, which results in him mutilating himself even further, happens without any reason, and seems to have no other cause but the wish for his own decline.15 along with mutilation comes the mortal illness.16 it is as if it was a character trait of bernhard’s heroes, to—at the end of the day—make straight for their own desperation. the desperate existence portrayed in bernhard’s work has yet another origin, however, which in turn makes reference to Kierkegaard’s philosophy. this correlation becomes apparent in his narrative Gehen, published in 1971. the setting of the story is that Karrer has gone mad and has been hospitalized in the steinhof psychiatric institution. Having gone for a walk with Karrer previously, Oehler tells the first-person narrator about the background of Karrer’s madness. the characters of the narrative are cocooned in an endless loop of quotations, which no longer penetrate the reality they are supposed to be referring to. the phrasings—“so rustenschacher says to Karrer, i say to scherrer, says oehler”17—while being catchy, at the same time point towards the theme of the narrative: how thought and speech correlate with reality. the impossibility of attaining reality by the means of thought and speech, the inability to surpass the quotation of a quotation, are the reasons for Karrer’s madness.18 the metaphor bernhard uses for thought is the action of walking: “Walking (and thus thinking)” refer to each other.19 This also is reflected in the style of the narration: bernhard continually rephrases the conglomerated sentences of the story, changes sentence parts, repeats, variegates, so that in the end there is no stringent narrative structure but rather a slow, intuitive motion which is not dissimilar to the movement of a rambling walk. the sentences stroll through the narrative, which—as a logical consequence—has no paragraphs. gradually the image forms an endless, circulating movement, without a straight direction or aim, similar to a walk, which has no other purpose but the walk itself. accordingly, the act of thinking within a terminology has no aim, because the purpose of all thought—reality itself—can never be caught up with by the means of thought and terminology. all reassurance about one’s own existence, therefore, which is accomplished by the process of thinking, is accomplished with the help of something which has invariably already lost its access to reality: “What we have is nothing but a substitute for reason. it is substitute thinking which enables our existence.”20 the same applies to existence bernhard, Das Kalkwerk, p. 176: “[Das Kalkwerk] müsse zuerst zur Verzweiflung, dann zur Geistes- und Gefühlsöde, dann zu Krankheit und Tod führen.” 15 bernhard, Die Jagdgesellschaft, p. 203: “plötzlich urplötzlich.” 16 cf. ibid., p. 202. 17 thomas bernhard, Gehen, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1971, p. 59: “so Rustenschacher zu Karrer, sage ich Scherrer, so Oehler.” 18 cf. ibid., p. 22: “essentially, all that is said, is a quotation.” (“Im Grunde ist alles, was gesagt wird, zitiert.”) 19 ibid., p. 8: “Gehen (und also Denken).” 20 ibid., p. 15: “Was wir haben, ist nichts als Verstandesersatz. Ein Ersatzdenken ermöglicht unsere Existenz.” 14

Thomas Bernhard: A Grotesque Sickness unto Death

19

itself. life is nothing but a “trial life,” because it cannot focus on an underlying, true, shape which it can use as a model.21 this alienation of thinking and reality is the cause of insanity. it is triggered when Karrer quarrels about the labeling and appellation of trousers in rustenschacher’s shop: once rustenschacher himself, just like previously his nephew, had reassured him once more that the trouser-materials were first-class…materials…and that it made no sense to claim these trouser-materials were remaindered materials, let alone czechoslovakian remaindered materials, Karrer repeated once more how blatantly obvious it was that these trouser-materials were czechoslovakian remaindered materials.22

insanity sets in at the exact point at which the discrepancy between reality and appellation becomes apparent, or rather it is realized that any appellation—be it “first-class materials” or “Czechoslovakian remaindered materials” equally falls short of reality.23 substitute thought—which takes the truth of that which is thought for granted—has failed. With the realization of this fact, all substitute thought, which is required to make our existence possible, has become impossible. thus, existence itself has become impossible: insanity is the only way out. We all know that Kierkegaard is unique in how he postulates the difference between thought and being and juxtaposes it to the Hegelian system. thought only ever thinks a “thought-actuality,”24 rather than thinking a reality the way it is in itself. interestingly—to draw a connection to bernhard at this point—Kierkegaard, too, makes a connection between walking and thinking and explains the action of thinking allegorically by the act of walking. in Fear and Trembling, for instance, walking stands for the interruption of reasonable thought by the paradoxical structure of our reality: “similarly, the human act of walking…is a continuous falling.”25 the Concluding Unscientific Postscript presents another striking example that points in bernhard’s direction: “it assumes that if existing is like walking along a road, then the oddity of existence is that the goal lies behind—and yet he is compelled to continue walking ahead.”26 to come to terms with one’s own existence, even though its purpose, its reason, and its aim lies behind one and therefore cannot possibly

ibid., p. 95: “Versuchsleben.” ibid., p. 73: “Nachdem Rustenschacher selbst wieder, wie sein Neffe vorher, gesagt hat, daß es sich bei den Hosenstoffen um erstklassige…Stoffe…handle, und es unsinnig sei, zu behaupten, es handle sich bei diesen Hosenstoffen um Ausschlußware oder gar um tschechoslowakische Ausschlußware, sagt Karrer noch einmal, daß es sich bei diesen Hosenstoffen ganz offensichtlich um tschechoslowakische Ausschlußware handle.” 23 cf. elisabeth strowick, “unzuverlässiges erzählen der existenz. thomas bernhards spaziergänge mit Kierkegaard,” in Denken/Schreiben (in) der Krise—Existentialismus und Literatur, ed. by cornelia blasberg and franz-Josef deiters, st. ingbert: röhring 2004, pp. 453–81, p. 473. 24 SKS 7, 292 / CUP1, 321. 25 SKS 4, 243 / PF, 37. 26 SKS 7, 408 / CUP1, 449. 21 22

20

Stefan Egenberger

be understood—herein lies the tragedy and comedy of our existence according to Kierkegaard, and it is exactly here that bernhard follows him.27 II. Communicating and Laughing if it is impossible for language to depict reality, then this is bound to affect bernhard’s diction: “language is useless when it comes to telling the truth, communicating; language for the writer allows but approximation, a continually desperate and thus dubitable approximation to the described.”28 bernhard mentioning communication here is reminiscent of Kierkegaard’s theory of indirect communication. even though bernhard expresses the dilemma of communication as such,29 he is evidently concerned—as is Kierkegaard—with the communication of existential truth: “We need to see existence as the circumstance which we want to describe. However, we can never see, no matter how hard we try, the circumstances.”30 this means that Bernhard’s language cannot but reflect upon its own inability to grasp reality—and here bernhard and Kierkegaard have something important in common. What they share, in the words of elisabeth strowick, is an “unreliable narration.”31 one of the main ways in which Kierkegaard expressed the uncertainty of his statements was by presenting them as authored by pseudonyms. He developed this technique to perfection in Either/Or, where the various deliberations of aesthete a in the first volume take turns in interpreting each other, before they are critically reflected there is another parallel between bernhard and Kierkegaard which becomes apparent: in order to illustrate the difference between thinking and existing, Kierkegaard had defined logical thought as motionlessness, as opposed to which reality is characterized by movement. it is that exact same idea which bernhard takes up when he refers to the difference between thinking and walking (thus contradicting his own identification of walking and thinking): “the difference between walking and thinking is that thinking has nothing to do with velocity while walking always does have to do with velocity.” (“Zwischen Gehen und Denken besteht der Unterschied, daß Denken nichts mit Geschwindigkeit zu tun hat, Gehen aber tatsächlich immer mit Geschwindigkeit.”) bernhard, Gehen, p. 90. Walking thus is motion, according to Kierkegaard: part of existence, while thinking, as opposed to existing, stands still. 28 thomas bernhard, Die Kälte. Eine Isolation, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1981, p. 89: “Die Sprache ist unbrauchbar, wenn es darum geht, die Wahrheit zu sagen, Mitteilung zu machen, sie läßt dem Schreibenden nur die Annäherung, immer nur die verzweifelte und dadurch nur zweifelhafte Annäherung an den Gegenstand.” 29 cf. bernhard, Der Keller, p. 32: “it is not possible to communicate truth” (“Wahrheit ist überhaupt nicht mitteilbar.”) 30 ibid., p. 44: “Wir müssen die Existenz als den Sachverhalt, den wir beschreiben wollen, sehen, aber wir sehen, so sehr wir uns bemühen, durch das von uns Beschriebene niemals den Sachverhalt.” both bernhard as well as Kierkegaard acknowledge the possibility of truth only in regards to their own existence: “the truth is known only by the one who is affected by it. as soon as he wishes to communicate it, he automatically turns into a liar” (“Die Wahrheit kennt nur der Betroffene, will er sie mitteilen, wird er automatisch zum Lügner.”) bernhard, Der Keller, p. 42. Kierkegaard argues it similarly: “[t]he ethical as the internal cannot be observed by anyone standing outside” (SKS 7, 292 / CUP1, 320). 31 strowick, “unzuverlässiges erzählen der existenz,” p. 454. 27

Thomas Bernhard: A Grotesque Sickness unto Death

21

by the ethical in the second volume. Furthermore, both standpoints are reflected upon once again by fictitious publisher Victor Eremita. It is not possible to ascertain conclusively in what way the individual statements are to be assessed. Kierkegaard not only made use of this technique, but he also provided a theoretical framework by which to understand it. the center of his theory of indirect communication is the idea of the double-reflection, in which every reflection is negated by another, second reflection and is thus rendered questionable: “In the deception of double-reflection, consideration is given to the negativity of the communication.”32 the purpose of indirect communication is none other than to rule out all—only deceptively certain— certainty. one of the ways in which bernhard succeeds in doing so is by allowing contradictory statements to coexist next to one another: “What you need to know, says oehler, is that all sentences that are uttered and contemplated, all sentences that exist in fact, are true and false at the same time.”33 thus everything is true and is not true, or is only true for a moment, or to a certain extent. the objectively not decidable decision as to which statement is applicable has to be taken by the reader. one particular stylistic feature, which serves to keep statements non-committal, afloat as it were, is that of humor. It does both Kierkegaard and Bernhard justice to perceive them—at least partly—as being humorous. interestingly, the particular way in which they both make use of humor is not dissimilar—both will always use humor in combination or even in amalgamation with the tragic and the serious.34 Just as Kierkegaard’s works can be classified within the tradition of tragic comedies, bernhard describes his narrations and theater plays as “comedy-tragedies.”35 in a very immediate way the comical is juxtaposed with the tragic and serious, and in the beginning it is a negative stylistic device: statements are undermined ironically, by referring to the statement’s incommensurability of that what it states. Kierkegaard’s conception of humor exceeds this immediate conception because the humor does not simply dissolve the tragedy of existence but rather assimilates it. With a smile the humor thus solves the tragedy—in a way that nonetheless preserves the tragedy. accordingly, Kierkegaard describes humor as an “equilibrium between the comic and the tragic.”36 but how is it possible for humor to unite the comical with the tragic? for Kierkegaard, the comical and the tragic are two different ways of expressing that particular contradiction which is found in every existence: “What lies at the root of both the comic and the pathos-filled is the misrelation, the contradiction between the infinite and the finite.”37 thus, the difference between the comical and the tragic “vanishes.”38 SKS 7, 76 / CUP1, 76. bernhard, Gehen, p. 16: “Man muß wissen, sagt Oehler, alle Sätze, die gesprochen werden und die gedacht werden und die es überhaupt gibt, sind gleichzeitig richtig und gleichzeitig falsch.” 34 for the following see christian Klug, Thomas Bernhards Theaterstücke, stuttgart: J.b. metzlerische verlagsbuchhandlung 1991, pp. 96–106. 35 bernhard, Frost, p. 189: “Komödientragödien.” 36 SKS 7, 265 / CUP1, 292. 37 SKS 7, 88 / CUP1, 89. 38 ibid. 32 33

22

Stefan Egenberger

in the Concluding Unscientific Postscript the fictitious humorous narrator climacus plays a trick on the reader by describing the relationship between humor and christian faith from no other but a humorous angle. by doing so, we cannot but doubt whether we have learnt anything that could help us understand christianity from his description. Humor acts as a reserve on any clear statement about existence and faith. Kierkegaard describes this function of humor as “revocation.” at a closer look, Kierkegaard’s revocation does not mean non-dialectic negation, however, but rather describes a situation in which that what has been revoked still is preserved, with all of its “very doubtful significance.”39 this becomes apparent in the “appendix. an understanding with the reader” to the Postscript, which acts as a kind of readinginstruction: the reader “can understand that understanding is a revocation—the understanding with him as the sole reader is indeed the revocation of the book.”40 the important thing is that the revocation does not render the endeavor useless: “[t]o write a book that does not demand to be important for anyone is still not the same as letting it to be unwritten.”41 it is also in fact particularly, or even exclusively, those contemplations that are dubious that seem absurd in humorous laughter, that provide meaning for the reader. When one looks at bernhard’s humorous narrative technique against this background, many striking similarities become apparent. for one, he deduces the unity of comedy and tragedy in humor from an existential contradiction. this seems precisely to be Bernhard’s intention, when he defines humor as being “in relation / to the irreconcilabilities.”42 the despair which grows within such irreconcilability, according to bernhard always has both a funny and a tragic dimension: “in a state of despair…it is possible, from one moment to the next, to step out of the tragedy (of which one is a part) into the comedy (of which one is part) and vice versa, one can step out of the comedy (which one is a part of) into the tragedy (which one is a part of) at any time.”43 Remembering Kierkegaard’s reading instructions in the “Appendix,” we can find similar advice in bernhard’s Das Kalkwerk. fro evaluates the research project which Konrad worked on until his demise and never managed to write down: even though the drafts for this project were no more but “for the most part mad” notes and scraps of paper, they were none the less “of great interest.”44 referring to the connection between comedy and seriousness fro continues: “[W]hatever is not serious, despite having been meant seriously…might still turn out to be serious and of utmost importance in the end.”45 SKS 7, 246 / CUP1, 271. SKS 7, 563 / CUP1, 621. 41 ibid. 42 bernhard, Über allen Gipfeln ist Ruh’, p. 232: “Verhältnis / zu den Unvereinbarkeiten.” 43 thomas bernhard, Watten. Ein Nachlaß, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1969, p. 87: “Man kann in Verzweiflung…von einem Augenblick auf den anderen aus der Tragödie (in der man ist) in das Lustspiel eintreten (in dem man ist), umgekehrt jederzeit aus dem Lustspiel (in dem man ist) in die Tragödie (in der man ist).” 44 bernhard, Das Kalkwerk, p. 148. 45 ibid: “[W]as nicht ernst ist, obwohl es doch ernst gemeint sei…könne letzten Endes doch ernst und von größter Bedeutung sein.” 39 40

Thomas Bernhard: A Grotesque Sickness unto Death

23

a formative stylistic device of bernhard’s humor is exaggeration. His literature might aptly be called no less than “exaggeration art.”46 each tragic or serious contemplation about life is exaggerated to such an extent that it can no longer be taken seriously. What is essential, all the high hopes and plans of bernhard’s protagonists—only ever told in the narrative vein of their failure—can be perceived in a wider scope, both tragically and comically. What this implies, however, is that the laughing matter about bernhard’s protagonists is not only their plans but their failure. this has an important consequence: we would have no choice but to take bernhard’s obsession with failure as an indication for pure nihilism, were the failure or the postulate of never-having-done-anything-but-fail not kept hovering by means of humor. While hovering, however, it is by no means certain that the failure is final. The originally senseless quest for a supporting reason for one’s own existence remains—if only through the vein of humor—possible as an impossible possibility. thus, by the means of humor which bernhard cultivates in his exaggeration mode, it is possible to “endure existence…to facilitate it.”47 certainly, for the believing christian Kierkegaard, the misrelation between the terminal and the eternal is solved in Jesus christ, who uncloses the hope for the believer to be relieved from it. bernhard does not consider such a possibility. both are in unison, however, when they say that this misrelation cannot be overcome by the existing themselves and that living with this contradiction can only be tolerated with humor. for Kierkegaard, at least when it comes to his Postscript, this remains a fact and faith does not change this—seeing as even christian hope can only be expressed by the means of humor. “in his outer appearance [the religious person] is a humorist.”48 in other words, even christians cannot draw on a religious certainty when communicating with others and can only express the contradiction they face by counterbalancing the suffering it causes with laughter. III. Faith in scholarly research the extent to which bernhard’s oeuvre can be interpreted in relation to Kierkegaard is contended. the particular bone of contention is the question of religion. Heinrich schmiedinger, for instance, drew a clear distinction for that reason between the nihilist novels of bernhard and the essays of Kierkegaard, which were clearly influenced by Christianity when written.49 With such a fundamental difference, schmiedinger strongly discouraged anyone from overemphasizing any parallels between Kierkegaard and bernhard. undoubtedly, Kierkegaard’s christian background is quite different from bernhard’s. Yet, let us not forget that Kierkegaard can well be considered one of the first thinkers who involved himself with the emerging nihilism. Furthermore, bernhard’s writings, too, assume involvement with religion. christian Klug is bernhard: Auslöschung, p. 611: “Übertreibungskunst.” ibid., p. 612: “die Existenz auszuhalten…sie zu ermöglichen.” 48 SKS 7, 454 / CUP1, 501. 49 cf. Heinrich schmiedinger, “thomas bernhard und sören Kierkegaard,” Jahrbuch der Universität Salzburg 1995–1997, 1999, pp. 29–45. 46 47

24

Stefan Egenberger

right in saying: “the questions, which bernhard and his protagonists think about obsessively are the classical questions of religion: they are ‘final questions.’ ”50 bernhard’s novel Das Kalkwerk, published in 1970, is particularly suitable for tracing the ambivalence in regards to the religious dimension of his work. the starting point of the novel is a crime. on the night of december 24–25 Konrad shoots his wheelchair-bound wife. Two days later, the police find him in a dried up cesspit. the novel describes the events leading up to the deed, and it becomes increasingly apparent, that life in the lime works means total loneliness, and an absolute sacrifice. for several years, Konrad has been involved in a research project on the sense of hearing to which he dedicated his entire life—in the end he even sacrificed his wife to it. even this layer of the plot harbors two religious implications. for one, the murder takes place on Christmas Eve. At first glance, Bernhard is aiming at reversing the christian principle of revelation: instead of the birth of the divine son as the revelation of god the father, a murder takes place. the second clue can be found in Konrad’s research project: the sense of hearing acts as a symbol for revelation. the fact that the project has failed—Konrad simply does not manage to write it down, despite the fact that it is all there in his head—implies, therefore, the absence of a revelation and leads to the events of the unholy night. At first sight this seems a radical antithesis to Christian beliefs and irreconcilable with Kierkegaard’s presuppositions. as much as this is the case, there are nonetheless parallels which can be drawn between Kierkegaard and bernhard: for one of Kierkegaard’s pseudonyms, too, explicitly assumed non-christian standpoints— even though the research literature has agreed not to take them as Kierkegaard’s own opinions. secondly, it is arguable that bernhard uses categories and thought patterns that can clearly be traced back to Kierkegaard in order to describe this said revelation and its failure. 1. by using pseudonyms, Kierkegaard repeatedly assumed standpoints outside of the christian faith. in the Postscript, for instance, the humorist climacus describes his philosophy of life in contrast to that of christianity. in Either/Or, likewise, we can find an explicit antithesis to the Christian world-view: the writings of the aesthete proclaim a hedonistic way of life, aimed at temptation and deception. it is his way to escape the boredom and despair of his life, which has come undone by the loss or rather rejection of christian principles. meanwhile, the aesthete’s antithesis to the christian world-view is quite tangible: don Juan, who stands for temptation, appears as the incarnation of the flesh, as the enemy of the Christian spirit,51 and in the thesis “the unhappiest one” friday is mentioned as the “holy” day—implicitly referring to the death of Jesus. death, and not resurrection, has become the center of “faith,” christianity has been parodied, reversed into its very opposite. these are but a few examples. basically, this all goes to say that Kierkegaard, too, has thought about deconstructing the christian faith and that—in particular—the aesthete in volume one of Either/Or has been put in a position which resembles that of bernhard’s 50 51

Klug, Thomas Bernhards Theaterstücke, p. 107. cf. SKS 2, 93 / EO1, 88.

Thomas Bernhard: A Grotesque Sickness unto Death

25

protagonists in a fundamental way and in which they cannot but fail. Kierkegaard had defined boredom, the never-ending repetition of the same as the construction principle of aesthetics. it is exactly this idea which informs Konrad’s situation in Das Kalkwerk: the conversations Konrad has with his wife, for instance, describe a never ending series of repetitions52 and the situation of Konrad’s wife who—once she has finished sewing a pair of gloves proceeds to undo the hems again immediately afterward—is grotesquely reminiscent of the sisyphus myth.53 the hope of ever discovering anything new, true, and real has been lost from the very beginning—this is what Kierkegaard’s aesthete has in common with bernhard’s heroes. 2. Were one to ask about shared intellectual ideas of Kierkegaard and bernhard, the most important concept one would come across would be the category of the moment; developed by Kierkegaard, it heavily features in bernhard’s work. by “moment” Kierkegaard means the fragile point in time in which time and eternity are one, in which the believer becomes aware of his eternal purpose. this moment means everything to Kierkegaard, and bernhard, as if in accordance, describes the following: the research project, a symbol for revelation in Das Kalkwerk, can only be undertaken at the very moment itself, “from one moment to the next.”54 this means that revelation is a “question of the moment, just as everything is a question of the moment.”55 What makes the moment interesting to both Kierkegaard and bernhard is its ambivalence. Kierkegaard described this ambivalence when writing that the moment cannot claim any duration of time and can therefore always be taken as being nothing at all. bernhard describes strauch’s poetry in Frost in a similar way—reminiscent of an “eschatological happening”:56 “my poetry is momentary. therefore it is not.”57 the essential point is that the absolute cannot be communicated, that it cannot manifest itself in time, without sacrificing its absoluteness. It is exactly this dilemma which Kierkegaard had abstractly described: “[b]ecause absoluteness is not directly the element of a finite existence,” the absolute can only appear momentarily.58 the contradiction between finite and infinite can only be synthesized in the moment— only to dissemble into the opposites of finite and infinite immediately afterwards. Konrad puts it similarly: “[b]ut these ideas would disappear in the very moment in which he had them.”59

cf. bernhard, Das Kalkwerk, p. 159: “their comments on the matter are always the same comments.” (“Ihre Kommentare dazu seien immer die gleichen Kommentare.”) 53 cf. ibid., p. 140. 54 ibid., p. 118: “von einem Augenblick auf den anderen.” 55 ibid., p. 116: “Frage des Augenblicks, wie ja alles eine Frage des Augenblicks.” cf. also pp. 57, pp. 66–7, p. 168, and p. 206. 56 gerhard vom Hofe and Peter Pfaff, Das Elend des Polyphem. Zum Thema der Subjektivität bei Thomas Bernhard, Peter Handke, Wolfgang Koeppen und Botho Strauß, Königstein: athenäum 1980, p. 35. 57 bernhard, Frost, p. 235. 58 SKS 7, 438 / CUP1, 483. 59 bernhard, Das Kalkwerk, p. 112: “[A]ber diese Einfälle wären im Augenblick, in welchem er sie habe, auch schon wieder weg.” 52

26

Stefan Egenberger

the idea of a moment entails another ambiguity, however, which unites Kierkegaard and bernhard. While bernhard always understands the moment as having the potential of the immediate onset of insanity,60 Kierkegaard also perceives the moment as a mixed blessing, in as much as it can entail either a decision for sin or for faith. it would be safe to assume that for Kierkegaard the “misunderstanding of the moment”61 can be just as much “an acoustical illusion”62 as is put forward in Konrad’s research project on the sense of hearing. the fact that in Das Kalkwerk Konrad does not manage to put pen to paper and rather has got the whole research project tucked away in his brain, is a poignant expression of Kierkegaard’s theory of the incommensurability of the absolute and the relative. The absolute cannot enter the sphere of the finite. Bernhard plays, as it were, with Kierkegaard’s contemplations on the relation of the inner and the outer and possibility and necessity to an extreme extent.63 Konrad’s thought-out and thought-of research project is nothing but pure possibility. the thought of it is something inner, completely sealed off from the outside, and it fails:64 “surely, a research project that someone has only got in their heads but has not managed to commit to paper, quite simply does not exist.”65 another aspect of the thought-out yet not written-down research project is the relation of possibility and necessity. Konrad believes he has the “possibility, the ability,” and he sometimes thinks how “he has the possibility to do everything.”66 He believes in the possibility of the project, that is, in the possibility of revelation. However, this remains pure possibility while the research project is not realized. the disappearance into possibility, which is no longer supported by reality, to Kierkegaard means the disintegration of self.67 Precisely this disintegration happens in Das Kalkwerk at the moment when Konrad shoots his wife and—by having done so—has to admit his own failure: “He was lacking what was most important: fearlessness of the realization of the becoming real.”68 the possibility of the research project is starkly contrasted by a world of bare necessity, a world that has “no movement,” instead just nonsensical repetition, a cf. bernhard, Gehen, p. 26. SKS 4, 255 / PF, 51. 62 SKS 4, 254 / PF, 51. 63 as we know, Kierkegaard had assumed that falling short of self had to do with the unilateral emphasis on the poles of the finite and infinite, the terminal and eternal, or possibility and necessity. The alternative to that is the fulfilled existence as one’s self in a balance of the opposing determinations. cf. SKS 11, 25–37 / SUD, 29–42. 64 cf. Kierkegaard’s explication on the dialectic on interiority and outwardness and his concept of “hidden inwardness” in SKS 7, 368–76 / CUP1, 405–14. SKS 7, 474 / CUP1, 522. 65 bernhard, Das Kalkwerk, p. 67: “Eine Studie, die einer nur im Kopf, aber nicht auf dem Papier habe, existiere ja gar nicht.” 66 ibid., p. 116, p. 117: “Möglichkeit, Fähigkeit,” “daß ihm jetzt alles möglich sei.” 67 cf. SKS 11, 32 / SUD, 36: in the moment that the self believes that all is possible to him/her “is exactly the final moment, the point at which the individual himself becomes a mirage.” 68 bernhard, Das Kalkwerk, p. 211: “das Wichtigste habe ihm gefehlt: Furchtlosigkeit vor Realisierung, vor Verwirklichung.” 60 61

Thomas Bernhard: A Grotesque Sickness unto Death

27

world that radically lacks any sense of possibility.69 this renders writing down the research project and therefore the materialization of revelation impossible: Konrad thinks “that he could write it down any time, any time at all…as long as he could do so all of a sudden.”70 there is no such possibility, however, because reality rules out possibility in a radical way: “[t]he whole world [is] nothing but distraction (from the research project).”71 the solution Konrad sees to his problem is to dissolve everything that stands in the way of the project, or rather anything that distracts him. the narrative expresses this attitude by his move into the lime works: “it is madness to seek an existence in the lime works, unless there is a so-called higher reason” it is “an act of utmost sacrifice.”72 The martyrdom that causes Konrad to sacrifice everything to his research project can equally be considered against the background of the theory of self-annihilation, which Kierkegaard takes up and extends to the self-annihilation in view of the absolute. by self-annihilation in religious terms Kierkegaard means a way that would successfully lead to god “when everything that is in the way is cleared out, every finitude, and first and foremost the individual himself in his finitude.”73 bernhard took up this idea in the very terminology: “to him everything is at all times the absolute, which was threatening to destroy him.”74 even the self-annihilation fails, the revelation fails to arrive—at least on the level of the narration. the humorist from the Postscript, climacus, might want to say the following on the subject: it does not matter. “everyone advances equally far am Ende [in the end].”75 the differences between individual human beings, even between failure and success are annulled in view of a higher-ranking madness for the humorist. thus, failure makes him laugh. Will this laughter reveal an underlying seriousness, similar to that which Kierkegaard’s and bernhard’s heroes proclaim? it must remain uncertain—but “all would be different.”76 Translated by Rebecca Sanger

ibid., p. 143: “keine Bewegung.” ibid., p. 92: “daß er die Studie in jedem Augenblick niederschreiben könnte…wenn er die Möglichkeit hätte, sie plötzlich niederzuschreiben.” 71 ibid., p. 173: “[D]ie ganze Welt [ist] nichts als Ablenkung (von der Studie).” cf. p. 195. 72 ibid., p. 166: “[I]m Kalkwerk existieren sei, habe es keinen sogenannten höheren Zweck, Wahnsinn”; “äußerste Aufopferung.” 73 SKS 7, 510 / CUP1, 561. 74 ibid. p. 69: “Alles sei ihm ununterbrochen das Absolute, das ihn zu vernichten drohte”; cf. bernard, auslöschung, p. 296: “indeed, i am currently in the process of taking apart Wolfsegg [the narrator’s birth place] and my family and to disintegrate them, to destroy them, to annihilate them and while doing so i am taking myself apart, disintegrating myself, destroying and annihilating myself.” (“Tatsächlich bin ich dabei, Wolfsegg und die Meinigen auseinanderzunehmen und zu zersetzen, sie zu vernichten, auszulöschen und nehme mich dabei selbst auseinander, zersetze mich, vernichte mich, lösche mich aus.”) 75 SKS 7, 409 / CUP1, 450. 76 bernhard, Das Kalkwerk, p. 198: “alles wäre anders.” 69 70

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Bernhard’s corpus Frost, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1963, p. 235; p. 229. Das Kalkwerk, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1973, p. 57; pp. 66–9; p. 92; p. 112; pp. 116–18; p. 148; p. 168; p. 211. Korrektur, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1975, pp. 120–24. Der Keller. Eine Erziehung, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1976, p. 32; pp. 42–4. Die Kälte. Eine Isolation, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1981, p. 89. Auslöschung. Ein Zerfall, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1986, pp. 54–5; p. 586; pp. 611–12. Alte Meister, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, p. 7. Zwei Erzieher, in Erzählungen, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, p. 61. Die Jagdgesellschaft, in Stücke 1, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, pp. 201–4, p. 221; pp. 241–3. Über allen Gipfeln ist Ruh’, in Stücke 3, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, p. 232; p. 266; p. 275. Der Theatermacher, in Stücke 4, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1988, p. 46. II. Sources of Bernhard’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard undetermined. III. Secondary Literature on Bernhard’s Relation to Kierkegaard görner, rüdiger, “gespiegelte Wiederholungen. zu einem Kunstgriff von thomas bernhard,” in Thomas Bernhard. Beiträge zur Fiktion der Postmoderne, ed. by Wendelin schmidt-dengler et al., frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1997, pp. 111–25. Hofe, gerhard vom and Peter Pfaff, Elend des Polyphem. Zum Thema der Subjektivität bei Thomas Bernhard, Peter Handke, Wolfgang Koeppen und Botho Strauß, Königstein: athenäum 1980, pp. 28–57. Klug, christian, Thomas Bernhards Theaterstücke, stuttgart: J.b. metzlerische verlagsbuchhandlung 1991, pp. 59–111. schmiedinger, Heinrich, “thomas bernhard und sören Kierkegaard,” Jahrbuch der Universität Salzburg 1995–1997, 1999, pp. 29–45. steinert, Hajo, Das Schreiben über den Tod. Von Thomas Bernhards “Verstörung” zur Erzählprosa der siebziger Jahre, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1984, pp. 59–67.

Thomas Bernhard: A Grotesque Sickness unto Death

29

strowick, elisabeth, “unzuverlässiges erzählen der existenz. thomas bernhards spaziergänge mit Kierkegaard,” in Denken/Schreiben (in) der Krise— Existentialismus und Literatur, ed. by cornelia blasberg and franz-Josef deiters, st. ingbert: röhring 2004, pp. 453–81. Weiß, gernot, Auslöschung der Philosophie. Philosophiekritik bei Thomas Bernhard, Würzburg: Königshausen & neumann 1993, pp. 45–56.

Hermann broch: “nennen’s mir an bessern” steen tullberg

I. Short Biography Hermann broch (1886–1951) was born in vienna into a mixture of higher bourgeoisie and second generation assimilated Jewry, which forms the background for so many leading european artists and intellectuals born around the 1880s. He was educated as an engineer in 1904–07 and ran his father’s textile factory in teesdorf (outside vienna) until 1927, where he dedicated himself to his authorship fulltime. during World War i he came into connection with the literary and intellectual life of vienna, contributing to ludwig von ficker’s periodical Der Brenner from 1913 and to franz blei’s Summa from 1917 onwards. a decisive and lifelong inspiration was also his encounter with Karl Kraus’ satirical and critical periodical Die Fackel. in the 1920s broch’s primary intellectual focus was a theory of value and philosophy of history, which he had begun working on in 1916. He also attended the University of Vienna in 1925–29 for the second time (the first brief stay was in 1904–05), where he studied philosophy, mathematics, and physics and came into contact with some of the leading names of the neo-positivist so-called vienna circle, amongst others moritz schlick (1882–1936) and rudolf carnap (1891–1970). in the highly productive period 1928–38, broch produced his masterly trilogy Die Schlafwandler or The Sleepwalkers (1931–32), numerous important essays on art and philosophy (a couple of which will be mentioned in this article), the novels Die Unbekannte Größe (1933) and Die Verzauberung (1936), the drama Die Entsühnung (1934), the comedy Aus der Luft gegriffen oder Die Geschäfte des Baron Laborde (1934), and the first drafts of what would become his second literary masterpiece Der Tod des Vergil. He also became personally acquainted with people like elias canetti (1905–94) and ernst bloch (1885–1977). in march of 1938 broch was arrested by the national socialists, but with the help of amongst others James Joyce, he got away to england and from there to the usa on a visa brought about by thomas mann and albert einstein. the stay in the usa (in new York and Princeton) lasted the rest of his life and was marked by a constant lack of money and a feverish productivity. His main intellectual interest was an extensive work on a mass psychology (published posthumously), but he also managed to finish his book on Virgil (1945) and the novel Die Schuldlosen (1950). broch is normally regarded as belonging to the canon of important renewers of the art of the novel, which also include franz Kafka, James Joyce, robert musil,

32

Steen Tullberg

marcel Proust, and andré gide, but his work did not enjoy a serious reception until the 1980s. II. The Origins of a Kierkegaard Quotation in one of the truly great novels of the twentieth century, Hermann broch’s The Sleepwalkers,1 there is a direct reference to søren Kierkegaard. it appears in the third volume of the trilogy in one of the philosophical excursions that as a whole constitutes an original philosophy of value which broch had been working on since around the outbreak of World War i. the passage reads: there is no severity that may not be a mask for fear [Angst]. but the fear of lapsing into sectarianism would be much too insignificant a motive to account for the severity of Protestantism. And the flight to punctilious fidelity, to the written word, is pregnant with the fear of god, that fear which comes to light in luther’s poenitentia, that “absolute” fear of the “ruthlessness” of the absolute which Kierkegaard experienced and in which god “is enthroned in sorrow.”2

broch’s knowledge of Kierkegaard is usually thought to originate almost entirely from theodor Haecker’s (1879–1945) translations and many introductions to Kierkegaard,3 but as far as I have been able to find out, Haecker never presents or cites the precise quotation, “in which god ‘is enthroned in sorrow’ ” (“in der Gott ‘trauernd thront’ ”), which originates from a journal entry from 1854.4 neither can it, to the best of my knowledge, be found in any of the other german translations of Kierkegaard’s Nachlass that must have been available to broch.5 in all probability, he has the phrase from the german translation from 1896 of Harald Høffding’s book on Kierkegaard as a philosopher (danish, 1892), where the entry is cited (from Efterladte Papirer, vol. viii, 1881, p. 169) at the end of the book with a slightly 1 Hermann broch, Die Schlafwandler. Eine Romantrilogie, vols. 1–3, munich and zurich: rhein verlag 1931–32. (english translation: The Sleepwalkers: A Trilogy, trans. by Willa and edwin muir, new York: vintage House 1996 (1945).) 2 broch, Die Schlafwandler, vol. 3, p. 322. (The Sleepwalkers, p. 524.) 3 see, for instance, the editor of Hermann broch, Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vols. 1–13, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp verlag 1976–80, Paul michael lützeler’s note in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 13/1, p. 282, note 1. 4 the original danish text is the following (my emphasis): “I min Barndom hørte jeg meget om, at der var stor Glæde, idel Glæde i Himlen; jeg troede det ogsaa og tænkte mig Gud salig i idel Glæde. Ak, jo mere jeg tænker derover, kommer jeg snarere til at forestille mig gud siddende i sorg, Den der meest af Alle veed hvad Sorg er,” SKS 26, 93, nb31:123. 5 the most obvious german translations being Sören Kierkegaards Verhältnis zu seiner Braut, Briefe und Aufzeichnungen aus seinem Nachlaß, ed. by Henriette lund, trans. by e. rohr, leipzig: insel-verlag 1904; Sören Kierkegaard Buch des Richters. Seine Tagebücher 1833–1855, trans. and ed. by Hermann gottsched, Jena and leipzig: eugen diederichs 1905; Sören Kierkegaard. Die Tagebücher 1834–1855, trans. and ed. by theodor Haecker, innsbruck: brenner-verlag 1923; and So spricht Sören Kierkegaard. Aus den Tage- und Nächtebüchern, trans. and ed. by robert dollinger, berlin: furche-verlag 1930.

Hermann Broch: “Nennen’s mir an Bessern”

33

different wording than broch uses.6 alternatively, broch might have picked it up from Julius baumann’s work on contemporary german and non-german philosophy from 1903, where Høffding’s Kierkegaard quotation is repeated.7 this is not completely trivial, because it suggests that broch might have been introduced to Kierkegaard well before he got to know Haecker’s works on the danish thinker, and also because it accentuates the philosophical dimension in Kierkegaard, rather than the cultural criticism, which is Haecker’s main point of focus. this is supported by the other, rather scarce, references that broch gives to Kierkegaard throughout his work, in that they appear predominantly in the context of a treatment of the philosophical concepts of value and anxiety. that being said, there is little doubt that broch must have read and enjoyed Haecker’s translations of and introductions to Kierkegaard, especially the ones appearing in Der Brenner, one of the most important and widely read periodicals in the german-speaking intellectual world of the time. evidence of this is given in a letter to the editor ludwig von ficker (1880–1967) on may 10, 1913.8 Here broch refers to some critical remarks by Haecker regarding thomas mann’s novel Death in Venice (1912), which Haecker made in a foreword to a translation of Kierkegaard’s Prefaces.9 Whether broch actually read Kierkegaard himself is not possible to verify, but robert Halsall (amongst others) is surely right when he prefers to speak of an indirect Kierkegaard influence in Broch rather than a more direct Kierkegaard reception.10

Harald Höffding, Sören Kierkegaard als Philosoph, with a foreword by christoph schrempf, stuttgart: frommann 1896 (Frommanns Klassiker der Philosophie, vol. 3), p. 134: “Als Kind hörte ich viel davon, dass im Himmel grosse Freude, eitel Freude sei; ich glaubte es auch, und ich dachte mir Gott selig in eitel Freude. Aber ach, je mehr ich darüber nachdenke, muss ich mir gott eher in trauer thronend vorstellen als einen, der am allerbesten weiss, was Trauer ist.” (my emphasis.) 7 Julius baumann, Deutsche und ausserdeutsche Philosophie der letzten Jahrzehnte dargestellt und beurteilt. Ein Buch zur Orientierung auch für Gebildete, gotha: Perthes 1903, pp. 490–4, see p. 492. broch owned books by both Høffding and baumann, although the ones mentioned are not to be found in the catalogue of broch’s vienna library that was published in 1990; cf. Klaus amann and Helmut grote, Die Wiener Bibliothek Hermann Brochs. Kommentiertes Verzeichnis des rekonstruierten Bestandes, vienna and cologne: böhlau verlag 1990. 8 cf. broch, Briefe, in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 13/1, p. 28. 9 theodor Haecker, “vorworte von sören Kierkegaard. vorbemerkung des Übersetzers,” Der Brenner, vol. 4, nos. 14–15 (may 1, 1914), pp. 666–70. in all probability, broch also knew Haecker’s book on Kierkegaard, Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, munich: J.f. schreiber 1913, and his important translation of parts of A Literary Review, which appeared in Der Brenner (vol. 4, 1914, pp. 815–49; pp. 869–908) a few weeks before the outbreak of the war under the title “Kritik der gegenwart.” 10 cf. robert Halsall, “zur Kierkegaardrezeption Hermann brochs,” in Literaturvermittlung um 1900. Fallstudien zu Wegen ins deutschsprachige kulturelle System, ed. by florian Krobb and sabine strümper-Krobb, amsterdam and new York: rodopi 2001, pp. 131–46. 6

34

Steen Tullberg

III. The Theory of Value in the context of The Sleepwalkers, Kierkegaard is brought on stage as a pivotal historical witness to the increasingly abstract nature of the image of god which, according to broch’s philosophy of history, is central to european thought since the renaissance. this development is described as a progressive “disintegration of values,” the heading for the ten philosophical chapters in volume three, which also forms the background for the chaotic experiences of the fictional characters of the novel. the protagonists are split between the irrational and the rational, another overall theme of the trilogy, and are unable to produce genuine knowledge precisely because of this divide. throughout broch’s philosophical work, true knowledge (Erkenntnis) is thought to be a process of forming (in the broadest sense of the word) the inner and outer world, a transformation of something unknown into something known, and his formula for this process is the rationalization of the irrational. in an age where the rational and the irrational are split up and have no mutual contact, this process of gaining knowledge becomes a special problem, and the problem is more specifically one of producing values. values become a problem when they are no longer self-evident. in an essay from 1933, “evil in the value-system of art,” broch credits nietzsche, but also Kierkegaard, for bringing decisive attention to the concept of value in a philosophical and historical context: it was an almost impassioned insight into the as-yet-unforeseeable implications of the concept of value that moved nietzsche (and Kierkegaard as well), and, however hesitantly, however reluctantly the various schools of philosophy, whether neo-Kantian or otherwise, adopted the concept of value, they really had no choice; everything clearly indicates that it was just this value-concept that had so suddenly come to the fore which enabled them to build a bridge between a foundering and outmoded speculative philosophy and the possibility of a new metaphysics.11

Here, the concept of value is given the immensely important role of making way for a new metaphysics that could replace the old, christian one, and although Kierkegaard never talks of values himself (unlike nietzsche), broch nevertheless regards him as a thinker profoundly moved by the historical reality behind the emergence of the concept of value. this notion of Kierkegaard’s historical role can be recognized in broch’s own concept of value, which consists of two logical aspects: the ethical and the aesthetic.12 The ethical is thought to be the unfinished and dynamic aspect of the (in Hermann broch, “das böse im Wertsystem der Kunst,” Die neue Rundschau, vol. 44, no. 2, 1933, pp. 159–60 (in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 9/2, p. 122; English translation: “evil in the value-system of art,” in Geist and Zeitgeist: Six Essays by Hermann Broch, ed. by John Hargraves, new York: counterpoint 2002, p. 6). 12 i will not go into broch’s dependency on the contemporary neo-Kantian philosophy and its concept(s) of value, which is dealt with in, for instance, friedrich vollhardt, Hermann Brochs geschichtliche Stellung. Studien zum philosophischen Frühwerk und zur 11

Hermann Broch: “Nennen’s mir an Bessern”

35

a Kantian sense) category of value, while the aesthetic is the finished and static result of the process of producing value. in this division of the concept of value there is an implicit underscoring of the ethical aspect: it is the active forming of the world (interior and exterior) that is important, whereas the aesthetic has the connotation of something unmoved and dogmatic. the ethical person relates to and interacts with his world, moves it and produces reality, while the aesthetic person feels comfortable with just improvising from something given, thus in danger of becoming a mere appendix to circumstance. broch’s accentuation of the ethical attitude towards life is particularly explicit in an entry from october 22, 1920, in a diary written for his friend ea von allesch. there he writes: “the aesthetic person, i.e., the person who celebrates life and everything else, is quite frankly, one cannot put it any other way, a bastard.”13 doubtless this is an expression of a widespread (often “vitalistic”) criticism of the bourgeois “philistine” or “aesthete,” and it cannot with certainty be said to originate from a reading of or influence from Kierkegaard. However, when confronted with a comparison with Heidegger in connection with his theory of value, broch agrees that there is a parallel in their method of thinking, and he suggests that it has to do with “the common ancestor Kierkegaard.”14 in his authorship, broch correlates this idea of the abominable aestheticization of life with the notion of “Kitsch.” this word emerged and was shaped in the artistically highly sophisticated vienna (and munich) of the dying Habsburg monarchy (a period famously diagnosed by broch as “the gay apocalypse”)15 and was probably given its most far-reaching meaning and consequence precisely in broch’s work. for instance, in the aforementioned essay, “evil in the value-system of art,” Kitsch in art is described as the great symptom of a world in ethical crisis: “the artistic expression of the age is to be seen in the enormous tension between good and evil within art. for the evil in art is Kitsch.”16 and Kitsch can only be understood on the background of “what constitutes the concept of values in general.”17 Romantrilogie “Die Schlafwandler” (1914–1932), tübingen: niemeyer 1986 (Studien zur deutschen Literatur, vol. 88). 13 broch, Briefe, in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 13/1, p. 49: “Der ästhetische Mensch, d.i. der das Leben und alles übrige zelebriert ist, man kann es nicht anders ausdrücken, das Schwein schlechthin.” 14 cf.ibid., p. 250: “den gemeinsamen Ahnen Kierkegaard.” 15 cf. the chapter “vienna’s gay apocalypse of 1880” in the 1947–48 essay, “Hugo von Hofmannsthal and His time: art and its non-style at the end of the nineteenth century,” in Geist and Zeitgeist: Six Essays by Hermann Broch, p. 178. cf. Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 9/1, p. 145. 16 Hermann broch, “das böse im Wertsystem der Kunst,” p. 161 (in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 9/2, p. 123; “Evil in the Value-System of Art,” p. 7). 17 broch, “das böse im Wertsystem der Kunst,” p. 161 (in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 9/2, p. 123; “Evil in the Value-System of Art,” p. 8). Recently Karsten Harries has pointed to the concept of Kitsch in an interpretation of Either/Or and mentioned broch in this connection; cf. Karsten Harries, Between Nihilism and Faith: A Commentary on Either/ Or, berlin and new York: Walter de gruyter 2010 (Kierkegaard Studies Monograph Series, vol. 21), pp. 76–88, see pp. 86–8.

36

Steen Tullberg

IV. The Concept of Anxiety in several places—particularly in his letters—broch discusses the relationship between his theory of value and the concept of anxiety, a discussion that often involves a possible Kierkegaard influence. Almost invariably Broch denies, sometimes regretfully, having made use of the danish thinker. in the context of the history of literature it is interesting that broch had a quite dramatic exchange of letters with his contemporary colleague, the novelist robert musil (1880–1942). in a letter that has now been lost musil apparently accused broch of plagiarizing decisive thoughts from him in the abovementioned essay, “evil in the value-system of art.” broch’s reply, from september 2, 1933, contains an unwavering rebuttal of the allegations made by musil, but broch admits that he has some regrets concerning the essay. amongst other things he now feels that he should have been more explicit in confronting his own theory of value with others, for instance the material theory of max scheler (1874–1928), but he also feels that a confrontation with Kierkegaard (and in this connection also with Heidegger) should have been made concerning the issue of the “nothing” (Nichts) as a basis for all positing of value (Wertsetzung).18 some years later, in June and July 1939, broch (indirectly) mentions Kierkegaard’s concept of anxiety in a number of letters. the concern is once again his theory of value which in the meantime has evolved into (the outlines of) a mass psychology. in a letter from June 15, 1939, to his psychoanalyst Paul federn (1871–1950) (one of the oldest and most loyal students of sigmund freud), broch tries to correct the misunderstanding that he exclusively deduces his concept of value from the phenomenon of anxiety. He narrows the problem down to the model of the “i” in his theory of value and underscores that this model is epistemological, not psychological in its conception. according to the model, whenever the “i” experiences an expansion (Ich-Erweiterung), there is a growth of value in the sphere of the intelligible, which in the psychological domain is experienced as an ecstatic moment. likewise, whenever there is a value-contraction of the “i” (Ich-Verengung) this shows itself psychologically as anxiety. broch realizes that in his account he has concentrated too heavily on the psychological content of the model and thus given reason to believe that his concept of value is strictly derived from the phenomenon and functioning of anxiety. He then excuses himself by saying that he thereby has ended up in the Kierkegaardian realm—but, he adds, who would mind ending up there, mention someone better! the passage reads: “in my defense, anyway, i can say that i have thereby wound up in the Kierkegaardian sphere and you know what [Karl Heinrich] Waggerl replied when he was confronted with his dependency upon [Knut] Hamsun; he said: ‘mention someone better’ [‘nennen’s mir an bessern.’]”19 cf. broch, Briefe, in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 13/1, pp. 252–4. Hermann broch, “Frauengeschichten.” Die Briefe an Paul Federn 1939–1949, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 2007, p. 42: “Zu meiner Entschuldigung darf ich allerdings sagen, daß ich damit in die Kierkegaardsche Sphäre geraten bin und Sie wissen, was [Karl Heinrich] Waggerl antwortete, als man ihm seine Abhängigkeit von [Knut] Hamsun vorwarf; er meinte: ‘Nennen’s mir an Bessern.’ ” 18 19

Hermann Broch: “Nennen’s mir an Bessern”

37

a month later broch corrects the same misapprehension of his theory of value in two letters, one dated July 14, 1939, to the psychologist oscar a. oeser (1904–83) and another dated July 15 to albert einstein (1879–1955).20 V. Spirit in an Unspiritual Age there are a number of other references to Kierkegaard in broch’s oeuvre, and most of them border on general themes that broch shares with his intellectual contemporaries, and deal with issues that are both related to his own thinking and to the particular historical situation of, especially, artists and novelists in the first half of the twentieth century. other, more implicitly, Kierkegaard related themes could doubtless be brought into relation to the work of such a prolific writer as Broch, but in order to avoid attributing something to Kierkegaard that is likely more a part of the general atmosphere of the time and has numerous intellectual sources, i will stick to broch’s explicit uses of Kierkegaard.21 in an essay called “the spirit in an unspiritual age” (“geist und zeitgeist”) originally given as a lecture in april 1934, broch has two interesting references to Kierkegaard, one concerning the relationship between philosophy and theology and another regarding a phenomenon he names “linguistic overcompensation.” the two issues are related and bring us back to the line of thought found in The Sleepwalkers and the philosophy of history unfolded there. the overall idea is— as mentioned previously—that european history since the renaissance and the reformation has been characterized by an increasing dissimulation of values. the secularization of a world once embedded in a universal, scholastic hierarchy of values into a world dominated by the fierce competition of autonomous value-systems with no mutual contact can also be described as a de-theologizing of philosophy. according to broch, all great philosophers since then, including Kierkegaard, have, reluctantly, been driven by the secularization of thought, culminating in the positivistic philosophy of his own age, but they have also felt a longing for a new theology. in his own words: but none of the great philosophers who had appeared since that time had forgotten that philosophy’s real task was theology, and all their aspirations were theological. this was true of descartes, of spinoza, of leibniz, of Kant (german idealism can really be seen as an attempt to create a Protestant-scholastic universal organon), true of Kierkegaard, and notably—as if finally religion had to turn to its origin—true of Hermann Cohen’s faithfully staunch neo-Kantianism, and of edmund Husserl.22

cf. broch, Briefe, in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 13/2, p. 101 and p. 103. robert Halsall takes up a number of these issues, for instance the importance of ethical and artistic autonomy and the notion of choice in broch’s work; cf. Halsall, “zur Kierkegaardrezeption Hermann brochs,” pp. 140ff. 22 Hermann broch, “geist und zeitgeist,” in Die unbekannte Größe und frühe Schriften mit den Briefen an Willa Muir, zurich: rhein-verlag 1961, p. 295 (in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 9/2, p. 184; English translation: “The Spirit in an Unspiritual Age,” in Geist and Zeitgeist, p. 48). 20 21

38

Steen Tullberg

in broch’s view there is a tragic aspect of the whole historical development and it has to do with language. the medieval world was a world of god, and it spoke the language of god. but the secular world is a world of things, and it speaks the language of things—the language of things is, however, mute. and in a mute world, men of words and ethical striving, men like Kierkegaard, have a tendency to overcompensate for this muteness. once again, Kierkegaard is mentioned alongside nietzsche and Heidegger, here together with the satirist Karl Kraus, who all seem to be characterized by the way they absolutize language itself: to be sure, the philosopher tries repeatedly to get back to language, and he tries all the more intensely, the more fanatical he is about the ethical nature of his task. and this starts a kind of linguistic overcompensation, which began with nietzsche—who sensed the coming of so many dangers—but which could also be found in Kierkegaard perhaps, and is clearly apparent today in Heidegger or Karl Kraus, though in different form.23

broch formulates the spiritual and philosophical longing for the absolute, for ethics and dogma, in many different ways, amongst others in the context of his theory of the novel. He claims that whenever philosophy tries to cross the boundaries of the metaphysical—which it does whenever aesthetic and ethical problems are involved—it can only do so in a sustainable way within the confines of a theological set of dogmas. only within the framework of a theology can metaphysics and ethics become “objective”; in fact, an untheological or secularized philosophy does not really exist because it comes to rely on the subjectivity of its inventor. according to broch, modernity does not “own” a philosophy, much less a theology, and the consequences of this insight lead him to the area where the “subjective” in a radical sense is legitimate, namely, in art, particularly in the art of the novel. given Kierkegaard’s denunciation of art as a realm for the ethical, it is obvious that broch’s turning toward the art of the novel as an ethical deed is anti-Kierkegaardian— if it was not for the fact that broch continuously struggles with precisely this theme, that is, the theme of the “immorality” of the work of art. in a letter from november 14, 1947, to his friend egon vietta, broch speaks of the dilemma of writing books, in casu the writing of The Death of Virgil (1945),24 in the midst of a world plagued by much more serious problems than artistic ones. He writes of his bad conscience and proceeds: “and behind this conscience lies the realization of the immorality of the work of art—be it in savonarola, in Kierkegaard, it amounts to the same.”25 in another letter to vietta written some years earlier, on november 10, 1936, broch discusses the legitimacy of irony in the modern novel (against the background of his work on the second edition of his great anti-fascistic novel The Spell),26 distinguishing between a broch, “geist und zeitgeist,” p. 303 (in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 9/2, p. 19; “the spirit in an unspiritual age,” pp. 56–7). 24 Hermann broch, Der Tod des Vergil, new York: Pantheon books 1945. 25 broch, Briefe, in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 13/3, p. 187: “Und hinter diesem Gewissen steht das Wissen um die unmoralität des Kunstwerkes—ob bei Savonarola, ob bei Kierkegaard, es ist das nämliche.” 26 Hermann broch, Die Verzauberung, first published posthumously in 1976 in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 3. 23

Hermann Broch: “Nennen’s mir an Bessern”

39

“passive” and “active” form of irony. broch is skeptical when it comes to the former because irony in its passive form has a tendency to become, on the one hand, a kind of “know-it-all” attitude or, on the other, “over-sensitiveness.” the active form of irony, however, has full legitimacy in broch’s eyes, and he ascribes it to Kierkegaard: “today, it seems to me, only active irony is legitimate, i.e., the irony of Kierkegaard etc.”27 Whether broch here is in some way referring to Kierkegaard’s dissertation and the many aspects of irony given herein (controlled irony maybe) or to some other part of the authorship (for instance the account of humor and irony in Postscript), or in a broader sense is thinking of a stylistic element in Kierkegaard is not that easily discernible, but he certainly brings “active” irony in relation to the ethical stance that in his view should be at the foundation of the activity of being an author. the last mention of Kierkegaard in broch’s writings is found in a letter from november 19, 1949, to the german-israeli author and critic Werner Kraft (1896–1991). the subject of the letter is the problem of form and style in the modern novel, and in this connection broch at some point mentions the way the romantics reduced god to a kind of poetic prop. broch then claims that if god really exists, then already the belief—not to mention the disbelief—in him is blasphemy. this notion can, according to him, be found in Kierkegaard, although not articulated quite so radically, and, above all, it can be found in Kafka, whom broch acknowledges as a kind of prophet of a new universal myth and a new world-belief.28 again, it is difficult to know exactly what part of Kierkegaard Broch is referring to, but he might be thinking of Kierkegaard’s stern rejection of all proofs of god’s existence. the idea of such a proof, according to Kierkegaard, takes all seriousness out of the christian existence and turns the belief in god into a kind of knowledge (a thought that can be found for instance in the Postscript, although Kierkegaard here deals more specifically with the danger of the idea of a historical proof of the truth of christianity itself).29 although, as already mentioned, it is problematic to say of broch that he had an intimate and first-hand knowledge of Kierkegaard, he certainly gives ample documentation throughout his writings for his reverence and admiration for the danish thinker. i have yet to mention the most straightforward example of this. it is stated in a letter from september 14, 1940, to broch’s translator (of The Death of Virgil) Jean starr untermeyer (1886–1970), in which he primarily helps her with a translation of some of the poems written by bertolt brecht (1898–1956) in his danish exile (“svendborger gedichte”). the letter is in english and at the end broch admits that he has not mastered the english language well enough to be of any real use: “i can’t read any poetry, neither yours nor Yeats’; perhaps in a few years, when— perhaps—my english has improved. but i am glad that you read Kierkegaard; he was a real thinker.”30

broch, Briefe, in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 13/1, p. 436: “Legitim erscheint mir heute bloß die aktive Ironie, also die Kierkegaards usw.” 28 cf. ibid., p. 376. 29 SKS 7, 30–54 / CUP1, 23–49. 30 broch, Briefe, in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vol. 13/2, p. 228. 27

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Broch’s corpus Die Schlafwandler. Eine Romantrilogie, vols. 1–3, munich and zurich: rhein verlag 1931–32 (in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vols. 1–13, ed. by Paul michael lützeler, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1976–80, vol. 1; english translation: The Sleepwalkers: A Trilogy, trans. by Willa and edwin muir, new York: vintage House 1996 [1945]). “das böse im Wertsystem der Kunst,” Die neue Rundschau, vol. 44, no. 2, 1933, pp. 157–91 (in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vols. 1–13, ed. by Paul michael Lützeler, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp 1976–80, vol. 9/2, pp. 119–57; English translation: “evil in the value-system of art,” in Geist and Zeitgeist: Six Essays by Hermann Broch, ed. by John Hargraves, new York: counterpoint 2002, pp. 3–39). “geist und zeitgeist,” in Die unbekannte Größe und frühe Schriften mit den Briefen an Willa Muir, zurich: rhein-verlag 1961, pp. 288–310 (in Kommentierte Werkausgabe, vols. 1–13, ed. by Paul michael lützeler, frankfurt am main: Suhrkamp 1976–80, vol. 9/2, pp. 177–201; English translation: “The Spirit in an unspiritual age,” in Geist and Zeitgeist: Six Essays by Hermann Broch, ed. by John Hargraves, new York: counterpoint 2002, pp. 41–64). II. Sources of Broch’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard baumann, Julius, Deutsche und ausserdeutsche Philosophie der letzten Jahrzehnte dargestellt und beurteilt. Ein Buch zur Orientierung auch für Gebildete, gotha: Perthes 1903, pp. 490–94. Haecker, theodor, Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, munich: J.f. schreiber 1913. — “vorworte von sören Kierkegaard. vorbemerkung des Übersetzers,” in Der Brenner, vol. 4, 1914, pp. 666–70. — “Kritik der gegenwart,” in Der Brenner, vol. 4, 1914, pp. 815–49. Høffding, Harald, Sören Kierkegaard als Philosoph, with a foreword by christoph schrempf, stuttgart: frommann 1896 (Frommanns Klassiker der Philosophie, vol. 3).

Hermann Broch: “Nennen’s mir an Bessern”

41

III. Secondary Literature on Broch’s Relation to Kierkegaard Hallsal, robert, “zur Kierkegaardrezeption Hermann brochs,” in Literaturvermittlung um 1900. Fallstudien zu Wegen ins deutschsprachige kulturelle System, ed. by florian Krobb and sabine strümper-Krobb, amsterdam and new York: rodopi 2001, pp. 131–46.

friedrich dürrenmatt: a swiss author reading and using Kierkegaard Pierre bühler

“as an author i cannot be understood without Kierkegaard.”1 this short sentence in friedrich dürrenmatt’s late work Stoffe expresses clearly how strong Kierkegaard’s influence on him has been, at different stages and in different domains of his oeuvre. Therefore this influence has to be described quite widely. In German literature, i do not know any other author who could express a similarly strong relation to Kierkegaard. The first part of this article will be a short presentation of the Swiss author himself. then i shall describe which books of Kierkegaard he had in his library and how his reading of Kierkegaard took place. in a third stage, the most extensive one, the numerous explicit references to Kierkegaard through his whole oeuvre will be presented and commented upon. but, at the same time, i shall try to show with some examples how Kierkegaard’s influence also works implicitly as a source of inspiration without explicit references, in narrative motives, in characters of novels or on stage, in drawings and paintings. For quotations from Dürrenmatt, it is not always easy to find the English translations of his texts, especially older ones. Whenever i can, i quote these translations, especially the texts collected in the new english translation Selected Writings.2 When the texts were not available, i have made my own translations, quoting from the complete german edition Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden3 and the collected interviews in the four volumes of Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden.4

1 friedrich dürrenmatt, Turmbau. Stoffe IV–IX, zurich: diogenes 1990, p. 123. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 29, p. 125.) 2 friedrich dürrenmatt, Selected Writings, vols. 1–3, trans. by Joel agee, ed. by brian evenson, Kenneth J. northcott and theodore ziolkowski, chicago and london: university of chicago Press 2006 (vol. 1, Plays; vol. 2, Fictions; vol. 3, Essays). 3 cf. above, footnote 1. 4 friedrich dürrenmatt, Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996.

44

Pierre Bühler

I. Who was Friedrich Dürrenmatt? The Swiss author Friedrich Dürrenmatt was born on January 5, 1921, in Konolfingen, canton of berne, as a son of a reformed pastor. as he recounted himself, his childhood in this village of the emmental region very strongly inspired his later work. the Protestant education he received from his parents led him to a constant interest in religious questions, even if his position on these matters is quite critical. in his late years, he sometimes characterized himself as an atheist.5 but quite often he wrote of himself as being a Protestant, connecting this position with the task of protestation.6 On his theater work, he also once wrote: “The difficulties a Protestant has with the art of the drama are precisely those he has with his faith.”7 in his early years, he discovered theological and philosophical books in his father’s library, including several books by Kierkegaard. about his father, he writes: “He was already reading Kierkegaard very early, when this author was still unknown among the pastors of the surrounding villages.”8 together with Kierkegaard’s works, the early reading of the Römerbrief of the swiss theologian Karl barth (1886–1968) is also often mentioned as an important source of inspiration. in later times, dürrenmatt makes a deep distinction between these two authors, emphasizing the opposition between objectivity (barth, especially in his dogmatics) and subjectivity (Kierkegaard, through all his oeuvre, but especially in the Concluding Unscientific Postscript). When dürrenmatt was 14 years old he moved with his family to the city of berne. after having received his bachelor degree (Matura) in 1941, he started his studies in berne and zurich, studying german literature, history of art and, mainly, philosophy. In these years 1941–45, a first intensive reading of Kierkegaard took place, in addition to studies of Plato, aristotle, and Kant.9 He also began to write, mainly short stories and some sketches for theater plays. besides, he was also drawing and painting, an artistic activity he would continue to practice throughout his entire life. in 1946 he suddenly interrupted his studies, married the actress lotti geissler, founded a family, and started his career as a writer. in the late 1940s and early 1950s he became more and more famous through his theater plays, but also his crime novels and his broadcast plays. in the year 1952 he moved with his wife and dürrenmatt, Turmbau, p. 209. Werkausgabe, vol. 29, p. 208: “barth brought me up as an atheist.” 6 friedrich dürrenmatt, Die Ehe des Herrn Mississippi, in Komödien I, zurich: arche 1957, pp. 81–157; quotation p. 116. Werkausgabe, vol. 3, p. 58. Selected Writings, vol. 1, p. 282: “this stubbornly scribbling Protestant”; “fingerübungen zur gegenwart,” in Theater-Schriften und Reden, zurich: arche 1966, p. 45. Werkausgabe, vol. 32, p. 32: “i am a Protestant and i protest.” 7 dürrenmatt, “theaterprobleme,” in Theater-Schriften und Reden, p. 125. Werkausgabe, vol. 30, pp. 65–6. Selected Writings, vol. 3, p. 157. 8 friedrich dürrenmatt, Labyrinth. Stoffe I–III, zurich: diogenes 1981, p. 198. Werkausgabe, vol. 28, p. 178. 9 in an interview given during the year 1983 (Gespräche 1961–1990, vol. 3, p. 178), dürrenmatt tinges this intensive Kierkegaard reading, by telling that maybe he read less Kierkegaard than “Plato, schopenhauer, nietzsche and especially Kant.” 5

Friedrich Dürrenmatt: A Swiss Author Reading and Using Kierkegaard

45

his three children to neuchâtel, in the french part of switzerland, where he lived until his death. theater plays like The Visit (1955) and The Physicians (1961)10 made him famous throughout the entire world. in the 1970s, after the failure of his theater play Der Mitmacher,11 he decided to devote himself mainly to the large project of telling the main stages of his life story through a recollection of the literary materials that had remained unwritten throughout his career. this project would keep him busy during almost twenty years, writing and rewriting new versions. the two volumes of Stoffe, Labyrinth (1981) and Turmbau (1990),12 would be the result of this long effort. during this crisis of the 1970s, a second intense reading of Kierkegaard took place, and Kierkegaard’s selfreflection strongly inspired Dürrenmatt’s project of a literary autobiography. With the help of Kierkegaard, Dürrenmatt reflects on how far it is possible to become the object of his own reflection. in 1983, dürrenmatt lost his wife. one year later, he married charlotte Kerr, a German filmmaker, actress, and journalist. She was actively involved in the last part of dürrenmatt’s oeuvre, especially with the project of a last theater play called Achterloo.13 dürrenmatt died on december 14, 1990, shortly after the publication of Turmbau, the second volume of the Stoffe. His second wife inspired the creation of a dürrenmatt centre in neuchâtel, where his drawings and paintings are displayed. His archives are at the Schweizerisches Literaturarchiv. He received several prizes, distinctions, and honoris causa doctoral degrees.14 the complete edition of his written oeuvre of 1998 comprises 37 volumes, and his drawings and paintings have been published in different volumes. II. How did Dürrenmatt Read and Write about Kierkegaard? there are quite a number of books by Kierkegaard in dürrenmatt’s library. they are all in german translation, and when dürrenmatt quotes Kierkegaard, it is always in German. Most of them are from older editions from the first half of the twentieth century. several are from the edition published by Jakob Hegner (cologne and cf. dürrenmatt, Der Besuch der alten Dame, in Komödien I, pp. 249–340; Die Physiker, zurich: arche 1962. Werkausgabe, vols. 3 and 7. Selected Writings, vol. 1, pp. 1–73 and 75–123. 11 cf. friedrich dürrenmatt, Der Mitmacher. Ein Komplex. Text der Komödie. Dramaturgie. Erfahrungen, Berichte, Erzählungen, zurich: arche 1976. Werkausgabe, vol. 14; for an exhaustive commentary of this failure and its literary consequences, see ulrich Weber, Dürrenmatts Spätwerk. Die Entstehung aus der mitmacher-Krise, frankfurt and basel: stroemfeld 2007 (editionTEXT, vol. 6). 12 cf. Turmbau and Labyrinth. Werkausgabe, vols. 28 and 29; some parts are translated in english in Selected Writings, vol. 3. 13 cf. friedrich dürrenmatt, Achterloo, zurich: diogenes 1983. friedrich dürrenmatt and charlotte Kerr, Rollenspiele. Protokoll einer fiktiven Inszenierung und Achterloo III, zurich: diogenes 1986. Werkausgabe, vol. 18. 14 He often joked about these degrees, telling that they were finally replacing his never written doctoral thesis on Kierkegaard und das Tragische; cf. for example Werkausgabe, vol. 32, p. 138. 10

46

Pierre Bühler

olten), translated and edited by theodor Haecker or Hermann diem and Walter rest.15 Others are from the first edition published by Eugen Diederichs (Jena), translated and edited by christoph schrempf.16 only two are from the newer edition published by eugen diederichs (düsseldorf and cologne), in the translation and edition by emanuel Hirsch.17 in addition, there are some other isolated german editions, sometimes in the form of extracts from the whole work. a single newer edition is one of The Moment.18 As we have already seen, his first reading of Kierkegaard took place in the first half of the 1940s. in this period, he probably found the books in his father’s library. When he writes of this first phase, he mainly mentions three books: The Concept of Anxiety, Fear and Trembling, and The Sickness unto Death.19 there are no direct traces of this early reading of Kierkegaard. When Dürrenmatt mentions this first phase, he also often mentions his project of a doctoral thesis on Kierkegaard und das Tragische that he never wrote.20 There is no trace left of this early, partly fictitious project. in his judgment, it was replaced, and well replaced, by his literary and theater work.21 in his late work Turmbau, writing about the decision to interrupt his studies and to start writing, he characterizes his dissertation as the impossible task to write objectively and the change to literary work as the perspective of writing subjectively about himself, “indirectly, in constantly contradictory parables.”22

sören Kierkegaard, Der Begriff des Auserwählten (1917); Über die Geduld (1938); Die Tagebücher 1834–1855 (1949); Briefe (1955); Einübung im Christentum/Zwei ethischreligiöse Abhandlungen/Das Buch Adler oder der Begriff des Auserwählten (1951); Philosophische Brosamen und Unwissenschaftliche Nachschrift (1959); Entweder-oder (1960). 16 sören Kierkegaard, Buch des Richters: seine Tagebücher 1833–1855 (1905); Der Augenblick (1909); Stadien auf des Lebens Weg (1922); Leben und Walten der Liebe (1924); Philosophische Brocken. Abschliessende unwissenschaftliche Nachschrift, 1. und 2. Teil (1925); Der Begriff der Angst (no date); Zur Selbstprüfung der Gegenwart anbefohlen (no date). 17 sören Kierkegaard, Erstlingsschriften (1960); Über den Begriff der Ironie, mit ständiger Rücksicht auf Sokrates (1961). 18 sören Kierkegaard, Der Augenblick: eine Zeitschrift, trans. by Hanns grössel and ed. by Hans magnus enzensberger, nördlingen: greno 1988. 19 dürrenmatt, Turmbau, p. 123. Werkausgabe, vol. 29, p. 125. 20 dürrenmatt, Werkausgabe, vol. 1, p. 248; vol. 29, p. 125, p. 173, p. 191, p. 227; vol. 32, p. 138; vol. 33, p. 125. 21 cf. dürrenmatt, Werkausgabe, vol. 32, p. 138. getting a doctoral degree honoris causa in Philadelphia, dürrenmatt explains that he interrupted his doctoral thesis in order to work on his first theater play, “not because I thought it would be better to write a complete nonsense than a half one, but because i realized that it is not only possible to think with the philosophy, but also with the theater stage.” in a similar way, dürrenmatt expresses (in Werkausgabe, vol. 29, pp. 173–4) the impossibility of getting through his course of studies in philosophy and the necessity of escaping in new forms of working. 22 dürrenmatt, Turmbau, p. 229. Werkausgabe, vol. 29, p. 227. cf. for another version of this passage: durrenmatt, “ ‘...so ist sein rennen…in die schriftstellerei und in den glauben eins.’ aus der fassung der 1973er-fassung der Stoffe,” in ...und Literatur. Pierre Bühler zum 15

Friedrich Dürrenmatt: A Swiss Author Reading and Using Kierkegaard

47

because the change is also a religious one, he adds: “literary writing and faith speak the same language.”23 for the second Kierkegaard period, in the 1970s, we have more traces, especially in the form of annotations or reading notes. He made marks in the margins, noted certain notions, or possible mottos for his own works, and so on. therefore, we know that in this second period he read three books in particular: Either/Or in 1971, The Concept of Irony in 1971 and 1973, and the Concluding Unscientific Postscript in the years 1973–76, in different stages. “since quite a long time already i am busy reading the Unscientific Postscript which i consider as Kierkegaard’s most important work.”24 in Either/Or, in the section of the “diapsalmata,” he found the motto for his novel Der Auftrag: What will come? What will the future bring? i do not know. i have no presentiment. When a spider plunges from a fixed point to its consequences, it always sees before it an empty space where it can never set foot, no matter how it wriggles. it is that way with me: before me always an empty space; what drives me forward is a consequence that lies behind me. this life is perverse and frightful, it is unbearable.25

in addition to this motto, there are only a few direct Kierkegaard quotations, and always without precise bibliographical references: a sentence from The Concept of Irony, a passage from the Concluding Unscientific Postscript, and a parable from The Sickness unto Death.26 at other places of his oeuvre, dürrenmatt writes about Kierkegaard without quoting him, sometimes just mentioning him briefly, en passant, among others, and sometimes focusing more precisely, underlining why Kierkegaard became so important for him or commenting extensively on some categories or stories he borrowed from him. III. What Became Important for Dürrenmatt in Kierkegaard? in this part, after having described in which ways dürrenmatt read, quoted, and wrote about Kierkegaard, i shall now summarize the main topics of this extensive 60. Geburtstag, zurich: institut für Hermeneutik und religionsphilosophie (Hermeneutische Blätter, nos. 1–2, 2009, p. 376. 23 in his late work Turmbau, p. 130 (Werkausgabe, vol. 29, p. 131), he mentions again this reading of The Concept of Irony, underlining that Kierkegaard’s thesis “that aristophanes was the closest to truth with his presentation of socrates in The Clouds” remained an important intuition for him. This intuition influenced his short story “Der Tod des Sokrates,” first planned as a theater play (cf. Turmbau, pp. 143–56. Werkausgabe, vol. 29, pp. 144–56). 24 friedrich dürrenmatt, “Über toleranz. rede anlässlich der verleihung der buberrosenzweig-medaille am 6. märz 1977,” Schweizer Monatshefte, vol. 57, no. 2, 1977, pp. 107–20; quotation p. 107. Werkausgabe, vol. 33, pp. 125–49; quotation pp. 125–6. 25 friedrich dürrenmatt, Der Auftrag oder Vom Beobachten des Beobachters der Beobachter. Novelle in vierundzwanzig Sätzen, zurich: diogenes 1986. Werkausgabe, vol. 26, p. 35. Selected Writings, vol. 2, p. 315; cf. SKS 2, 32–3 / EO1, 24 (in different english translation). 26 for the interpretation of these three important quotations, see below, part iii.

48

Pierre Bühler

reception. But first I have to clarify what is meant by “topics.” We could be tempted just to identify some contents. but, as Peter rusterholz has stressed,27 for dürrenmatt, theology and philosophy not only offer themes, but also and mainly inspire the forms in which he is working on his themes. that is particularly the case with Kierkegaard’s influence. Therefore we have to take into account that there can also be a Kierkegaardian inspiration even when dürrenmatt is not explicitly mentioning Kierkegaard, for example when he is writing a novel or working on stage. some examples will show this influence on Dürrenmatt’s creativity itself more concretely. for the following presentation, i would like to distinguish seven main topics. 1. Already in the first occurrence, an early letter from 1949 or 1950 to his colleague max frisch (1911–91) about his theater play Graf Öderland, dürrenmatt underlines the possibility of using Kierkegaard’s categories for the interpretation of certain dramatic characters.28 mentioning that Kierkegaard thought intensively about aesthetics, he proposes to understand frisch’s character of graf Öderland as an aesthete in a Kierkegaardian sense, in opposition to a “deeply religious” character. in footnotes to his letter, he comments on this interpretation by stressing that graf Öderland is struggling between ethics and aesthetics. 2. in a very similar way, dürrenmatt uses Kierkegaard’s notions for the interpretation of his own theater characters. That is best shown in his reflections about the failure of his theater play Der Mitmacher in the early 1970s.29 at that time, dürrenmatt was reading The Concept of Irony, and therefore he was inspired by his reading: “in Kierkegaard’s conception socrates is an ironical hero.”30 He applies this idea to his play character cop, comparing him with socrates, stressing that neither has a general, objective guarantee and that neither builds his position upon ignorance. in fact, as annette mingels has shown,31 Kierkegaard is not writing about socrates as an ironical hero, but as an ironical subject or an ironical individual. but because dürrenmatt is interpreting his theater play, he freely writes of an ironical hero, connecting this idea with Kierkegaard’s theory of irony.32 3. Humor is another important Kierkegaardian category that dürrenmatt regularly uses. at the end of his commentary to Der Mitmacher, dürrenmatt describes how he runs away from embarrassing questions of the critics who want to label everything in Peter rusterholz, “theologische und philosophische denkformen und ihre funktion für die interpretation und Wertung von texten friedrich dürrenmatts,” in Contemplata aliis tradere. Studien zum Verhältnis von Literatur und Spiritualität, ed. by claudia brinker et al., bern: lang 1995, pp. 473–89. 28 friedrich dürrenmatt, “brief über graf Öderland,” in Frisch und Dürrenmatt, ed. by Hans bänziger, berne: francke 1960, pp. 206–12. Werkausgabe, vol. 31, pp. 29–37, especially p. 32 and pp. 36–7. 29 dürrenmatt, Der Mitmacher, p. 102, pp. 1745, pp. 194–5, p. 286. Werkausgabe, vol. 14, especially p. 120, pp. 202–3, pp. 226–7, and p. 326. 30 dürrenmatt, Der Mitmacher, p. 174. Werkausgabe, vol. 14, p. 202. 31 annette mingels, Dürrenmatt und Kierkegaard. Die Kategorie des Einzelnen als gemeinsame Denkform, cologne: böhlau 2003, p. 218. 32 in the same sense, see friedrich dürrenmatt, “friedrich dürrenmatt interviewt f.d.,” in Friedrich Dürrenmatt zum 60. Geburtstag am 5. Januar 1981, basel: reiss 1980 [no page numbers]. Werkausgabe, vol 31, pp. 159–60. 27

Friedrich Dürrenmatt: A Swiss Author Reading and Using Kierkegaard

49

his work. at the end, the last answer that he shouts to them is: “With humor!”33 this humor, inspired by Kierkegaard’s analysis of humor, represents for dürrenmatt the possibility of conceiving a new theater form that can be characterized as tragicomedy, considered by dürrenmatt as the only way to truly capture the problems of mankind today. dürrenmatt often writes of comedies when he characterizes his theater plays, but in a very tragicomic sense: the tragic situation is so extreme that it becomes comic, and at the same time, the comic characters come into such difficulties that they become tragic.34 even if there is no direct reference, this tragicomic dimension— often dürrenmatt characterizes it also as “the grotesque”—reminds us of passages about the tragic and the comic in Kierkegaard’s Concluding Unscientific Postscript.35 the following quotation may suggest this: but the tragic is still possible even if pure tragedy is not. We can approach it through comedy, we can bring it forth as a terrifying moment, as the yawning of an abyss; many of shakespeare’s tragedies, for instance, are comedies out of which the tragic arises. now the conclusion might easily be drawn that comedy is the expression of despair, but this conclusion is not a necessary one. to be sure, whoever sees the senselessness, the hopelessness of this world might well despair, but this despair is not a consequence of this world but an answer to it, and a different answer would be not to despair, it would be the decision to endure the world, in which we frequently live like gulliver among the giants.36

the “yawning of an abyss”—a very Kierkegaardian motif—is a central moment in many of dürrenmatt’s narrations and theater plays, for example, in the famous short story The Tunnel. instead of coming out of a small tunnel, as it does normally, a crowded train goes deeper and deeper inside the earth, finally falling to its center. nobody in the train seems to realize the situation, except a young student who gets together with the chief conductor in the empty engineer’s cabin. the chief conductor asks: “What shall we do?,” and the young student replies “with spectral serenity”: “nothing.”37 in an earlier version, the student adds: “god let us drop and therefore we are now falling towards him.”38 the category of humor also plays a central role in dürrenmatt’s interpretation of the paintings of varlin (1900–77), a swiss painter who was one of his very close friends. in a text he wrote for the catalogue of an exhibition, dürrenmatt writes of the dimension of humor in varlin’s paintings. in this context, he suddenly refers to dürrenmatt, Der Mitmacher, p. 288. Werkausgabe, vol. 14, p. 328. cf. dürrenmatt, “theaterprobleme,” in Theater-Schriften und Reden, pp. 92–131. Werkausgabe, vol. 30, pp. 31–72 (in Selected Writings, vol. 3, pp. 137–61). 35 SKS 7, 453–477 / CUP1, 499–525. concerning these connections see Pierre bühler, “foi et humour. une petite dramaturgie de la foi chrétienne, d’après dürrenmatt,” Bulletin du Centre protestant d’études, vol. 3, 1976, pp. 5–39. 36 dürrenmatt, “theaterprobleme,” in Theater-Schriften und Reden, pp. 122–3. Werkausgabe, vol. 30, pp. 62–3. Selected Writings, vol. 3, p. 156. 37 friedrich dürrenmatt, “der tunnel,” in Die Stadt. Prosa I–IV, zurich, arche 1964 [1961], pp. 151–69. Werkausgabe, vol. 21, pp. 21–8. Selected Writings, vol. 2, pp. 21–8; quotation of the last sentences p. 28. 38 dürrenmatt, “der tunnel,” p. 169. Werkausgabe, vol. 21, p. 98. 33 34

50

Pierre Bühler

Kierkegaard, “who thought about art in a far sharper way than almost all those who came after him,”39 and quotes the last sentence in The Concept of Irony, about the difference between irony and humor: Humor has a far more profound skepticism than irony, because here the focus is on sinfulness, not on finitude. The skepticism of humor is related to the skepticism of irony as ignorance is related to the old thesis: credo quia absurdum; but it also has a deeper positivity, since it moves not in human but in theanthrological categories; it finds rest not by making man but by making man god-man.40

on the basis of this quotation, dürrenmatt emphasizes Kierkegaardian aspects in varlin’s paintings. in his way of representing human beings, they become witnesses of the history of mankind, characterized by “sinfulness.” but at the same time, they are represented in a way we can love them, as creatures with dignity, even if they are prostitutes, writers, and vagabonds, “creatures of a painter who loves human beings, even if he sees them as they are. somebody who loves the human being in this way gives him a chance. Credo quia absurdum.”41 in many ways, it is also possible to discover Kierkegaardian humor in dürrenmatt’s own drawings and paintings. very often, they reveal people fighting with unexpected situations of paradoxical failure, with a strong accent on mythical and apocalyptical motifs.42 4. another important point dürrenmatt stresses is Kierkegaard’s dramaturgic dimension. in this context, dürrenmatt underlines a proximity between Kierkegaard and gotthold ephraim lessing (1729–81), in different interviews,43 but also in a text where he comments upon his stage interpretation of lessing’s theater play Emilia Galotti. Writing of a Kierkegaardian way of playing lessing, he states: “it is possible, since Kierkegaard was one of the greatest disciples of lessing.”44 in the passage of Turmbau where he tells of his clear dependence on Kierkegaard, dürrenmatt again insists on this proximity between Kierkegaard and lessing: “from a dramaturgic point of view, Kierkegaard is the only successor of lessing, not only because he marks the limits of the tragic hero and therefore of the tragedy, but because he thinks ‘dramaturgically.’ He does not consider dialectically the concepts, but the ‘positions.’ ”45 the best example of such a dramaturgy of dialectical positions is dürrenmatt’s theater play The Marriage 39 friedrich dürrenmatt, “varlin,” in Varlin. Der Maler und sein Werk. Eine Monographie, ed. by Hugo loetscher, zurich: arche 1969, pp. 47–59, quotation on p. 58. Werkausgabe, vol. 32, pp. 174–82, quotation on p. 181. 40 dürrenmatt, “varlin,” p. 58. Werkausgabe, vol. 32, pp. 181–2. SKS 1, 357 / CI, 329. 41 dürrenmatt, “varlin,” p. 59. Werkausgabe, vol. 32, p. 182. 42 cf. Pierre bühler and ulrich Weber, Dürrenmatts Endspiele, neuchâtel, centre dürrenmatt, cahier no. 7, 2003. 43 cf. dürrenmatt, Gespräche 1961–1990, vol. 3, p. 80 and p. 228. in opposition to Karl barth who led dürrenmatt to become an atheist, Kierkegaard is characterized here by “the courage for the subjective.” 44 friedrich dürrenmatt, “macht und verführung oder die macht der verführung. zu lessings ‘emilia galotti,’ ” in Programmheft zur Inszenierung von ‘Emilia Galotti’, zurich: schauspielhaus 1974 [no page numbers]. Werkausgabe, vol. 30, p. 228. 45 dürrenmatt, Turmbau, p. 123. Werkausgabe, vol. 29, p. 125.

Friedrich Dürrenmatt: A Swiss Author Reading and Using Kierkegaard

51

of Mr. Mississippi, written in 1950 and played in various versions.46 the play presents different male characters representing various conceptions of life, functioning like different dramaturgic positions: a communist, a Jew, a christian, and an opportunist. all are struggling with anastasia, a woman representing the world, a world that they would like, each in his own way, to gain, to influence, to change, and to make better. But Anastasia, “the world,” cannot be changed, and finally she betrays them all. As already mentioned, among these men, there is count bodo von Übelohe-zabernsee, a decrepit and ill, constantly drunken, nobleman who represents a last christian. He is trying to live the adventure of love, “this sublime enterprise in which man finds his greatest dignity.”47 this quotation can be found in a monologue in which he is presenting to the observers what could have been the author’s intention: “he wanted to investigate what happens when certain ideas collide with human beings who really take them seriously, and who with bold initiative and mad audacity and inexhaustible greed for perfection seek to put them in practice.”48 Übelohe tries to save anastasia by loving her, but she betrays this love also, and therefore he is defeated like the others. in his monologue, he comments upon what happened with him in a very Kierkegaardian way as a paradoxical situation: thus this lover of cruel fables and good-for-nothing comedies, this stubbornly scribbling Protestant and lost dreamer of dreams who created me, had me crushed. in order to taste my core, my essence. oh horrible curiosity! thus he degraded me, in order to make me, not like a saint—he has no use for saints—but like himself. in order to cast me into the crucible of his comedy, not as victor but as vanquished—the only position in which man finds himself over and over again. And all this merely in order to see whether, in this finite creation, God’s mercy really is infinite. Our only hope.49

In the last scene of the play, Übelohe reappears as a Don Quixote, “a dented tin helmet on his head, a bent lance in his right hand, submerged again and again in the circling shadow of a windmill.”50 In a long tirade, Don Quixote (or Übelohe!) underlines the paradoxical nature of his defeat, and once more we must think of Kierkegaard for whom Don Quixote also had an important meaning: as you lift us up with your whirling hand, Horse and rider, both of us wretched, as you hurl us into the silver blur of the glassy sky: on my worn-out jade i soar dürrenmatt, Die Ehe des Herrn Mississippi, in Komödien I, pp. 81–157. Werkausgabe, vol. 3, pp. 9–114. Selected Writings, vol. 1, pp. 253–313. 47 dürrenmatt, Die Ehe des Herrn Mississippi, p. 116. Werkausgabe, vol. 3, p. 58. Selected Writings, vol. 1, p. 282. 48 dürrenmatt, Die Ehe des Herrn Mississippi, p. 116. Werkausgabe, vol. 3, p. 58. Selected Writings, vol. 1, p. 282. 49 dürrenmatt, Die Ehe des Herrn Mississippi, pp. 116–17. Werkausgabe, vol. 3, p. 58. Selected Writings, vol. 1, p. 282. 50 dürrenmatt, Die Ehe des Herrn Mississippi, p. 156. Werkausgabe, vol. 3, p. 113. Selected Writings, vol. 1, p. 312. 46

52

Pierre Bühler above and beyond your greatness Into the flaming abyss of the infinite an eternal comedy for the greater glory of Him who is fed by our helplessness.51

5. already in The Marriage of Mr. Mississippi, the topic of grace plays an important role, as the paradoxical meaning of his defeat. dürrenmatt has also often presented this topic in terms of a christological dimension, and this reveals another connection to Kierkegaard. i shall concretize this with the theater play Ein Engel kommt nach Babylon (1953).52 as in Kierkegaard’s Philosophical Fragments, dürrenmatt works with the possibility of misunderstanding. if a king loves a maiden of lowly station, states Kierkegaard, his love will be an unhappy one: to avoid a misunderstanding, he has to hide his higher station and appear constantly incognito, because the maiden could love his wealth instead of him, and that would be the end of his love.53 in dürrenmatt’s theater play, the misunderstanding happens, but in another way, as a tragicomic inversion of Kierkegaard’s motif. the angel comes to babylon to give heaven’s gift, a beautiful young girl named Kurrubi, to the poorest man in the city, who is the beggar akki. but when the angel comes, King nebuchadnezzar is disguised as a beggar because he wants to suppress all beggars in his kingdom, and he works as a beggar incognito to discover and arrest the last resisting ones. this beggar seems so clumsy that the angel thinks he must be the poorest in the city and gives Kurrubi to him. the young girl immediately falls in love with her beggar, but only if he remains a beggar. she cannot love him as a king. therefore the king becomes angry against heaven because of this misunderstanding. He rejects Kurrubi, as does, progressively, the whole city with him, because nobody will be the poorest to whom heaven’s grace is given. Kurrubi becomes more and more excluded and persecuted. finally, the beggar akki, the only one who accepts her, leaves the city with her, walking out into the wilderness. in an interview from 1977, connected to this theater play Ein Engel kommt nach Babylon that was staged as an opera at that time, Dürrenmatt reflects on his notion of grace. this notion may have a religious connotation, and that may have led to a very specific Christian interpretation. But, for Dürrenmatt, grace, as it is presented in his theater play, “has mainly to do with contingency because when something happens unexpectedly, it is grace.”54 therefore, he can consider the notion of grace as “an existential signal.” a little later, dürrenmatt returns to this notion and states that he used it mainly because it allowed him to clarify “something

dürrenmatt, Die Ehe des Herrn Mississippi, pp. 156–7. Werkausgabe, vol. 3, p. 114. Selected Writings, vol. 1, pp. 312–13. 52 dürrenmatt, Ein Engel kommt nach Babylon, in Komödien I, pp. 159–247. Werkausgabe, vol. 4, pp. 9–123. 53 cf. SKS 4, 230–42 / PF, 23–36: “the god as teacher and savior (a Poetical venture),” especially SKS 4, 232ff. / PF, 26ff. 54 dürrenmatt, Gespräche 1961–1990, vol. 2, p. 202. 51

Friedrich Dürrenmatt: A Swiss Author Reading and Using Kierkegaard

53

that appeared [to him] as important in Kafka and in Kierkegaard.”55 this sentence refers to a remark in which Dürrenmatt reflects upon the connection between Kafka (1883–1924) and Kierkegaard in relation with an earlier story he never finished, called Der Uhrenmacher or The Watchmaker, and in connection with building the background for the character of Kurrubi (“vor-Kurrubi-stoff”).56 it was at a time when he was struggling with “a religious dialectics set up by Kierkegaard and being chased through the christian paradoxes.”57 the starting point was a short story of Kafka called An Imperial Message: a messenger has to bring the message to a subject living far away from the capital. but the message of the emperor to his subject never arrives: the messenger gets lost in the labyrinth of rooms in the imperial palace and the labyrinth of streets in the capital. dürrenmatt tells how he imagined a counterstory called The Watchmaker: in a lost village of the empire, a poor watchmaker gets the message that the emperor’s daughter is on the way to him to marry him. the watchmaker is used to thinking precisely, and the more he thinks about his situation, the more he feels that he is caught up in a plot. With his daughter, the emperor must set a trap. therefore, when the emperor’s daughter arrives, and instead of welcoming her, he strangles her. dürrenmatt comments upon this story with following sentence: “With Kafka, it is impossible for grace to arrive, with me it sets up mischief.”58 Years later, as dürrenmatt explains, he discovered his story in Kierkegaard’s The Sickness unto Death.59 To underline the dimension of offense in the Christian definition of sin, Kierkegaard tells the story of a poor day laborer who receives from the emperor the message that he wants him as his son-in-law. exactly as in dürrenmatt’s story, the day laborer feels more and more trapped by the emperor. the message becomes a piece of folly, except if he can find the courage to believe in this message, the courage of faith. But who could? Concluding his reflection, Dürrenmatt remarks: “coming from Kafka, i arrived close to Kierkegaard; literary materials are common property.”60 6. as we already saw above, another accent in dürrenmatt’s reception of Kierkegaard is the aspect of individuality or subjectivity.61 in different interviews he gave through the years, dürrenmatt underscores that he found in Kierkegaard an important emphasis on the individual as a necessary point of view for a writer.62 He also sees this idea of the individual in a Kierkegaardian sense expressed in the ibid., p. 204. friedrich dürrenmatt, “anmerkung zu einem themenkomplex,” in Programmheft der Uraufführung von Rudolf Kelterborns Oper ‘Engel kommt nach Babylon’, zurich: schauspielhaus 1977 [no page numbers]. Werkausgabe, vol. 4, pp. 128–33. 57 dürrenmatt, “anmerkung zu ‘der doppelgänger,’ ” in Werkausgabe, vol. 1, p. 325. dürrenmatt is writing about another of his early stories, the broadcast play Der Doppelgänger, connected with Der Uhrenmacher as a counter-story: the first sets heaven’s justice as incomprehensible, and the second one heaven’s grace. 58 dürrenmatt, “anmerkung zu einem themenkomplex,” Werkausgabe, vol. 4, p. 131. 59 cf. SKS 11, 197–8 / SUD 84–5. 60 dürrenmatt, “anmerkung zu einem themenkomplex,” Werkausgabe, vol. 4, p. 132. 61 for this point, see mingels, Dürrenmatt und Kierkegaard. Die Kategorie des Einzelnen als gemeinsame Denkform, especially pp. 109–357. 62 cf., for example, dürrenmatt, Gespräche 1961–1990, vol. 1, p. 181. 55 56

54

Pierre Bühler

greek character of minotaur in the labyrinth: the individual in Kierkegaard’s sense lives in solitude.63 in a similar way he can characterize Kierkegaard’s thinking as “subjective thinking.”64 this Kierkegaardian accent on subjectivity helps him to clarify his relationship to the theater audience. this audience is a mass, and his task as a dramaturgical author is to introduce subjective thinking to this mass. in connection with his Essay on Israel, he also writes about Kierkegaard’s “subjective thinking” or “subjective dialectics.”65 in this situation it means for him the decision to risk a position without scientific guarantees, to assume an individual opinion and its consequences, taking into account all questions that may surge up. i think that the motto with the spider motif, chosen from Either/Or for his novel The Assignment,66 expresses the same risk of going his subjective way without any objective security. this aspect of subjectivity is especially underlined for the religious human being. dürrenmatt expresses it in terms that strongly evoke Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling: …the religious human being is determined by its relation with god. for Kierkegaard the religious human being is the individual. it is no more subordinate to the general. in the individual the particular is above the general. the individual adopts, so to speak, a position towards itself. it enters into a relation that can only be grounded in the paradox if it has to be really a relation. for Kierkegaard, the religious human being can only be understood as a dialectical being through the paradox and become “dramaturgically” tangible because god reveals himself only through faith.67

in a passage of Der Mitmacher, dürrenmatt quotes from the Concluding Unscientific Postscript in order to emphasize with Kierkegaard: “to be a human being has been abolished, and every speculative thinker confuses himself with humankind, whereby he becomes something infinitely great and nothing at all.”68 But finally this confusion becomes ridiculous because every urchin, every cellar dweller can play this game. Therefore, “one finally perceives that to be simply and solely a human being means something more than playing party games that way.”69 as already mentioned above, this aspect of subjectivity helped dürrenmatt in later years to clarify his autobiographical project of the Stoffe. in an early discussion with his colleague max frisch about his novel Stiller, dürrenmatt had already asked if it was possible for an author to write directly about his own life.70 there already dürrenmatt becomes skeptical about a pure autobiography. as he will underscore later, there is a fictional part in every autobiography. To think about this “autodürrenmatt, Gespräche 1961–1990, vol. 4, p. 173. cf. dürrenmatt, Gespräche 1961–1990, vol. 2, p. 224. 65 ibid., pp. 190–91. 66 cf. above, footnote 25. 67 dürrenmatt, Turmbau, p. 124. Werkausgabe, vol. 29, pp. 125–6. 68 SKS 7, 119 / CUP1, 124. 69 SKS 7, 120 / CUP1, 125. 70 about max frisch’s novel Stiller, see friedrich dürrenmatt, “ ‘stiller’, roman von Max Frisch. Fragment einer Kritik” (around 1954), first published in Theater-Schriften und Reden, pp. 261–71, especially pp. 263–4. Werkausgabe, vol. 32, pp. 42–53, especially pp. 44–5. 63 64

Friedrich Dürrenmatt: A Swiss Author Reading and Using Kierkegaard

55

fiction,” Dürrenmatt searches his inspiration in Kierkegaard’s reflections about his authorship as an indirect communication. therefore dürrenmatt chooses to tell about his life in an indirect way by means of the unfinished stories of his authorship.71 7. as we saw above, dürrenmatt’s reception of Kierkegaard often makes connections with other authors who were important for him: Kant,72 lessing, Kafka, barth, Kassner,73 etc. one connection that we already came upon above74 has to be more emphasized here, namely, the one dürrenmatt makes between Kierkegaard and socrates. this happens in the context of a speech he gave about tolerance in 1977, when he received the “buber-rosenzweig-medal.”75 For his definition of tolerance, dürrenmatt uses Kierkegaard’s critique of objective thinking and his emphasis on subjectivity extensively, especially in the Concluding Unscientific Postscript. therefore, he sees a possibility to develop, with the help of Kierkegaard, what he calls an existential tolerance, far away from the dangers he sees in Hegel’s and barth’s objective dialectics. this existential tolerance allows an open dialogue between religions, but it also makes it possible to mark the limits of power in political perspectives and therefore also to develop political tolerance. in the context of these reflections, Dürrenmatt says that “the authentic disciple of Socrates is not Plato, but Kierkegaard.”76 IV. A Short Conclusion “as an author i cannot be understood without Kierkegaard.” i hope that this short sentence, quoted at the beginning of the article, now has more concrete outlines. Because Kierkegaard’s influence on Dürrenmatt’s work involves many different perspectives, it is not easy to present it in a simple way. but this complexity bears witness to a creative reception. and this creative reception throws a new light on Kierkegaard’s oeuvre, allowing us to rediscover in it several interesting potentialities. Kierkegaard’s existential message finds in Dürrenmatt’s oeuvre a rich variety of expression.

for this point, see ulrich Weber, “‘ob man sich selbst ein stoff zu werden vermag?’ Kierkegaard und die entwicklung des subjektiven schreibens im ‘mitmacher’-Komplex,” Quarto, no. 7, 1996, pp. 65–79. 72 for example, dürrenmatt, Turmbau, p. 123. Werkausgabe, vol. 29, p. 125: “together with the study of Kant came the study of Kierkegaard.…Kierkegaard became even more important for me than Kant.” 73 rudolf Kassner is an austrian philosopher; in a short passage of Labyrinth, dürrenmatt opposes Kierkegaard’s existential dialectics to Kassner’s logical dialectics that he considers to being very close to Hegel’s dialectics (cf. Labyrinth, p. 329. Werkausgabe, vol. 28, p. 296). 74 cf. above, footnote 29. 75 dürrenmatt, “Über toleranz,” pp. 107–20. Werkausgabe, vol. 33, pp. 125–49. 76 dürrenmatt, “Über toleranz,” p. 113. Werkausgabe, vol. 33, p. 136. 71

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Dürrenmatt’s corpus “brief über graf Öderland,” in Frisch und Dürrenmatt, ed. by Hans bänziger, berne: francke 1960, pp. 206–12, especially pp. 208–9 (undated letter, presumably from 1949–50). (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 31, pp. 29–37, especially p. 32 and pp. 36–7. also reprinted in Max Frisch. Friedrich Dürrenmatt. Briefwechsel, ed. by Peter rüedi, zurich: diogenes 1998, pp. 112–21.) “interview with H. mayer and m. reich-ranicki” (June 6, 1965), in Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996, vol. 1, p. 181. “ ‘stiller,’ roman von max frisch. fragment einer Kritik” (around 1954), in TheaterSchriften und Reden, zurich: arche 1966, pp. 261–71, especially pp. 263–4. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 32, pp. 42–53, especially pp. 44–5.) “rede von einem bett auf der bühne aus” (1969), in Dramaturgisches und Kritisches, zurich: arche 1972, pp. 7–10. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 32, pp. 138–40.) “varlin,” in Varlin. Der Maler und sein Werk. Eine Monographie, ed. by Hugo loetscher, zurich: arche 1969. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 32, pp. 174–82, especially pp. 181–2.) “macht und verführung oder die macht der verführung. zu lessings ‘emilia galotti,’ ” in Programmheft zur Inszenierung von ‘Emilia Galotti,’ zurich: schauspielhaus 1974 [no page numbers]. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 30, p. 228.) “interview with H.l. arnold and H.t. lehner” (July 9, 1976), in Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996, vol. 2, pp. 190–91. Der Mitmacher. Ein Komplex. Text der Komödie. Dramaturgie. Erfahrungen, Berichte, Erzählungen, zurich: arche 1976, p. 102; pp. 174–5; pp. 194–5; p. 286. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 14, p. 120; pp. 202–3; pp. 226–7; p. 326.) “Über toleranz. rede anlässlich der verleihung der buber-rosenzweig-medaille am 6. märz 1977,” Schweizer Monatshefte, vol. 57, no. 2, 1977, pp. 107–20

Friedrich Dürrenmatt: A Swiss Author Reading and Using Kierkegaard

57

(reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 33, pp. 125–49.) “interview with d. fringeli” (may 1977), in Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996, vol. 2, p. 204. “interview with d. bachmann and P. rüedi” (october 5, 1977), in Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996, vol. 2, p. 224. “anmerkung zu einem themenkomplex,” Programmheft der Uraufführung von Rudolf Kelterborns Oper ‘Engel kommt nach Babylon’, zurich: schauspielhaus 1977 [no page numbers]. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 4, pp. 128–33.) “anmerkung ii zu ‘es steht geschrieben,’ ” in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 1, pp. 248–9. “anmerkung zu ‘der doppelgänger,’ ” in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 1, pp. 325–6. “friedrich dürrenmatt interviewt f.d.,” in Friedrich Dürrenmatt zum 60. Geburtstag am 5. Januar 1981, basel: reiss 1980 [no page numbers]. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 31, pp. 159–60.) “interview with H.l. arnold” (January 6, 1981), in Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996, vol. 3, p. 80. Labyrinth. Stoffe I–III, zurich: diogenes 1981, p. 198; p. 218; p. 329. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 28, p. 178; p. 196; p. 296.) “interview with a. conrad” (august 12, 1983), in Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996, vol. 3, pp. 177–8. “interview with f.J. raddatz” (1986), in Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996, vol. 3, p. 228. Der Auftrag oder Vom Beobachten des Beobachters der Beobachter. Novelle in vierundzwanzig Sätzen, zurich: diogenes 1986. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 26, p. 35.) “interview with m. Haller” (december 1990), in Gespräche 1961–1990 in vier Bänden, vols. 1–4, ed. by Heinz ludwig arnold, in collaboration with anna von Planta and Jan strümpel, zurich: diogenes 1996, vol. 4, p. 173. Turmbau. Stoffe IV–IX, zurich: diogenes 1990, pp. 122–5; p. 130; pp. 174–5; p. 192; p. 229. (reprinted in Werkausgabe in siebenunddreissig Bänden, vols. 1–37, zurich: diogenes 1998, vol. 29, pp. 124–6; p. 131; pp. 173–4; p. 192; p. 227.)

58

Pierre Bühler

II. Sources of Dürrenmatt’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard Kierkegaard, søren, Buch des Richters: seine Tagebücher 1833–1855, trans. by Hermann gottsched, Jena: eugen diedrichs 1905. — Der Augenblick, trans. by Hermann gottsched, Jena: eugen diederichs 1909. — Der Begriff des Auserwählten, trans. by theodor Häcker, Hellerau: Jakob Hegner 1917. — Stadien auf des Lebens Weg, trans. by christoph schrempf and Wolfgang Pfleiderer, Jena: Eugen Diederichs 1922. — Leben und Walten der Liebe, trans. by christoph schrempf and albert dorner, Jena: eugen diederichs 1924. — Philosophische Brocken. Abschliessende unwissenschaftliche Nachschrift, Teil 1 und Teil 2, trans. by christoph schrempf and Hermann gottsched, Jena: eugen diederichs 1925. — Über die Geduld, trans. by theodor Haecker, leipzig: Jakob Hegner 1938. — Der Begriff der Angst, trans. by christoph schrempf, Jena: eugen diederichs (no date). — Zur Selbstprüfung der Gegenwart anbefohlen, trans. by christoph schrempf and albert dorner, Jena: eugen diederichs (no date). III. Secondary Literature on Friedrich Dürrenmatt’s Relation to Kierkegaard bark, Joachim, “dürrenmatts ‘Pilatus’ und das etikett des christlichen dichters,” in Friedrich Dürrenmatt. Studien zu seinem Werk, ed. by gerhard P. Knapp, Heidelberg: stiehm 1976 (Poesie und Wissenschaft, vol. 33), pp. 53–68. bühler, Pierre, “foi et humour. une petite dramaturgie de la foi chrétienne, d’après dürrenmatt,” Bulletin du Centre protestant d’études, vol. 3, 1976, pp. 5–39. — “le grotesque de la grâce. motifs bibliques dans l’œuvre de dürrenmatt,” Foi et vie, vol. 90, no. 5, 1991, pp. 93–102. — “Humour et quête d’identité. le suisse dürrenmatt et le danois Kierkegaard,” in La littérature suisse. Les masques d’identité, ed. by michel reffet, strasbourg: Presses universitaires 1999, pp. 43–57. — “gnadenlosigkeit? christologische figuren in den späten Werken dürrenmatts,” in Die Verwandlung der ‘Stoffe’ als Stoff der Verwandlung. Friedrich Dürrenmatts Spätwerk, ed. by Peter rusterholz and irmgard Wirz, berlin: erich schmidt 2000, pp. 161–78. — “le paradoxe chrétien et ses potentialités créatives. dürrenmatt et la théologie,” in Dürrenmatt im Zentrum. 7. Internationales Neuenburger Kolloquium 2000, ed. by Jürgen söring and annette mingels, berne: lang 2004, pp. 237–57. Hensel, georg, “der dramatiker nach Kierkegaard und einstein. lobrede auf friedrich dürrenmatt zur verleihung des georg-büchner-Preises,” in Herkules und Atlas. Lobreden und andere Versuche über Friedrich Dürrenmatt, ed. by daniel Keel, zurich: diogenes 1992, pp. 25–42. immoos, thomas, “dürrenmatts protestantische Komödie,” Schweizer Rundschau, vol. 72, 1973, pp. 271–80.

Friedrich Dürrenmatt: A Swiss Author Reading and Using Kierkegaard

59

liechti, anna, “drei männer vor gericht. dürrenmatts auseinandersetzung mit der dialektischen theologie,” Quarto, no. 7, 1996, pp. 111–18. mingels, annette, Dürrenmatt und Kierkegaard. Die Kategorie des Einzelnen als gemeinsame Denkform, cologne: böhlau 2003. — “Jener einzelne: Kierkegaards Kategorie des einzelnen als grundkonstante in dürrenmatts theologiekritischem denken,” in Dürrenmatt im Zentrum. 7. Internationales Neuenburger Kolloquium 2000, ed. by Jürgen söring and annette mingels, berne: lang 2004, pp. 259–84. müller farguell, roger W., “durch einander. dürrenmatt and Kierkegaard,” Schweizer Monatshefte, vol. 74, no. 6, 1994, pp. 23–6. — “zur dramaturgie aporetischen denkens. dürrenmatt und Kierkegaard,” in Neue Perspektiven zur deutschsprachigen Literatur der Schweiz, ed. by romey sabalius, amsterdam and atlanta: rodopi 1997, pp. 153–65. rüedi, Peter, Dürrenmatt oder Die Ahnung vom Ganzen, zurich: diogenes 2011, pp. 25–7; pp. 203–11; pp. 261–3; pp. 370–73. rusterholz, Peter, “theologische und philosophische denkformen und ihre funktion für die interpretation und Wertung von texten friedrich dürrenmatts,” in Contemplata aliis tradere. Studien zum Verhältnis von Literatur und Spiritualität, ed. by claudia brinker et al., bern: lang 1995, pp. 473–89. rusterholz, Peter, and Wirz, irmgard (eds.), Die Verwandlung der ‘Stoffe’ als Stoff der Verwandlung. Friedrich Dürrenmatts Spätwerk, berlin: erich schmidt 2000, pp. 13–22, pp. 55–75; pp. 129–95. stucki, Pierre-andré, “un théâtre chrétien. dürrenmatt,” in his Le christianisme et l’histoire d’après Kierkegaard, basel: verlag für recht und gerechtigkeit 1963, pp. 205–8. Weber, emil, Friedrich Dürrenmatt und die Frage nach Gott. Zur theologischen Relevanz der frühen Prosa eines merkwürdigen Protestanten, zurich: theologischer verlag 1980, pp. 38–62; pp. 228–37. Weber, ulrich, “ ‘ob man sich selbst ein stoff zu werden vermag?’ Kierkegaard und die entwicklung des subjektiven schreibens im ‘mitmacher’-Komplex,” Quarto, no. 7, 1996, pp. 65–79. — Dürrenmatts Spätwerk. Die Entstehung aus der mitmacher-Krise, frankfurt and basel: stroemfeld 2007 (editionTEXT, vol. 6), especially pp. 126–32; pp. 161–71.

theodor fontane: a Probable Pioneer in german Kierkegaard reception Julie K. allen

during the winter of 1880, the 60-year-old german apothecary-turned-writer theodor fontane met the 38-year-old danish literary critic georg brandes (1842–1927) at a party in berlin. they conducted a fairly lengthy conversation, which fontane mentioned in a letter to moritz lazarus on march 11, 1880.1 fontane does not elaborate on what topics they discussed, but the recent appearance of the first German edition of Brandes’ monograph Sören Kierkegaard, published by J.a. barth in 1879,2 makes it plausible that their conversation touched on brandes’ views about his prematurely deceased countryman, who, had he not died so prematurely, would have been much closer to fontane’s age than brandes. unfortunately for modern scholars, fontane makes no mention of Kierkegaard’s name anywhere in his copious correspondence or papers, but that silence does not preclude the possibility that his conversation with brandes prompted him to seek out Kierkegaard’s works. His encounter with brandes made a strong enough impression on fontane that, while working on the novel Unwiederbringlich in 1888, he asked their mutual friend and publisher Julius rodenberg (1831–1914) to have brandes verify the accuracy of his portrayal of denmark “with regard to personal and political elements.”3 It is probable that Fontane read Brandes’ book, but his first exposure to Kierkegaard most likely came from an entirely different source than brandes. after his initial training and employment as a pharmacist, fontane’s peripheral involvement in the 1848 revolution prompted him to pursue a career as a journalist, reporting on literary and foreign affairs for Prussian government-subsidized newspapers. His first supervisor at the Central Office for Press Affairs, from 1851 to 1853, was Ryno Quehl (1821–64), who subsequently became the Prussian consul in Copenhagen erwin Kobel, “theodor fontane—ein Kierkegaard-leser?” Jahrbuch der deutschen Schillergesellschaft, vol. 36, 1992, p. 262: “Prof. Frank und Professor Brandes, mit denen ich vorzugsweise gesprochen, haben mir sehr gefallen.” 2 georg brandes, Sören Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, leipzig: J.a. barth 1879. 3 theodor fontane, Briefe an Julius Rodenberg. Eine Dokumentation, ed. by HansHeinrich reuter, berlin: aufbau verlag 1969, p. 30. 1

62

Julie K. Allen

until his death in 1864.4 Quehl’s first years in Copenhagen coincided with the final years of Kierkegaard’s life and his attack on Christendom, a dispute which Quehl discussed at length in his 1856 book From Denmark.5 The son of a pastor, Quehl had studied theology before turning to literature and journalism, but he retained a strong interest in religious issues. He provides a brief introduction of Kierkegaard’s oeuvre, a lengthy summary of the “attack on christendom,”6 and an in-depth analysis of the Danish reaction to Kierkegaard, which Quehl compares to similar debates over religious reform in Berlin. He justifies his inclusion of the discussion of Kierkegaard’s work as an attempt to “persuade the educated classes in favor of a peaceful and thoughtful judgment.”7 fontane was working as a foreign correspondent in London when Quehl’s book appeared, but it seems likely that he read it, since he makes reference to it in his travel diary from september 1864,8 after an extended stay with Quehl in Copenhagen. By that time, Fontane had returned from England and traveled to denmark to report on the Prussian occupation in the aftermath of denmark’s defeat in the second schleswig War. during this period he learned some danish and acquired a fairly broad familiarity with danish society and culture, so he would at least have had some basic knowledge of Kierkegaard’s life and work.9 given the absence of direct references to Kierkegaard in fontane’s papers, however, the question of whether or not fontane studied Kierkegaard in any depth cannot be conclusively answered. if fontane did draw on Kierkegaard’s works, he would have been among the first German authors to do so, preceding such betterdocumented Kierkegaard-readers as Hugo von Hofmannsthal (1874–1929), rainer maria rilke (1875–1926), and franz Kafka (1883–1924).10 though fontane read danish well enough to follow danish newspapers such as Fædrelandet and Dagbladet, as his notes for Unwiederbringlich attest,11 it is unlikely that he read Kierkegaard in the original danish. fortunately, many of Kierkegaard’s works had been translated into german by this time, beginning with a few volumes in the early 1870s by albert bärthold12 and continuing throughout the 1880s. for example, the 4 Karl Wipperman, “Quehl, Ryno,” Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, vols. 1–56, munich: Historische commission bei der bayerischen akademie der Wissenschaften, leipzig: duncker und Humblot 1875–1912, vol. 27, p. 31. 5 Ryno Quehl, Aus Dänemark. Bornholm und die Bornholmer. Dr. Sören Kierkegaard: Wider die dänische Staatskirche. Mit einem Hinblick auf Preussen, berlin: decker 1856. 6 Quehl’s source for his summary is the Copenhagener Zeitung, which he describes as “[eine] in nur sehr wenigen Exemplaren verbreitete[n] deutsche[n] conservative...Zeitung,” Dänemark, p. 284. 7 Quehl, Dänemark, p. xxviii. 8 theodor fontane, Unterwegs und wieder Daheim, ed. by Kurt schreinert and Hermann Kunisch (vol. 18.a, in theodor fontane, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–30, ed. by edgar gross, munich: nymphenburg 1959–75), p. 927. 9 for more detail on this subject, see theodor fontane, Im Paris des Nordens. Impressionen aus Dänemark, berlin: aufbau 2001. 10 Kobel, “fontane,” p. 261. 11 ibid., p. 262. 12 see Sören Kierkegaard. Eine Verfasser-Existenz eigner Art. Aus seinen Mittheilungen zusammengestellt, trans. and ed. by albert bärthold, Halberstadt: frantz 1873; Zwölf Reden

Theodor Fontane: A Probable Pioneer in German Kierkegaard Reception

63

first German edition of Fear and Trembling appeared in 1882,13 followed by Either/ Or in 1885,14 and Stages on Life’s Way in 1886.15 scholarly interest in Kierkegaard did not gain serious traction in germany until after the turn of the century, with the translation of his collected works by christoph schrempf (1860–1944) in 1909 and emanuel Hirsch (1888–1972) in 1950.16 as for the more fundamental question of how Kierkegaard’s oeuvre might have contributed to fontane’s work, close readings of certain of fontane’s novels reveal enough systematic and meaningful connections between fontane’s work and Kierkegaard’s to justify the supposition that he was, at the very least, acquainted with Kierkegaard’s central ideas, whether from brandes’ monograph or personal study. the issue of fontane’s possible reception of Kierkegaard received little attention from scholars until the early 1990s. since then, however, erwin Kobel17 and, to a lesser extent, Paul irving anderson, have presented very thorough,18 detailed arguments supporting the thesis that fontane was not only familiar with Kierkegaard’s works and alluded to Kierkegaard in his own work, but also systematically explored some of Kierkegaard’s central ideas in his novels, notably Unwiederbringlich (1892) and Effi Briest (1895). evidence for fontane’s literary transmutation of Kierkegaard’s ideas primarily takes two forms: on a narrative plane, he invests specific characters in the novels with distinctive resemblances to Kierkegaard; in his conceptual framework, he draws on Kierkegaardian ideas to explain the motivations underlying the most fateful actions of his protagonists. on both levels, fontane neither slavishly imitates Kierkegaard nor parrots his conclusions; instead, he carefully and poetically explores the ways in which Kierkegaard’s insights into the human mind and spirit might play out in interpersonal relationships. despite his fairly advanced age during much of his authorship, the modernity of fontane’s work tends to be ahead of his time; the strong evidence indicating his thoughtful engagement with Kierkegaardian philosophy serves as an additional support for this characterization, as well as clue to the nature of some of the earliest Kierkegaard reception in germany. von Søren Kierkegaard (excerpts from Four Upbuilding Discourses (1843) and Christian Discourses), trans. and ed. by albert bärthold, Halle: J. fricke 1875; Lessing und die objective Wahrheit: aus Søren Kierkegaards Schriften, trans. and ed. by albert bärthold, Halle: J. fricke 1877. 13 sören Kierkegaard, Furcht und Zittern. Dialektische Lyrik von Johannes de silentio (Søren Kierkegaard), trans. and ed. by H.c. Ketels, erlangen: a. deichert 1882. 14 sören Kierkegaard, Entweder-Oder. Ein Lebens-Fragment, trans. and ed. by alexander michelsen and otto gleiss, leipzig: J. lehmann 1885. 15 sören Kierkegaard, Stadien auf dem Lebenswege, trans. and ed. by albert bärthold, leipzig: J. lehmann 1886. 16 anton bösl, Unfreiheit und Selbstverfehlung. Søren Kierkegaards existenzdialektische Bestimmung von Schuld und Sühne. freiburg: Herder 1997, p. 13. 17 Erwin Kobel, “Die Angst der Effi Briest. Zur möglichen Kierkegaard-Rezeption fontanes,” Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts, 1994, pp. 254–88; Kobel, “fontane,” pp. 255–87. 18 see Paul irving anderson, Ehrgeiz und Trauer. Fontanes offiziöse Agitation 1859 und ihre Wiederkehr in Unwiederbringlich, stuttgart: steiner 2002 (Beiträge zur Kommunikationsgeschichte, vol. 11).

64

Julie K. Allen

I. Fontane’s Biography and Significance born on december 30, 1819, in neuruppin, germany, northwest of berlin, Henri Theodor Fontane was first child of Louis Henri Fontane and Emilie Fontane, née labry. both parents were descendants of french Huguenots who had sought sanctuary in Prussia toward the end of the seventeenth century. though berlin’s Huguenot refugee community was largely assimilated and neither of fontane’s parents spoke much french, they took enormous pride in their french cultural heritage. besides being a gifted storyteller and unlucky gambler, louis Henri fontane was an apothecary, and fontane followed his father into the profession, though without enthusiasm. between 1835 and 1849, he worked in various apothecaries, but devoted his free time to literature, an interest that was fostered by the literary journals many apothecaries of the time subscribed to for the benefit of their customers. His earliest literary attempts, such as the novel Geschwisterliebe, which was serialized in the literary magazine Figaro in 1839, were unremarkable. However, fontane’s artistic development and connections received a boost in 1844, when he joined a literary club called “tunnel über der spree” in berlin, among whose members could be found such leading figures of the German literary scene as theodor storm (1817–88), gottfried Keller (1819–90), and Joseph von eichendorff (1788–1857). fontane was particularly close to bernhard von lepel (1818–85), his commanding officer during his time as a soldier in the Emperor-Frantz regiment in berlin, who introduced fontane to nordic ballad traditions and with whom he conducted a close correspondence over more than forty years.19 fontane’s path to germany’s literary Parnassus was long and meandering, however, delayed in part by a detour into political activism. during the 1848 revolution, fontane was attracted by the revolutionaries’ espousal of freedom and democracy, even taking briefly to the barricades on March 18 in Berlin and accepting a nomination to the german national assembly in frankfurt. throughout the fall of 1848, fontane’s letters and newspaper articles passionately support the revolutionary cause. in a letter to lepel on october 12, 1848, fontane exclaims, “i am interested in freedom itself, not in its form!—i want a free people!”20 similarly, in an essay published in the Berliner Zeitungshalle on november 7, 1848, he demands “Freedom at any price! Strive for it, make any sacrifice it requires!”21 the following year, he further demonstrated his patriotism by publishing Männer und Helden: Acht Preussen-Lieder.22 after the revolution of 1848, he quit his job and began working as a journalist for the nationalistic Central Office for Press Affairs, first in Berlin and then in london until 1859. He published a few novels during this period that earned little acclaim. While in england, he published several books about british Jørgen Hendriksen, Theodor Fontane og Norden. et Kapitel af “Det Nordiske” i tysk Opfattelse, copenhagen: P. Haase 1935 (Tyske Studier, vol. 4), pp. 13–14. 20 Helga ritscher, Fontane. Seine politische Gedankenwelt, göttingen: musterschmidt Wissenschaftlicher verlag 1953 (Göttinger Bausteine zur Geschichtswissenschaft, no. 8), p. 31. my translation. 21 ibid. 22 theodor fontane, Männer und Helden. Acht Preussen-Lieder, berlin: a.W. Hayn 1850. 19

Theodor Fontane: A Probable Pioneer in German Kierkegaard Reception

65

society, poetry, folk ballads, and landscape, which resonated with contemporary german interest in english stories.23 after losing his job over an article critical of Prussian governmental policy, fontane returned to berlin as the editor of the conservative newspaper Kreuzzeitung. during this period, he also began working on his Wanderungen durch die Mark Brandenburg, in which he applied the technique he had used in his books about the british isles to the region surrounding berlin. fontane was involved, both personally and intellectually, in each of the major conflicts that paved the way for the German unification. During the First Schleswig War of 1849–50, fontane sympathized with the rebellious danish-governed duchies that were disappointed in their hopes of Prussian support: “From the first moment, I was aflame for Schleswig-Holstein’s cause, and I deeply regretted the Prussian policies that blindly and tragically insisted on leaving events in the hands of the revolutionaries.”24 after the Prusso-danish treaty was signed on July 2, 1850, and the Prussian troops withdrew from schleswig-Holstein, fontane spontaneously decided to join the remaining German volunteers to continue fighting the Danes. He made it as far as Hamburg before a job offer from the central Press agency in berlin persuaded him to give up the idea. When war broke out again in schleswig in 1864, fontane immediately traveled to the front to write about the war and the subsequent Prussian occupation of denmark. ultimately, fontane reported from Prussian war zones in denmark (1864–65), austria (1866), and france (1870), including a stint as a prisoner of war in a french camp at vaucouleurs. He published his accounts both individually as newspaper articles and as collections.25 After two decades of non-fiction writing, Fontane returned to fictional literature in the 1870s. He left the conservative Kreuzzeitung in 1870 to become a drama critic for the liberal Vossische Zeitung, which ensured his exposure to the products of the emerging literary movements of naturalism and scandinavian modernism, particularly as mediated by brandes and ibsen. fontane was skeptical of the more radical social platforms of these movements, such as ibsens’ gospel of “free love,”26 but their realistic aesthetic resonated with his own. finally, in 1878, at the age of 57, he embarked on a highly prolific career as a novelist, publishing more than twenty novels and memoirs in roughly twenty years. in contrast to his insipid youthful attempts, fontane’s mature work was highly successful, garnering praise for his masterful narrative style, keen portrayal of society, and nuanced treatment of social and moral issues. His belated success was due not only to his own maturation as a see theodor fontane, Gedichte, berlin: carl reimarus verlag 1851; theodor fontane, Ein Sommer in London, dessau: gebrüder Katz 1854; theodor fontane, Aus England: Studien und Briefe über Londoner Theater, Kunst und Presse, stuttgart: ebner und seubert 1860; and theodor fontane, Jenseits des Tweed. Bilder und Briefe aus Schottland, berlin: J. springer 1860 (english translation: Across the Tweed: A Tour of mid-Victorian Scotland, trans. by brian battershaw, london: Phoenix House 1965). 24 Hendriksen, Theodor Fontane og Norden, p. 22. 25 see theodor fontane, Der schleswig-holsteinische Krieg im Jahre 1864, berlin: decker 1866; theodor fontane, Der deutsche Krieg von 1866, berlin: decker 1869–71; theodor fontane, Kriegsgefangen. Erlebtes 1870, berlin: decker 1871; and theodor fontane, Der Krieg gegen Frankreich 1870–71, berlin: decker 1873–76. 26 anderson, Ehrgeiz und Trauer, p. 192. 23

66

Julie K. Allen

writer, but also to the revolution in aesthetic norms and literary styles that took place in germany during the 1870s and 1880s. the majority of fontane’s novels are realistic narratives, often dealing with personal and marital problems within a larger context of societal issues. His first novel, the historical romance Vor dem Sturm, appeared in 1878, followed by several more contemporary novels, including the scandalous L’Adultera (1882),27 Irrungen Wirrungen (1888),28 and Frau Jenny Treibel (1893).29 in both Unwiederbringlich (1892)30 and Effi Briest (1895),31 fontane used historical occurrences as the basis for masterful literary explorations of human psychology. His last completed novel, Der Stechlin,32 appeared in 1899, shortly after fontane’s death on september 20, 1898, at age 78 in berlin. Unwiederbringlich is the only one of fontane’s novels set in denmark, primarily in copenhagen and the formerly danish duchies of schleswig and Holstein. the plot is derived from a scandal at the ducal court of strelitz in mecklenburg in the 1840s. in 1841, a 44-year-old nobleman named carl Hans friedrich von maltzahn had attended the wedding of the danish prince frederik (later King frederik vii) to Princess caroline of strelitz. at the wedding, he fell in love with 29-year-old auguste von dewitz, a lady-in-waiting at court. carl obtained a divorce from his wife caroline, but auguste refused to marry him. His social position soon became untenable, so he left the country, traveling via various european countries to new York in the spring of 1845. shortly afterward, auguste quietly married Wilhelm von bernstorff, an aspiring politician. after the death of his oldest daughter in 1851, carl and caroline remarried, but the marriage was not happy. on august 20, 1855, caroline committed suicide, leaving behind a letter containing a single word: unwiederbringlich (irretrievable). the novel’s title, which on one level refers to the protagonists’ vanished marital bliss, also functions as an epitaph for denmark’s erstwhile and irretrievable political dominance in northern europe. fontane deliberately “transposed” the events, both geographically and temporally, explaining to rodenberg: “i, however, have been a clever captain…and have transposed the story to schleswig-Holstein, so that it now takes place in lesser part in a castle near glücksburg and in greater part in

27 theodor fontane, L’Adultera, breslau: schottlaender 1882. (english translation: L’adultera, trans. by lynn r. eliason, new York: Peter lang 1990.) 28 theodor fontane, Irrungen Wirrungen, leipzig: f.W. steffens 1888. (english translation: Delusions, Confusions, trans. by Peter demetz, new York: continuum 1989.) 29 theodor fontane, Frau Jenny Treibel, berlin: fischer 1893. (english translation: Frau Jenny Treibel, trans. by myra richards Jessen, new York: appleton-century-crofts 1948.) 30 theodor fontane, Unwiederbringlich, berlin: Wilhelm Hertz 1892. (english translation: Beyond Recall, trans. by douglas Parmée, london: oxford university Press 1964.) 31 theodor fontane, Effi Briest, berlin: f. fontane 1896. (english translation: Effi Briest, trans. by Hugh rorrison and Helen chambers, london: angel books 1995.) 32 theodor fontane, Der Stechlin, berlin: f. fontane 1899. (english translation: The Stechlin¸ trans. by William l. zwiebel, columbia, south carolina: camden House 1995.)

Theodor Fontane: A Probable Pioneer in German Kierkegaard Reception

67

copenhagen and on the island of zealand.”33 the effect of the transposition, aside from protecting the identity of the maltzahn family, is to invest the personal events in the novel with geopolitical significance. Christian Grawe argues for the inherently political nature of fontane’s choice to set the story in denmark on the eve of war with Prussia, reasoning that the transposition of the action from the german countryside to the site of a nerve center of european politics at the time of the events with parallels to the german situation during the time of the novel’s composition is eo ipso also a political choice. the northern land lives in the german, especially in the Prussian, consciousness of the time as a militarily defeated opponent, whose defeat helped prepare for German unification.34

in the novel, fontane paints a picture of the danish empire in decline, internally hollowed out by moral decadence yet externally aggressive in its attempts to annex schleswig. behind the scenes, present only in conversation between the characters, looms the threat of growing Prussian military and moral power, in stark contrast to denmark’s carefree frivolity. the novel ends before the outbreak of war between denmark and Prussia in 1864, but the writing is on the wall: the once-mighty danish empire, that straddled northern europe from greenland to sweden, will fall before the righteous might of Prussia. the shifts in fontane’s political views between democratic, liberal, and conservative positions over the course of his nearly eighty years of life make it impossible to link him conclusively to any particular political party, but the fact of his political engagement is evident in both his life and works.35 the older he became, the more fontane distanced himself from political parties and their agitations; his memoirs in particular tend to gloss over his involvement with various political organizations. throughout his ideological meanderings, however, one constant element of Fontane’s political views was his support for a unified German state, whatever the cost. during the 1848 revolution, he published an article entitled “Prussia’s future” in which he advocated the dissolution of Prussia for the sake of a greater germany. His enthusiasm for both schleswig wars stemmed from his conviction that the duchies needed Prussia’s help to free themselves from danish domination, and Prussia needed the duchies to further its own geopolitical plans for a powerful, united germany. Prussia needed to wrest schleswig-Holstein from denmark to gain access to the north sea, but even more so to demonstrate its superiority over the once-mighty danish empire. decades later, in a letter to his friend James morris, an english doctor, on february 8, 1897, fontane reiterated his support for Prussia’s military and political agenda: “a state…needs certain things, in order to survive, and even its rival states must acquiesce in its attempts to meet

fontane, Briefe an Julius Rodenberg, p. 28. christian grawe, “unwiederbringlich. roman,” in Fontane-Handbuch, ed. by christian grawe and Helmuth nürnberger, stuttgart: Kröner 2000, p. 606. 35 gudrun loster-schneider’s dissertation Der Erzähler Fontane. Seine politischen Positionen in den Jahren 1864–1898 und ihre ästhetische Vermittlung (tübingen: narr 1986) summarizes the scholarly debates over fontane’s role as a political author since the 1920s. 33 34

68

Julie K. Allen

these needs. We needed schleswig-Holstein. We had to have it, and we took it.”36 Unwiederbringlich reflects this conviction, but without animosity toward Denmark or danish culture. on the contrary, the tone of the novel is elegiac, commemorating denmark’s vanished greatness. the sympathetic, though fatalistic, view of denmark in Unwiederbringlich can be explained to a certain extent by the affinity Fontane felt with Scandinavia throughout his life, to which the elements of scandinavian history and nordic landscapes in his works attest. as a child growing up in the baltic sea town of swinemünde, he was surrounded by danes and swedes. scholars such as Jørgen Hendriksen37 and Karsten Jessen38 have documented the importance of the scandinavian atmosphere of swinemünde as an antithesis to neuruppin in the development of fontane’s personality and preferences. in his autobiography From Twenty to Thirty, fontane explains his attraction to the north: “everyone who has preference for the south will judge differently, but i, for my part, am most decisively not southern-oriented and can apply the words of a.W. schlegel about his friend fouqué quite properly to myself. ‘the magnetic needle of his character,’ said schlegel of fouqué, ‘points north.’ ”39 He repeated these sentiments in a letter to ernst gründler on february 11, 1896, where he confesses, “i am a creature of the north and, for me, italy cannot compete.”40 this statement echoes the declaration by melanie in L’Adultera: “i’m drawn to the north. more and more it strikes me as my true native home.”41 II. Fontane’s Indebtedness to Kierkegaard in light of fontane’s predisposition toward scandinavia, as well as his attraction to revolutionary rhetoric and psychological analysis, it would have been logical for him to have been drawn to Kierkegaard and his work. although close contemporaries, however, there was scant possibility of any direct connection between the two during Kierkegaard’s lifetime, though there are tantalizing moments when their paths might have crossed, had circumstances been different. Kierkegaard’s visits to berlin occurred while fontane was in school there, but they moved in entirely different circles, while fontane’s visits to denmark took place long after Kierkegaard’s death. ironically, if fontane had achieved immediate success as a novelist rather than detouring into journalism, he might never had had occasion to make use of Kierkegaard, due to the language gap between them, as well as the significant lag involved in Kierkegaard’s introduction into german literary circles. the fact that fontane did not begin his literary career in earnest until nearly three decades after Kierkegaard’s death worked theodor fontane, Briefe. Ausgabe in fünf Bänden, vols. 1–5, ed. by otto drude and Helmuth nürnberger, munich: Hanser verlag 1976–82, vol. 4, p. 635. 37 see Hendriksen, Theodor Fontane og Norden. 38 Karsten Jessen, Theodor Fontane und Skandinavien, Ph.d. thesis, christianalbrechts-universität zu Kiel, 1975. 39 theodor fontane, Von Zwanzig bis Dreißig. Autobiographisches (vol. 15 in fontane, Sämtliche Werke), p. 96. 40 fontane, Briefe, vol. 4, p. 531. 41 fontane, L’Adultera, p. 174. (english translation: L’adultera, p. 147.) 36

Theodor Fontane: A Probable Pioneer in German Kierkegaard Reception

69

in his favor, allowing him access to several german translations of Kierkegaard’s work and enabling him to incorporate his own explorations of Kierkegaardian concepts in his later novels, particularly Unwiederbringlich and Effi Briest. despite the dissimilarities between Kierkegaard and fontane’s family backgrounds and professional situations, their writings and personalities display some common elements. both men grapple in their texts with the fundamental problems facing their respective societies, though from very different perspectives and by divergent means, in an attempt to analyze the social and spiritual problems that afflicted their countrymen and -women. they each focus on the crucial importance of individual choice in the pursuit of happiness and self-knowledge, with particular emphasis on human interactions, emotional relationships, and marriage. in his chapter “fontane and Kierkegaard—ein seltsames Paar,” Anderson identifies as similar traits their shared sense of being confined in a narrow-minded, parochial society and the conviction that writing was their means to overcoming the challenges they faced in life, whether physical, social, educational, or financial. He points in particular to Kierkegaard’s anguished reactions to his disastrous encounter with the Corsair in 1846, an episode that brandes documented comprehensively in his monograph, as closely paralleling fontane’s emotional state after his fall from grace in 1859 over an article in favor of German unification.42 both men regarded themselves as having been wronged by those in power, misrepresented by the press, and misunderstood by their audiences. unlike Kierkegaard, fontane was not caricatured by the press; instead, his career in the press was nearly destroyed. Yet such thematic and biographical similarities, however compelling, do not prove anything about fontane’s reception of Kierkegaard. instead, we must turn to fontane’s own writings for concrete clues to his interpretation and application of Kierkegaardian ideas. on a holistic level, anderson suggests that fontane and Kierkegaard’s respective strengths complement each other’s weaknesses: Kirkegaard [sic] was able to develop his concepts of ethics and marriage out of the excessively elevated claims of purity of faith and the destabilizing problems of daily life together. one could not expect such a complex system of thought from fontane. naturally, the representation, and, above all, the discrete treatment of sexual and political relationships by Kierkegaard would be unthinkable. but what about by fontane, with eyes and language sharpened by Kierkegaard’s spirit?…in this way, Kierkegaard’s power of making faith to an experience enhance fontane’s more subdued but also continually proliferating fantasy. in a way similar to that in which Kierkegaard develops the concept of faith out of its impossibility, fontane coaxes the nature of marriage out of everything that contradicts the possibility of marital bliss.43

the freedom of interpretation suggested by such a model, in which fontane would have cherry-picked aspects of Kierkegaard’s thought for his own use, reflects the very different historical and social context of fontane and Kierkegaard’s authorships. anderson argues that fontane’s view of Kierkegaard is distinctly colored by brandes’ representation, in particular the rejection of Kierkegaard’s rationalist approach 42 43

anderson, Ehrgeiz und Trauer, p. 196. ibid., p. 193.

70

Julie K. Allen

to philosophical problems, rather than the empirical style favored by brandes and fontane.44 While fontane may have shared brandes’ philosophical concerns about Kierkegaard’s style, though, he displays none of the latter’s contempt for Kierkegaard’s concern with religion and human spirituality. many of Kierkegaard’s particular concerns about danish society, his discussion of which generally elicited brandes’ scorn, would have been irrelevant to fontane, while many of his own concerns about the state of affairs in Wilhelminian germany went unaddressed in Kierkegaard’s work. the areas in which Kierkegaard’s ideas would have appealed most to fontane include Kierkegaard’s insights into the human psyche, spirit, and interpersonal relationships. One of the most straightforward ways in which Fontane may have specifically alluded to Kierkegaard in his novels is through the creation of characters who share particular traits with him. the most explicit candidate for such a connection is the ship owner Kirkegaard, who runs the ferry service between glücksburg and copenhagen in Unwiederbringlich. since there is only a single reference to this character in the novel45 and he makes no personal appearance in the text, the name association could be a simple homage to Kierkegaard, perhaps in recognition of his role as a mediator between denmark and germany. Kobel, however, invests the name with deeper significance, suggesting that Fontane made the orthographic alteration from “Kierkegaard” to “Kirkegaard” in order to emphasize the original meaning of “cemetery” and underscore the connection to the melancholy poem by Waiblinger, “Der Kirchhof” (The Graveyard), that appears repeatedly in the first chapters of the novel and sets the tone for the tragic occurrences to follow.46 in Quehl’s introduction of Kierkegaard, he makes particular note of the linguistic equivalence of Kierkegaard and “Kirchhof,”47 though fontane’s own mastery of danish would have made the connection obvious to him. Effi Briest contains no character by Kierkegaard’s name, but rather a character who shares certain physical and character traits with Kierkegaard. Kobel makes a persuasive case for the similarities of physical appearance and temperament between Kierkegaard and the hunchbacked pharmacist alonzo gieshübler, whom innstetten introduces to Effi as “a character, the best we have here, an aesthete and something of an original, but he’s all heart.”48 though it is debatable whether or not Kierkegaard had a hunchback, the caricatured image of him that persists in the popular imagination resembles quite closely the description fontane provides of gieshübler, “a little man with crooked shoulders, almost the point of deformity,”49 who compensates for his malformation with elegant clothing and disguises his tendency toward melancholy with urbanity and wit. Kobel offers the following mutually applicable description: He is slender and weak, tormented by suffering that likely derives from his crippled spine; he himself bemoans the mismatch between his body and his soul, the lack of 44 45 46 47 48 49

ibid., p. 193; p. 191. fontane, Unwiederbringlich, p. 77. (Beyond Recall, p. 66.) Kobel, “fontane,” pp. 263–5. Quehl, Dänemark, p. 277. fontane, Effi Briest, p. 80. (Effi Briest, p. 41.) fontane, Effi Briest, p. 100. (Effi Briest, p. 48.)

Theodor Fontane: A Probable Pioneer in German Kierkegaard Reception

71

physical strength and the pure spirit-existence mandated thereby; he is melancholy, a burden to himself, and afraid that he will become a burden to others as well; in his secret thoughts, he is convinced that he is not capable of anything, despite his intellectual gifts, in particular not of the one thing of which everyone is capable: being a husband; but he knows how to conceal his melancholy; there is nothing morose about him; he is a lover of opera and theater performances, moves in the most elegant circles, dressed in an elegant and costly manner. 50

the similarities between them encompass even trivial details, for example, the fact that gieshübler wears a top hat “which was much too tall for his proportions,”51 which could be read as an allusion to Kierkegaard. As particularly significant to the characterization of both men, Kobel cites nearly identical statements by gieshübler and various of Kierkegaard’s pseudonyms about their prematurely aged spirits. Gieshübler tells Effi, “I was never really young,”52 which is almost identical with victor eremita’s description of “the unhappiest one” in Either/Or, as someone who “has never been young.”53 similar statements in Kierkegaard’s autobiographical writings reinforce the applicability to Kierkegaard himself; for example, in his diary, Kierkegaard wrote of himself, albeit in the third person, “as a child he was already an old man.—so he continued to live, but he never became any younger.”54 like Kierkegaard, gieshübler feels compelled to conceal his melancholy nature and overly serious soul, to dress up and go out into society. it is conceivable that these narrative allusions to Kierkegaard could be gratuitous or coincidental, but the argument for the significance of Fontane’s Kierkegaard reception is supported by his exploration of Kierkegaardian themes, in particular the question of the way in which a person’s life-view determines their choices and actions, on much deeper levels within the novels. Kierkegaard’s conception of “three existence-spheres: the esthetic, the ethical, [and] the religious”55 plays a central role in both Unwiederbringlich and Effi Briest. the question of whether fontane deliberately incorporated these concepts is subordinate to their value as an apparatus for interpreting the meaning of the novels. For example, the figure of gieshübler, aside from any resemblance to Kierkegaard himself, serves to illustrate the tensions between the spheres of the aesthetic and the ethical. gieshübler aspires to be an aesthete, but is barred from the selfishness of the true aesthete by his own compassionate nature. His thoughtful and chivalrous treatment of Effi is completely above board, but he inadvertently facilitates her affair with crampas by sponsoring artistic soireés that give Crampas the opportunity to insinuate himself with Effi. fontane explains that “the harmless gieshübler in his innocence, despite his horror of ambiguous dealings, [had] been the servant of two masters. the one was innstetten and the other was crampas.”56 innstetten, always secure in the consciousness of 50 51 52 53 54 55 56

Kobel, “fontane,” p. 258. fontane, Effi Briest, p. 103. (Effi Briest, p. 50.) fontane, Effi Briest, p. 102. (Effi Briest, p. 49.) SKS 2, 219 / EO1, 226. SKS 22, 83, NB11:141 / JP 6, 6420. SKS 6, 439 / SLW, 476. fontane, Effi Briest, p. 248. (Effi Briest, p. 109.)

Julie K. Allen

72

doing the right thing, whether or not it brings pleasure to himself or others, embodies the ethical, while Crampas, who risks Effi’s reputation, his marriage, and his own life for the sake of self-indulgence, represents the aesthetic. in vacillating between her husband and her lover, Effi is also choosing between these opposing spheres of existence. Kierkegaardian tension between the aesthetic, ethical, and religious spheres is fundamental to the irreconcilable conflicts between the main characters in Unwiederbringlich. count Holk conceives of himself as an aesthete, a don Juan, living in the moment and savoring life, as his attempted seduction of ebba rosenberg attests. christine, on the other hand, moves between the ethical and the religious, doing her duty as a wife and mother while enduring her suffering by turning to her faith for consolation. Though neither character is an exact copy of the figures created by Kierkegaard to illustrate these life-views, fontane explores the tragic consequences of these contradictory perspectives on life within a failing marriage. both Kobel and anderson cite this constellation of character types as evidence that fontane deliberately structured the novel around Kierkegaardian concepts, though anderson attributes fontane’s familiarity with this paradigm to brandes, while Kobel argues that fontane’s knowledge of the concepts goes beyond brandes’ discussion of them, such that fontane must have read Stages himself.57 anderson suggests further that the characterization of Holk could stem from fontane’s reading of Quehl’s chapter on Kierkegaard, which begins with a quotation condemning the “half-heartedness” that is the main weakness of fontane’s male protagonist, Helmut Holk: “the character, the illness of our time, said Kierkegaard on may 24, 1855, is lack of character, half-heartedness.”58 Half-hearted or not, Holk is concerned with immediacy and pleasure, while christine’s focus is on manners and propriety. it is not just the difference between christine and Holk’s personalities that renders their marriage untenable, however, but rather the discrepancies between their interpretations of the meaning of love. the efforts of Holk and christine to save their marriage, like those of fontane’s own parents, who separated in 1847, are doomed by their conflicting life-views and the way in which each of them fundamentally misunderstand each other as a result, despite their best intentions. by way of explanation, Kobel cites the passage from Stages on Life’s Way where frater taciturnus explains the dialectic of unhappy love in relation to the ethical and the aesthetic, though with a gender reversal in fontane’s novel: “love itself has an ethical and an esthetic element. she declares that she loves and has the esthetic element and understands it esthetically; he says that he loves and understands it ethically. Hence they both love and love each other, but nevertheless it is a misunderstanding.” 59 it is not, therefore, a lack of love for each other that separates christine and Holk but, rather, inherently contradictory conceptions of love. Kobel goes so far as to say that their love has always been illusory, that Holk was motivated by admiration for Christine, while Christine mistook her happiness over fulfilling her

57 58 59

Kobel, “fontane,” p. 268. Quehl, Dänemark, p. 285. SKS 6, 390 / SLW, 421.

Theodor Fontane: A Probable Pioneer in German Kierkegaard Reception

73

familial obligations for love,60 but anderson disagrees on this point, citing fontane’s assurances that the early years of their marriage were full of love.61 despite their initial happiness, however, Holk and christine’s remarriage is doomed to failure, agreeing with Kierkegaard’s postulate in Repetition that one cannot repeat and thus reclaim the past. shortly after the Holks’ remarriage, asta’s friend elizabeth performs a folk-song, which ends with the stanza: “i do think of those vanished days, John, and always they fill me with happiness, but those which were dearest to me, i do not wish them back again.”62 this poem closes the circle begun with the poem “the graveyard” by Waiblinger at the beginning of the novel and reinforces the novel’s title, affirming the impossibility of retrieving past happiness. the character in Unwiederbringlich who offers the most compelling applications of Kierkegaardian philosophy is christine. like Kierkegaard and gieshübler, she has a melancholy disposition, aggravated by the death of her youngest child several years earlier, but she does her best to conceal it from her husband and children. she tries to find comfort in her Pietistic faith, often driving her husband to distraction with her self-satisfied piety. Yet she is tormented by indistinct fears that make her restless and uneasy. Kobel points out the striking similarity between christine’s conversation with her friend and confidante Julie von Dobschütz immediately after Holk’s departure for copenhagen and a passage from The Concept of Anxiety, which appeared in a german edition in 1890,63 while fontane was still working on revisions to Unwiederbringlich. Kierkegaard analyzes fear in the following terms: “What, then, is it? nothing. but what effect does nothing have? it begets anxiety. this is the profound secret of innocence, that it is at the same time anxiety.”64 christine is and remains innocent of any sin, but she is still plagued by fears she cannot identify, as the dialogue between christine and Julie reveals: “‘What is it, christine?’ ‘nothing.’ ‘and yet you seem so moved….’ ‘nothing,’ repeated the countess, ‘or at least nothing definite. But I have a vague fear.’”65 the nothingness around which christine’s fear coalesces is the future, with all of its conflicting possibilities. Despite her confidence that her own actions are impeccably ethical, christine’s fear of the possibilities implicit in the future undermines her faith and disrupts her peace of mind. it is christine’s inability to transition from the ethical sphere to the religious that causes her downfall. in Kierkegaard’s terminology from Fear and Trembling, christine would be a Knight of resignation, not a Knight of faith. Her piety lacks the joyousness and confidence required of the truly religious person, as Kierkegaard notes in Stages on Life’s Way: “a religious person is always joyful….therefore, whoever says truthfully, he is always in danger and always joyful, he utters at once the most humble and the most high-spirited word that has ever been spoken.”66 christine Kobel, “fontane,” p. 269. anderson, Ehrgeiz und Trauer, p. 192. 62 fontane, Unwiederbringlich, p. 336. (Beyond Recall, p. 293.) 63 sören Kierkegaard, Zur Psychologie der Sünde, der Bekehrung und des Glaubens. Zwei Schriften Søren Kierkegaards (includes The Concept of Anxiey and Philosophical Fragments), trans. and ed. by christoph schrempf, leipzig: f. richter 1890, p. 38. 64 SKS 4, 347 / CA, 41. 65 fontane, Unwiederbringlich, p. 81. (Beyond Recall, p. 69.) 66 Kobel, “fontane,” p. 282. 60 61

74

Julie K. Allen

performs her religion out of ethical conviction, good will, and a sense of duty. she instructs her daughter asta, “We must not live for our own pleasure and enjoyment, but to do our duty.”67 she is neither joyful nor willing to acknowledge the danger in which she finds herself. Rather than espousing the Kierkegaardian paradox that being in danger ensures the proximity of god, christine leans toward a grundtvigian churchliness that equates piety with security and the absence of danger, but her sense of security proves false and, ultimately, fatal. When Holk leaves her to pursue ebba rosenberg, she is comforted by the consciousness of having done her duty throughout, but her ethical convictions cannot sustain her through the emotional and spiritual turmoil of the endless possibilities associated with her remarriage. Kobel notes the similarities between christine’s situation and two sketches by Kierkegaard, “a Possibility” in Stages on Life’s Way, and “shadowgraphs” in Either/Or.68 in all three cases, the protagonist is tormented by the destructive play of unmanageable possibilities. christine, drowning in despair closely resembling Kierkegaard’s “sickness unto death,” finally resolves the situation by committing suicide, despite the religious prohibitions against such an act. Julie von dobschütz had observed christine’s agony, but convinced herself that christine’s “christian sentiments and religious convictions—those christian sentiments which bear us through life, for so long as it is god’s will—”69 would give her the strength to endure. christine’s remarriage pushes her to the brink of the ethical, but she is unable to make the leap of faith that might have helped her come to terms with her situation. the central tragedy in Effi Briest can also be productively analyzed by the application of Kierkegaardian concepts, particularly the figure of the reflective seducer and the seductive power of fear. in attempting to answer the question of why Effi conducts the fateful affair with Major Crampas, Kobel argues that none of the traditional explanations for her adultery suffice, as Effi does not love Crampas, Innstetten is neither unattractive nor disagreeable, Crampas is five years older than innstetten, and he lacks the seductive charms of a don Juan.70 instead, Kobel points to the resemblances between Cramps and Kierkegaard’s discussion of the reflective seducer in Either/Or as the most coherent explanation for Effi’s fall. Like the seducers Kierkegaard describes, crampas seeks distraction from the emptiness of his life through sensual encounters. He wields his power over naïve young girls through smooth words and deceit for the sake of his own pleasure. fontane describes him as reckless in his amorous adventures and fundamentally selfish in character: “To help a friend one minute and deceive him five minutes later were things his concept of honour had no trouble in accommodating. He did both the one and the other with astounding bonhomie.”71 From the beginning, Effi knows of his reputation for extramarital affairs and guards herself against believing his malicious reports, but he gradually insinuates himself into her confidence and intimacy. Unlike Kierkegaard’s

67 68 69 70 71

fontane, Unwiederbringlich, p. 68. (Beyond Recall, p. 59.) Kobel, “fontane,” p. 285. fontane, Unwiederbringlich, p. 339. (Beyond Recall, p. 296.) Kobel, “angst,” pp. 257–8. fontane, Effi Briest, pp. 233–4. (Effi Briest, p. 103.)

Theodor Fontane: A Probable Pioneer in German Kierkegaard Reception

75

first-person account of Johannes the Seducer, however, Fontane rarely provides any insight into crampas’ thoughts as he carries out his seduction. Fontane makes it clear that Crampas’ power over Effi relies on manipulation of her fears, illustrating Kierkegaard’s explanation in “silhouettes” of faust as a reflective seducer: “His visage is not smiling, his brow not unclouded, and joy is not his escort; the young girls do not dance into his embrace, but he scares them to himself.”72 Effi has an overactive imagination and an inherently fearful nature, though she tries to feign courage because innstetten wants her to be “brave and decisive, just like him.”73 she is afraid of the old house they inhabit in Kessin, of the exotic decorations, of the coachman’s mentally ill wife with the black hen on her lap, and above all of the ghost of the chinaman said to haunt the upstairs hall. unlike innstetten, crampas pretends to be sympathetic, but instead he plays on her fears and takes advantage of every opportunity to position himself as a refuge. He goes so far as to accuse Innstetten of deliberately intimidating Effi with the story of the chinaman’s ghost in order to ensure her obedience, for “a ghost is like a cherub with a sword.”74 Kobel notes that crampas accuses innstetten unjustly of doing exactly what he himself is guilty of, namely, manipulating Effi’s emotions to serve his own ends.75 He heightens Effi’s fear of Innstetten so that she will turn to him for comfort. crampas is particularly skilled at exploiting the dualistic nature of fear, which both repels and attracts simultaneously. in The Concept of Anxiety, Kierkegaard explains: “anxiety is a sympathetic antipathy and an antipathetic sympathy…. Linguistic usage confirms this perfectly. One speaks of a pleasing anxiety, a pleasing anxiousness, and of a strange anxiety, a bashful anxiety, etc.”76 crampas deliberately tells Effi gruesome stories, such as Heine’s poem “Vitziputzli,” about a murdered spaniard whose faithful dog deposits his head on the banquet table of his murderer, King Don Pedro the Cruel, in order to awaken her fears. As intended, Effi is horrified and fascinated at the same time, and Crampas uses the occasion to flirt outrageously with her, touching her hand as he recites Heine’s verses about “fingers soft and lilywhite.”77 Even the moment of Effi’s surrender to Crampas in the carriage is pervaded by fear. as they pass under the dark canopy of treetops, she “began to shake and clenched her fingers to get a hold on herself.” 78 at precisely this moment, crampas begins kissing her hands; Effi feels like she is going to faint and closes her eyes and when she opens them, the deed is done. As Kobel points out, Effi’s moment of weakness very neatly and precisely illustrates Kierkegaard’s observation about the connection between anxiety and vertigo: anxiety is the dizziness of freedom, which emerges when the spirit wants to posit the synthesis, and freedom looks down into its own possibility, laying hold of finiteness to support itself. freedom succumbs in this dizziness….in that very moment everything is 72 73 74 75 76 77 78

SKS 2, 201 / EO1, 206. fontane, Effi Briest, p. 122. (Effi Briest, p. 57.) fontane, Effi Briest, p. 230. (Effi Briest, p. 101.) Kobel, “angst,” p. 275. SKS 4, 348 / CA, 42. fontane, Effi Briest, p. 237. (Effi Briest, p. 104.) fontane, Effi Briest, p. 280. (Effi Briest, p. 122.)

76

Julie K. Allen changed, and freedom, when it again rises, sees that it is guilty….anxiety is a feminine weakness in which freedom faints. Psychologically speaking, the fall into sin always takes place in weakness.79

In the decisive encounter with Crampas, Effi recognizes the dizzying possibilities before her, but, unable or unwilling to choose, she surrenders to her fear instead. by contrast, just as Kierkegaard notes of Johannes the seducer, crampas “was conscious…at the very moment of stimulation, and the evil lay in this consciousness.”80 Yet despite Crampas’ scheming and deceit, Effi does not blame him for the tragic consequences of their affair, but only herself, as she notes in her parting letter: “the guilt is all mine.”81 By embracing her guilt and its consequences, Effi is able to overcome many of her fears. in accordance with Kierkegaard’s assertion that “anxiety is the dizziness of freedom,” many of Effi’s fears derived from her anxiety over the possibilities in her future, in particular her recurring fear of dying prematurely. once she realizes that the worst has come to pass, she is able to come to terms with her own fears. she accepts responsibility for her guilt, even after her meeting with her daughter annie drives home how high a price innstetten is making her pay for her mistake. she cries out: “god in heaven, forgive me for what i have done. i was a child….no, no, i wasn’t a child, i was old enough to know what i was doing. i did know, and i don’t want to take away from my guilt…but this is too much.”82 Until her final illness, she blames Innstetten for his part in her misery, for his coldness and cruelty, but finally, Effi forgives him as well. She turns her attention toward obtaining what mercy she can from god, though she confesses “i was always a bad christian,” and, just before she dies, she declares herself reconciled “with man and god, and reconciled with him.”83 This movement completes Effi’s journey through the Kierkegaardian spheres of existence. Having flirted disastrously with the aesthetic and suffered bravely under the ethical, Effi is ready to make the leap into the religious and find peace at last. although it would be convenient to have a document from fontane’s hand attesting to his having read various of Kierkegaard’s works, the preponderance of Kierkegaardian themes in fontane’s late novels essentially renders the question moot. in an era when modern german literature was just beginning to grapple with existential questions, fontane produced multiple narrative explorations of problems about which Kierkegaard had waxed most eloquent, in particular the ways in which an individual’s choices and actions are predicated upon his or her approach to life. In addition to superficial narrative allusions to Kierkegaard, the character constellations fontane describes in Unwiederbringlich and Effi Briest enact the tensions and transitions between Kierkegaardian spheres of existence in different ways, showing the central role of agency in determining human happiness. fontane’s implicit reception of Kierkegaard’s ideas in Wilhelminian germany in the 1890s is insightful, skillful, and worthy of recognition. 79 80 81 82 83

SKS 4, 365 / CA, 61. SKS 2, 296 / EO1, 306. fontane, Effi Briest, p. 330. (Effi Briest, p. 142.) fontane, Effi Briest, p. 483. (Effi Briest, p. 206.) fontane, Effi Briest, p. 514; p. 517. (Effi Briest, pp. 219–20.)

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Fontane’s corpus Unwiederbringlich, berlin: Wilhelm Hertz 1892, p. 77; p. 81. (english translation: Beyond Recall, trans. by douglas Parmée, london: oxford university Press 1964, p. 66; p. 69.) Effi Briest, berlin: f. fontane 1896, pp. 100–103; p. 233. (english translation: Effi Briest, trans. by Hugh rorrison and Helen chambers, london: angel books 1995, pp. 48–51; p. 103.) II. Sources of Theodor Fontane’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard brandes, georg, Sören Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, leipzig: J.a. barth, 1879. Quehl, Ryno, Aus Dänemark. Bornholm und die Bornholmer. Dr. Sören Kierkegaard: Wider die dänische Staatskirche; mit einem Hinblick auf Preussen, berlin: decker 1856. III. Secondary Literature on Theodor Fontane’s Relation to Kierkegaard anderson, Paul irving, Ehrgeiz und Trauer. Fontanes offiziöse Agitation 1859 und ihre Wiederkehr in unwiederbringlich, stuttgart: steiner 2002 (Beiträge zur Kommunikationsgeschichte, vol. 11), pp. 190–228. fried, michael, Menzel’s Realism: Art and Embodiment in Nineteenth-Century Berlin, new Haven and london: Yale university Press 2002, pp. 141–66. Kobel, erwin, “theodor fontane—ein Kierkegaard-leser?,” Jahrbuch der deutschen Schillergesellschaft, vol. 36, 1992, pp. 255–87. — “Die Angst der Effi Briest. Zur möglichen Kierkegaard-Rezeption Fontanes,” Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts, 1994, pp. 254–88.

max frisch: literary transformations of identity sophie Wennerscheid

I. Max Frisch’s Life and Works max frisch was born in zurich, switzerland on may 15, 1911. His parents were the architect franz bruno frisch, and Karolina bettina frisch, born Wildermuth. after his school years he studied german language and literature, art history, and philosophy at zurich university for three years (1931–33). He did not, however, complete his degree, but started working as a journalist for various newspapers, for example, the Neue Zürcher Zeitung. In 1934 his first novel, Jürg Reinhart, was published.1 in 1936 he began studying architecture, and after completing his studies in 1941 he worked as an architect, married, had a child, and wrote several literary texts on the conflict between bourgeois and aesthetic existence. Max Frisch is considered one of the most influential Swiss writers of the twentieth century. in his works he explores the problematic conditions of the self in modernity. frisch creates literary characters which refuse to accept given expectations and try to remain individuals. they are all afraid of general habits and repetitions, cannot believe in transcendental reconciliation and thus have to accept the absurdity of existence and the lack of meaning in the world. asked about the central question in his work, frisch names the question of how to stay alive “between the portrait of you that is made by the others and the one you make yourself.”2 the discussion of the identity question can therefore be characterized as frisch’s “literary trademark”3—a hallmark which definitely encourages looking for Kierkegaardian traces in frisch’s work.

max frisch, Jürg Reinhart. Eine sommerliche Schicksalsfahrt, stuttgart: deutsche verlags-anstalt 1934. 2 see fritz raddatz, “ ‘ich singe aus angst–das unsagbare,’ ein zeit–gespräch mit max frisch,” DIE ZEIT, april 17, 1981. 3 in an interview from 1967, frisch declares: “Mein literarisches Warenzeichen, ich weiß, ist das Identitätsproblem. Daß ich mich mit diesem Warenzeichen nicht identisch fühle, kommt noch hinzu.” dieter e. zimmer, “noch einmal anfangen können. ein gespräch mit max frisch,” DIE ZEIT, december 22, 1967, p. 13. 1

80

Sophie Wennerscheid

some of frisch’s most important works are Stiller (1954),4 Homo Faber (1957),5 Biedermann und die Brandstifter (1958),6 Andorra (1961),7 Mein Name sei Gantenbein (1964),8 Montauk (1975),9 and Der Mensch erscheint im Holozän (1979).10 frisch also had great success with the writing of diaries and journals. like Kierkegaard’s journals, they consist of the observation of current events, literary ideas and self-reflective observations which tend to be of a general rather than of private character. the Journal 1946–1949 and the Journal 1966–1971 in particular give a good inside view on frisch’s working.11 later, frisch adopted this open form of self-reflection in much of his prose. Thus, Stiller, Homo Faber, and Montauk are constructed as diaries of the protagonists. When it comes to narrative techniques, Gantenbein is also very similar to the diary structure. max frisch won several important literature prizes, amongst others, the georgbüchner-Prize in 1958, the Peace Prize of the german book trade (friedenspreis des deutschen buchhandels) in 1976, and the Heinrich-Heine-Prize in 1989. in 1974 frisch received honorary membership of the academy of arts and letters and the national institute of arts and letters. He was awarded various honorary degrees, for example, by the university of new York in 1982. max frisch died in zurich on april 4, 1991. II. Kierkegaard’s Impact on Max Frisch’s Works Just like many other german-speaking authors from the twentieth century,12 max frisch was affected by Kierkegaard’s thoughts on aesthetic existence and on the existentialist concept of freedom and self-choice.13 However, how exactly the integration of Kierkegaardian ideas in frisch’s work has taken place cannot now be determined. although many literary scholars continue to argue that frisch’s literary

max frisch, Stiller, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1954. max frisch, Homo Faber, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1957. 6 max frisch, Biedermann und die Brandstifter, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1958. 7 max frisch, Andorra. Stück in zwölf Bildern, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1961. 8 max frisch, Mein Name sei Gantenbein, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1964. 9 max frisch, Montauk. Eine Erzählung, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1975. 10 max frisch, Der Mensch erscheint im Holozän. Eine Erzählung, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1979. 11 max frisch, Tagebuch 1946–1949, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1950; max frisch, Tagebuch 1966–1971, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1972. 12 For a first introduction to Kierkegaard’s impact on German literature of the twentieth century see steffen steffensen, “die einwirkung Kierkegaards auf die deutschsprachige literatur des 20. Jahrhunderts,” in Die Rezeption Søren Kierkegaards in der deutschen und dänischen Philosophie und Theologie, ed. by Heinrich anz, Poul lübcke and friedrich schmöe, copenhagen and munich: fink 1983 (Text & Kontext, Sonderreihe, vol. 15), pp. 211–24. see also dieter Hoffmann, Arbeitsbuch Deutschsprachige Prosa seit 1945, vols. 1–2, tübingen and basel: a. francke verlag 2006, vol. 1, pp. 195–212. 13 see dieter Hoffmann, Arbeitsbuch, pp. 196ff. 4 5

Max Frisch: Literary Transformations of Identity

81

works evolved from a fundamental examination of Kierkegaard’s work,14 clear evidence is lacking. frisch remained mute about which of Kierkegaard’s works he read, as well as about how and when Kierkegaard caught his attention. His letters and diaries also fail to provide any exact information. thus, the 1946–49 diary which was published in 1950 contains many references to various authors and books frisch was reading at that time; however, it does not contain any direct or indirect reference to Kierkegaard.15 Furthermore, reflections on typical Kierkegaardian themes—such as choice, freedom, responsibility—appear only in an isolated manner.16 Plus, it is almost impossible to determine whether these really are references to Kierkegaard or whether it is only a case of frisch taking up themes which are fundamental for existential philosophy from Kierkegaard to sartre. in any case, what is much more important is what an author like frisch turns these references into—that is, how they are transformed into his own literary thought. in this context frisch himself says that for him the most important books are those which, due to their open, contradictory form, make us a present “with our own thoughts.”17 and surely, this thesis can notably be applied to Kierkegaard’s works. consequently, all that can be said about frisch’s relationship to Kierkegaard can only be taken from frisch’s literary texts and the two or three isolated comments he made. The first direct hint, which connects Frisch and Kierkegaard, is not be found in frisch’s own works but in a letter from the swiss author friedrich dürrenmatt (1921–90), which he supposedly wrote to frisch in 1950. in this letter, dürrenmatt tries to interpret frisch’s early drama Graf Öderland, in which the main character graf Öderland begins to kill people out of desperation about the highly bureaucratic world around him. dürrenmatt claims that Öderland is an aesthete and explains in a note, “Please excuse me that i don’t paraphrase what i call the aesthetic in its last consequence. i follow Kierkegaard here. Please take the aesthetic as the nonreligious

see Wolfgang stemmler, Max Frisch, Heinrich Böll und Sören Kierkegaard, dissertation, munich 1972. many interpreters avoid talking about an explicit Kierkegaard reception in Max Frisch’s work. Most of them confine themselves to comparing Kierkegaard’s and frisch’s general positions. in doing so, their substantial interest is almost always the (non-) identity question. see Josef imbach, “entfremdung als identitäts- und transzendenzverlust. Kierkegaard als schlüssel für eine theologische interpretation von max frischs roman ‘stiller,’ ” Geist und Leben, vol. 52, Würzburg: echter-verlag 1979, pp. 133–46. see also Kerstin gühne-engelmann, Die Thematik des versäumten Lebens im Prosawerk Max Frischs am Beispiel der Romane ‘Stiller,’ ‘Homo faber’ und ‘Mein Name sei Gantenbein,’ dissertation, university of freiburg, 1994. very often the perspective is decidedly theological. see christian Hoffmann, Max Frischs Roman ‘Homo faber’— betrachtet unter theologischem Aspekt, frankfurt am main: lang 1978. 15 frisch, Tagebuch 1946–1949. 16 see Jørgen Kjær, “max frisch. theorie und Praxis,” Orbis Litterarum, vol. 27, 1972, pp. 264–95, see p. 265. 17 max frisch, Gesammelte Werke in zeitlicher Folge, vols. i–Xii, ed. by Hans mayer, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp 1976, vol. II/2 (Tagebuch 1946–1949), p. 447. 14

82

Sophie Wennerscheid

abyss.”18 in another note, dürrenmatt tries to understand the drama’s characters as chess pieces and characterizes Öderland as a bishop, because he symbolizes a “diagonal between the ethical and the aesthetical line that leads into nonentity.”19 The first explicit hint of Frisch’s interest in Kierkegaard, however, is found in frisch’s comments on his play Don Juan oder Die Liebe zur Geometrie (1953). even if frisch states that he did not know Kierkegaard’s explications of mozart’s Don Giovanni while writing his don Juan play,20 it is evident that he read Kierkegaard’s text on “the immediate erotic stages or the musical erotic” afterwards. on the occasion of the debut performance of the play, the zurich theater printed a program, in which frisch declares that not the music, as pointed out by Kierkegaard, is the true medium of don Juan but “the theater, whose essence lies in the fact that mask and true being are not identical.”21 but there are more striking parallels to be discovered, indeed.22 for Kierkegaard as well as for frisch, don Juan is a representative of sensuality, and the possibility of repetition frightens him as it confronts him with boredom and despair. He becomes desperate because he can live neither a fulfilled aesthetic nor a fulfilled ethical existence. for, different from the traditional don Juan, frisch’s don Juan is not a seducer but a narcissistically-minded intellectual who has committed himself to geometry. But because he cannot escape from his self-chosen role, he finds his tragic-comic ending in the “hell of marriage.” so, the question about the meaning of the role, which for frisch’s work is fundamental from the beginning, can be traced back to Kierkegaard. a few years later, in 1955, frisch once again refers to Kierkegaard’s don Juan text in passing and states that Don Juan is “one of these figures who can just be understood in light of christianity.”23 after this engagement with the don Juan figure, Frisch’s interest in Kierkegaard focuses on the question of the necessity of becoming oneself. therefore, particularly those of frisch’s novels which deal with

see Hans bänziger, Frisch und Dürrenmatt, 5th ed., bern and munich: francke verlag 1967, p. 216. 19 see ibid., p. 217. 20 frisch claimed not to have known Kierkegaard’s text in an interview from 1981. see volker Hager, Max Frisch, reinbeck bei Hamburg: rowohlt 1983, p. 53. 21 max frisch, Don Juan oder Die Liebe zur Geometrie, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1953. frisch’s remark on Kierkegaard can only be found in “nachträgliches zu ‘don Juan,’ ” Gesammelte Werke in zeitlicher Folge, vol. III/1, pp. 168–75, see p. 171; Max Frisch, Don Juan, or the Love of Geometry, Four Plays: The Great Wall of China; Don Juan, or the Love of Geometry; Philipp Hotz’s Fury; Biography, a Game, trans. by michael bullock, london: methuen 1969, pp. 85–160, here p. 156. 22 see Peter ruppert, “max frisch’s don Juan: the seduction of geometry,” Monatshefte, vol. 67, 1975, pp. 236–48. see also Heinz Hiebler, “sören Kierkegaards don-Juan- und faustKonzeption und ihr bezug zur deutschen literatur am beispiel von nikolaus lenau, max frisch und Peter Härtling,” Europäische Mythen der Neuzeit: Faust und Don Juan, vol. 1, 1993, pp. 153–64. some further remarks can be found in Jürgen brummack, “max frisch und Kierkegaard,” Text & Kontext, vol. 6, 1978, pp. 388–400, see p. 390. 23 see max frisch, Gesammelte Werke in zeitlicher Folge, vol. II/1, p. 225. 18

Max Frisch: Literary Transformations of Identity

83

the problem of identity—I’m not Stiller, Homo Faber, and Wilderness of Mirrors / Gantenbein—have repeatedly been read in the spirit of Kierkegaard. the clearest references to Kierkegaard can be found in frisch’s novel Stiller,24 which tells the story of the swiss artist anatol stiller, who refuses to recognize and to accept his own past, because he has no courage to become the person he is. He wants a rebirth, though not in a Kierkegaardian sense, but in trying to create himself as another person, here as the American Mr. White. The first part of the novel consists of notes which Stiller/White writes in prison. The second part consists of an epilogue which prosecutor rolf writes about stiller after he has been convicted to be himself and has been released from prison. the following references to Kierkegaard are obvious in the novel Stiller. first, placed before the novel is a quotation from Kierkegaard’s Either/Or, Part Two, which deals with the difficulty and the blessedness of self-choice. Second, the male main characters, stiller and rolf, show clear parallels to Kierkegaard’s concept of the aesthetical and the ethical in Either/Or. third, the structure of the two books is comparable because, like Kierkegaard’s Either/Or, frisch’s novel shows a clear division into two parts. Just as in Either/Or the papers of the aesthete a make up volume one, so also the first part of Stiller consists of stiller’s notes. and just like Judge William’s letters to a from the second part of Either/Or, frisch’s novel offers Rolf’s epilogue in which he reflects upon his friend and antagonist stiller. furthermore, important research has pointed out that Stiller includes central Kierkegaardian terms and concepts such as despair, repetition, freedom, and the leap of faith.25 one last direct reference to Kierkegaard is the fact that the prosecutor rolf sends stiller “a volume of Kierkegaard.”26 it is not mentioned which one is meant here. it is also left open what exactly stiller has read of it and how he interprets it. In a letter to Rolf he writes: “And then I’m going to fit up a workshop, I can’t spend all my time reading your Kierkegaard and similar heavy stuff.”27 but some time later his reading prompts him to question rolf about his understanding of Kierkegaard, whereupon rolf, however, has to admit that he has never really been “an expert on Kierkegaard,” but just had given him the volume because of a discussion on “melancholy as a symptom of the aesthetic attitude to life.”28 to describe rolf as a “mentor in the spirit of Kierkegaard”29 also seems to be highly questionable. in particular, the importance of the motto for the understanding of the novel is highly controversial. in fact, two things are noteworthy at this point. on the one max frisch, Stiller, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1954. see Philip manger, “Kierkegaard in max frisch’s novel stiller,” German Life & Letters, vol. 20, 1966–67, pp. 119–31. see also Holger stig Holmgren, “Kierkegaard und max frischs roman ‘stiller’. ein Kommentar zu einer diskussion,” Orbis litterarum, vol. 36, oxford: blackwell 1981, pp. 53–75 and børge Kristiansen, “om identitet. selvet hos Kidde, Pontoppidan og frisch i lyset af Kierkegaard,” Kritik, vol. 39, 2006, pp. 128–36. 26 see frisch, Stiller, p. 513. (english translation: I’m not Stiller, trans. by michael bullock, san diego: Harcourt brace 1994, p. 341.) 27 frisch, Stiller, pp. 516–17. (I’m not Stiller, p. 344.) 28 frisch, Stiller, p. 519. (I’m not Stiller, p. 345.) 29 see Wolfgang stemmler, Max Frisch, Heinrich Böll und Sören Kierkegaard, dissertation, munich 1972, p. 74. 24 25

84

Sophie Wennerscheid

hand, the schrempf translation,30 which frisch had chosen, differs from the danish original in a crucial point, and on the other hand, the motto has been composed of two quotations from Either/Or, Part two, which compared to the original appear in a reversed order. the motto frisch cited says: “behold, for this reason it is so hard to choose oneself, because in this choice absolute isolation is identical with the most profound continuity, because through this choice every possibility of becoming something else—or rather of remoulding oneself into something else—is ruled out.” “as the passion for freedom awakes in him (and it awakes in the choice, as it is already presupposed in the choice), he chooses himself and fights for this possession as for his happiness, and this is his happiness.” Kierkegaard, Either/Or31

the passage in frisch’s edition, which greatly differs from the danish original, is the one which says that after choosing yourself it is impossible to remold yourself into something else; that means to create a new identity by writing it. Kierkegaard’s original, however, does not talk about remolding a new identity at this point.32 it can, however, be assumed that it was just this idea of writing a new identity which electrified Frisch because it describes exactly what his protagonist Stiller/White tries to do with all his might. He tries, but necessarily fails, because the people surrounding him will not accept his new identity, his new “self,” least of all his wife Julika. One of the first important writers on Frisch, Hans Mayer, pointed out, however, that the motto is not the key to the whole book, but stands in an ironic relationship to stiller’s development.33 indeed, mayer reads the entire novel as a refutation of Kierkegaard.34 Philip manger, by contrast, argued against this interpretation and assumed “that frisch intended his motto and the novel’s content to be in agreement with each other.”35 max frisch himself gives advice not to overrate the importance of the Kierkegaard motto. during a talk in 1977 he declares: “the Kierkegaard motto appeared very late, too, because i began to read Kierkegaard then and this corresponded to me tremendously. then i selected this audacious motto—actually as a help to the frisch presumably used the following edition: Kierkegaard, Entweder–Oder I–II, ed. by christoph schrempf, Jena: diederichs 1913. see Kathleen Harris, “die KierkegaardQuelle zum Roman ‘Stiller,’ ” Materialien zu Max Frisch, “Stiller,” vols. 1–2, ed. by Walter schmitz, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1978, vol. 1, pp. 217–19, see p. 217. 31 frisch, Stiller, p. 7. (I’m not Stiller, p. 6.) The first part of the quotation corresponds to SKS 3, 208 / EO2, 217, the second part corresponds to SKS 3, 207 / EO2, 216. 32 Kierkegaard’s version only says: “…as long as one has not chosen oneself, there seems to be a possibility in one way or another of becoming something different.” see SKS 3, 208 / EO2, 217. 33 Hans mayer, “anmerkungen zu ‘stiller,’ ” Dürrenmatt und Frisch. Anmerkungen, neske: Pfullingen 1963, pp. 38–54, see p. 40. 34 ibid., p. 52. 35 manger, “Kierkegaard in max frisch’s novel Stiller,” p. 119. 30

Max Frisch: Literary Transformations of Identity

85

readers.”36 but the question how this “help for the reader” should be understood has been discussed again and again. if thereby the novel is read in accordance with Kierkegaard or not depends on to which extent one reads stiller’s development after having been released from prison as a turn to the ethical-religious or if he remains in the world of aesthetics. thus, the unquestioned point of reference is always Kierkegaard’s so-called theory of stages, or rather of the different stages of despair he developed in The Sickness unto Death.37 besides Either/Or and The Sickness unto Death, it is Kierkegaard‘s Repetition that has left the most dominant traces in Stiller. there is just as little evidence for frisch having read Repetition as for his having read The Sickness unto Death. still, both readings seem likely since both characters, stiller and rolf, repeatedly and very decidedly refer to terms like “despair” and “repetition.” stiller, for example, declares at one point: “repetition. and yet i know that everything depends on whether one succeeds in ceasing to wait for life outside repetition, and instead, of one’s free will (in spite of compulsion), manages to turn repetition, inescapable repetition, into one’s life by acknowledgement: this is i…!”38 it is exactly this kind of acceptance of the “i,” the “i” who has become guilty in the past, which stiller apparently cannot achieve because in order to become it he would have to acknowledge his guilt. He confesses: “my greatest fear: repetition.”39 furthermore, Fear and Trembling, published at the same time as Repetition, seems important for the novel Stiller because at a certain point rolf calls upon stiller: “You tremble, you said, tremble!”40 talking about the “one volume of Kierkegaard” which rolf has given stiller, frisch could have been thinking about an edition in which Repetition and Fear and Trembling had been published together.41 apart from the works of Kierkegaard already mentioned, it is possible that frisch also read Kierkegaard’s diaries. Kierkegaard notices in his diary in 1841 that the one unhappily in love was like a mimosa: the more violently one tries to open it, the stronger it seals off. in the same way mr. White sees stiller as the “epitome of a masculine sensitive plant.”42 see an excerpt from a talk that Walter schmitz had with max frisch on July 13, 1977; quoted from Materialien zu Max Frisch, “Stiller,” vol. 2, p. 34. 37 Holger stig Holmgren makes a meticulous comparison of the stages of despair which stiller goes through and the stages of despair which Kierkegaard describes in The Sickness unto Death. see Holmgren, “Kierkegaard und max frischs roman ‘stiller.’ ” 38 frisch, Stiller, p. 89. (I’m not Stiller, p. 59.) 39 frisch, Stiller, p. 88. (I’m not Stiller, p. 58.) michael butler points out that frisch uses the word “repetition” in a way totally different from Kierkegaard’s sense. He writes: “Whereas the danish theologian saw repetition as god’s will and the ultimate meaning of life, stiller uses the term of deadening habit, the sterilization of experience.” michael butler, The Novels of Max Frisch, london: oswald Wolff 1976, p. 78. 40 frisch, Stiller, p. 555. (I’m not Stiller, p. 369.) 41 While the Either/Or edition frisch supposedly read was published in two separate volumes by the popular eugen diederichs verlag, diederichs published Repetition and Fear and Trembling in a single volume. for this hint i would like to thank Harald steffes. 42 see SKS 19, 227, Not8:11 / KJN 3, 223: “they say love makes one blind; it does more than that, it makes one deaf, it paralyzes one; the person suffering from it is like the mimosa 36

86

Sophie Wennerscheid

in conclusion we can say the following: the references to various works by Kierkegaard are not only of manifold but also of unsystematic nature. obviously, Kierkegaard offered a pool of ideas and problems which frisch could use to literarily develop the dilemma of human existence, which is stretched between the longing for individual unfolding, on the one hand, and the constraint of submitting to existing parameters, on the other, or as Kierkegaard would say, the tension between the universal and the particular. in the novel following Stiller, Homo Faber, frisch comes back to the problematic relationship of the individual to his guilt in the past once again. Walter faber, an engineer who believes in the calculability of the world, begins, without knowing, a sexual relationship with his daughter and indirectly becomes guilty of her death and the misfortune of her mother, the Jew, Hanna landsberg. the relation of this work to Kierkegaard can only be stated in very general aspects such as human selfoverestimation, guilt, and recollection.43 Just like Stiller and Homo Faber, Gantenbein also deals with reflection on a failed relationship. a man, the novel begins, “has been through an experience, now he is looking for the story of his experience….”44 To find the fitting story, the firstperson narrator makes up various characters, for example, gantenbein. the relationship of this novel to Kierkegaard has been construed similarly to that of the two previous novels. even if there is no direct hint at Kierkegaard,45 it is taken for granted that there is a hidden Kierkegaard-theme. Hans mayer points out: “the secret Kierkegaard issue in this novel is connected to the question, whether life can be possible as a pure aesthetic existence.”46 The way the first-person narrator is constructed as a mask or a role, his indifferent behavior towards others, especially towards women, his inability to make decisions, all of this can be seen as an indication of an “improper manner of existence.”47 but the similarities between gantenbein’s and Kierkegaard’s world of thoughts implies differences between them at the same time. While in Kierkegaard’s work the positions of the aesthetic and of the ethical that closes so no picklock can open it; the more force one uses, the more tightly is it shut.” see max frisch, Stiller, p. 140; p. 158. See also Harris, “Die Kierkegaard-Quelle zum Roman ‘stiller,’ ” p. 219. 43 see christian Hoffmann, Max Frischs Roman ‘Homo faber,’ pp. 95ff. 44 max frisch, Mein Name sei Gantenbein, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1964, p. 9 (english translation: Gantenbein: A Novel, trans. by michael bullock, london: methuen 1982, p. 8.) 45 at one point it is mentioned that gantenbein once has read “a danish letter” from which he still remembers two or three sentences. frisch, Mein Name sei Gantenbein, pp. 274–75; Gantenbein: A Novel, pp. 168–9. Willy michel refers this to Kierkegaard. see Willy Michels, “Poetische Transformationen Kierkegaardscher Denkfiguren im neueren deutschen roman,” Festschrift für Friedrich Kienecker zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. by gerd michels, Heidelberg: Julius groos verlag 1980, pp. 153–77, see p. 154. 46 Hans mayer, “mögliche ansichten über Herrn gantenbein,” Über Max Frisch, vols. 1–2, ed. by Walter schmitz, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1971–76, vol. 2, pp. 314–24, see p. 323. 47 Heinz gockel, Max Frisch. Gantenbein–das offen-artistische Erzählen, 2nd ed., bonn: bouvier verlag 1979, p. 125.

Max Frisch: Literary Transformations of Identity

87

seem to be attributed to two opposed characters, Frisch fits the ethical reflection of the aesthetic existence directly into the aesthetic character. the aesthetic way of existence is thus, right from the beginning, characterized as a problematic one. the possibility of a religious reconciliation is discussed but refused in the end. III. Reading Frisch with Kierkegaard? it seems to me that the importance of Kierkegaard for the literary work of max frisch has been overrated by many scholars. although in frisch’s work there are many aspects which can be connected to Kierkegaard, these references serve rather to interpret frisch’s texts than to give clear philological evidence of textual references to Kierkegaard’s work or of an intended discussion of relevant ideas of Kierkegaard on frisch’s side. We can conclude that the literary negotiation of existentialist problems in frisch’s work is not primarily based on an interest in Kierkegaard, but more on a fundamental interest in existentialist themes, which were broadly discussed in the german and swiss public after 1945. to interpret max frisch’s prose it might be similarly fruitful—next to a Kierkegaard–frisch comparison—to consult Heidegger’s, sartre’s, or camus’ existential philosophy as the basis for an interpretation.48 that important results in the frisch research have been produced in the 1960s and 1970s, that is, at a time when existentialist issues were again strongly discussed, we can take as evidence for the fact that it was the discussion of existentialist issues which has made frisch’s work so popular. consequently, interest in frisch’s work declines in the 1980s when, simultaneously, interest in existential philosophy began to diminish. a rereading of frisch’s work with regard to references to Kierkegaard could, however, be tempting and promising if not based on existentialist aspects. still missing is, for example, research on frisch’s poetics, that means works which examine the open, self-reflective form of narration of Frisch and Kierkegaard, or research on gender theory which concentrates on the central problem of concepts of masculinity in both authors’ works.

see doris Kiernan, Existentiale Themen bei Max Frisch. Die Existentialphilosophie Martin Heideggers in den Romanen Stiller, Homo Faber und Mein Name sei Gantenbein, berlin and new York: lang 1976. see also W. gordon cunliffe, “existentialistische elemente in frischs Werken,” Über Max Frisch, vol. 2, pp. 158–71. 48

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Frisch’s corpus Don Juan oder Die Liebe zur Geometrie, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1953. (english translation: Don Juan, or the Love of Geometry, Four Plays: The Great Wall of China; Don Juan, or the Love of Geometry; Philipp Hotz’s Fury; Biography, A Game, trans. by michael bullock, london: methuen 1969, pp. 85–160; see p. 156.) Stiller, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1954, p. 7; p. 88; p. 89; p. 140; p. 158; pp. 516–19; p. 555. (english translation: I’m not Stiller, trans. by michael bullock, san diego: Harcourt brace 1994, p. 6; p. 58; p. 59; pp. 341–5; p. 369.) Mein Name sei Gantenbein, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1964, pp. 274–5. (english translation: Gantenbein: A Novel, trans. by michael bullock, london: methuen 1982, pp. 168–9. “nachträgliches zu ‘don Juan,’ ” Gesammelte Werke in zeitlicher Folge, vols. i–Xii, ed. by Hans Mayer. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp 1976, vol. III/1, pp. 168–5, see p. 171. II. Sources of Frisch’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard undetermined. III. Secondary Literature on Frisch’s Relation to Kierkegaard bänziger, Hans, Frisch und Dürrenmatt, 5th ed., bern and munich: francke verlag 1967, pp. 216–17. brummack, Jürgen, “max frisch und Kierkegaard,” Text & Kontext, vol. 6, 1978, pp. 388–400. butler, michael, The Novels of Max Frisch, london: oswald Wolff 1976, p. 78; p. 81; p. 82; p. 132; p. 135; p. 143. gockel, Heinz, Max Frisch. Gantenbein—das offen-artistische Erzählen, 2nd ed., bonn: bouvier verlag 1979, pp. 122–40. gühne-engelmann, Kerstin, Die Thematik des versäumten Lebens im Prosawerk Max Frischs am Beispiel der Romane ‘Stiller,’ ‘Homo faber’ und ‘Mein Name sei Gantenbein,’ dissertation university of freiburg 1994, pp. 23–35; pp. 115–35; pp. 267–9. Hager, volker, Max Frisch, reinbeck b. Hamburg: rowohlt 1983, p. 53.

Max Frisch: Literary Transformations of Identity

89

Harris, Kathleen, “stiller (max frisch): ich oder nicht-ich?,” The German Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 4, 1968, pp. 689–97, reprinted as: “Die Kierkegaard-Quelle zum roman ‘stiller,’ ” in Materialien zu Max Frisch, “Stiller,” vols. 1–2, ed. by Walter schmitz, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1978, vol. 1, pp. 217–19. Hiebler, Heinz, “sören Kierkegaards don-Juan- und faust-Konzeption und ihr bezug zur deutschen literatur am beispiel von nikolaus lenau, max frisch und Peter Härtling,” in Europäische Mythen der Neuzeit: Faust und Don Juan, vols. 1–2, ed. by P. csobádi, gernot gruber, Jürgen Kühnel, ulrich müller, and oswald Panagl, anif: verlag u. müller-speiser 1993, vol. 1, pp. 153–64. Hoffmann, christian, Max Frischs Roman Homo faber–betrachtet unter theologischem Aspekt; frankfurt am main: lang 1978, p. 19; p. 85; pp. 95–109; p. 117. Hoffmann, dieter, Arbeitsbuch Deutschsprachige Prosa seit 1945, vols. 1–2, tübingen and basel: a. francke verlag 2006, vol. 1, pp. 196–202. Holmgren, Holger stig, “Kierkegaard und max frischs roman ‘stiller’. ein Kommentar zu einer diskussion,” Orbis litterarum, vol. 36, oxford: blackwell 1981, pp. 53–75. imbach, Josef, “entfremdung als identitäts- und transzendenzverlust. Kierkegaard als schlüssel für eine theologische interpretation von max frischs roman ‘stiller,’ ” Geist und Leben, vol. 52, Würzburg: echter-verlag 1979, pp. 133–46. Kjær, Jørgen, “max frisch. theorie und Praxis,” Orbis Litterarum, vol. 27, 1972, pp. 264–95. Kristiansen, børge, “om identitet. selvet hos Kidde, Pontoppidan og frisch i lyset af Kierkegaard,” Kritik, vol. 39, 2006, pp. 128–36. manger, Philip, “Kierkegaard in max frisch’s novel ‘stiller,’ ” German Life & Letters, vol. 20, 1966–67, pp. 119–31, reprinted as: “Kierkegaard in max frischs roman ‘stiller,’ ” in Materialien zu Max Frisch, “Stiller,” vols. 1–2, ed. by Walter schmitz, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1978, vol. 1, pp. 220–37. mayer, Hans, “anmerkungen zu ‘stiller,’ ” Dürrenmatt und Frisch. Anmerkungen, neske: Pfullingen 1963, pp. 38–54. — “mögliche ansichten über Herrn gantenbein,” Über Max Frisch, vols. 1–2, ed. by Walter schmitz, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1971–76, vol. 2, pp. 314–24, see p. 323. Michel, Willy, “Poetische Transformationen Kierkegaardscher Denkfiguren im neueren deutschen roman, –eine wirkungsgeschichtliche betrachtung zu max frisch, ‘stiller’ und ‘mein name sei gantenbein,’ Peter Härtling, ‘niembsch oder der stillstand,’ gabriele Wohmann, ‘ernste absicht’ und martin Walser, ‘das einhorn,’ ” in Festschrift für Friedrich Kienecker zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. by gerd michel, Heidelberg: Julius groos verlag 1980, pp. 153–77. ruppert, Peter, “max frisch’s don Juan: the seduction of geometry,” Monatshefte, vol. 67, 1975, pp. 236–48. schmitz, Walter (ed.), Materialien zu Max Frisch, “Stiller,” vols. 1–2, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1978, vol. 2, p. 34. steffensen, steffen, “die einwirkung Kierkegaards auf die deutschsprachige literatur des 20. Jahrhunderts,” Die Rezeption Søren Kierkegaards in der deutschen und dänischen Philosophie und Theologie, ed. by Heinrich anz, Poul

90

Sophie Wennerscheid

lübcke and friedrich schmöe. copenhagen and munich: fink 1983 (Text & Kontext, Sonderreihe, vol. 15), pp. 220–22. stemmler, Wolfgang, Max Frisch, Heinrich Böll und Sören Kierkegaard, dissertation, munich 1972. zimmer, dieter e., “noch einmal anfangen können. ein gespräch mit max frisch,” DIE ZEIT, december 22, 1967, p. 13.

theodor Haecker: the mobilization of a total author markus Kleinert

I understand by an author in this qualified sense, by the author, let us say by the total author, someone who rarely exists and who cannot always exist, someone who brings everything into what he writes, into the written word—everything that he is, everything that he knows, everything that kindles him and his own responding fire— knowing its [the word’s] character to lead its own life and to remain—litera scripta manet—to stand up against him or for him, to bear witness for him or against him and his life.1

I. theodor Haecker made his appearance at the beginning of the twentieth century in the context of german-language Kierkegaard reception and quickly established himself as one of its dominant figures. In Haecker’s role as mediator of Kierkegaard it is impossible to distinguish clearly where he intends to reproduce Kierkegaard and where he interprets him, where he holds himself back and where he actively inserts his own opinions. german-language Kierkegaard reception, as it was advanced and steered by Haecker, and his own encounter with Kierkegaard became inextricably intertwined. Haecker makes no secret of the program within which his encounter with Kierkegaard takes place. Haecker’s commitment to Kierkegaard, which is expressed in numerous translations, introductions, afterwords, lectures, essays, and studies, does not serve to integrate Kierkegaard into contemporary intellectual movements but rather to formulate an uncompromising criticism of the present. in his view, the opposition between the dogmatically presupposed christian order of things and an age which ignores or perverts this order of things—to use a fitting formulation from the critic of the age himself, between hierarchism and anarchism in its various forms2—should be, if not eliminated, then at least raised as the decisive problem. Haecker’s program is thus unambiguously formulated—which, however, i would like to thank Prof. dr. Hinrich siefken (nottingham), gerhard thonhauser (vienna), and christian Wiebe (bielefeld) for their useful comments on this article. 1 theodor Haecker, “vorwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, ed. and trans. by theodor Haecker, 2nd ed. in one volume, leipzig: Hegner 1941, pp. 9–18, see p. 17. 2 see, for example, theodor Haecker, Tag- und Nachtbücher 1939–1945, ed. by Heinrich Wild, munich: Kösel 1947, p. 206; p. 281 (in theodor Haecker, Werke, vols. 1–5,

92

Markus Kleinert

does not mean that this program binds him in his occupation with Kierkegaard or characterizes it exhaustively, or that it prevents diversity and change, not to mention that the extensive effect of Haecker’s preoccupation with Kierkegaard remains tied to his intentions. in order to make clear the special position of Haecker as mediator, i will show by means of some examples how he tries to promulgate Kierkegaard’s thought and how his efforts in this regard then influence his own work as an author. In this way it should also become clear that Haecker’s unambiguous program makes it easy to overlook the nuances and the acute observations in his work which are still relevant for Kierkegaard studies today. after a brief overview of Haecker’s life and works (in section ii), i will treat the various testimonies to his encounter with Kierkegaard, including his intimate and faithful work as a mediator in his translations (section iii), along with the texts accompanying these (Section IV), and then the freer reflections on Kierkegaard in his own original and independent writings (section v). my concluding remarks summarize these observations and show how an engagement with Haecker’s works which does not simply leave the matter at a simple approval or rejection of his intellectual program or at a historicization of it (section vi) might look. II. Haecker was born in 1879 in eberbach in schwabia.3 After finishing secondary school he began training as a salesman and started upon this career. between 1901 and 1903 he studied various fields at the University of Berlin, including scandinavian literature, and attended the lectures of, among others, Wilhelm dilthey (1833–1911), rudolf virchow (1821–1902), and ulrich von Wilamowitz-moellendorff (1848–1931). through his friend of youth ferdinand schreiber (1877–1942) he came munich: Kösel 1958–67, vol. 2, p. 221; p. 305). (english translation: Journal in the Night, trans. by alexander dru, new York: Pantheon books 1950, p. 145; p. 202.) 3 this biographical overview is based on the following sources: Hinrich siefken (in cooperation with Friedrich Pfäfflin), Theodor Haecker 1879–1945, with a Haecker bibliography by eva dambacher, Marbacher Magazin, vol. 49, 1989; Theodor Haecker: Leben und Werk. Texte, Briefe, Erinnerungen, Würdigungen, ed. by bernhard Hassler and Hinrich siefken, stadtarchiv esslingen am neckar 1995 (Esslinger Studien, vol. 15), see especially Hinrich siefken’s newly reworked “chronik,” pp. 9–25. a brief introduction to Haecker’s life and work can be found in clemens bauer, “theodor Haecker,” in Haecker, Werke, vol. 5, pp. 371–412; michael langer, “theodor Haecker,” in Christliche Philosophie im katholischen Denken des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts, vols. 1–3, ed. by emerich coreth, Walter M. Neidl, and Georg Pfligersdorfer, Graz: Styria 1987–90, vol. 3, pp. 216–25; Florian mayr, “theodor Haecker. eine einführung in sein Werk,” Paderborn: schöningh 1994 (Politik- und Kommunikationswissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Görres-Gesellschaft, vol. 13); Hinrich siefken, “leben und Werk des christlichen essayisten theodor Haecker. eine einführung,” in Theodor Haecker (1879–1945). Verteidigung des Bildes vom Menschen, ed. by gebhard fürst, Peter Kastner, and Hinrich siefken, stuttgart: akademie der diözese rottenburg-stuttgart 2001 (Hohenheimer Protokolle, vol. 55), pp. 17–41 (see the useful tabular overview of Haecker’s work, pp. 22–3).

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

93

into contact with the schreiber Publishing House in esslingen, where he earned his living throughout his entire life. alongside his work at the publishing house, he improved his education with a university entrance diploma and studied philosophy at the university of munich from 1905 to 1910, although he did not complete the degree. during this period max scheler (1874–1921) was his most important instructor, even though the teacher’s philosophy evoked the disciple’s criticism too.4 With his short treatise Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit in 1913 Haecker began his work as an author, which in the following three decades grew considerably in two literary organs: from 1914 to 1923 he published intensively (and later sporadically) in ludwig von ficker’s (1880–1967) Der Brenner and from 1923 to 1941 in carl muth’s (1867–1944) Hochland. With numerous publications in the journal Der Brenner and the publishing house that produced it, Haecker stepped on to one of the most important artistic and intellectual stages of the day. He brought attention to himself by means of brilliant satire and polemics in the manner of Karl Kraus (1874–1936),5 in which he expressed his critique of contemporary culture especially by means of reflecting its language.6 He translated Kierkegaard— with whom he presumably first became familiar through Christoph Schrempf (1860–1944)7—and wrote commentaries and notes to the translations. He also see, for example, theodor Haecker, “geist und leben. zum Problem max scheler,” in Christentum und Kultur, munich: Kösel & Pustet 1927, pp. 221–73 (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 213–56); see also the brief comparison—from an interesting point of view—of Haecker and scheler in ludwig rohner, Die literarische Streitschrift. Themen, Motive, Formen, Wiesbaden: otto Harrassowitz 1987, pp. 201–6. 5 a selection of essays and glosses, which stand in relation to the journal Der Brenner, appeared in 1922 from the same publishing house with the title Satire und Polemik. 1914–1920 (in Werke, vol. 3, pp. 9–305). In this collection Haecker justifies his previous aggressive criticism by, for example, claiming in the Preface that the satirist is “the clear mirror…of a distorted world” (ibid., p. 14, for further reflections on satire and polemics, see, for example, p. 84, pp. 147ff., pp. 249–50 (in Werke, vol. 3, p. 15, pp. 96–7, pp. 175ff., pp. 300–301). that the collection Satire und Polemik aims at a criticism of the present and the reference to Kierkegaard serves this purpose is also seen from the fact that Kierkegaard does not even appear in the index to the first edition (p. 254). 6 Haecker’s linguistic style is determined by “a powerful and willful rhetoric, in part with an expressionistic character,” which is certainly also overdone. see langer, “theodor Haecker,” p. 217. some of the long quotations in what follows will give the reader a sense of Haecker’s rhetorical power. 7 Habib c. malik, Receiving Søren Kierkegaard: The Early Impact and Transmission of His Thought, Washington, d.c.: catholic university of america Press 1997, p. 376, note 133. concerning his appropriation of Kierkegaard (and the danish language) Haecker was strikingly coy. His reticience to address this means that hardly any of his sources of knowledge of Kierkegaard can be definitively documented. From his early publications, one can at least conclude that Haecker was familiar with the presentations of Kierkegaard by georg brandes and Harald Høffding (available both in danish and in german): georg brandes, Søren Kierkegaard. En kritisk Fremstilling i Grundrids, copenhagen: gyldendal 1877 (Sören Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, authorized german edition, anonymously trans. by adolf strodtmann, leipzig: barth 1879); Harald Høffding, Søren Kierkegaard som Filosof, copenhagen: P.g. Philipsens forlag 1892 (Sören Kierkegaard als 4

94

Markus Kleinert

translated, for example, virgil, and cardinal newman (1801–90) who in 1921 played a crucially influential role in Haecker’s conversion to the Catholic Church. after his conversion, critical aspects in Haecker’s account of Kierkegaard become more and more obvious. but this critical occupation with Kierkegaard in no way diminishes but rather finds its expression in further translations, commentaries, and essays. as an example of the position of the convert Haecker as well as of the significance which Kierkegaard continued to have for him, one can take the piece d’occasion from 1923, entitled “christentum und Kultur,”8 in which Haecker resumes the nineteenth-century theological discussion about christianity’s connection to and separation from culture, about synthesis and diastasis, with special attention to the confessional differences. the possibility of a christian culture presupposes the truth of revealed and natural logos as well as the true relation between natural and revealed logos, just as, for example, christian art presupposes the recognition of the hierarchy of natural values. In nuce: the possibility of a christian culture—that is, under the presupposition of the fact of the revelation, under the presupposition also of the assumption of this revelation through faith, of the primacy of faith, of the liveliness of faith—stands in a direct relation to the relative health of the natural understanding and of reason, to the relative purity of customs, and not in the single ones, and not only in the closer community of faith, but rather of an entire tribe, an entire people, an entire nation.9

it is interesting to see the special place which is ascribed to Kierkegaard against the background of this clearly not unproblematic definition. On the one hand, Kierkegaard is defended against the objection of being a source for the fixation on an isolated subjectivity and an overemphasis on the irrational, for which Protestantism had been criticized.10 on the other hand, Kierkegaard is regarded as a representative of the Protestant tension between christianity and culture, which appears in his

Philosoph, trans. and ed. by albert dorner and christoph schrempf, stuttgart: frommann 1896). in addition, he was also familiar with the outstanding editions and presentations of christoph schrempf. With the help of such information and of course through his own reading of Kierkegaard’s writings in the original danish, Haecker quickly came to his own way of understanding Kierkegaard. based on this, he can criticize, even in his early publications, other interpretations and uses of Kierkegaard, such as those of franz blei, Jakob Wassermann, or Heinrich lilienfels. 8 theodor Haecker, “christentum und Kultur. aus anlaß eines buches,” which appeared in the collection with the same name, munich: Kösel & Pustet 1927, pp. 15–65 (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 95–133). the book that is the occasion for this article is Werner elert, Der Kampf um das Christentum. Geschichte der Beziehungen zwischen dem evangelischen Christentum in Deutschland und dem allgemeinen Denken seit Schleiermacher und Hegel, munich: beck 1921. cf. the rich description of Haecker by richard seewald, in theodor Haecker, Der Buckel Kierkegaards, foreword by richard seewald, zurich: thomas 1947, pp. 9ff. 9 Haecker, “christentum und Kultur. aus anlaß eines buches,” p. 50 (in Werke, vol. 1, p. 123). 10 ibid., p. 36 (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 112–13).

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

95

works as a tension between the aesthetic and the religious in his own person and which is symptomatic of the present:11 What did it help that he said of his genius: “i could care less!,” if these four words were ingenious enough in his mouth, also they carried the “birthmark” of his person, since indeed every colon that he made, every comma that he did not make—could it be anything other than genius? but, on the other hand, he did not treat any aesthetic subject matter so easily, and he had no poetic idea that was so immediate that he did not give it weight with his serious religiosity indeed with his theology.12

After Haecker had already during World War I pilloried the glorification of the war and the failure of the spiritual leaders, he followed this with special attentiveness the rise of national socialism, against which he took up the struggle with the means at his disposal, namely, journalism. of his publications from this period one should emphasize his book Vergil, Father of the West from 1931, in which the relation of christianity and culture is thematized once again. by means of the characterization of virgil as a tertullianic anima naturaliter christiana, Haecker defines as the principle of the West and its art at present: “through the medium of christianity humanity entered into the truth of god, not indeed to be overwhelmed and lost there but rather to abide and dwell in it.”13 in the article published in the following year, 1932, “betrachtungen über vergil, vater des abendlandes,” Haecker sharpens the journalistic engagement against national socialism to an overt attack.14 in spite of his precarious position in the third reich, Haecker, who in the interim had to provide for a family with three children, continued his work as an author. He explores above all the possibility of a christian philosophy in a series of shorter books, among others, Was ist der Mensch? and Schöpfer und Schöpfung.15 even the ibid., pp. 61–4 (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 131–3). ibid., p. 63–4 (in Werke, vol. 1, p. 132). 13 theodor Haecker, Vergil. Vater des Abendlandes, leipzig: Hegner 1931, p. 88 (in Werke, vol. 5, pp. 9–142, here p. 84) (english translation: Virgil: Father of the West, trans. by a.W. Wheen, london: sheed & Ward 1934, p. 67); in relation to the adventistic humanity Haecker fomulates “the wonderful, easily violated principle of our faith that grace presupposes nature or completes it” (Werke, vol. 5, p. 25, this remark does not appear in the first edition). On Haecker’s basic theological assumptions and their significance for his conception of art, see Hans-eckehard bahr, Poiesis. Theologische Untersuchung der Kunst, stuttgart: evangelisches verlagswerk 1961, pp. 73ff. (cf., by contrast, georg langenhorst, Theologie & Literatur. Ein Handbuch, darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche buchgesellschaft 2005, p. 28.) 14 see siefken, Theodor Haecker 1879–1945, pp. 45ff., and Hinrich siefken, “die Weiße rose und theodor Haecker. Widerstand im glauben,” in Die Weiße Rose. Student Resistance to National Socialism 1942/1943. Forschungsergebnisse und Erfahrungsberichte, A Nottingham Symposium, ed. by Hinrich siefken, nottingham: university of nottingham 1991 (University of Nottingham Monographs in the Humanities, vol. 7), pp. 117–46. see also Die Stärkeren im Geiste. Zum christlichen Widerstand der Weißen Rose, ed. by detlef bald and Jakob Knap, essen: Klartext 2012. 15 theodor Haecker, Was ist der Mensch?, leipzig: Hegner 1933 (in Werke, vol. 4, pp. 9–175); theodor Haecker, Schöpfer und Schöpfung, leipzig: Hegner 1934 (in Werke, vol. 4, pp. 315–480). 11

12

96

Markus Kleinert

deterioration of his situation due to the prohibition against public speaking that was issued against him in 1935 and the prohibition against publishing imposed on him in 1938 could not deter him from his work as an author: his manifesto from this period is his Tag- und Nachtbücher 1939–1945, which were published posthumously after the war.16 the danger that Haecker ran due to his political obstruction, which also showed itself in Haecker’s connection to the “White rose” group, is made clear by the fact that a trial against Haecker for planning high treason was abandoned in 1943 because his knowledge of the action of the “Weiße rose” group could not be proven. on april 9, 1945, Haecker succumbed in ustersbach near augsburg as a result of diabetes. that a more or less critical encounter with Kierkegaard runs through Haecker’s work from beginning to end is clear from the fact that it begins with the treatise Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit and ends with the extended review “der buckel Kierkegaards,” which was completed in 1943 but published only posthumously. from the Nachlass the unfinished Metaphysik des Fühlens was later published.17 traces of the effects of Haecker’s work can be found not only in the philosophy and theology of the day but also in aesthetic theory and in general in the intellectual diagnosis of the present situation—not least of all with respect to politics. for example, Haecker’s contributions to Kierkegaard exercised an enormous influence on everyone who stood in direct or indirect connection with the Brenner—and to this category belong such significant and different representatives of intellectual history as ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951), martin Heidegger (1889–1976), theodor W. adorno (1903–69), or martin buber (1878–1965).18 that Haecker’s writings attained a certain degree of national and international popularity is testified by the fact that there have been numerous reprints and translations of them. While there can be no doubt about a certain influence of Haecker’s work during his lifetime as well as a certain reception in the second half of the twentieth century, nonetheless this influence and this reception are difficult to determine precisely. It is not surprising that the resoluteness and uncompromisingness with which Haecker presented his

see the critical edition by Hinrich siefken, theodor Haecker, Tag- und Nachtbücher 1939–1945, first complete edition with commentaries, ed. by Hinrich Siefken, Innsbruck: Haymon 1989 (Brenner-Studien, vol. 9). a resemblance with Kierkegaard’s so-called “diaries,” above all the late nb journals is obvious; however, the special character of this part of Kierkegaard’s complete works must first be worked through before Haecker’s Tag- und Nachtbücher can be regarded with an eye to their points of commonality with respect to form and content. 17 theodor Haecker, Metaphysik des Fühlens. Eine nachgelassene Schrift, munich: Kösel 1950 (in Werke, vol. 5, pp. 289–368). 18 compare, for example, allan Janik, “Haecker, Kierkegaard and the early brenner: a contribution to the History of the reception of ‘two ages’ in the german-speaking World,” in Two Ages, ed. by robert l. Perkins, macon, georgia: mercer university Press 1984 (International Kierkegaard Commentary, vol. 14), pp. 189–222, see pp. 217–19. On Haecker’s influence and reception in general, see Karin Masser, Theodor Haecker— Literatur in theologischer Fragestellung, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1986 (Europäische Hochschulschriften, series i: German Language and Literature, vol. 904), pp. 339–63. 16

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

97

position had a polarizing effect on people. Where the position of the academic outsider enjoys an explicit treatment, it usually evokes decisive agreement or decisive rejection: for example, t.s. eliot (1888–1965) judged Haecker to be “a great critic and a good european”;19 Heinrich böll (1917–85) demonstrably shows his reverence with the title and one of the mottos of his novel, Wo warst du Adam (1951);20 whereas Heidegger in his lecture Einführung in die Metaphysik (1935) dismisses Haecker’s Was ist der Mensch? as “unphilosophical” without even mentioning the author’s name.21 one must distinguish between such explicit reactions—where the criticism primarily takes the form of the charges that Haecker was overly insistent on being right, that he was a zealot, and that he argued with the enthusiasm of someone who had recently been converted—and an implicit reception or effect. moreover, explicit criticism might imply impulses on the side of the critic and some kind of appreciation for the one criticized as well, as can be seen in the treatment of Haecker by the t.s. eliot, Beiträge zum Begriff der Kultur, berlin and frankfurt am main: suhrkamp (formerly s. fischer) 1949, anhang: die einheit der europäischen Kultur (separately 1946), pp. 147–66, see p. 156; cf. eliot’s dependence on Haecker’s method in “vergil and the christian World,” The Sewanee Review, vol. 61, no. 1, 1953, pp. 1–14, see p. 4 and p. 6. 20 Heinrich böll, Wo warst du Adam, opladen: friedrich middelhauve 1951, motto, p. 5: “Eine Weltkatastrophe kann zu manchem dienen. Auch dazu, ein Alibi zu finden vor Gott. Wo warst du, Adam? ‘Ich war im Weltkrieg.’ theodor Haecker, Tag- und Nachtbücher, 31. märz 1940.” compare Haecker’s note in Tag- und Nachtbücher 1939–1945, p. 52 (in Werke, vol. 2, p. 51): “a world catastrophe may serve many purposes. as an alibi before god, for example. adam where art thou? ‘i was at the world war.’ only it’s a coarse excuse. others search for an alibi in their own consciences. adam where art thou? ‘i was with my conscience—does it not belong to me! that is the subtlest way of all of avoiding action.” english translation quoted from Journal in the Night, p. 29. 21 martin Heidegger, Einführung in die Metaphysik, 6th ed., tübingen: niemeyer 1998 (1953), p. 109: “to be sure, there are books today entitled: ‘What is man?’ but the title merely stands in letters on the cover. there is no questioning. not only because people have been so busy writing books that they have forgotten how to question, but because the writers already possess an answer and what is more an answer that forbids questioning. if a man believes the propositions of catholic dogma, that is his individual concern; we shall not discuss it here. but how can we be expected to take a man seriously who writes ‘What is man?’ on the cover of his book although he does not inquire, because he is unwilling and unable to inquire. and then when the Frankfurter Zeitung, among others, praises such a book, which questions merely on its cover, as ‘an extraordinary, magnificent and courageous work,’ even the blindest among us know where we stand….In itself this sort of scribbling is unimportant and insignificant. What is not unimportant is the paralysis of all passion for questioning that has long been with us. the consequence of this paralysis is that all standards and perspectives have been confused and that most men have ceased to know where and between what the crucial decisions must be made, if a sharp and original historical knowledge is to be combined with greatness of historical will. such hints as we have thrown out can only suggest how far questioning as a fundamental element of historical being has receded from us.” english translation quoted from An Introduction to Metaphysics, trans. by ralph manheim, new Haven and london: Yale university Press 1959, pp. 142–3. on may 13, 1935 Haecker gave a lecture to the students at the university of freiburg, which caused an uproar among the national socialists. see siefken, Theodor Haecker 1879–1945, pp. 51–3. 19

98

Markus Kleinert

representatives of critical theory.22 the implicit impulses by Haecker contribute to an underground history of reception, where Haecker often plays the role less of an independent standpoint than as a mediator of other standpoints, especially as mediator of Kierkegaard. an interesting episode in this underground history of reception is Haecker’s relation to carl schmitt (1888–1985). schmitt’s disposition towards catholicism was decisively influenced by Kierkegaard, whom he read in Haecker’s translations. Schmitt might also have been influenced by Haecker’s ideas regarding the appropriate manner of using Kierkegaard, which, for example, are implied in the critical encounter with franz blei (1871–1942). in any case the two men were in personal contact in munich during the years of World War i, a contact that was not destroyed in the Weimar republic. they were defenders of an intellectual catholicism, which aimed at a new determination of the relation of catholicism to modernity. erik Peterson (1890–1960) also belonged to this group; Peterson met schmitt through Haecker and, as is well known, became a critical counterpart of schmitt.23 Haecker was kept informed about schmitt’s and Peterson’s spiritual positions by his friend richard seewald (1889–1976). in such cases the problem mentioned in the introduction appears, namely, that of the distinction between Kierkegaard reception and Haecker reception, between reproduction and interpretation. this will be made clearer in the following. III. of the different kinds of encounters with Kierkegaard which stamp Haecker’s work, his translations should be emphasized first. Haecker made some of Kierkegaard’s texts accessible for the first time in German translation, and here both the selection and the manner of the translation are of interest. the Kierkegaard texts chosen by Haecker for translation come especially from three parts of the complete authorship: first, the posthumous writings (for example, The Book on Adler), second the edifying and christian discourses, and third, the so-called “diaries” or Tagebücher: that is, the journals and notebooks. (moreover, adorno refers to Haecker’s relevant writings in theodor W. adorno, Kierkegaard. Konstruktion des Ästhetischen. Mit einer Beilage, new, expanded edition, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1962, and he also mentions Haecker casually in his later writings in other contexts; cf. Walter benjamin, “Privilegiertes denken. zu theodor Haeckers ‘vergil’ ” in Die literarische Welt, vol. 8, no. 6, february 5, 1932, pp. 1–2 (Gesammelte Schriften, vols. 1–8, ed. by rolf tiedemann and Hermann schweppenhäuser, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1972–99; vol. 3, Kritiken und Rezensionen, ed. by Hella tiedemann-bartels, pp. 315–22); max Horkheimer, “zu theodor Haecker: der christ und die geschichte,” in Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung, vol. 5, 1936, pp. 372–83. 23 reinhard mehring, Carl Schmitt. Aufstieg und Fall, munich: beck 2009, see especially p. 97 and p. 143; the biography in this work is very useful for a characterization of the relevant milieu; further references to the relation between Haecker and schmitt can be found in bernd Wacker (ed.), Die eigentlich katholische Verschärfung. Konfession, Theologie und Politik im Werk Carl Schmitts, munich: fink 1994. 22

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

99

Haecker planned a translation of Kierkegaard’s dissertation The Concept of Irony, but an ugly conflict surrounded this translation, and so the plan was never realized.)24 the contemporary situation with Kierkegaard editions explains the selection of these seemingly marginal texts in Kierkegaard’s complete authorship, since Haecker selected the texts which were not available in the edition made by christoph schrempf.25 another explanation is a constellation of issues relevant for Haecker himself. the selection of texts can be explained by Haecker’s intended criticism of modernity, which also has to explain the authority of the critic, indeed, the concept of authority in general. the problem of the recognizability of authority and the confessional distinctions in relation to authority are connected to this issue. the texts selected for translation can be understood as an attempt to answer these questions.26 in his early treatise Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit Haecker lamented the neglect of Kierkegaard’s discourses in the german translations—as well as the quality of the translations in general: Kierkegaard left no doubt that his dialectics is a method used to reach the life of spirit, which for him cannot be revealed otherwise. clearly, it would have been necessary for the german translators also to publish the edifying and christian discourses. [footnote: alas, and if only a bit more of the passion and stormy power of the original could be felt in the translation of the poetic writings! thus one is all too often tempted to cry out: hands off, if you are so sleepy!] i do not know why they have not done so, and can see no sufficient motive in the fact that the reading world of today finds edifying and Christian discourses boring. Whoever is occupied with Kierkegaard and thus with the spirit does not need to pay any attention to this demand of the day. those discourses, however, belong essentially to Kierkegaard’s works and were always regarded by him as what was really serious in his production; they are above all directed in the christian manner “ad se ipsum” and were intended and designed by him right down to every single word, to every single comma, for reading aloud. from them it is clear what role dialectics plays.27

cf. Philipp schwab, “der ‘ganze Kierkegaard im Keim’ und die tradition der ironie. grundlinien der deutschsprachigen rezeptionsgeschichte von Kierkegaards Über den Begriff der Ironie,” Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2009, pp. 373–492, which contains an account of Haecker’s plan to translate The Concept of Irony and his argument with Wilhelm Kütemeyer who translated it before he could; see pp. 403–5; pp. 409–11. 25 søren Kierkegaard, Gesammelte Werke, vols. 1–12, trans. and ed. by Hermann gottsched and christoph schrempf, Jena: diederichs 1909–22; see gerhard schreiber, “christoph schrempf: the ‘swabian socrates’ as translator of Kierkegaard,” Kierkegaard’s Influence on Theology, tome i, German Theology, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2012 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 10), pp. 275–319. 26 cf. malik, Receiving Søren Kierkegaard, see especially p. 377; Janik, “Haecker, Kierkegaard and the early brenner,” pp. 195–216, see especially p. 204, note 49. 27 theodor Haecker, Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, munich: schreiber 1913, p. 49; With regard to Kierkegaard’s profane and sacred production, see “nachwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Am Fuße des Altars. Christliche Reden, trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, munich: beck 1923, pp. 67–87, see pp. 71–3 (“the mission of søren Kierkegaard,” in theodor Haecker, Søren Kierkegaard, trans. and with a biographical note by alexander dru, london: oxford university Press 1937, pp. 51–67, see pp. 55–6). translation slightly revised. 24

100

Markus Kleinert

in view of the criticism of the existing translations, a commentary on Haecker’s own method of translation seems appropriate. Methodological reflections can be found, for example, in Haecker’s impressive translation of Kierkegaard’s “Tagebücher.” in the first edition (from 1923) not only does Haecker justify his selection of Kierkegaard’s journals and notebooks—he chooses material that is not used or only partially used in the main published writings and that can be regarded as proof for a continuity of Kierkegaard’s intellectual development28—but also he explains a guiding principle of his translation, namely, that what is incomplete in content and form (for example, what is inchoate and abrupt) is just as justified as what is complete.29 in the second edition of this translation (from 1941) the translation principles are once again emphasized,30 as in this example: “regarding my way of translation i will in principle note: after many attempts i quickly reached the decision to translate as far as possible literally, that is, as far as the word is connected with the spirit; that carries one far.”31 With this the translator turns against the spiritless “liquefaction,” against the false idea of most translators: a fluid language, which ultimately is the language of the popular newspapers.32 since language is a central object of Haecker’s studies, there are in his works, alongside such specific references to his work as a translator, numerous reflections on language and on translation—for example, the original reflections concerning the key words or “heart words” of a language in the book on virgil33—which could be placed in connection with the method Haecker used in his Kierkegaard translations. both the parts of Kierkegaard’s collected works selected by Haecker for translation and the guiding principles he used in the translations are still of interest—and it is therefore not strange that Haecker’s conscientious translations are still useable even today and are occasionally even reprinted.34 IV. the great interest with which Haecker’s translations of Kierkegaard were met also extended to the texts accompanying these translations: that is, the prefaces, malik sees in the selection from Kierkegaard’s journals and notebooks a catholic tendency to mediate faith and knowledge. see Receiving Søren Kierkegaard, p. 385. 29 sören Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, vols. 1–2, ed. and trans. by theodor Haecker, vol. 1, 1834–1848, innsbruck: brenner 1923, pp. vii–viii. 30 sören Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, ed. and trans. by theodor Haecker, 2nd ed. in one volume, leipzig: Hegner 1941, pp. 10–13. 31 ibid., p. 10. 32 Haecker, Tag- und Nachtbücher 1939–1945, pp. 129–30 (in Werke, vol. 2, pp. 136–7) (Journal in the Night, p. 87). 33 Haecker, Vergil. Vater des Abendlandes, pp. 117–21 (in Werke, vol. 5, pp. 112–15); t.s. eliot refers to this in his vergil essay (see above note 19). 34 for example, sören Kierkegaard, Kritik der Gegenwart. Der Pfahl im Fleisch, trans. and ed. by theodor Haecker, vienna: Karolinger 1988; sören Kierkegaard, Einübung im Christentum. Zwei kurze ethisch-religiöse Abhandlungen. Das Buch Adler (= Der Begriff des Auserwählten in translation by theodor Haecker), complete ed., munich: deutscher taschenbuch verlag 2005. 28

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

101

postscripts, or translator’s notes. in such presumably unnoteworthy and secondary texts, Haecker carries out his own intellectual program with great pithiness. they offer only to some extent, if at all, the customary introduction to Kierkegaard’s life and works or a commentary but rather a positioning undertaken with reference to Kierkegaard—and here the references to Kierkegaard and Haecker’s own position merge with one another. Here three aspects of these accompanying texts should be emphasized: first, the appropriation of Kierkegaard’s critique of his age; second, the attempt to steer the reception through the assessment of different (actual or anticipated) ways of Kierkegaard reception; third, a vague criticism of Kierkegaard as an absolutized corrective. these aspects will be illustrated by means of a few examples. In his first Kierkegaard translation, which appeared in the Brenner in 1914, Haecker, to set the mood for the following translations, offers a selection from Kierkegaard’s Prefaces and—what is often overlooked in the research—the introduction to Kierkegaard’s unpublished fragmentary narrative Johannes Climacus or De omnibus dubitandum est.35 in the translator’s preliminary remarks Haecker not only shows the continued relevance of the satirical criticism of the present contained in the extract but also treats generally the meaning of art, the relation of the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious. against the absolutizing of art and an “aesthetic world-view” of the age, Haecker places a relative validity of art, which should be understood as a dependent part within the infinite life of the spiritual human being. in the translator’s preliminary remarks some of the central themes of Kierkegaard’s work are announced, but their very general and apodictic treatment by Haecker is only loosely connected with the complex and ambiguous treatment found in Kierkegaard himself. the criticism of the present, which Haecker introduces with reference to Kierkegaard, is also expressed in the suspicion that the present must misunderstand or falsify Kierkegaard. at the next opportunity, in the preface to the translation of Kierkegaard’s edifying discourse “the thorn in the flesh,” which appeared soon thereafter in the Brenner, Haecker returns to the introduction to Johannes Climacus or De omnibus dubitandum est. He satirically paints a picture of how “Pamphlet psychologists and philosophizing psychoanalysts” will stumble upon this text, which is so rich for Kierkegaard’s biography—in which the childhood and youth of the naive Johannes climacus is portrayed, who later falls into the trap of the Hegelians.36 Kierkegaard reception, according to Haecker, turns Kierkegaard’s intent into its opposite in that the author of the single one, in spite of his engagement sören Kierkegaard, “vorworte,” [trans. and preliminary note by theodor Haecker], Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 14, pp. 666–83 (“aus ‘vorworte,’ ” pp. 671–3; “einleitung zu ‘de omnibus dubitandum est,’ ” pp. 674–83). 36 “vorwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Der Pfahl im Fleisch, trans. and foreword by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 16, pp. 691–705, see p. 697, remark: “Die Kindheitsgeschichte Kierkegaards, die im vorigen Heft des ‘Brenner’ erschien, habe ich eigens für die Psychoanalytiker übersetzt, eigens für den Herrn Dr. Theodor Reik, den ich staunend in mein Herz geschlossen habe, damit er sie in der ‘Imago’ unter der Rubrik Vater und Gott verwerte. Er geniere sich ja nicht, nur zu! Früher oder später muß es ja doch sein. Ich bin für Beschleunigung.” 35

102

Markus Kleinert

against the leveling mass, is turned into the favorite of the public and a fashionable phenomenon: “the [current intellectuals] now of course play along with the new ‘irrationality’ and in short with Kierkegaard.”37 How decisively Haecker makes use of Kierkegaard in the determination of his own view is already revealed in the title which the translator gives to the texts or the excerpts. thus, for example, the second part of Kierkegaard’s A Literary Review (with omission of some specific references to Thomasine Gyllembourg’s original) appeared under the title Kritik der Gegenwart, and Haecker’s afterword with its concentrated critique of its age also uses this title.38 against the background of Haecker’s opposition between the eternal hierarchy of spiritual values and the contemporary neglect of it, Kierkegaard is presented as both an abstract and a concrete figure by which one can take one’s bearings. Kierkegaard’s effort to get people to acknowledge the absolute is supposed to function as a corrective to the relativism that saturates the age. also, with respect to the concrete forms of such a corrective, Kierkegaard’s life and works serve as a point of orientation since, for example, the struggle against the ideology of the mass media, against the “berliner tageblatt-liberalismus,” is conceived as a continuation of the “Corsair conflict.” since Haecker’s positioning can be seen above all in the negation of contemporary world-views and Kierkegaard is employed to criticize them, it is impossible to decide whether Haecker identified with Kierkegaard’s position or whether differences were repressed in favor of the effectiveness of the criticism.39 an extensive version of this criticism can be found in the “afterword” which Haecker attaches to his translation of Kierkegaard’s The Book on Adler published in 1917 under the title Der Begriff des Auserwählten (more precisely, in his arrangement of the many different drafts of the posthumous material). in the “afterword,” whose weight and independence resulted in a separate publication in the following year, ibid., p. 704. on this see the informative article by Janik, “Haecker, Kierkegaard and the early brenner.” 39 Werner becker, “der Überschritt von Kierkegaard zu newman in der lebensentscheidung theodor Haeckers,” Newman Studien, vol. 1, 1948, pp. 251–70, pp. 338–9 (on Haecker’s criticism of Kierkegaard, see pp. 254–9). becker sees Haecker’s criticism of Kierkegaard anticipated in the “afterword” to Kritik der Gegenwart, ibid., p. 255: “Wenn Staat, Kirche und Familie ‘ausgehöhlt sind und weder Autorität noch innere Zustimmung sich verschaffen können,’ so bleibt nichts übrig, als den Auserwählten, die absolute Ausnahme, den Heiligen oder den Religionsstifter in den Mittelpunkt zu stellen, den ‘Einzelnen,’ um den das Weltbild Kierkegaards gebaut ist. Als Notlösung, also nicht als grundsätzliche, hybride Festlegung hat Haecker die Einseitigkeit Kierkegaards entgegengenommen. Die Sätze Kierkegaards sind, wie Haecker damals schon deutlich erkennt, in dem Sinne polemisch (‘polemisch gegen die Welt’), daß sie die Negation in den Vordergrund stellen und die Position ‘verstecken’. An dieser Stelle ist in dem Nachwort Haeckers eine erste Kritik wenigstens angesetzt und angedeutet an zwei entscheidenden Trennungen, die Kierkegaard vorgenommen hat: die Trennung von Logik und Tun, und die Trennung ‘zwischen der Welt und dem Geist der Religiösität.’ Von hier aus ist kein weiter Weg mehr zum Finden des Schlüssels für die Schöpfungswirklichkeit, für das Prinzip der Analogie.” 37 38

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

103

Haecker, with the use of numerous examples, places art, religion, and science (formerly, the theological science) in a relation to each other—and that means above all that he determines the irreducibility and the supremacy of religious faith. In order to confirm this relation and evaluation, Haecker makes use of aspects of Kierkegaard’s work. Here he makes an unspecific reference which is claimed to be founded not only in The Book on Adler but in all of Kierkegaard’s writings. besides the decisive aspect, “that the socratic method is also valid inside christianity; that according to the word of the prophet, god himself wants to be the teacher of every human being; that churches, institutions and human beings can only be midwives,”40 Kierkegaard’s criticism of the sublation of the law of contradiction—in aesthetics and in ethics and religion—is emphasized. The infinitely passionate person can indirectly communicate existential contradictions by means of paradox and antitheses, but he leaves the solution of the contradictions to god. the goal is clearly that Kierkegaard, in such a general presentation, is supposed to support Haecker’s criticism of the present, in which the drawing of the borders between art, religion and science is blurred and their hierarchy is inverted. symptomatic for this blurring and inversion is the success of the “aesthetic world-view” or the obviousness with which the selfunderstanding as christian people or christian state and the war converge—here one notes the date of publication. this “afterword” once again makes clear the issue which is valid in general for the presentation of Kierkegaard found in Haecker’s accompanying texts: in order to authorize a program for spiritual renewal, the presentation must be simple and unambiguous and when necessary must be made simple and unambiguous. looking back to the examples mentioned, one can ask whether the aesthetic life-view in Kierkegaard, which needs to be more precisely determined, is in fact judged unambiguously or if a convention for interpretation partly prefigured by Kierkegaard has not simply been taken over. While a criticism of Kierkegaard is only hinted at in the accompanying texts of the early translations, it of course becomes clearer after Haecker’s conversion. Haecker thus uses the “afterword” to his translation of newman’s Grammar of Assent for a comparison of Kierkegaard and newman (on occasion of the problem of transition in relation to faith and knowledge): We find here two great thinkers of the nineteenth century, Newman and Kierkegaard, in one respect in the most brusque antagonism to each other, while they in another sense are essentially in agreement. they are both well aware that ultimately even for the pure intellect alone…an irritating paradox lies in the irrational fact that what is logically only probable is supposed to lead to unconditioned certainty, above all in religious questions. But while the one, Kierkegaard, goes the way of the fiery youth and absolute passion and, so to speak, gets rid of all human passions and if possible creates a vacuum in order to make the “leap” as the utmost wager of faith (but also newman has written a beautiful sermon on “Wagers of faith”), newman goes the way of a mature man and prudence and fills in the gaps wherever he can and piles up the probabilities more and more to the theodor Haecker, “nachwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Der Begriff des Auserwählten, trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, Hellerau: Hegner 1917, pp. 335–421, see p. 345 (published separately, “ein nachwort,” Hellerau: Hegner 1918, see p. 17; in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 9–87, see p. 18).

40

104

Markus Kleinert point where a qualitative transition to certainty takes place. i confess for my part that i believe that the latter path is the humanly and divinely natural, desired and normal one, whereas the former, which is only allowed by god in cases of exceptions for individual souls and for specific purposes, is of the utmost danger.41

but even this evaluation at the end of the comparison is retracted in favor of a more equal perspective, which confirms the continued importance of Kierkegaard for Haecker: on the other hand, there is a kind of cruel and indeed intellectual unnaturalness, indeed almost a kind of absurdity in the attempt to divide at some point into two the thought of thinkers like Pascal, Kierkegaard, newman, who grew so personally and organically with their thought, and then suddenly and arbitrarily, without rhyme or reason one declares: up to this point they are rational and healthy and one can go along with them, but from there then there is something excessive or superstitious or mad; and it may well be for a person who has faith that the fact that he does not need to do so but rather can understand the entire thinker as a unity even if he himself cannot or will not follow the same way entirely, would be a quite good argument for the probability of the correctness of his view.42

V. the independent works by Haecker which are explicitly occupied with Kierkegaard43 cannot be distinguished fundamentally from the writings treated in the previous section, but can only be distinguished with respect to their weighting of information, instrumentalization, criticism, and steering of the reception. in his debut work Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit (1913) Haecker is confronted with the tricky task of wanting to make Kierkegaard’s incommensurable importance measurable for the reader. He adopts and even potentiates Kierkegaard’s own presentation of himself (for example, in On My Activity as a Writer), when he wants to “draw attention” to the religious author, who appeared at a decisive moment for the spiritual fate of europe, in order to lead theodor Haecker, “nachwort,” in John Henry newman, Philosophie des Glaubens (Grammar of Assent), trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, munich: Wiechmann 1921, pp. 429–48, see pp. 442–3. cf., for example, the criticism in the “afterword” to sören Kierkegaard, Am Fuße des Altars. Christliche Reden, trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, munich: beck 1923, pp. 67–87, see p. 83: “but just as Kierkegaard’s passionate nature often led him to treat the things of this life too cavalierly, for they embittered him by weighing too heavily upon him when they entered into the causality of his life, so in this case, if they did not blind him to the other great principle of christianity, that of community, they only let him see it in a spiritual sense, as the communion of saints, and hindered his seeking its realization in the visible church and the sacraments.” english translation quoted from theodor Haecker, Søren Kierkegaard, pp. 51–67, see p. 63. 42 Haecker, “nachwort,” in newman, Philosophie des Glaubens (Grammar of Assent), p. 443. 43 Works referring to Kierkegaard only indirectly or vaguely, for example, the important independent writings of Haecker in the 1930s, cannot be taken into account in this overview. 41

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

105

the age beyond the aesthetic and the ethical to the religious and the christian. With respect to the history of philosophy, Haecker sees in bergson and above all in Pascal a family resemblance with Kierkegaard’s attempt to demonstrate the importance of “inwardness”44 with special attention to the problem of communication. Haecker uses the complex concept of “inwardness” as if it were perfectly obvious, and this facilitates co-opting of Kierkegaard with free associations. thus, for example, carl dallago, who owes his knowledge of Kierkegaard to Haecker’s treatise, equates Kierkegaard’s “inwardness” with his own concept of the “purely human” and then equates this in turn with christianity, which is opposed to “ecclesial christianity” as outwardness.45 With the background of Haecker’s personal relation to scheler, one can perhaps imagine that scheler’s criticism of the “false inwardness” in Von zwei deutschen Krankheiten (1919) is aimed—also—at Haecker’s promotion of inwardness.46 alongside the contextualization of Kierkegaard’s work with regard to the history of philosophy, Haecker in his debut also undertakes a contextualization with regard to the Zeitgeist; this discussion is informative with regard to Haecker’s own spiritual frame of reference.47 in the “spiritual” events in europe there were possibilities for comparison of Kierkegaard’s work with, for example, ibsen, strindberg, and tolstoy, and even with Kraus and nietzsche (the latter appears, however, as a weaker and failed repetition of Kierkegaard). among Haecker’s more original observations is the claim that gerhart Hauptmann, on account of his novel Der Narr in Christo Emanuel Quint, also bears a family resemblance to Kierkegaard.48 a considerably more distanced and ambiguous relation to Kierkegaard is evident in Haecker’s essay dedicated to him, which was first given as a lecture in 1924 and with which Haecker intended to supplement and take up critically the theological, philosophical, and literary discussion with Kierkegaard. in regard to the theological discussion, the reader is reminded to look at Kierkegaard’s edifying discourses and journals.49 in regard to the literary discussion, the consideration of Kierkegaard’s see, for example, renate von Heydebrand, “art. ‘innerlichkeit,’ ” in Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, vol. 4, columns 387–8. 45 cf. Janik, “Haecker, Kierkegaard and the early brenner,” pp. 217–19. 46 max scheler, “von zwei deutschen Krankheiten,” in Schriften zur Soziologie und Weltanschauungslehre, vol. 6 in his Gesammelte Werke, vols. 1–15, 2nd revised ed. with supplements of writings from the time of “schriften,” ed. by maria scheler, bern and munich: francke 1963, pp. 204–19, see pp. 207ff. 47 theodor Haecker, Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, munich: schreiber 1913, pp. 45–62. 48 ibid., pp. 58–9. see also my “auch ein höherer Wahnsinn. annäherungen an die gestalt des narren in christo,” in Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2010, pp. 223–36, see pp. 235–6, note 22. 49 theodor Haecker, “sören Kierkegaard,” Hochland, 1925, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 188–212, see pp. 193–4 (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 171–211, see p. 180): “they [the pseudonymous works] supply matter for contemplation and study to the poet, psychologist, and philosopher, and moreover, they appeared not under Kierkegaard’s name but under various pseudonyms— an important criterion. His really precious theological ideas are not found in those works, where exaggerated definitions of faith and paradox stand side by side with profoundly true 44

106

Markus Kleinert

literary forms of communication is recommended.50 (these are two reminders that found little resonance for a long time in the history of reception.) in regard to the philosophical discussion, Hacker emphasizes Kierkegaard’s “preserving” dialectic of existence by means of a slogan which, without context, becomes deceptive: “subjectivity is the truth.” according to Haecker, Kierkegaard’s dialectic of existence prevents the confusion of subjectivity and immediacy as well as that of faith and immediacy. the criticism of Kierkegaard consists in the charge of one-sidedness and exaggeration: however justified the corrective of the time and of Christendom was and is, the absolutizing of the corrective is equally dangerous. Haecker claims that this kind of absolutizing is grounded in Kierkegaard partly personally (with regard to the overemphasis of the spiritual vis-à-vis the physical or the psychological), and partly confessionally-ecclesiologically (with regard to the authority of the church). in comparison with the exuberant enthusiasm of his early writings, Haecker’s balancing commentary on Kierkegaard sounds slightly self-satisfied: He was a good character, and there was love in him. this victory helps us to forget his mistakes and errors; they were indeed not of an absolute sort but rather consequences of his constitution and upbringing and mistakes and errors of his great truths and virtues, and because he had as his only master his conscience which he always loyally obeyed, and had not the higher authority of docrine of the church.51

in the essay “der begriff der Wahrheit bei sören Kierkegaard” (1932) the criticism is made sharper—with respect to the confessional aspect. as a result of the confessional division, in answering the main question of how i become christian, Kierkegaard separated the “how” of faith from the “what” of faith (and the condition of the world, which precedes faith) and simply identifies it with faith.52 according to this view, the “how” of faith is the self-sublation of the understanding produced by the permanent paradox, but never “objective certainty.” Haecker sketches the caricature of a faith without content, in which the decision has become an end in itself. the passage in which this criticism culminates is quoted here at length: definitions. It is in the Religious Discourses, which from the beginning bear his full name, partly also in the journal, and wherever he speaks not of faith but of love, of the essence and mystery of Divine Love that we find his most profound theological ideas, the noblest product of his mind.” english translation quoted from Haecker, Søren Kierkegaard, pp. 9–50, see pp. 17–18. 50 “Yet there is much to be discussed. Questions of style, of form, the relation of poetry to prose, of music to spirit, of classicism to romanticism, of pathos to humour, not only as to what Kierkegaard said, but as to the manner in which he said it.” (Haecker, “sören Kierkegaard,” p. 205 (in Werke, vol. 1, p. 199), english translation quoted from Haecker, Søren Kierkegaard, p. 37). 51 ibid., p. 211 (in Werke, vol. 1, p. 210). on the criticism of Kierkegaard by the catholic Haecker, see also becker, “der Überschritt von Kierkegaard zu newman in der lebensentscheidung theodor Haeckers,” pp. 258–9. 52 theodor Haecker, Der Begriff der Wahrheit bei Sören Kierkegaard, innsbruck: brenner 1932, pp. 33–4 (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 381–431, see pp. 400–401). this isolation of the “how” of faith represses the Thomistic intuitions which Haecker claims to find in Kierkegaard’s work.

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

107

the metaphysical ethicist Kierkegaard thus eternalizes, ontologizes the passion of decision, which lies between nothingness and being…he leaves the human being hanging in the leap of decision, created the myth of the leap, and then again he defines something that not only does not really exist but that is impossible. He completely overlooks the other parables about the Kingdom of god, where clearly the first decision must be made…Kierkegaard confuses also the decisions which appear after the great decision for faith and the truth of faith with this. faith in the truth of revelation can long since be unshakably and supernaturally certain, if the human being is forced into ever new decisions from the results of this faith….contributing to this confusion of Kierkegaard was his view of human understanding as a monad, so to speak, which is without windows for faith and the supernatural, as an organ, which invariably is valid only for the natural man and the world, which cannot be driven out of his absolute neutrality for all revelation, not to mention that it would have a secret longing for it, which is our thesis. Kierkegaard’s passion is not scared off by self-destruction. His definition of Christian subjectivity as truth is a catastrophe, which, if taken seriously, would invariably lead to every objective irrationalism, every denial of common sense in the preliminary questioning and study of faith. clearly Kierkegaard, through his fanatical radicalism in the demand for what a human being must “be” in order to be a “christian,” has indirectly come to a kind of despairing proof that there was, is and will be ever only one christian. no human being as human being, not even the baptized one, indeed, not even the holy one can be that “pure subjectivity” as “pure truth,” but only the human being who is at the same time god: there can be no christian except for christ himself!53

in this criticism an obviously one-sided picture of Kierkegaard appears in that, for example, the definition of subjectivity as truth, which is loosely tied to the Johannes climacus of the Concluding Unscientific Postscript fails to appreciate both the dialectic of the definition developed there and the function of the pseudonym. Kierkegaard thus appears as a pioneer for modern subjectivism, irrationalism, and decisionism,54 which is the real target of Haecker’s attack and which he opposes on his side with the dogmatically presupposed “objective certainty,” “the unfalsified doctrine.”55 ironically, in the Kierkegaard reception Haecker’s criticism has become less popular than his tendentious presentation. at least with respect to its formulation, the criticism in the review “der buckel Kierkegaards,” which was written in 1943 and published in 1947, takes a slightly more reserved tone. this review was occasioned by the thesis of rikard magnussen about Kierkegaard’s inherited physical disabilities and their consequences.56 Here the criticism of subjectivistic thought from the essay on truth is confirmed; moreover, in the physical debility Haecker recognizes the occasion for an unchristian

ibid., pp. 67–9 (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 425–6). see, for example, the dig at Karl barth, ibid., p. 66 (in Werke, vol. 1, p. 424). 55 ibid., p. 71 (in Werke, vol. 1, p. 428). 56 theodor Haecker, Der Buckel Kierkegaards, introduced by richard seewald, zurich: thomas 1947 (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 561–624) (with reference to rikard magnussen, Sören Kierkegaard, set udefra, copenhagen: munksgaard 1942, and Det saerlige Kors. Efterskrift til Bogen: Sören Kierkegaard, set udefra, copenhagen: munksgaard 1942). 53 54

108

Markus Kleinert

pessimism.57 above all Haecker’s well-known criticism (from the original and unoriginal writings) of the absolutizing of a corrective is reformulated with the help of the concept of “sincerity”: Kierkegaard, it is claimed, made “human sincerity” into the absolute measure in religious matters, he writes, “so to speak, a new religion with the principle of ‘human sincerity.’ ”58 finally, Haecker summarizes his broken relation to Kierkegaard in a comparison of Kierkegaard with newman, a somewhat resigned summary, which no longer bears triumphing features: in view of the many intuitions of metaphysical, religious and theological truths in the great works of the great man, which Kierkegaard is, this was always my greatest disappointment and for me not understandable, namely, to find in him not the industry and the clearly burning passion of the intellect for the unstained and snow-white purity of the true doctrine, of which the letters of the apostles, the fathers, the history of the church and the saints so insistently bear witness, about which also at about the same time Newman was restlessly exercised, until he finally left with a bleeding heart his beloved step-mother, the anglican church, for the sake of the truth in order to return to the bosom of the real mother.59

this overview of Haecker’s original writings directly referring to Kierkegaard makes clear that Kierkegaard remained for Haecker a lifelong figure of orientation: as a model to follow and as an opponent to criticize, and in the analysis of whom Haecker himself gave an account of his own activity as an author. regardless of whether it is fair to Kierkegaard or not, the clearer and clearer criticism of the absolutizing of the corrective must always have been for Haecker a warning not to raise oneself up as judge of one’s own age and of christendom despite the genius one might have. VI. if one now tries to gain an overview of Haecker’s encounter with Kierkegaard as it has been presented here, the close connection between Haecker’s mediation of Kierkegaard and the profiling of his own program by means of Kierkegaard is striking. With regard to profiling his own program, the confirmation is as important as the criticism. It cannot be overlooked that this profiling function can also lead to oversimplifying or making the original one-sided—with regard to both affirmation and negation. (Here one need only recall the authorization of the criticism of the present or the criticism of the decisionist concept of faith.) but if the functionalization serves as the sole identifying feature of the relation, then the diversity of the confrontation is not adequately appreciated, the diversity which contains numerous aspects that are interesting for Kierkegaard research right up to this very day (such as with respect to the theory and practice of translation or historical contextualization). Haecker’s dogmatism, the radicalism in content and form with regard to his polemics as well as to his confession, might tempt one to describe his work summarily ibid., pp. 43–5; pp. 94–6, respectively pp. 66ff. (in Werke, vol. 1, pp. 580–81 and pp. 618–9 respectively pp. 596ff.). 58 ibid., p. 34 (in Werke, vol. 1, p. 573). 59 ibid., pp. 48–9 (in Werke, vol. 1, p. 584). 57

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

109

as conservative cultural criticism or catholic reaction and to limit reception to the alternative of agreement and rejection. there are many ways out of this unproductive kind of reception. With respect to content, instead of regarding Haecker’s view on its own and as a form of anachronistic stubbornness, it could be productive to use him in the reconstruction of the culture of debate of the time.60 With respect to the formal or linguistic aspect, it could be productive to have a look not only at the immediate forerunners and successors of the satire and polemics, but rather to take into account the parenetic tradition (as, for example, penitential sermons) and its function in the context of a spiritual program.61 With regard to the possible kinds of reception of Haecker’s work, these suggestions can suffice. In relation to the work itself, it should be clear that Kierkegaard remained a decisive figure for Haecker as Haecker both approached and distanced himself from him. indeed, with regard to his fundamental self-understanding as religious author, Haecker’s approach to Kierkegaard should ultimately outweigh all confessional distancing. in the portrait of Kierkegaard “the total author,” which is presented at the beginning of this article, it is not difficult to recognize an ideal self-image of the one giving the portrait. Translated by Jon Stewart

thus, for example, gerald Hartung, with relation to the secularization of the christian image of the human being, presented a productive relation between Heidegger and Haecker since he regards the latter as a theological contribution to the debate about philosophical anthropology in the 1930s. gerald Hartung, Das Maß des Menschen. Aporien der philosophischen Anthropologie und ihre Auflösung in der Kulturphilosophie Ernst Cassirers, Weilerswist: velbrück Wissenschaft 2003, on Haecker, see pp. 154–9, quotation from p. 159: “Auch Haecker hat trotz eines dogmatischen Kerns seines Menschenbildes einen zentralen Aspekt der Debatte herausgearbeitet, den Heidegger nicht der Lächerlichkeit preisgeben kann: Wenn nach den letzten Dingen gefragt wird, gibt es keine neutrale Position. Die Frage Was ist der mensch? ist unter den Bedingungen der säkularen Moderne zu einer solchen Frage geworden.” cf. note 21. 61 on this point richard Purkarthofer indicates an important genealogical feature: richard Purkarthofer, “zur deutschsprachigen rezeptionsgeschichte von Kierkegaards ‘nachlass,’ ” Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2003, pp. 316–45, see pp. 328–9: “Rhetorische Feuerwerke mit durchwegs starkem polemischen und satirischen Einschlag die sie [Haeckers Begleittexte zu seinen Kierkegaard-Übersetzungen] sind, verfallen sie nicht selten in Sprache und Duktus des 16. Jahrhunderts.” 60

bibliography

62

I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Haecker’s corpus A. Haecker’s Primary Texts Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, munich: schreiber 1913. “f. blei und Kierkegaard,” Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 1, no. 10, pp. 457–65 (reprinted in Satire und Polemik. 1914–1920, innsbruck: brenner 1922, pp. 19–27). “vorbemerkung,” in sören Kierkegaard, “vorworte,” [trans. and preliminary note by theodor Haecker,] Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 14, pp. 666–70 (reprinted in Satire und Polemik. 1914–1920, innsbruck: brenner 1922, pp. 33–7). “vorwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Der Pfahl im Fleisch, trans. and foreword by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 16, pp. 691–705 (in the book version: “vorwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Der Pfahl im Fleisch, trans. for the first time into German and foreword by Theodor Haecker, Innsbruck: Brenner 1914, pp. 5–21; later partly published in Satire und Polemik. 1914–1920, innsbruck: brenner 1922, pp. 38–43). “nachwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Kritik der Gegenwart (Aus ‘En literair Anmeldelse’, Kopenhagen 1846), trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 20, pp. 886–908 (in the book version: “nachwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Kritik der Gegenwart, trans. by theodor Haecker, innsbruck: brenner 1914, pp. 62–87; later partly published in Satire und Polemik. 1914–1920, innsbruck: brenner 1922, pp. 44–57). “nachwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Der Begriff des Auserwählten, trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, Hellerau: Hegner 1917, pp. 335–421 (published separately: this bibliography is to be regarded as a resource with respect to the article’s topic; however, it should not be regarded as exhaustive. the creation of a complete literature list is difficult since Haecker’s writings have often in part or as a whole been published in various versions in different places; corresponding references, for example, to the numerous reprints and translations have only been made here when they are relevant for the theme in question, as for example, Haecker’s new “vorwort” to the second edition of his translation of Kierkegaard’s “tagebücher”; compare, for example, eva dambacher’s extensive bibliography in siefken, Theodor Haecker 1879–1945, pp. 71–95. also useful is the possibility of doing research in “DER BRENNER online” (http://corpus1.aac.ac.at/brenner) and also in the catalogue of the Bibliothek des Deutschen Literaturarchivs (http://dla-marbach.de/opac_kallias). 62

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

111

“ein nachwort,” Hellerau: Hegner 1918 [vorbemerkung, pp. 5–6]; later published in part in Satire und Polemik. 1914–1920, innsbruck: brenner 1922, pp. 164–92). “nachwort,” in John Henry newman, Philosophie des Glaubens (Grammar of Assent), trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, munich: Weichmann 1921, pp. 429–48. “vorwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Religiöse Reden, trans. [and foreword] by theodor Haecker, munich: Wiechmann 1922, pp. iii–v. “nachwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Am Fuße des Altars. Christliche Reden, trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, munich: beck 1923, pp. 67–87. (english translation: “the mission of søren Kierkegaard,” in theodor Haecker, Søren Kierkegaard, trans. [slightly revised] and with a biographical note by alexander dru, london: oxford university Press 1937, pp. 51–67.) “vorwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, vols. 1–2, selected and trans. [and foreword] by theodor Haecker, vol. 1, 1834–48, innsbruck: brenner 1923, pp. v–viii (2nd ed., leipzig: Hegner 1941, pp. 9–18). “sören Kierkegaard,” Hochland, 1925, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 188–212. (reprinted in Christentum und Kultur, munich: Kösel & Pustet 1927, pp. 66–114.) (english translation: Søren Kierkegaard, trans. [slightly revised] and with a biographical note by alexander dru, london: oxford university Press 1937, pp. 9–50.) Christentum und Kultur, munich: Kösel & Pustet 1927. Der Begriff der Wahrheit bei Sören Kierkegaard, innsbruck: brenner 1932. Der Buckel Kierkegaards, with “geleitwort von richard seewald” [pp. 7–16], zurich: thomas 1947. (english translation: Kierkegaard the Cripple, trans. by c. van o. bruyn, with an introduction by alexander dru, london: Harvill 1948 (Changing World Series, no. 4).) Tag- und Nachtbücher 1939–1945, introduced and ed. by Heinrich Wild [foreword, pp. 9–13], munich: Kösel 1947 (Hegner-Bücherei, vol. 2). (english translation: Journal in the Night, trans. from the German by Alexander Dru [Preface/ introduction, pp. vii–Xlvi], new York: Pantheon books 1950.) B. Haecker’s Translations of Kierkegaard’s Works Am Fuße des Altars. Christliche Reden, trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, munich: beck 1923. Der Begriff des Auserwählten, trans. and afterword by theodor Haecker, Hellerau: Hegner 1917. “der Pfahl im fleisch,” trans. and foreword by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 16, pp. 691–705 (foreword), pp. 706–12; Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 17, pp. 797–814 (end) [published separately: Der Pfahl im Fleisch, trans. for the first time into German and foreword by Theodor Haecker, innsbruck: brenner 1914]. “die Kraft gottes in der schwachheit des menschen. eine rede,” trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1921, vol. 6, issue 2, no. 10, pp. 735–44. Die Krisis und eine Krisis im Leben einer Schauspielerin. Mit Tagebuchaufzeichnungen des Verfassers, trans. by theodor Haecker, innsbruck: brenner 1922.

112

Markus Kleinert

“die sünderin,” trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1919, vol. 6, issue 1, no. 2, pp. 133–40. Die Tagebücher, vols. 1–2, selected and trans. [and foreword] by theodor Haecker, vol. 1: 1834–48, vol. 2: 1849–55, innsbruck: brenner 1923 (2nd ed. in one vol. [new foreword, pp. 9–18], leipzig: Hegner 1941 [only in this ed.: Personen- und sachregister, pp. 642–9]; 3rd ed., munich: Kösel 1949; 4th ed., munich: Kösel 1953). “eine möglichkeit,” Der Brenner, 1919, vol. 6, issue 1, no. 1, pp. 47–59 (anonymously translated.) “gottes unveränderlichkeit,” trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1922, vol. 7, issue 1, pp. 26–40. “Kritik der gegenwart (aus ‘en literair anmeldelse’, Kopenhagen 1846),” trans. for the first time into German by Theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 19, pp. 815–49; Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 20, pp. 869–86 (end), pp. 886–908 (afterword) [published separately: Kritik der Gegenwart, trans. for the first time into German and afterword by Theodor Haecker, Innsbruck: brenner 1914]. Religiöse Reden, trans. [and foreword] by theodor Haecker, munich: Wiechmann 1922. “tagebücher,” selected and trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, 1920, vol. 6, issue 1, no. 3, pp. 225–9; Der Brenner, 1920, vol. 6, issue 1, no. 4, pp. 259–72 (part ii); Der Brenner, 1920, vol. 6, issue 1, no. 5, pp. 336–41 (part iii); Der Brenner, 1921, vol. 6, issue 2, no. 8, pp. 590–94 (part iv). Über die Geduld und die Erwartung des Ewigen (Religiöse Reden), trans. by theodor Haecker, leipzig: Hegner 1938. “vom tode. aus ‘drei reden bei gedachten gelegenheiten’ [an einem grab],” trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, vol. 5, Yearbook 1915, pp. 15–55. “vorworte,” [trans. and preliminary note by theodor Haecker,] Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 14, pp. 666–83 [“aus ‘vorworte,’ ” pp. 671–73; “einleitung zu ‘de omnibus dubitandum est,’ ” pp. 674–83]. II. Sources of Haecker’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard brandes, georg, Søren Kierkegaard. En kritisk Fremstilling i Grundrids, copenhagen: gyldendal 1877. (german translation: Sören Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, authorized german edition, anonymously trans. by adolf strodtmann, leipzig: barth 1879.) Høffding, Harald, Søren Kierkegaard som Filosof, copenhagen: P.g. Philipsens forlag 1892. (german translation: Sören Kierkegaard als Philosoph, trans. and ed. by albert dorner and christoph schrempf, stuttgart: frommann 1896.) schrempf, christoph, Sören Kierkegaard. Ein unfreier Pionier der Freiheit, introduced by Harald Høffding, frankfurt am main: neuer frankfurter verlag 1907.

Theodor Haecker: The Mobilization of a Total Author

113

III. Secondary Literature on Haecker’s Relation to Kierkegaard becker, Werner, “der Überschritt von Kierkegaard zu newman in der lebensentscheidung theodor Haeckers,” Newman-Studien, vol. 1, 1948, pp. 251–70; pp. 338–9. beyer, H., “søren Kierkegaard i nutidens tyskland,” For Kirke og Kultur, vol. 41, 1934, pp. 424–9. biemer, günter, “theodor Haecker: in the footsteps of John Henry newman,” New Blackfriars, vol. 81, 2000, pp. 412–31. blei, franz, “sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der innerlichkeit. von theodor Haecker. münchen: J.f. schreiber,” Die weißen Blätter, 1914, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 92–4 [“feststellungen ‘auf gelbem Papier’ ”]. blessing, eugen, Theodor Haecker. Gestalt und Werk, nürnberg: glock und lutz 1959. cristellon, luca, “l’interpretazione del paradosso kierkegaardiano in theodor Haecker,” Kierkegaard: filosofia e teologia del paradosso, Atti del Convegno tenuto a Trento il 4–6 dicembre 1996, ed. by michele nicoletti and giorgio Penzo, brescia: morcelliana 1999, pp. 301–26. dallago, carl, “eine auseinandersetzung,” Der Brenner, 1922, vol. 7, issue 1, pp. 176–217. — “Über eine schrift ‘sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der innerlichkeit,’ ” Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 11, pp. 467–78 (parts i and ii); Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 12, pp. 515–31 (parts iii and iv); Der Brenner, 1914, vol. 4, issue 2, no. 13, pp. 565–78 (part v) (printed separately: Ueber eine Schrift. Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, innsbruck: brenner 1914). fürst, gebhard, Peter Kastner, and Hinrich siefken (eds.), Theodor Haecker (1879–1945). Verteidigung des Bildes vom Menschen, stuttgart: akademie der diözese rottenburg-stuttgart 2001 (Hohenheimer Protokolle, vol. 55). grosche, robert, “la notion d’analogie et le problème théologique d’aujourd’hui,” Revue de Philosophie, vol. 55, 1935, pp. 302–12. Halsall, r., “zur Kierkegaardrezeption Hermann brochs,” Literaturvermittlung um 1900, ed. by f. Krobb and s. strumper-Krobb, amsterdam: rodopi 2001, pp. 131–46. Heywood-thomas, John and Hinrich siefken, “theodor Haecker and alexander dru. a contribution to the discovery of Kierkegaard in britain,” Kierkegaardiana, vol. 18, 1996, pp. 173–90. Janik, allan, “Haecker, Kierkegaard and the early brenner: a contribution to the History of the reception of ‘two ages’ in the german-speaking World,” in Two Ages, ed. by robert l. Perkins, macon, georgia: mercer university Press 1984 (International Kierkegaard Commentary, vol. 14), pp. 189–222. (reprinted in Søren Kierkegaard: Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers, ed. by daniel W. conway and K.e. gover, vols. 1–4, london and new York: routledge 2002, vol. 4, pp. 123–47.) larsen, Holger, “en tysk søren Kierkegaard,” Freds-Varden, vol. 6, 1918, pp. 118–23.

114

Markus Kleinert

malik, Habib c., Receiving Søren Kierkegaard: The Early Impact and Transmission of His Thought, Washington, d.c.: catholic university of america Press 1997, see pp. 371–91. mumbauer, Johannes, “die neuen tertulliane. (sören Kierkegaard und theodor Haecker),” Literarischer Handweiser, vol. 58, 1922, pp. 545–50. ruttenbeck, Walter, Sören Kierkegaard. Der christliche Denker und sein Werk, berlin and frankfurt an der oder: trowitzsch & sohn 1929, pp. 322–23. schulz, Heiko, “a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), pp. 307–419, see pp. 328–31. Siefken, Hinrich (in cooperation with Friedrich Pfäfflin), Theodor Haecker 1879–1945, with a Haecker bibliography by eva dambacher, Marbacher Magazin, vol. 49, 1989. thulstrup, niels, “Kierkegaard og nietzsche i katolsk belysning,” Information, april 18, 1950.

franz Kafka: reading Kierkegaard nicolae irina

Franz Kafka’s (1883–1924) prolific literary production spans a brief period of time, yet it encompasses a wide variety of literary forms: novels, short stories, parables, aphorisms, letters, and diaries. the impact of his work was very significant particularly in the literary world, but it also marked noticeable developments of broader cultural importance. it has been argued that Kafka’s fiction stirred up the French existentialists’ interest in Kierkegaard’s philosophy. for instance, in a 1949 discussion between maja goth (1923–99) and Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–80), the latter talks about Kierkegaard’s great influence on Kafka, yet indicating that it was “par l’atmosphère de Kafka que les Français avait trouvé accès à Kierkegaard et après lui à Hegel: …‘Avant Kafka,…on ne lisait pas Kierkegaard en France et on ne s’occupait pas de Hegel.’ ”1 moreover, it seems quite intriguing that, even within the danish literary world, the interest in Kierkegaard was stimulated at least to some extent by the early translations of Kafka’s texts.2 on a different note, it is also particularly relevant that Kafka’s case, more than that of any other literary figure of the time, can be viewed as a

i am particularly indebted to the baden-Württemberg foundation and the canadian centre for german and european studies at York university for partly supporting my research for this article. 1 maja goth, Franz Kafka et les lettres françaises 1928–1955, Paris: J. corti 1956, p. 138. cf. Kafka-Handbuch, vols. 1–2, ed. by Hartmut binder, stuttgart: Kröner 1979, vol. 2, p. 685: “Kafka wurde in einem Zuge mit den Philosophen—Kierkegaard, Hegel, Heidegger—genannt, die das existentialistische Denken beherrschten. Er war nicht nur einer der ihren, sondern trug auch dazu bei, das Interesse für ihre Werke zu wecken.” see also marthe robert, “Kafka in frankreich,” Akzente. Zeitschrift für Dichtung (Franz Kafka, wiedergelesen), vol. 13, no. 4, 1966, p. 317, quoted in leena eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction: Freud, Darwin, Kierkegaard, Helsinki: academia scientiarum fennica 1999 (Suomalaisen tiedeakatemian toimituksia, Series Humaniora, vol. 302), p. 161. 2 torben brostrøm, “den moderne lyrik og Prosa. 1920–1970,” in torben brostrøm and Jens Kistrup, Dansk Litteraturhistorie, vols. 1–4, copenhagen: Politikens forlag 1971, vol. 4, p. 302: “Måske var det også oversættelseslitteraturen, der stimulerede Kierkegaardinteressen. Man fandt ham i Kafka, som kom på dansk.”

116

Nicolae Irina

“representative index” of the decisive impact of Kierkegaard’s translations on the literature of german-speaking countries.3 I. Kafka’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard The Czech-Austrian novelist benefitted from Christoph Schrempf’s (1860–1944) german translations, in progress at that time, published in the german edition of Kierkegaard’s Gesammelte Werke.4 He thus became familiar with Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works, Either/Or, Fear and Trembling, Repetition, Stages on Life’s Way, but also with The Moment.5 Kafka read them all, except Stages, between the summer of 1917, when he first read Fear and Trembling, and the first months of 1918.6 in addition, Kafka’s library apparently included The Concept of Anxiety, The Sickness unto Death, and, from the Four Upbuilding Discourses of 1844, “the thorn in the flesh,”7 although there is no definitive indication that Kafka ever read any of the latter.8 cf. Heiko schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), p. 331. 4 sören Kierkegaard, Gesammelte Werke, vols. 1–12, trans. and ed. by Hermann gottsched and christoph schrempf, Jena: diederichs 1909–22. 5 Kierkegaard, Gesammelte Werke, see vols. 1 and 2 (Entweder-Oder, Parts 1–2, 1911 and 1913); vol. 4 (Stadien auf dem Lebensweg, 1922), vol. 3 (Furcht und Zittern. Wiederholung, 1909); and vol. 12 (Der Augenblick, 1909). 6 Kafka actually read Fear and Trembling for the second time by the beginning of march 1918. cf. Hartmut binder’s section in Kafka-Handbuch, vol. 1, pp. 524–7. at the beginning of february 1921, in a letter sent from matliary to ottla, his youngest sister, Kafka asks her to find Fear and Trembling on the shelves of his library and send it to him, in order to offer it to a new acquaintance, robert Klopstock, a young medicine student from budapest with whom he remained close friends until Kafka died, three years later. cf. letter no. 91 to ottla (matliary, ca. february 10, 1921), in franz Kafka, Briefe an Ottla und die Familie, ed. by Hartmut binder and Klaus Wagenbach, new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1974, p. 108. cf. franz Kafka, Letters to Ottla and the Family, trans. by richard and clara Winston; ed. by n.n. glatzer, new York: schocken books 1982, p. 62. 7 sören Kierkegaard, “der Pfahl im fleisch,” trans. and ed. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, vol. 4, nos. 16–18, may 15–June 15, 1914, pp. 691–712 and pp. 797–814. 8 cf. Jürgen born, Kafkas Bibliothek. Ein beschreibendes Verzeichnis. Mit einem Index aller in Kafkas Schriften erwähnten Bücher, Zeitschriften, und Zeitschriftenbeiträge, frankfurt am main: fischer 1990, pp. 114–16; p. 210. the scholarship is fairly divided on this topic. on the one hand, binder lists The Sickness unto Death, The Concept of Anxiety, and “the thorn in the flesh” (SKS 5, 317–44 / EUD, 37–56) among Kafka’s late 1922 readings of Kierkegaard’s work and refers to Klaus Wagenbach, who lists them together with the Stages in a fragmentary catalogue of Kafka’s reference library compiled a decade after his death. cf. Klaus Wagenbach, Franz Kafka. Eine Biographie seiner Jugend. 1883–1912, bern: francke 1958, p. 257. cf. binder’s section in Kafka-Handbuch, vol. 1, pp. 565–6. robert a. darrow too holds that Kafka “eventually read almost all of Kierkegaard’s work that was available in german translation.” robert a. darrow, Kierkegaard, Kafka, and the Strength 3

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

117

other primary and secondary sources were limited to (1) a collection of Kierkegaard’s journal entries, translated, edited and introduced by Hermann gottsched in 1905, titled Buch des Richters,9 (2) a small selection of Kierkegaard’s letters and papers, published at the request of regine (schlegel) and translated by raphael meyer, entitled Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr.” Aus nachgelassenen Papieren10 (and perhaps also Sören Kierkegaards Verhältnis zu seiner Braut, edited by Henriette lund),11 (3) rudolf Kassner’s 1906 essay “sören Kierkegaard. aphoristisch,” included in his Motive,12 (4) olaf Peder monrad’s biographical volume, Sören Kierkegaard: sein Leben und seine Werke (1909),13 (5) a series of articles in Der Brenner,14 like Willy Haas’ article, “die verkündigung und Paul claudel” (1913),15 theodor Haecker’s, of “The Absurd” in Abraham’s Sacrifice of Isaac (thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of Humanities), Wright state university 2005, p. 52. in contrast, richard W. sheppard holds that there is no clear indication of Kafka’s ever reading The Sickness unto Death. cf. richard W. sheppard, “Kafka, Kierkegaard and the K’s: theology, Psychology and fiction,” Journal of Literature and Theology, vol. 5, no. 3, 1991, p. 284. brian f.m. edwards too expresses some doubts regarding the degree of Kafka’s reading Kierkegaard, but adds that “it is certain that, in addition to Buch des Richters, he had read Fear and Trembling and Either/Or.” brian f.m. edwards, “Kafka and Kierkegaard: a reassessment,” German Life and Letters, vol. 20, no. 3, 1967, p. 223. see also eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 150. 9 sören Kierkegaard, Buch des Richters. Seine Tagebücher 1833–1855, trans. and ed. by Hermann gottsched, Jena and leipzig: diederichs 1905. 10 Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr.” Aus nachgelassenen Papieren, trans. and ed. by raphael meyer, stuttgart: Junker 1905. 11 Sören Kierkegaards Verhältnis zu seiner Braut. Briefe und Aufzeichnungen aus seinem Nachlaß, ed. by Henriette lund, trans. by e. rohr, leipzig: insel 1904. indeed, Kafka mistakenly indicates insel verlag as the publisher of Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr,” one indication that he may have been aware of lund’s edition as well. see Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, mid-march, 1918), in franz Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, trans. by richard and clara Winston, new York: schocken books 1977, p. 199. cf. franz Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, ed. by max brod, new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1958, p. 235; p. 509, note 12. cf. Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vols. 1–2, ed. by malcolm Pasley, new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1989, vol. 2, p. 240; p. 492, note 51. 12 rudolf Kassner, Motive. Essays, berlin: fischer 1906, see chapter “sören Kierkegaard. aphoristisch,” pp. 1–76. also published in two abridged versions: rudolf Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” Die neue Rundschau, vol. 17, no. 1, may 1906, pp. 513–43 and rudolf Kassner, Essays, leipzig: insel 1923, see especially “sören Kierkegaard,” pp. 157–91 (the latter version also appeared in book form: rudolf Kassner, Sören Kierkegaard, Heidelberg: Pfeffer 1949). 13 olaf Peder monrad, Sören Kierkegaard. Sein Leben und seine Werke, Jena: diederichs 1909. 14 Kafka’s library contained at least twelve numbers of Der Brenner (published twice a month in innsbruck). 15 Willy Haas, “die verkündigung und Paul claudel,” Der Brenner, vol. 3, no. 19, 1913, pp. 853–69. One can find Haas’ handwritten dedication on the volume he himself sent to Kafka: “Mit vielen Grüßen. (S. 899) in herzlicher Verehrung und Freundschaft.” see description and photocopy of the dedication in born, Kafkas Bibliothek, pp. 160–61. Haas’

118

Nicolae Irina

“f. blei und Kierkegaard” (1914),16 and perhaps carl dallago’s “Über eine schrift ‘sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der innerlichkeit’ ” [Haecker (1913)],17 (6) carl dallago’s short essay, Der Christ Kierkegaards18 (1922), and (7) max brod’s Heidentum, Christentum, Judentum. Ein Bekenntnisbuch (1922).19 in this context, it has been argued that some of Kafka’s literary activity bears the underlying influence of Kierkegaard’s thought, although this issue was and still is sharply debated. in my view, Kafka is undeniably an assiduous reader of Kierkegaard. However, much of the latter’s influence, encrypted in the former’s literary production, is yet to be deciphered and is already subject to various interpretations. the two volumes of the Kafka-Handbuch, edited and co-authored by Hartmut binder, offer a very systematic account of Kafka’s life and work, treated chronologically, doubled by a concise analysis of related secondary literature.20 We also owe a great deal to leena eilittä’s comprehensive investigation of these different views formulated over the course of the twentieth century. even more recently, Helge miethe also summarizes this scholarship.21 in what follows, i will build on these results and some other previous or recent accounts, not included in these articles. after listing all references to Kierkegaard in Kafka’s writings, i will briefly try to illustrate the extent and implications of the debate about Kierkegaard’s influence on Kafka. I concur that, although Kierkegaard was indeed a constant source of inspiration for Kafka, there is no clear indication of a “productive reception” of the dane’s thought, as schulz puts it.22

page reference indicates his response included in the “rundfrage über Karl Krauss. (zweite folge),” in the same volume of Der Brenner, vol. 3, no. 19, July 1, 1913, pp. 898–900; more precisely, Haas’ response is on pp. 899–900. see also reiner stach, Kafka: The Decisive Years, trans. by Shelley Frisch, Orlando: Harcourt 2005, p. 413 and Thomas Anz, “Identifikation und abscheu: Kafka liest Kierkegaard,” in Franz Kafka und die Weltliteratur, ed. by manfred engel and dieter lamping, göttingen: vandenhoek & ruprecht 2006, p. 86. 16 theodor Haecker, “f. blei und Kierkegaard,” Der Brenner, vol. 4, no. 10, february 15, 1914, pp. 457–65. 17 carl dallago, “Über eine schrift ‘sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der innerlichkeit,’ ” Der Brenner, vol. 4, nos. 11–13, march 1–april 1, 1914, pp. 467–78; pp. 515–31; pp. 565–78. 18 carl dallago, Der Christ Kierkegaards, innsbruck: brenner 1922. Kafka presented it himself to gustav Janouch. see gustav Janouch, Gespräche mit Kafka. Aufzeichnungen und Erinnerungen, enlarged ed., frankfurt am main: fischer 1968, p. 117. (english translation: Conversations with Kafka, trans. by goronwy rees, new York: new directions 1971, p. 81; p. 207, note 27). cf. binder, Kafka-Handbuch, vol. 1, p. 347. 19 max brod, Heidentum, Christentum, Judentum. Ein Bekenntnisbuch, vols. 1–2, munich: K. Wolff 1922. 20 cf. Kafka-Handbuch. 21 Helge miethe, Sören Kierkegaards Wirkung auf Franz Kafka. Motivische und sprachliche Parallelen, marburg: tectum verlag 2006. see especially, “der stand der forschung,” pp. 9–15. 22 cf. schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” p. 331.

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

119

II. References to Kierkegaard in Kafka’s corpus Apparently, Kafka’s first contact with Kierkegaard’s texts as well as Kafka’s first written reference to Kierkegaard23 was in august 1913—the year of Kierkegaard’s centennial anniversary—when a 20-year-old Kafka started to read Buch des Richters. gottsched grouped the 200-page selection from Kierkegaard’s 1833–55 journals in seven chapters: “Kierkegaards Persönlichkeit,” “Kierkegaard und regine olsen,” “Kierkegaard und der Korsar,” “Kierkegaards schwermut,”24 “Kierkegaard und die ideale,” “Kierkegaard und einzelne männer,” and “Kierkegaard im Hospital.” Kafka’s relation with felice bauer was already problematic at the time, which is certainly one of the reasons why coming across the conundrum of Kierkegaard’s relation with regine olsen, as illustrated by the second chapter of the Buch des Richters, must have had a significant impact on Kafka.25 indeed, before reading Kierkegaard’s notes, Kafka was already torn within by his doubts related to the relationship with his fiancée. On July 21, 1913, he had put together a “summary of all the arguments for and against my marriage,”26 where he listed seven reasons of which the majority were against marriage. many of them can be recognized in the draft letter to felice’s father, in which Kafka tries to build a case for his unsuitability for marriage, as brian f.m. edwards puts it, based on his “instability, neurosis, hatred of his job, sense of alienation and, above all…his

cf. sheppard, “Kafka, Kierkegaard and the K’s,” p. 221; p. 281. Almost five years later, referring to Kierkegaard, Kafka notes in a letter from Zürau sent to max brod (ca. march 5, 1918): “wer könnte sagen, was das alles war: seine Schwermut.” Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 240. also quoted in binder’s section in Kafka-Handbuch, vol. 1, p. 524. cf. Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, mid-march, 1918), in franz Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 236 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 200). 25 in fact, prior to Kafka’s reading of Buch des Richters, august strindberg’s notes had a remarkable impact on Kafka. guy vogelweith insists on the triangular relation between the three writers: “…avec l’expérience de ses mariages malheureux, Strindberg pourrait nous dire ce qui, par un heureux pressentiment, détourna Kafka et Kierkegaard de toute intimité prolongée avec d’autres êtres.” guy vogelweith, “Kafka et Kierkegaard. regard oblique sur une rupture,” Obliques. Une nouvelle conception de la revue, no. 3, 1978, p. 46. vogelweith refers to Kafka’s letters to felice from december 9, 1912 and January 10, 1913. the latter is quite suggestive: “Warte, nächstens muß ich Dir einmal etwas über die Erinnerungen an Strindberg schreiben, die letzhin in der Neuen Rundschau erschienen sind und mich an einem Sonntag Vormittag unter ihrem Eindruck ganz verrückt in meinem Zimmer haben herumlaufen lassen.” franz Kafka, Briefe 1913–März 1914, ed. by Hans-gerd Koch, new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1999, p. 31. vogelweith quotes the french version. see franz Kafka, Lettres à Felice, trans. by marthe robert, Paris: gallimard 1972, p. 193. Presumably, Kafka refers to lucia dora frost’s “strindberg,” Die neue Rundschau, vol. 23, no. 2, 1912, pp. 995–1004. 26 see franz Kafka, Tagebücher, vols. 1–3, ed. by Hans-gerd Koch, michael müller, and malcolm Pasley, new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1990, vol. 1, pp. 568–70. (in english as The Diaries of Franz Kafka, vols. 1–2, ed. by max brod, new York: schocken books 1948–49, vol. 1, pp. 292–3.) 23 24

120

Nicolae Irina

literary vocation.”27 Exactly one month later Kafka finds consolation in confirming the similitude, to some degree, with the dane’s situation. He notes: today i got Kierkegaard’s Buch des Richters. as i suspected, his case, despite essential differences is very similar to mine, at least he is on the same side of the world. He bears me out like a friend. i drafted the following letter to her father, which, if i have the strength, i will send off tomorrow.28

three years later Kafka seems to be in the same disposition, after another failed episode with felice, in marienbad. the journal entry of august 27 shows that, once again, Kafka looks for help with breaking the cycle of eternal evaluations, hoping to gain some strength from Kierkegaard’s determination to act and break his engagement to regine.29 in his reassessment of Kafka’s debt to Kierkegaard, edwards discusses the links between the three events of the year 1917 that markedly impacted Kafka’s life: the diagnosis of tuberculosis (on september 4), the end of the relationship with felice (december 26) and a renewed interest in Kierkegaard’s work.30 Kafka’s construal of the consequences of the medical verdict that helped him terminate the relationship has covered a large spectrum of interpretations, from the optimistic understanding of it as a “symbol of future freedom,” as edwards puts it, to reinterpreting the disease as a “punishment from god.”31

edwards, “Kafka and Kierkegaard: a reassessment,” p. 221. it is worth already mentioning in this context that, five years later in a letter to his friend, Max Brod, Kafka praises the success of Kierkegaard’s method used to protect regine’s image: “…under the softening influence of time, [Kierkegaard’s books] must have made his fiancée breathe a sigh of relief at having escaped that torture machine whose motor was now merely idling, or which at any rate was only occupied with her shadow. at that price she may well have patiently endured the ‘tastelessness’ of his almost annual publications. and as the best proof of the validity of Kierkegaard’s method (to scream in order not to be heard and to scream falsely just in case you are heard), she remained, after all, virtually as innocent as a lamb. Perhaps in this way Kierkegaard succeeded somewhat against his will, or intentionally, in reaching his tangential path.” Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, end of march, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, pp. 238–9 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 202). 28 see Kafka, Tagebücher, vol. 1, p. 578 (The Diaries of Franz Kafka, vol. 1, p. 298). 29 Seemingly, Kafka needed yet another “authoritative confirmation of his own natural impulse not to marry,” as edwards puts it. edwards, “Kafka and Kierkegaard: a reassessment,” p. 222. cf. Kafka, Tagebücher, vol. 1, p. 803: “Die nächste Aufgabe ist unbedingt: Soldat werden. Laß auch den unsinnigen Irrtum, daß Du Vergleiche anstellst, etwa mit Flaubert, Kierkegaard, Grillparzer. Das ist durchaus Knabenart. Als Glied in der Kette der Berechnungen sind die Beispiele gewiß zu brauchen oder vielmehr mit den ganzen Berechnungen unbrauchbar, einzeln in Vergleich gesetzt sind sie aber schon von vornherein unbrauchbar. Flaubert und Kierkegaard wußten ganz genau wie es mit ihnen stand, hatten den geraden Willen, das war nicht Berechnung, sondern Tat. Bei dir aber eine ewige Folge von Berechnungen, ein ungeheuerlicher Wellengang von 4 Jahren.” (The Diaries of Franz Kafka, vol. 2, pp. 164–5.) 30 cf. edwards, “Kafka and Kierkegaard: a reassessment,” p. 218. 31 ibid., pp. 218–19. 27

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

121

eilittä also remarks that, during the sick-leave that Kafka spent in zürau, he “found himself in an intensely active spiritual and intellectual state,”32 reading Fear and Trembling, Repetition, Either/Or, but also the selection from Kierkegaard’s papers entitled Søren Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr,”33 and the biography written by monrad.34 the latter includes a brief description of spiritual life in earlynineteenth-century Denmark, and it subsequently highlights the most significant details of Kierkegaard’s life and work. this concentrated immersion in Kierkegaard’s texts left a noticeable mark in Kafka’s notes and letters from this period. as early as october 1917, Kafka writes a letter to his blind friend, oskar baum, a writer himself, in response to the latter’s request on behalf of Herr P., a blinded war veteran. In this letter, Kafka makes his first reference to Kierkegaard from the period of convalescence in zürau.35 Kafka writes: “Kierkegaard is a star, although he shines over territory that is almost inaccessible to me. i’m glad that you will be reading him. i know only Fear and Trembling.”36 in fact, Kafka had already read the selection from Kierkegaard’s journals, Buch des Richters, as the diary entry of august 21, 1913, cited above proves, but this cannot be counted as one of Kierkegaard’s books. on november 24, 1917, in a belated letter to his closest friend, max brod (1884–1968), sent from zürau, Kafka mentions that his seclusion offers him “plenty of leisure time but oddly enough none for letter-writing” and adds a brief report of his solitary activities, mainly limited to dealing with the mice in his room, walking and reading Kierkegaard: “since the plague of mice…by day i either lie out in the open or at the window, reading…a few moments with a book (now it is Kierkegaard), toward evening a walk on the road, and this suffices me in my solitude.”37 Kafka’s epistolary exchange with brod turns gradually into “a vivid and polemical discussion about Kierkegaard’s philosophy.”38 Kafka reacts to the first part of Either/Or with a great deal of repugnance. the occasion is given by baum’s visit after which Kafka concludes that the “impossibility of [oskar’s] marriage really comes down to the impossibility of marriage in general.”39 Kafka writes to brod:

cf. eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, pp. 151–2. Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr.” Aus nachgelassenen Papieren, trans. and ed. by raphael meyer. 34 monrad, Sören Kierkegaard. Sein Leben und seine Werke. 35 cf. eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 152. 36 Kafka’s letter to oskar baum (zürau, october–november, 1917), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 190 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 162). cf. Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 485, note 86. 37 Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, november 24, 1917) in franz Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 201 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, pp. 170–71). cf. Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 199. 38 eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 152. 39 Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, middle or end of January, 1918); the letter is dated January 20 in Kafka’s Tagebücher, vol. 3, p. 220 (Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 189). cf. Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 223. 32 33

122

Nicolae Irina partly as a consequence of the visit i started reading Either/Or, with a special craving for help, the evening before oskar’s departure, and am now reading buber’s most recent books,40 sent by oskar. Hateful, repellent books, all three of them. to put it correctly and precisely, they are written—Either/Or especially—with the sharpest of pens (almost the whole of Kassner41 comes rolling ponderously out of Either/Or), but they drive you to despair. and as can happen when you are reading passionately, you occasionally have the unconscious feeling that they are the only books in the world, and even the healthiest lungs feel short of breath. of course this statement requires an elaborate explanation; it’s only my present state that permits me to talk this way. they are books that can be written as well as read only if one has at least a trace of real superiority to them. as things are, their hatefulness grows under my hands.42

nevertheless, Kafka’s enthusiasm for Kierkegaard’s writings remains untouched. shortly thereafter, in yet another letter sent to brod from zürau (postmarked January 28, 1918), Kafka asks for brod’s advice regarding an unauthorized reprinting of “report to an academy” in an austrian morning newspaper brought to his attention by the Writers’ association. should he consent to the penalties, the twenty marks collected on Kafka’s behalf would be “very welcome…for, say, more Kierkegaard.”43 brod’s response to Kafka’s november letter refers to Kierkegaard’s Stages on Life’s Way, another opportunity for brod to ponder the similarities and differences between Kafka’s relation with felice, on the one hand, and Kierkegaard’s with Regine, on the other. Reflecting on their “fundamental reason for the break,” Brod writes: “Die Ähnlichkeit mit deinem Schicksal ist wohl auffallend, aber doch mehr im Äußerlichen, denn das Grundmotiv des Bruches ist bei ihm, wenn er sich recht erkennt, etwas Negatives, nämlich seine Schwermut.”44 However, brod gives a religious twist to his analysis. as eilittä explains, brod suggests that the differences martin buber, Die Rede, die Lehre und das Lied. Drei Beispiele (leipzig: insel 1917) and Ereignisse und Bewegungen (leipzig: insel 1917). cf. Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 152, note 3. see also ritchie robertson, Kafka—Judaism, Politics, and Literature, oxford: clarendon Press 1985, p. 191. 41 rudolph Kassner (1873–1959), austrian philosopher, aesthetician, and critic; friend of rainer maria rilke, oscar Wilde, and Paul valéry. cf. Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 461, note 11; p. 432, note 20. 42 Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, middle or end of January, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, pp. 224–5 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 190). cf. Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 228. 43 my emphasis. Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau; postmark: January 28, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 230 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 195). cf. Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 230 (the request for advice was initially written by Kafka on the back of a form from the Allgemeiner Schriftstellerverein (founded in 1901) that his sister ottla delivered to max, in Prague, and p. 232. according to Winston, the union in question was the german Writers federation (Deutscher Schriftsteller-Verband, founded in 1887). cf. Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 462, note 22. 44 cf. brod’s letter to Kafka (march 3, 1918), in Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 237. see also Kafka’s response to brod’s remarks in his letter from zürau sent to max brod (ca. march 5, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, pp. 235–6. cf. Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 240. cf. Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, midmarch, 1918), in Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 200. 40

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

123

“might have had a religious origin revealing, as he defines it, the ‘negativity’ of christianity and the ‘positivity’ of Judaism…[maintaining] that Kierkegaard’s refusal to marry reflected merely his resigned Christianity whereas Kafka was looking for positive alternatives when making his decision not to marry.”45 the effect of brod’s lines on Kafka is illuminating and confusing at the same time. given an obvious estrangement he feels vis-à-vis the dane, Kafka seems to truly appreciate Brod’s clarifications regarding Kierkegaard’s emphasis on the authenticity of marriage. brod’s other remarks regarding Kierkegaard’s “negativity” are disapproved though. it is worth mentioning here that although Kafka already ordered Stages on Life’s Way at that time, he apparently did not receive it until a new edition of the dane’s work was published in 1922.46 as already mentioned, by mid-March 1918, he had just finished reading Kierkegaard’s Repetition, adding it to the list of Kierkegaard’s major works including Fear and Trembling, Either/Or, and The Moment. in this context, in his criticism of brod’s religious interpretation, Kafka is not able to argue against brod’s tenets without relying heavily on other texts than Stages, mainly on Fear and Trembling: Perhaps i have really lost my way in Kierkegaard; i realize this with astonishment when i read your lines about him. it is in fact just as you say: the problem of arriving at a true marriage is his principal concern, the concern that is forever rising into his consciousness.…it’s as if a next-door neighbor had turned into a distant star, in respect both to my admiration and to a certain cooling of my sympathy….he certainly cannot be called merely negative. in Fear and Trembling, for example—which you ought to read now—his affirmativeness turns truly monstrous and is checked only when it comes up against a perfectly ordinary helmsman. What I mean is, affirmativeness becomes objectionable when it reaches too high. He doesn’t see the ordinary man (with whom, on the whole, he knows how to talk remarkably well) and paints this monstrous abraham in the clouds. but all the same one cannot call him negative on that account (unless at most you’re applying to him the terminology of his early books); and who can say all that was involved in his melancholia.47

indeed, besides discovering similar relationship issues, what apparently prompted Kafka’s full-fledged interest in Kierkegaard’s writings are the ethical and religious questions raised by Kierkegaard’s portrayal of abraham in Fear and Trembling. obviously, topics stemming from Kierkegaard’s text have also ignited and fueled the debate with brod. eilittä comments that Kafka disagrees with brod’s construal of Kierkegaard’s christianity as merely negative: “[Kafka] maintains in contrast that Kierkegaard’s description of the biblical character is very positive when portraying

eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 153. Kierkegaard, Gesammelte Werke, vol. 4. cf. binder’s section in Kafka-Handbuch, vol. 1, p. 565. 47 Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, mid-march, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, pp. 235–6 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, pp. 199–200). cf. Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, pp. 239–40. 45 46

124

Nicolae Irina

Abraham as somebody whose faith in God is so vast that he is willing to sacrifice his own son.”48 the above passage from Kafka’s response to brod has surely drawn much attention in relation to Kafka’s understanding of Kierkegaard’s religious ideas and, consequently, various other scholars have largely discussed its main implications. for instance, richard W. sheppard, too, notices that Kafka states that “despite his reservations about the ‘monstrous’ abraham, one ‘certainly’ cannot describe Kierkegaard as a negative thinker.”49 furthermore, schulz also shows that Kafka also “complained that Kierkegaard paid no attention to the (conflicts of the) ordinary man as possibly being reflected in the Abraham story; instead the former painted ‘den ungeheuren Abraham in die Wolken.’ ”50 While still waiting for the Stages to arrive, as he mentions in a second letter sent to brod at the end of march, Kafka tries to get a more detached perspective on the Dane’s texts and looks for some conceptual clarifications.51 He seems to question everything: Kierkegaard’s originality—trying to discern traces of schelling and Hegel behind his notions of “the dialectical,” “knights of infinity/faith,” and “motion”—but also the quality of the extant german translations, which he considers reprehensible. confronted with a poorly rendered conceptual apparatus, like any other contemporary German reader of Kierkegaard, Kafka finds himself helplessly lost in abysmal translation: at any rate the translator has behaved disgracefully. i thought he had made “changes in consideration of the author’s youth” only in Either/Or; has he now done the same in Stages? that is disgusting, especially the feeling of how helpless we are. Yet the german of the translation is not all that bad, and here and there in the afterword one finds a useful remark. That is because so much light radiates from Kierkegaard that some

eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 153. cf. Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, mid-march, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 235 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, pp. 199–200). cf. Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 240. 49 sheppard, “Kafka, Kierkegaard and the K’s,” p. 281. 50 schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” p. 332. see also Walter Herbert sokel, Franz Kafka: Tragik und Ironie. Zur Struktur seiner Kunst, munich and vienna: albert langen-georg müller verlag 1964, pp. 467ff. 51 see Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, end of march, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 238 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, pp. 201–3). see also Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, pp. 245–8. see also sheppard, “Kafka, Kierkegaard and the K’s,” p. 281. Kafka complains about the ambiguous, unequivocal character of Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous texts (“they might well pass for perplexing letters by [Kierkegaard’s seducer] himself, written behind clouds”), which only “later develop to a kind of unequivocalness.” Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, end of march, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 238 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 202). see also Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, p. 247. 48

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

125

of it penetrates even to the deepest abysses. but the publisher certainly did not have to summon up these “abysses” to translate Kierkegaard.52

Part of this letter consists of extended comments on some of Kierkegaard’s journal entries included in Buch des Richters. Kierkegaard’s theology thus becomes an even more central topic in the letter sent to brod, in which Kafka tackles, for instance, Kierkegaard’s notes about the relation to god included by gottsched in the chapter “Kierkegaard und die ideale” of Buch des Richters.53 indeed, it is with an easily discernible interest that Kafka sums up what he makes out of Kierkegaard’s perspective on the elusiveness of any religious relationship. He actually insists on one of Kierkegaard’s passages: “So wie das Christentum es darstellt, habe ich nie dargestellt, daß Liebe zu Gott Haß gegen die Welt ist und umgekehrt.”54 the mutually exclusive relation between the “love to god” versus “hatred of the world” seems to have particularly drawn Kafka’s attention: the relationship to the divine is primarily not subject to any outside judgment; perhaps this is so much so that Jesus himself would not be permitted to judge how far a follower of his has come. to Kierkegaard that seems to be more or less a question of the last Judgment, which is to say answerable—insofar as an answer will still be needed—only after the end of this world. consequently the present external image of the religious relationship has no significance. Granted, the religious relationship wishes to reveal itself but cannot do so in this world; therefore striving man must oppose this world in order to save the divine element within himself. or, what comes to the same thing, the divine sets him against the world in order to save itself.55

as already mentioned, Kafka is truly fascinated and appalled at the same time by Kierkegaard’s abraham. eilittä remarks the sharp contrast between Kafka’s “enthusiasm for Kierkegaard’s conception of the religious person as expressed in his letters to brod,” on the one hand, and the “often very sarcastic remarks [in which] Kafka repeatedly mocks abraham’s mental faculties and motivations,”56 on the other, as they appear in the february 1918 notes gathered in the Oktavhefte. Posthumously published by brod, the Oktavhefte are in fact eight blue notebooks that Kafka used between the end of november 1916 and early may 1918. in these Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, end of march, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 238 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 202). see also Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, pp. 246–7. 53 see especially the paragraphs under the title “das gottverhältnis. vater—sohn— geist,” in Kierkegaard, Buch des Richters, pp. 112–16. 54 Kierkegaard, Buch des Richters, p. 114. the passage corresponds to: “…saaledes som Xstd. fremstiller det, har jeg aldrig fremstillet at Kjerlighed til Gud er Had til Verden og omvendt.” SKS 23, 272, nb18:33. this is apparently Kierkegaard’s own version of James 4:4, used on several occasions. see, for instance, SKS 8, 300 / UD, 55 and SKS 5, 255 / EUD, 35. 55 Kafka’s letter to brod (zürau, end of march, 1918), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, p. 239 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, pp. 202–3). see also Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vol. 2, pp. 247–8. also, compare with the slightly different translation in sheppard, “Kafka, Kierkegaard and the K’s,” pp. 281–2. 56 eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 156. 52

126

Nicolae Irina

smaller notebooks, in octavo format size (as opposed to the previous ones in quarto format), Kafka’s notes tend to be more concise and philosophical in nature, as is his very productive literary production of this period comprised of short stories, parables, and aphorisms.57 the most notable, from the present endeavor’s perspective, are the final two notebooks, “G” (which runs from mid-October 1917 until the end of february 1918) and “H” (which runs from the end of february until the early may 1918), which stand out due to their “highly meditative and reflective character.”58 indeed, a melting pot of creativity, Kafka’s notes in the Oktavhefte coincide with his sustained readings from Kierkegaard, in zürau, to which i have already referred. February 1918 finds Kafka ironically suggesting that “Kierkegaard’s Abraham is merely a greedy character who is not in harmony with his spiritual world… for whom the everyday world is not enough but who does not possess enough spiritual capacity to enter the realm of spirit and therefore he remains stuck with his possessions on the way there,…[remaining] caught between the material and spiritual realms,”59 as eilittä puts it. Kafka tries to grasp the meaning of the hidden thoughts of abraham—“Ritter der Unendlichkeit, Ritter des Glaubens.”60 three years later, Kafka sees Kierkegaard’s abraham with similar lenses. the letter sent from matliary to robert Klopstock, in June 1921, reveals Kafka’s still unmitigated irony vis-à-vis Kierkegaard’s description of abraham. Kafka confesses that he has “been meditating a good deal about this abraham, but these are old stories, no longer worth discussing; especially not the real abraham.”61 i suggest that Kafka’s use of Kierkegaard’s preferred method of indirect communication,62 that is, (socratic) irony, is in fact not merely a stylistic loan. see franz Kafka, “betrachtungen über sünde, leid, Hoffnung und den wahren Weg,” in Gedanken und Gewissen. Essays aus 100 Jahren, ed. by günther busch and J. Hellmut freund, frankfurt am main: fischer 1986, pp. 172–83. richard t. gray claims that these aphorisms are “characterized by the intermingling of mysterious invocation and logical rigor that Kafka diagnosed in the writings of the danish philosopher.” A Franz Kafka Encyclopedia, ed. by richard t. gray, et al., Westport, connecticut: greenwood Press 2005, pp. 159–60. 58 gray, A Franz Kafka Encyclopedia, p. 210. notebooks “f,” “g,” and “H” cover the entire period Kafka spent his convalescence with his sister ottla in zürau. 59 eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 156. cf. franz Kafka, Nachgelassene Schriften und Fragmente, vols. 1–4, ed. by Jost schillemeit, frankfurt am main: fischer 1992–93, vol. 2, pp. 104–5. 60 Kafka, Nachgelassene Schriften und Fragmente, vol. 2, p. 102. 61 Kafka’s letter to robert Klopstock (matliary, June 1921), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, pp. 333–4 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 285). 62 unlike Kierkegaard and socrates, as reed merrill points out, “Kafka never assumes a position, and as a result his irony is always diffuse and impossible to categorize.” reed Merrill, “ ‘Infinite Absolute Negativity’: Irony in Socrates, Kierkegaard and Kafka,” Comparative Literature Studies, vol. 16, no. 3, 1979, p. 225. merrill also indicates that irony as a method of indirect communication is indeed the way in which socrates, Kierkegaard, and Kafka try to find “the source of subjectivity which can lead one indirectly to self-knowledge and self-mastery.” Merrill, “ ‘Infinite Absolute Negativity’: Irony in Socrates, Kierkegaard and Kafka,” p. 228. Wolfgang lange argues that “Kafka adopts Kierkegaard’s concept of irony and develops it into a weapon in his fight for sovereignty. Wolfgang Lange, “Über Kafkas Kierkegaard-lektüre und einige damit zusammenhängende gegenstände,” Deutsche 57

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

127

Pondering the difficulty of the task of emulating Abraham’s paradigmatic example, Kafka offers an ironical portrayal of various possible failures. Kafka’s variations of the biblical story describe banal figures, mundane Abrahams, unavailable or possibly unworthy to be summoned to the terrible sacrifice and the leap of faith. The latter version of the unsummoned abraham interpretation (“ein Abraham, der ungerufen kommt”) is in fact the most intriguing, since it alters abraham’s case into a form of resistance against the possibility of the most terrible instance of irony—a trick played by the divine caller. abraham chooses not to answer the deceptive call, being horrified of the imminent metamorphosis. He is “afraid that he will, to be sure, ride out as Abraham and his son, but on the way will turn into Don Quixote.”63 in fact, Edwards identifies Kafka himself with this version of Abraham, claiming that “in Kierkegaard’s theology, as in the story of his engagement to regine olsen, Kafka will have found the confirmation that he expected, but only by distortion.”64 there is only one more brief reference to Kierkegaard in Kafka’s diary, written on december 18, 1922, indicating Kafka’s enduring interest in reading Kierkegaard: “Die ganze Zeit über im Bett. Gestern ‘Entweder-Oder.’ ”65 Kafka’s renewed consideration of Kierkegaard’s writings is quite remarkable. as eilittä remarks, “despite his earlier criticism, Kierkegaard’s philosophy seems to have retained its hold over Kafka, for he started to read Either/Or once more only a year and a half before his death.”66 apparently, however, Kafka read Stages on Life’s Way before starting to re-read Either/Or, and he seems to have read subsequently The Sickness unto Death, The Concept of Anxiety, and “the thorn in the flesh.”67 III. Kafka’s Relations to Kierkegaard as we have seen, Kierkegaard is a long-term yet ambivalent source of inspiration for Kafka’s work and life. the few explicit and implicit references to Kierkegaard Vierteljahrsschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte, vol. 60, no. 2, 1986, p. 286. see also eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 170. 63 Kafka’s letter to Klopstock (matliary, June 1921), in Kafka, Briefe 1902–1924, pp. 333–4 (Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, p. 285). cf. Peter tschuggnall, Das Abraham-Opfer als Glaubensparadox. Bibeltheologischer Befund, literarische Rezeption, Kierkegaards Deutung, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1990, p. 66, as quoted by schulz, and the latter’s interpretation, in “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” pp. 332–3. also, eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, pp. 157–8. 64 edwards, “Kafka and Kierkegaard: a reassessment,” p. 224. in connection with edward’s tenet, schulz too claims that “Kafka thought he had found a spiritual alter ego in Kierkegaard.” schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” p. 332. 65 cf. Kafka, Tagebücher, p. 925 (The Diaries of Franz Kafka, vol. 2, p. 232). 66 eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 158, note 5. 67 binder claims that “die Briefe, die Kafka aus Zürau schrieb, belegen, daß er diese Werke nicht schon 1918 oder früher kennengelernt haben kann.” binder’s section in KafkaHandbuch, vol. 1, pp. 565–6. cf. Wagenbach, Franz Kafka. Eine Biographie seiner Jugend. 1883–1912, p. 257.

128

Nicolae Irina

throughout Kafka’s authorship confirm that, as Schulz claims, “Kafka’s reception of Kierkegaard is of a highly productive and original, if somewhat eclectic kind, even though it must be admitted that we may hardly speak of a receptive production in the proper sense of the word.”68 although it has been argued for quite some time that a few of Kafka’s texts and characters are Kierkegaardian in nature, what seems irrefutable is only that such associations are indeed feasible, some maybe more plausible than others, yet none definitely certain in terms of Kafka’s own acknowledgement. sheppard, too, considers that Kafka’s relationship to Kierkegaard has a multilevel and ambiguous nature. He briefly summarizes previous scholarship on Kafka’s attraction to Kierkegaard that put particular emphasis either on its stylistic, biographical, philosophical, or theological content.69 not covered by sheppard in his article but worth mentioning in this context are, for instance, richard t. gray’s and leena eilittä’s more recent contributions. gray claims that the stylistic level is the one on which Kierkegaard’s influence on Kafka is most evident: “In terms of style, Kafka insightfully characterizes the persuasiveness of Kierkegaard’s writing as predicated on a fusion of ‘magic and logic,’ of irrational, mystical incantation and consistent, rational argument.”70 sheppard also mentions that some critics have argued that Kafka’s diaries and notebooks are a more reliable starting place for determining Kafka’s personal position regarding Kierkegaard.71 in an attempt to link Kafka’s work to Kierkegaard’s writings, sheppard offers his own suggestion of interpretation, describing three levels of influence (biographical, authorial, and metaphysical). He claims that although Kafka never read The Sickness unto Death, Kierkegaard’s book “provides us with a set of conceptual tools by means of which we can better understand the psychology of the protagonists of The Trial and The Castle.”72 looking at Kafka’s two major novels through the lens of Kierkegaard’s conceptual framework, Sheppard sees significant affinities between Kierkegaard’s treatment of the problems of angst, guilt, and despair in The Sickness unto Death, on the one hand, and Kafka’s preoccupations and concerns reflected in his portrayal of Joseph K. and K, on the other.73 nevertheless,

schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” p. 333. 69 the diversity of perspectives is indeed remarkable. eilittä, too, lists the different views about the relationship between Kafka and Kierkegaard holding that it “has shifted radically from one view to another: some critics have maintained that Kafka’s work bears significant resemblance to Kierkegaard’s philosophy whereas other critics have suggested that Kierkegaard did not influence Kafka.” Eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 150. 70 gray, A Franz Kafka Encyclopedia, pp. 159–60. 71 cf. sheppard, “Kafka, Kierkegaard and the K’s,” p. 277. 72 ibid. cf. also p. 280 and p. 284. 73 cf. ibid., p. 284. giovanni Pellegrini also offers an account of the relation between Kafka and Kierkegaard with particular reference to the problems of guilt, meaning of death etc., as miethe points out: “Sehr detailliert befaßt sich auch Giovanni Pellegrini mit Kafkas Beziehung zu Kierkegaard. Er sieht Kafka als Interpreten von Kierkegaard (Untertitel der Arbeit: Kafka interprete di Kierkegaard) und analysiert ausführlich die Dialektik des 68

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

129

sheppard’s otherwise very intriguing association fails to provide valuable input regarding Kierkegaard’s influence on Kafka. as already mentioned, eilittä’s 1999 article offers a detailed analysis of Kierkegaard’s influence on Kafka, covering almost seventy years of scholarship, that is, from brod’s “allegorical interpretation,” through the views of some of the french existentialists, to contemporary criticism. due to the comprehensiveness of eilittä’s study, I find it more beneficial in the context of the present investigation to refer the reader to her article. Here and now i will only sum up eilittä’s survey, reiterating the core of her findings. according to eilittä, brod’s interpretation of The Castle translates the novel “allegorically into Kierkegaardian terms and assumes that certain of its characters and episodes illustrate Kierkegaard’s philosophical ideas.”74 brod’s account influenced Herbert Tauber, who sees Kafka’s novel more like a direct “retranslation of Kierkegaardian ideas into fiction.”75 John Kelly’s 1940 article goes a little further, indicating that The Castle reflects not only Kierkegaard’s theological content, but also religious questions “similar to those of Kierkegaard’s disciple Karl barth” and even calvin, according to eilittä.76 separating itself from previous allegorical approaches, the french criticism of Kafka’s indebtedness to Kierkegaard also coincides with the development of existentialism.77 according to eilittä, early critics like J.c. daniel-rops, Jean Wahl, albert camus, and Jean-Paul sartre, but also maja goth emphasized, each in different ways, that “Kafka’s work involved central existentialist issues such as the absurdity of the world, existential choice, and the hope which is available for a human being.”78 furthermore, later french critics like eduard grangier, Pierre de boisdeffre, and maurice blanchot, marked the beginning of a more in-depth reading of Kafka’s works, stressing the “crucial differences between Kierkegaard’s and Kafka’s religious views.”79 Existenzbegriffs, die Idee der Schuld und die Bedeutung des Todes im Werk dieser beiden seelenverwandten Autoren.” miethe, Sören Kierkegaards Wirkung auf Franz Kafka, p. 10. 74 eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 159. cf. bert nagel’s section in Kafka-Handbuch, vol. 2, p. 626. on this particular topic, robert’s perspective is more nuanced. see marthe robert, “Kafka en france,” Obliques. Une nouvelle conception de la revue, no. 3, 1978, p. 8. 75 eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 159. 76 cf. ibid., pp. 159–60. 77 ritchie robertson maintains that, by the 1940, “Kafka was widely seen not as a religious prophet but as a forerunner of existentialism, giving fictional form to the metaphysical uncertainty and spiritual homelessness that was considered characteristic of modern man.” ritchie robertson, “introduction,” in Klaus Wagenbach, Kafka, trans. by ewald osers, london: Haus Publishing. 2003, p. viii. in support to his claim robinson quotes Kafka himself (end of february, 1918): “i was not led into life by the sinking hand of christianity, like Kierkegaard, nor did I catch the last tip of the Jewish prayer-shawl before it flew away, like the Zionists. I am the end or the beginning.” Quoted in Robertson, “Introduction,” p. viii. cf. Kafka, Nachgelassene Schriften und Fragmente, vol. 2, p. 98. 78 eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 166. 79 ibid.

130

Nicolae Irina

eilittä concludes her survey with a glance at the critical discussion in the germanand english-speaking world starting in the 1960s, noting a growing tendency to dissociate Kafka from Kierkegaard’s religious thought. she sees a more distinct tendency in fritz schaufelberger and Wiebrecht ries. However, eilittä points out, …critics found instead similarities between Kierkegaard’s and Kafka’s attitude towards their personal problems on a psychological level (Wiebrecht ries, brian f. m. edwards), in their concept of irony (reed merrill, Wolfgang lange) and in the role that art played for them (fritz billeter). most of these more recent critics (including claude david and ritchie robertson) emphasized the difference between brod’s early religious interpretation and their own views.80

But Eilittä’s examination of Kierkegaard’s influence on Kafka is more than just a “study of literature.”81 she complements the literature survey with an interesting approach dealing with what she sees as an indirect relation between Kierkegaard’s theology and Kafka’s aesthetic views, developing her own interpretation regarding Kafka’s construal of the distinctive traits of the artist’s figure in his late stories— Erstes Leid (1921), Ein Hungerkünstler (1922), and Josefine, die Sängerin oder das Volk der Mäuse (1924). eilittä claims that the identities of Kafka’s late characters seem to have been inspired more or less by Kierkegaard’s “religious person” and that in the late stories one can certainly notice how Kafka “might have assimilated Kierkegaardian ideas to his own views,…appropriated some central concepts from Kierkegaard’s philosophy and adapted them to his view about existential questions.”82 not surprisingly, eilittä places a great deal of emphasis on the comparison between Kafka’s choosing literature and Kierkegaard’s choosing the religious mode of existence.83 Although not necessarily proving Kierkegaard’s influence here, Eilittä states that “perhaps Kafka’s most revealing remark on this subject is in an aphorism in which Kafka equates writing with praying (Schreiben als Form des Gebetes).”84 Furthermore, Eilittä evaluates the similarities between Kafka’s late figures and Kierkegaard’s account of some of his central themes: inwardness, passion, solitude, suffering, and repetition, and she concludes that only the portrayal of Josefine meets all Kierkegaardian standards, including the possibility of repetition, as her “devotion leads her to trust her art endlessly, to move easily beyond the ethical ibid., p. 173. cf. Janne Kylliäinen, “finland: the reception of Kierkegaard in finland,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), p. 212. 82 eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 150. eilittä elsewhere insists that Kafka’s reading of Kierkegaard’s texts is “a clear rejection of Kierkegaard’s Protestant theology,” clarifying that he “remained detached from Kierkegaard’s christianity.” leena eilittä, “art as religious commitment: Kafka’s debt to Kierkegaardian ideas and their impact on His late stories,” German Life and Letters, vol. 53, no. 4, 2000, p. 499; p. 503. 83 cf. eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 185. 84 ibid., p. 182. cf. Kafka, Nachgelassene Schriften und Fragmente, vol. 2, p. 354. 80 81

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

131

code and to preserve her trust with her art and life.”85 in fact, Walter H. sokel, too, describes the resemblance between Kafka’s late characters and Kierkegaard’s Abraham, emphasizing that some of Kafka’s “pure self figures” (for example, Ein Hungerkünstler and Josefine) demand that the “absolute uniqueness” of their “art” be recognized.86 as we have seen, the secondary literature dealing with Kafka’s relations to Kierkegaard covers a wide spectrum of interpretations, with many recent critics suggesting that Kierkegaard is “a more or less irrelevant figure for Kafka,” as Eilittä points out.87 However, such standpoints are not utterly new. frederick a. olafson challenges the prevalent interpretations that one way or another link Kafka’s literary production to Kierkegaard’s writings, especially to Fear and Trembling.88 Placing more emphasis on Kierkegaard’s and Kafka’s biographical similarities, edwards, too, holds that it is arguably doubtful that Kierkegaard’s religious writings have exercised any crucial role in Kafka’s own religious struggles. from edwards’ point of view, it was in fact the biographical parallels (especially the marriage issue), rather than Kierkegaard’s religious thought, that obviously marked Kafka and may have played a far more significant part in his life.89 indeed, at the antipode of scholarly interpretations that suggest clear Kierkegaardian traces in Kafka’s texts, olafson’s and edwards’ indicate the need for clarifying Kafka’s affinities with Kierkegaard and analyzing the incongruities that seemingly dissociate them. olafson argues that “careful examination of Kafka’s greatest work, The Castle, invalidates at almost every point the critical estimates that place Kafka in the currently fashionable line of descent from Kierkegaard to the theologians of crisis.”90 Edwards confirms Olafson’s perspective pointing out that, eventually, Kafka’s K, in The Castle, directly opposes abraham’s religious stance. According to Edwards, this opposition makes him “Kafka’s first positive hero: in attacking the passivity of the villagers, their unquestioning acceptance of the irrational and unethical demands of the castle authorities, he sets himself up as the champion of reason and the unrelenting opponent of blind faith.”91 However, such conclusions are themselves debatable just like others’ attempts to identify Kierkegaard’s presence throughout Kafka’s authorship. eilittä, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction, p. 208. Walter H. sokel, “beyond self-assertion: a life of reading Kafka,” in A Companion to the Works of Franz Kafka, ed. by James rolleston, rochester, new York: camden House 2002, p. 46. Sokel calls the “the prototype of an ever-recurring figure in Kafka’s myth the ‘pure self,’ with the dual meaning of ‘pure’ in mind signifying both the chastity and the fundamental authenticity of that aspect of self.” ibid., p. 43. for a more detailed discussion of what he calls “Kafka’s myth,” see ibid., pp. 42–9. sokel also holds that gregor samsa, from Kafka’s “die verwandlung,” is an accomplished Kierkegaardian “absolute individual.” cf. ibid., p. 53. 87 eilittä, “art as religious commitment,” p. 500. 88 cf. frederick a. olafson, “Kafka and the Primacy of the ethical,” The Hudson Review, vol. 13, no. 1, 1960, p. 70. 89 cf. edwards, “Kafka and Kierkegaard: a reassessment,” p. 221. 90 olafson, “Kafka and the Primacy of the ethical,” pp. 60–61. 91 edwards, “Kafka and Kierkegaard: a reassessment,” p. 224. 85 86

132

Nicolae Irina

despite all criticisms related to the true nature of Kafka’s use of Kierkegaard, it is nonetheless clearly noticeable that Kafka was time and again engaged in a rather in-depth analysis of Kierkegaard’s works and life experiences. Kafka’s commentaries on Kierkegaard’s abraham and the very productive exchange of letters between Kafka and brod dedicated every so often to Kierkegaardian themes undeniably prove, as miethe claims, that “das Besondere an Kafkas Verhältnis zu Kierkegaard ist…die Tiefe, mit der er sich mit den Texten Kierkegaards auseinandergesetzt hat, die Tiefe der Kafkaschen Kierkegaardlektüre und die daraus resultierende Reflektion.”92

92

miethe, Sören Kierkegaards Wirkung auf Franz Kafka, p. 142.

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Kafka’s corpus The Diaries of Franz Kafka, vols. 1–2, trans. by Joseph Kresh, ed. by max brod, new York: schocken books 1948, vol. 1, p. 298. (n.b. this translation is based on Kafka’s original manuscripts and not a german edition.) Tagebücher, 1910–1923, in Gesammelte Werke, vols. 1–11, ed. by max brod et al., new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1950–74, unnumbered volume, ed. by max brod, p. 318; p. 511; pp. 511–12; p. 584. Briefe 1902–1924, in Gesammelte Werke, vols. 1–11, ed. by max brod et al., new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1950–74, unnumbered volume, ed. by max brod, p. 190; p. 201; pp. 224–5; p. 230; pp. 234–40; pp. 333–4. (english translation: Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, trans. by richard and clara Winston, new York: schocken books 1977, p. 162; p. 171; p. 190; p. 195; pp. 199–203; pp. 285–8.) Briefe an Ottla und die Familie, in Gesammelte Werke, vols. 1–11, ed. by max brod et al., new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1950–74, unnumbered volume, ed. by Hartmut binder and Klaus Wagenbach, p. 108. (english translation: Letters to Ottla and the Family, trans. by richard and clara Winston; edited by n.n. glatzer, new York: schocken books 1982, p. 62.) Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, Briefwechsel, vols. 1–2, ed. by malcolm Pasley, new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1987–89, vol. 2, 1989, p. 199; p. 228; p. 230; p. 232; pp. 239–40; pp. 246–8; p. 250. Tagebücher, vols. 1–3, ed. by Hans-gerd Koch, michael müller and malcolm Pasley, new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1990, vol. 1, p. 578; p. 803; p. 925. Nachgelassene Schriften und Fragmente, vols. 1–4, ed. by Jost schillemeit, new York: schocken books; frankfurt am main: fischer 1992, vol. 2, p. 98; pp. 104–5; p. 354. II. Sources of Kafka’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard brod, max, “Kierkegaard,” Die neue Rundschau, no. 4, april, 1921, pp. 403–18. — Heidentum, Christentum, Judentum. Ein Bekenntnisbuch, vols. 1–2, munich: K. Wolff 1922, see especially vol. 1, p. 22; pp. 31–3; pp. 154–5; p. 175; p. 224; p. 228; p. 270; pp. 284–319; and vol. 2, p. 69; p. 74; p. 99; p. 238–59.

134

Nicolae Irina

— letters to franz Kafka, in Max Brod, Franz Kafka. Eine Freundschaft, vols. 1–2, ed. by malcolm Pasley, frankfurt am main: fischer 1989, see vol. 2, pp. 237–8; pp. 243–5; p. 302; p. 381. dallago, carl, “Über eine schrift ‘sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der innerlichkeit,’ ” Der Brenner, vol. 4, nos. 11–13, march 1–april 1, 1914, pp. 467–78; pp. 515–31; pp. 565–78. — Der Christ Kierkegaards, innsbruck: brenner 1922. gottsched, Hermann, “vorwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Buch des Richters. Seine Tagebücher 1833–1855, trans. and ed. by Hermann gottsched, Jena and leipzig: diederichs 1905, pp. 1–9. Haas, Willy, “die verkündigung und Paul claudel,” Der Brenner, vol. 3, no. 19, 1913, pp. 853–69, see especially p. 867 and p. 869. Haecker, theodor, Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, munich: i.f. schreiber 1913. — “f. blei und Kierkegaard,” Der Brenner, vol. 4, no. 10, february 15, 1914, pp. 457–65. — “vorwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, “der Pfahl im fleisch,” trans. and ed. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, vol. 4, nos. 16–18, may 15–June 15, 1914, pp. 691–712; pp. 797–814, see pp. 691–705. Kassner, rudolf, Motive. Essays, berlin: fischer 1906, see the chapter “sören Kierkegaard. aphoristisch,” pp. 1–76 (abridged version: “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” Die neue Rundschau, vol. 17, no. 1, may 1906, pp. 513–43; and in his Essays, leipzig: insel 1923, see the chapter “sören Kierkegaard,” pp. 157–91). lund, Henriette (ed.), Sören Kierkegaards Verhältnis zu seiner Braut. Briefe und Aufzeichnungen aus seinem Nachlaß, ed. by Henriette lund, trans. by e. rohr, leipzig: insel 1904, pp. 1–20, pp. 39–40, note; pp. 58–65; p. 79, note; p. 82, note; p. 83, note; pp. 85–91; pp. 99–102; p. 107, note; p. 110; pp. 114–15, note; pp. 116–20. meyer, raphael (ed.), “einleitung” and “anmerkungen,” in Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr.” Aus nachgelassenen Papieren, trans. and ed. by raphael meyer, stuttgart: Junker 1905, pp. iii–v; pp. 154–7. monrad, olaf Peder, Sören Kierkegaard. Sein Leben und seine Werke, Jena: diederichs 1909. schrempf, christoph, “nachwort,” in sören Kierkegaard, Gesammelte Werke, vols. 1–12, trans. and ed. by Hermann gottsched and christoph schrempf, Jena: diederichs 1909–22, see especially vol. 2, pp. 309–29; vol. 3, pp. 208–17; vol. 4, pp. 459–80; and vol. 12, pp. 155–71. III. Secondary Literature on Kafka’s Relation to Kierkegaard albérès, r. m., “Kafka face au mariage (1912–1921),” La Table Ronde, no. 150, June 1960, pp. 66–73. anisimov, ivan and iakov elsberg, “infelice: franz Kafka’s courtship,” Times Literary Supplement, July 4, 1968, pp. 393–4.

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

135

Anz, Thomas, “Identifikation und Abscheu. Kafka liest Kierkegaard,” in Franz Kafka und die Weltliteratur, ed. by manfred engel and dieter lamping, göttingen: vandenhoek & ruprecht 2006, pp. 83–91. bancaud-maenen, florence, “Kafka et Kierkegaard. frères de sang ou penseurs contraires?” in Germanica, no. 26, June 2000 (Philosophie et litérature dans les pays de langue allemande au XXe siècle, ed. by fabrice malkani, lille: université charles-de-gaulle—lille iii), pp. 101–13. Billeskov Jansen, F.J., “Die Wahlverwandtschaften. Streiflichter über Goethe, Kierkegaard und Kafka,” Text & Kontext, no. 6, 1978, pp. 128–40. billeter, fritz, Das Dichterische bei Kafka und Kierkegaard. Ein typologischer Vergleich, Winterthur: Keller 1965. binder, Hartmut, Kafka-Handbuch, vols. 1–2, ed. by Hartmut binder, stuttgart: a. Kröner 1979, see vol. 1, pp. 523–8. bøggild, Jacob, “ ‘loven hungrer ud.’ om lovens bogstav hos Kierkegaard og Kafka,” K&K, vol. 93, 2002, pp. 97–119. boisdeffre, Pierre de, “Kierkegaard et Kafka,” Revue de Paris, no. 7, 1955, pp. 138–42. — “la tragédie de la solitude chez Kierkegaard et chez Kafka,” Civitas, vol. 11, nos. 7–8, 1956, pp. 341–6. born, Jürgen, Kafkas Bibliothek. Ein beschreibendes Verzeichnis. Mit einem Index aller in Kafkas Schriften erwähnten Bücher, Zeitschriften, und Zeitschriftenbeiträge, frankfurt am main: fischer 1990, see especially pp. 114–16; p. 210. brostrøm, torben, “den moderne lyrik og Prosa. 1920–1970,” in torben brostrøm and Jens Kistrup, Dansk Litteraturhistorie, copenhagen: Politikens forlag 1971, vol. 4 (Fra Tom Kristensen til Klaus Rifbjerg), pp. 9–424, see p. 302. brod, max, “Kierkegaard,” Die neue Rundschau, no. 4, 1921, pp. 403–18. — “nachwort,” in franz Kafka, Das Schloß, munich: K. Wolff 1926, pp. 492–504. — “Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Kafka,” L’Arche, no. 21, november 1946, pp. 44–55. — Diesseits und Jenseits, vols. 1–2, zurich and Winterthur: mondial 1947, see especially vol. 1, pp. 35–40; p. 244; pp. 293–4; p. 297; p. 311; p. 313; and vol. 2, p. 328; p. 330. — “Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Kafka,” Prisma, no. 11, 1947, pp. 17–20. — Franz Kafkas Glauben und Lehre, Winterthur: mondial 1948, see especially p. 69. — Franz Kafka: A Biography, trans. by g. Humpreys roberts and richard Winston, new York: schocken books 1960, see p. 113; p. 144; p. 164; pp. 170–71; pp. 180–81; p. 184; p. 198. — Das Unzerstörbare, stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1968, pp. 144–54. buhrmann, Peter, “søren Kierkegaard i amerika,” Prismer. Semesterskrift fra Tværfag, spring 1994, pp. 12–22. butin, gitte Wernaa, “abraham—Knight of faith or counterfeit? abraham figures in Kierkegaard, derrida, and Kafka,” Kierkegaardiana, vol. 21, 2000, pp. 19–35. — “A Cage Went in Search of a Bird”: Reading Repetitions in the Writings of Kafka and Kierkegaard, Ph.d. thesis, charlottesville, virginia: university of virginia 2005.

136

Nicolae Irina

camus, albert, “l’espoir et l’absurde dans l’oeuvre de franz Kafka,” in Le mythe de Sisyphe, Paris: gallimard 1942, pp. 171–87. (english translation: “Hope and absurdity,” trans. by William barrett, in The Kafka Problem, ed. by angel flores, new York: new directions 1946, pp. 251–61, see especially pp. 256–8.) crimmann, ralph P., Franz Kafka. Versuch einer kulturphilosophischen Interpretation, Hamburg: Kovač 2004, see pp. 35–40. daniel-rops, Petiot, Henri J.c., “l’univers désespéré de franz Kafka,” Les Cahiers du Sud, vol. 24, march 1937, pp. 161–76. darrow, robert arnold, Kierkegaard, Kafka, and the Strength of “The Absurd” in Abraham’s Sacrifice of Isaac, master of Humanities thesis, dayton, ohio: Wright state university 2005. david, claude, “die geschichte abrahams. zu Kafkas auseinandersetzung mit Kierkegaard,” in Bild und Gedanke. Festschrift für Gerhart Baumann zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. by günter schnitzler et al., munich: fink 1980, pp. 79–90. edwards, brian f.m., “Kafka and Kierkegaard: a reassessment,” German Life and Letters, vol. 20, no. 3, 1967, pp. 218–25. eilittä, leena, Approaches to Personal Identity in Kafka’s Short Fiction: Freud, Darwin, Kierkegaard, Helsinki: academia scientiarum fennica 1999 (Suomalaisen tiedeakatemian toimituksia, Series Humaniora, vol. 302), see especially pp. 149–208. — “art as religious commitment: Kafka’s debt to Kierkegaardian ideas and their impact on His late stories,” German Life and Letters, vol. 53, no. 4, 2000, pp. 499–510. faggin, s., “Kierkegaard e Kafka. materiali per un’ermeneutica esistenziale,” in Kierkegaard e la letteratura, ed. by massimo iritano and inge lise rasmussen, rome: città nuova 2002 (NotaBene. Quaderni di Studi Kierkegaardiani, vol. 2), pp. 139–42. flores, Kate, “biographical note,” in The Kafka Problem, ed. by angel flores, new York: new directions 1946, see especially p. 13; p. 16. goebel, rolf J., “Kafka and Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling. critique and revision,” Journal of the Kafka Society of America, no. 9, 1985, pp. 69–82. Golomb, Jacob, ‫ מאזנים‬,”‫ “קפקא בין קירקגור וניטשה‬,‫ יעקב‬,‫גולומב‬, 53, 1985, ’‫עמ‬ 50–51. [golomb, Jacob, “Kafka between Kierkegaard and nietzsche,” Moznaim: Literary Monthly of the Hebrew Writers in Israel, no. 53, 1985, pp. 50–51.] — “Kafka’s existential metamorphosis: from Kierkegaard to nietzsche and beyond,” Clio, vol. 14, 1985, pp. 271–86. goth, maja, Franz Kafka et les lettres françaises 1928–1955, Paris: J. corti 1956, see especially p. 60; pp. 118–19; p. 129; p. 135; pp. 137–40; p. 149; pp. 160–64; pp. 187–9; p. 192; p. 196; pp. 224–7; pp. 236–8; p. 255. grangier, edouard, “abraham, oder Kierkegaard, wie Kafka und sartre ihn sehen,” Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, vol. 4, no. 3, 1949–50, pp. 412–21. gray, richard t., “the literary sources of Kafka’s aphoristic impulse,” The Literary Review, no. 26, 1983, pp. 537–50. — “Pascal and Kierkegaard: scepticism and critical method,” in his constructive Destruction: Kafka’s Aphorisms, Literary Tradition and Literary Transformation, tübingen: m. niemeyer 1987, pp. 190–203.

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

137

— “Kierkegaard,” in A Franz Kafka Encyclopedia, ed. by richard t. gray, ruth v. gross, rolf J. goebel and clayton Koelb, Westport, connecticut: greenwood Press 2005, pp. 159–60. Hale, geoffrey arthur, “Fragmentary Extravagance.” Modernist Readings of Kierkegaard in Kafka, Rilke and Adorno, Ph.d. thesis, Johns Hopkins university, baltimore 1996. — Kierkegaard and the Ends of Language, minneapolis: university of minnesota Press 2002, see pp. 32–6; pp. 143–6; p. 165; p. 200. Hessel, r.a. egon, “Kierkegaard und Kafka,” Kierkegaard-Studiet (international edition), vol. 3, 1966, pp. 11–16. Hopper, stanley r., “Kafka and Kierkegaard: the function of ambiguity,” American Imago. A Psychological Journal of the Arts and Sciences, no. 35, 1978, pp. 93–105. Hoel, sigurd, “forord,” in franz Kafka, Prosessen, trans. by Paul gjensdahl, oslo: gyldendal 1933 (gyldendals moderne romanserie), pp. 5–8. Hubben, William, Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and Kafka. Four Prophets of Our Destiny, new York: collier books 1974, see especially pp. 138–9; pp. 143–4; p. 147; pp. 151–2; pp. 159–64. ishinaka, shoji,「カフカとキルケゴール」[Kafka und Kierkegaard],『ドイツ文 學』[die deutsche literatur], no. 12, 1954, pp. 5–9. Kawai, Yoshio,「キェルケゴールとカフカ」[Kierkegaard and Kafka],『キェル ケゴール研究』[Kierkegaard-Studiet], vol. 16, 1986, pp. 5–17. Kelly, John, “franz Kafka’s ‘trial’ and the theology of crisis,” The Southern Review, vol. 5, 1940, pp. 748–66. Klentak-Zabłocka, Małgorzata, “Spotkanie na skraju przepaści. Kafka i Kierkegaard” [meeting on the edge of abyss: Kafka and Kierkegaard], Literatura na Świecie, no. 6, 1986, pp. 256–62. Knottnerus, s.l., “Kafka over Kierkegaard,” In de Waagschaal Nieuwe Jaargang, vol. 3, 1974–75, no. 17, pp. 17–22, and no. 19, pp. 8–11. Krysztofiak, Maria, “Die Denkwelt von Søren Kierkegaard in den Aphorismen Franz Kafkas,” in Skandinavien und Mitteleuropa. Literarische Wahlverwandtschaften, Wrocław: ATUT; Görlitz: Neisse 2005 (Beihefte zum Orbis Linguarum, vol. 42), pp. 79–101. Kylliäinen, Janne, “finland: the reception of Kierkegaard in finland,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), pp. 197–218, see p. 212. lange, Wolfgang, “Über Kafkas Kierkegaard-lektüre und einige damit zusammenhängende gegenstände,” Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte, vol. 60, no. 2, 1986, pp. 286–308. madsen, carsten, Om læsning. Kierkegaard, Kafka, Mallarmé og Jacobsen, Århus: Århus universitetsforlag 1995. malik, Habib c., Receiving Søren Kierkegaard: The Early Impact and Transmission of His Thought, Washington, d.c.: catholic university of america Press 1997, see pp. 365ff.

138

Nicolae Irina

Merrill, Reed, “ ‘Infinite Absolute Negativity’: Irony in Socrates, Kierkegaard and Kafka,” Comparative Literature Studies, vol. 16, no. 3, 1979, pp. 222–36. miethe, Helge, Sören Kierkegaards Wirkung auf Franz Kafka. Motivische und sprachliche Parallelen, marburg: tectum verlag 2006. Muenzer, Clark S., “A Kafkan Reflection on Kierkegaard. ‘Auf der Galerie’ and ‘Kritik der gegenwart,’ ” in Wegbereiter der Moderne. Festschrift für Klaus Jonas, ed. by Helmut Koopmann and clark muenzer, tübingen: niemeyer 1990, pp. 144–62. mustard, Helen m., “sören Kierkegaard in german literary Periodicals, 1860–1930,” Germanic Review, vol. 26, no. 2, 1951, pp. 83–101. nagel, bert, Kafka und Goethe. Stufen der Wandlung von der Klassik zur Moderne, berlin, e. schmidt 1977, see especially “Kleist, Kierkegaard, musil,” pp. 26–9. nakazawa, Hideo, “zu Kafkas und brods Kierkegaard-deutung,”『ドイツ文學』 [die deutsche literatur], no. 79, 1987, pp. 128–35. niehaus, michael, “entgründung. auch ein Kommentar zu Kafkas das urteil,” Weimarer Beiträge, no. 48, 2002, pp. 344–63. olafson, frederick a., “Kafka and the Primacy of the ethical,” The Hudson Review, vol. 13, no. 1, 1960, pp. 60–73. Paludan, Jacob, “elevens strid med læremesteren,” Nationaltidende, october 29, 1947, p. 4. Pellegrini, giovanni, “Kafka lettore di Kierkegaard. analisi di una interpretazione,” Tempo Presente, no. 172, 1995, pp. 52–8. — “abramo, l’argomentazione e l’incantesimo. Kafka interprete di Kierkegaard,” Il Cannocchiale, no. 3, september–december, 1999, pp. 69–110. — La legittimazione di sé: Kafka interprete di Kierkegaard, turin: trauben 2001. ravn, Kim, “Kafka og Kierkegaard,” in Franz Kafka, ed. by gitte lunding Johansen and torben Hamann Hansen, exhibition catalogue, copenhagen: assistens Kirkegårds formidlingscenter 1996, pp. 15–19. reiss, H.s., “franz Kafka’s conception of Humour,” The Modern Language Review, vol. 44, no. 4, 1949, pp. 534–42. ries, Wiebrecht, Transzendenz als Terror. Eine religionsphilosophische Studie über Franz Kafka, Heidelberg: schneider 1977, pp. 23–65. robbins, Jill, “Kafka’s Parables,” in Midrash and Literature, new Haven: Yale university Press 1986, pp. 265–84. robert, marthe, “Kafka in frankreich,” Akzente. Zeitschrift für Dichtung (Franz Kafka, wiedergelesen), vol. 13, no. 4, 1966, pp. 310–20. — “Kafka en france,” Obliques. Une nouvelle conception de la revue, no. 3 (“Kafka”), 1978, pp. 3–10, see pp. 8–9 (revised version in Le siècle de Kafka, Paris: centre georges Pompidou 1984, pp. 14–20, see pp. 18–19). robertson, ritchie, Kafka—Judaism, Politics, and Literature, oxford: clarendon Press 1985. — “introduction,” in Klaus Wagenbach, Kafka, trans. by ewald osers, london: Haus Publishing 2003, pp. vii–xiv. rogalski, aleksander, Tryptyk miłosny: Sören Kierkegaard—Regine Olsen, Franz Kafka—Felice Bauer, Émile Verhaeren—Marthe Massin [amorous triptych], Warsaw: Państ. Instytut Wydawniczy 1977.

Franz Kafka: Reading Kierkegaard

139

schaufelberger, fritz, “Kafka und Kierkegaard,” Reformatio. Evangelische Zeitschrift für Kultur und Politik, vols. 7–8, 1959, pp. 379–400; pp. 451–6. schmidt, Hermann, “franz Kafka tanzt nicht, ‘wenn der endlichkeit Ängste aufzuspielen beginnen,’ ” Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2001, pp. 268–94. schoeps, Hans Joachim, “theologische motive in der dichtung franz Kafkas,” Die neue Rundschau, vol. 62, no. 1, 1951, pp. 21–37. schulz, Heiko, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), pp. 331–3; p. 347; p. 386. sheppard, richard W., “Kafka’s Ein Hungerkünstler: a reconsideration,” German Quarterly, no. 46, 1973, pp. 219–33. — “Kafka, Kierkegaard and the K’s: theology, Psychology and fiction,” Literature and Theology, vol. 5, no. 3, 1991, pp. 277–96. sokel, Walter Herbert, Franz Kafka. Tragik und Ironie. Zur Struktur seiner Kunst, munich and vienna: albert langen-georg müller verlag 1964, see pp. 61–2; p. 108; p. 438; p. 445; pp. 466–70; p. 506; pp. 571–2. — “beyond self-assertion: a life of reading Kafka,” in A Companion to the Works of Franz Kafka, ed. by James rolleston, rochester, new York: camden House 2002, pp. 33–59, see p. 46. stach, reiner, Kafka: The Decisive Years, trans. by shelley frisch, orlando: Harcourt 2005, see p. 148; p. 328; pp. 413–14. stewart, Jon, “france: Kierkegaard as a forerunner of existentialism and Poststructuralism,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), p. 454. sørensen, villy, Kafkas Digtning, copenhagen: gyldendal 1968, pp. 179–89. — Sørensen om Kierkegaard. Villy Sørensens udvalgte artikler om Søren Kierkegaard, ed. by gert Posselt, gyldendal 2007, pp. 227–38 and pp. 259–73. tauber, Herbert, Franz Kafka: An Interpretation of His Works, london: secker and Warburg 1948, see especially p. 75; p. 144; pp. 147–53; p. 186; p. 200; p. 208; pp. 227–8; p. 238; pp. 241–2. theunissen, michael and Wilfried greve, “einleitung,” in Materialen zur Philosophie Søren Kierkegaards, ed. by michael theunissen and Wilfried greve, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1979, see pp. 55–6. Toeplitz, Karol, “F. Kafki i J.P. Sartre’a reinterpretacja ‘Konfliktu Abrahama’ ” [F. Kafka and J.P. Sartre’s Reinterpretation of the “Abraham Conflict”], Gdańskie Zeszyty Humanistyczne, vol. 2, no. 28, 1985, pp. 41–55. tschuggnall, Peter, Das Abraham-Opfer als Glaubensparadox. Bibeltheologischer Befund, literarische Rezeption, Kierkegaards Deutung, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1990, see pp. 65–6. tuono, marco, “la metafora della rinascita in una teologia capovolta. suggestioni antropologiche del pensiero di Kierkegaard nella “metamorfosi” di Kafka,” in Il religioso in Kierkegaard. Atti del convegno di studi organizzato dalla Società Italiana per gli Studi Kierkegaardiani tenutosi dal 14 al 16 dicembre 2000 a Venezia, ed. by Isabella Adinolfi, Brescia: Morcelliana 2002, pp. 437–45.

140

Nicolae Irina

vircillo, domenico, “ambiguità e fede in Kierkegaard, nietzsche e Kafka,” Sapienza, no. 26, 1973, pp. 27–69. vogelweith, guy, “Kafka et Kierkegaard. regard oblique sur une rupture,” Obliques. Une nouvelle conception de la revue, no. 3 (“Kafka”), 1978, pp. 45–9. Wagenbach, Klaus, Franz Kafka. Eine Biographie seiner Jugend. 1883–1912, bern: francke 1958, see especially p. 115; p. 152; p. 215, note 423; p. 257. — Kafka, trans. by ewald osers, cambridge, massachusetts: Harvard university Press and london: Haus Publishing 2003, see especially p. 46; pp. 80–81. Wahl, Jean, “Kierkegaard and Kafka,” trans. by lienhard bergel, in The Kafka Problem, ed. by angel flores, new York: new directions 1946, pp. 262–75. — “Kafka et Kierkegaard commentaires,” in Petite Histoire de ‘L’Existentialisme,’ Paris: Éditions club maintenant 1974, pp. 95–131. Wexelblatt, robert, “Kleist, Kierkegaard, Kafka and marriage,” San Jose Studies, no. 9, 1983, pp. 7–15.

rudolf Kassner: a Physiognomical appropriation steen tullberg

I. Kassner’s Influence and Style If one ignores Hermann Gottsched (1848–1916) and the first—controversial— translator of Kierkegaard’s collected works, christoph schrempf (1860–1944), rudolf Kassner (1873–1959) together with theodor Haecker (1879–1945) are the two great figures in the German-language reception at the beginning of the twentieth century to have introduced and presented the thought of søren Kierkegaard. Haecker emphasized Kierkegaard as a cultural critic and, among other things, translated parts of A Literary Review under the title Kritik der Gegenwart, which was published a few weeks before the outbreak of war in 1914 in the important journal Der Brenner. by contrast, Kassner’s interest in Kierkegaard was concerned with the tension between art and life, life and thought, which he portrayed first and foremost in a long and widely read essay published in Die Neue Rundschau as early as 1906.1 from Haecker, who was the more influential of the two, one can trace connections to, among others, martin Heidegger (1889–1976), Karl Jaspers (1883–1969), ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951), ferdinand ebner (1882–1931) and Hermann broch (1886–1951), while Kassner in his age exercised an influence on especially Rainer maria rilke (1875–1926), Hugo von Hofmannsthal (1879–1929), and the young georg lukács (1885–1971). in his debut book, the collection of essays Die Seele und die Formen from 1911, lukács gave some of the most penetrating characterizations of Kassner and his fascinating, but at times difficult, style. In the essay “Platonismus, Poesie und die formen. rudolf Kassner” he writes: Kassner sees syntheses, so to speak, only with closed eyes; when he looks at things, he sees so much, such fine details, so many aspects that can never be repeated again, that every summary of these can only appear as a lie, a conscious distortion. Yet nonetheless he follows his longing, he closes his eyes in order to see things together—for what they are worth—but his honesty forces him immediately to look at them again and then they are again separated, isolated, deflated. The moving back and forth between these two poles determines Kassner’s style….Kassner is a Schwärmer for the larger perspectives, but once and for all also—due to conscientiousness—an impressionist. this dualism 1 rudolf Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” Die Neue Rundschau (Freie Bühne), Jahrgang 17, vol. 1, no. 3, berlin: s. fischer 1906, pp. 513–43.

142

Steen Tullberg produces the glowing intensity and at the same time the impenetrable fog that constitutes his style.2

in the same essay lukács says that one of Kassner’s strengths is that there is so much that he does not see, and this ability to “sort out” what does not hold his immediate interest is also evident in Kassner’s interpretation of Kierkegaard, as we will see. in his debut book lukács also has an essay on Kierkegaard entitled “das zerschellen der form am leben. sören Kierkegaard und regine olsen,” translated into english simply as “søren Kierkegaard and regine olsen.” Here he credits and quotes Kassner with the following words: Kassner—who describes Kierkegaard in unforgettable and unsurpassable terms— discards every explanation. “Kierkegaard,” he writes, “made a poem of his relationship with regine olsen, and when Kierkegaard makes a poem of his life, he does so not in order to conceal the truth but in order to be able to reveal it.”3

The two other mentioned authors, who were influenced by Kassner, also made statements about the relation between Kassner and Kierkegaard. rainer maria rilke, whose eighth duino elegy is dedicated to rudolf Kassner, thought that Kassner’s crippled feet (which were the result of his being stricken by polio as a child) corresponded to Kierkegaard’s melancholy such that being lame had the same significance for Kassner’s work as an author as Kierkegaard’s melancholy had for him.4 Hugo von Hofmannsthal summarized (in 1929) the similarity between Kassner and Kierkegaard with the word “dissimulation,” by which he means that there are decisive and comprehensive thoughts hidden in what are apparently loosely thrownout, individual ideas: Perhaps Kassner’s work has that distinctive dissimulation in common with the Kierkegaardian oeuvre which has only recently been discovered in all its depth: the will to bring forth the profound and the comprehensive in such a particularly hidden artistic manner that it appears to be merely something individual, special, even unimportant; a philosophical attitude of the utmost importance—maybe the very counterposition to the dangerous dynamic exaggeration of the late nietzsche.5

Kassner exercised an influence on numerous other authors in his own time and thereafter (for example, friedrich dürrenmatt (1921–90) and denis de rougemont (1906–85)), but his authorship gradually became forgotten.6 With the completion of georg lukács, “Platonismus, Poesie und die formen. rudolf Kassner,” in Die Seele und die Formen. Essays, berlin: egon fleischel & co. 1911, pp. 53–4. 3 ibid., p. 66. english translation quoted from “søren Kierkegaard and regine olsen,” in The Lukács Reader, ed. by arpad Kadarkay, oxford and cambridge: blackwell 1995, pp. 12–13. 4 cf. Rainer Maria Rilke und Rudolf Kassner. Freunde im Gespräch, ed. by Klaus e. bohnenkamp, frankfurt am main: insel 1997, p. 69. 5 Quoted from Rudolf Kassner zum achtzigsten Geburtstag, ed. by alphons clemens Kensik, Winterthur: eugen rentsch 1953, p. 21. 6 one can be suspicious that a racist disposition in parts of Kassner’s physiognomical thinking might have prevented the dissemination of his authorship after Word War ii. this is 2

Rudolf Kassner: A Physiognomical Appropriation

143

the edition of his collected works, edited by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp from 1969 to 1991,7 Kassner has, however, experienced a minor renaissance of sorts, and his Kierkegaard interpretation has long had the status of a classic in germanlanguage scholarship. II. Kierkegaard and Form As early as Kassner’s first work Die Mystik, die Künstler und das Leben (1900) about english poets and painters (the pre-raphaelites) in the nineteenth century, one receives a hint of his understanding and situating of Kierkegaard, which plays a role in determining Kassner’s own thought. Specifically, in the section on William Blake and his doctrine of emanation Kierkegaard is mentioned in a characteristic context: “blake’s christ participates in the same way in the overman of nietzsche and in the christ, as sören Kierkegaard holds him up for ‘christendom.’ ”8 the constellation of blake (and his presentation of christ as the one who on the strength of his imagination liberates people from intellectualism and moralism), nietzsche’s overman, and Kierkegaard’s christ suggests in a nutshell what later in Kassner would become his ambitious so-called “physiognomical” thinking9 and his life-long occupation with Kierkegaard as a christian pendant and counterbalance to nietzsche. Kassner interprets Kierkegaard and his work based on a general scheme which understands existence as a drama, where the goal is to find the correct harmony between life and thought, the correct form. drama is Kassner’s expression for a philosophy, which, like Kierkegaard’s, does not merely want to be expounded but lived, and Kierkegaard found, in Kassner’s presentation, this correct form in the single individual, who produces and communicates by means of the paradox, which gave his life and work their unique unity. by contrast, Kassner does not so much understand Kierkegaard in the causally explanatory, biographical framework, which dominated Kierkegaard research in his day, but more based on an understanding of the authorship as an act, a process of giving form, which points to an inner teleology due not least of all to the influence of the controversial British-born author and posthumous son-in-law of richard Wagner, Houston stewart chamberlain (1855–1927), whose main work Die Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (1899–1901), was central for the pangermanic movement in the early 1920s and later for the nazis’ anti-semitic ideology. Kassner was influenced by the Grundlagen but seems as early as around 1906 to have distanced himself from chamberlain—that is, the same year as his long essay on Kierkegaard was published. cf. geoffrey g. field, Evangelist of Race: The Germanic Vision of Houston Stewart Chamberlain, new York: columbia university Press 1981, pp. 173ff. one should add to this that in 1940 the nazis made it illegal for Kassner’s works to be published, presumably because Kassner’s wife was of Jewish ancestry. 7 see rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91. 8 rudolf Kassner, Die Mystik, die Künstler und das Leben. Über englische Dichter und Maler im 19. Jahrhundert, leipzig: eugen diederichs 1900, p. 24 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 1, p. 33.) 9 for this see bong-Hi cha, Das Erstlingswerk Rudolf Kassners. Ansätze zu seinem “physiognomischen Weltbild,” bamberg: schmacht 1976.

144

Steen Tullberg

in the interaction between the man and his work. this gives Kassner a sharp eye for the poet Kierkegaard—or more correctly—for the notion that Kierkegaard is a poet who has had to overcome the poetic in order to find his correct form of expression. in this connection Kassner is a man for sharp distinctions; he thus distinguishes between the Platonist, the poet and the artist, and Kierkegaard is, according to his view, the greatest artist among the philosophers, indeed, even one of the greatest artists who has ever lived—and in addition one of the greatest humorists. in order to understand this more precisely, one needs to understand Kassner’s expressionistic anthropology that is stamped with Platonism.10 in the long essay from 1906, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,”11 the concluding chapter, “die form,” is decisive for his interpretation.12 a central statement here is the introductory words that “all human life is expression and form.” from this he continues: “Human beings understand each other in that they give themselves form and expression, in that they let the large be large, the small, small, the lonely, lonely, and the happy, happy.”13 this demand to differentiate, to give everything its own suitable “form” has a counterpart in the demand to bring as many phenomena as possible under a common name, creatively to reduce the number of forms to the one necessary form. This demand is fulfilled most cleanly in the genius, who at once gives everything its necessary, distinct form, and at the same time in his entire activity expresses the one form, which fits with himself: Pascal found his form in the cloister, Nietzsche in the overman, Plato in the ideas, francis of assisi in poverty—and Kierkegaard found his form in “the single individual.”14 Kierkegaard found “the single individual,” writes Kassner, because the world around him had become mediocre; because no one cared to accept their responsibility or guilt any longer; because everyone thought that they were christians merely by going to church together with others; because the theater had become a church and the church a theater—Kierkegaard brought to light “the single individual,” because everywhere he looked, he could only see the masses, noise, and masks.15 further, according to Kassner, in Kierkegaard “the single individual” is a necessary condition for christianity; “the single individual” is the christian’s inherent form: “the individual is his [the christian’s] form, but the form in which on this see Heiko schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), pp. 322ff. 11 see rudolf Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” in Die neue Rundschau, vol. 1, berlin: s. fischer 1906, pp. 538–43 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, pp. 39–97). 12 the chapter “die form” has been omitted from the substantially reworked separate version of the essay which Kassner published in 1949. rudolf Kassner, Sören Kierkegaard, Heidelberg: carl Pfeffer 1949. 13 Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” p. 538 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, p. 89). 14 Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” p. 539 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, p. 92). 15 Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” p. 540 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, p. 93). 10

Rudolf Kassner: A Physiognomical Appropriation

145

the others understand him, is the contradiction, the paradox.” this is also articulated in the following way: “the individual produces the paradox.”16 the reason for this is the individual’s oppositional relation to his surrounding world. Kassner reasons as follows: the solitary person in the cloister is not yet a paradox, the solitary person in the dance hall is, by contrast, a contradiction, only the individual can be lonely in a dance hall. the pastor is likewise not a single individual, since there are many people who become pastors, who could easily also be tax collectors. the christian is, by contrast, someone like, for example, Kierkegaard, whom no one believed because he took everything ironically and made jokes about everything. a christian, an individual, is in a fundamental sense someone whom no one believes in and whom everyone regards as a deceiver, and therefore the christian must prove himself, give witness, and if it is demanded, go to death for it. this opens up for Kassner’s analysis of the connection between logic, art, and humor. logic is, according to Kassner, fundamentally a tautology (in agreement with the above-mentioned ascribing of a determinate form to a determinate phenomenon— what is great is “great,” what is lonely is “lonely,” etc.), but just as art is the overcoming of the antithesis, Kierkegaard’s “single individual” is the overcoming of the tautology. to turn the tautological logic on its head is the very essence of humor: “Humor is inverted logic.”17 Kierkegaard overcame the tautological logic on the strength of his humor, but also on the strength of his artistic richness related to this: “Kierkegaard was an artist, like others are human beings; his form was cheerful [heiter], just as the human body is something cheerful [Heiteres].”18 Here, the untranslatable word Heiterkeit is introduced as yet another characteristic of Kierkegaard’s uniqueness. this is a good example of Kassner’s own sometimes impenetrable style, his tendency to think in rigid structures and to pile up adjectives and nouns as meaning-bearing predicates. in this connection Kassner has a polemic against georg brandes (1842–1927), who is not mentioned by name but is merely referred to as “a critic with a european-wide reputation.”19 this concerns brandes’ characterization of the second part of Either/Or as “a gust from the heath,”20 which Kassner puts in connection with Kierkegaard’s father’s cursing of god as a young shepherd in Jutland, while brandes rather points to the fact, that the second part of Either/Or ends with a sermon given on the Jutland heath. in any case, brandes’ words are, according to Kassner, an expression of a mistaken interpretation, which is due to the fact that brandes has not understood Kierkegaard’s talk of “the single individual” and likewise has no sense for Kierkegaard’s Heiterkeit. Kassner emphasizes how opposites attract each other in Kierkegaard: Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” pp. 540f. (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, p. 93). 17 Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” p. 543 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, p. 97). 18 Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” p. 542 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, p. 95). 19 Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” p. 541 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, p. 94). 20 Quoted from Georg Brandes, Søren Kierkegaard. En kritisk Fremstilling i Grundrids, in his Samlede Skrifter, vols. 1–4, copenhagen: gyldendal 1919, vol. 2, p. 313. 16

146

Steen Tullberg i say, the longing for death, melancholy, strict sören Kierkegaard is a single individual… because his whole work from the first to the last page is a great, unique, infinite cheerfulness [Heiterkeit]. Just as i said at the beginning that only the truly melancholy person, the one born to melancholy, rejects sympathy…so i say here that this melancholy individual produced a wonderful cheerfulness [Heiterkeit].21

III. Kierkegaard and Kassner’s Physiognomical Thinking in the years before World War i Kassner developed an extensive philosophy of culture, which he in time called a “universal physiognomic.” as already noted, it is a returning point in the meager Kassner reception that his thought—and in particular the physiognomical—is esoteric and obscure, and the present article will not pretend to have fully penetrated Kassner’s physiognomical thinking. However, it seems fitting to give an account of a couple of points regarding his physiognomical thinking and its relation to Kierkegaard. in Kassner’s theory of physiognomy there are clear elements of his Kierkegaard interpretation; however, one must come quite a long way into his collected works to see Kierkegaard explicitly placed in connection with this theory.22 Perhaps the clearest connection appears in a late discussion from 1938 of another physiognomical thinker, the swiss philosopher max Picard (1888–1965). Here Kassner writes in a passage after having mentioned the importance of a series of russian poets for physiognomy, among whom dostoyevsky is emphasized: i further count among those who sought from psychology a transition to physiognomy, Kierkegaard, to whom all physiognomists owe a debt of gratitude. I find this transition mainly in his superbly sublime work on anxiety. but it remained a transition or an attempt at one due to the fact that the strict concepts of christianity, that is, punishment, judgment, guilt and imprecation, kept Kierkegaard in the realm of the psychological.23

Here it is thus claimed that Kierkegaard was a kind of physiognomist—and that he in one sense or another with his thought (specifically in The Concept of Anxiety) sought to overcome psychology to the advantage of physiognomy. the claim is quite surprising, and in what follows an attempt will be made to determine more precisely what it really means. the basis for Kassner’s physiognomy is expressed in a basic proposition, an axiom, which is formulated as a paradox. the sentence is bold and even somewhat breathtaking: “the human being is precisely as he appears because he does not appear

Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” p. 541 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, p. 94). 22 see also steffen steffensen, “Kassner und Kierkegaard. ein vortrag,” Orbis Litterarum, vol. 18, copenhagen: munksgaard 1963, pp. 80–90. 23 rudolf Kassner, “ueber Physiognomik,” in Der kleine Bund. Literarische Beilage des Bundes, ed. by max rychner, vol. 19, bern: fritz Pochon-Jent 1938, p. 75 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 424). 21

Rudolf Kassner: A Physiognomical Appropriation

147

as he is.”24 as we have seen above, in Kassner the individual is the paradox, and there are, as noted, elements of Kassner’s Kierkegaard interpretation incorporated into his physiognomical thinking—albeit in a heavily transformed way, and this is important to emphasize. When Kassner takes over expressions like “the single individual,” “the idea,” “the god-man,” and others, he always gives them his own stamp, often in admitted debt to Kierkegaard, but at the same time in a direct distancing of himself from him. Kassner “translates” Kierkegaard with no scruples, and a central point of divergence is expressed when Kierkegaard speaks about “faith,” in which case Kassner would rather speak of “imagination.” Kierkegaard distinguishes too sharply between faith and imagination (and subsequently between the aesthetic and the ethical) according to Kassner, and his main criticism of The Concept of Anxiety is that hereditary sin is considered so profoundly here that it defies manifestation and becomes “faceless.”25 it is, if one will, the iconoclastic feature in Kierkegaard which awakens Kassner’s criticism, and generally it is the inheritance of theological dogmatics in Kierkegaard which, in Kassner’s eyes, should be disposed of. one example of Kassner’s conscious transformation of Kierkegaard’s concepts is his presentation of “the single individual” in Das physiognomische Weltbild from 1930. as noted, this is a concept which has been taken over from Kierkegaard, but Kassner draws attention to the fact that he ascribes another meaning to the concept than Kierkegaard. Whereas “the single individual” in Kierkegaard was “the last form of the Christian,” the same figure in Kassner’s physiognomy has been transformed into “the last [form] of the human being, who still seeks a connection with the past and the future and seeks not only the present, but presence and profundity.”26 Kassner continues: “the individual is for me the briefest designation for what i in so many places in my books call the man on the edge. as such he is without possessions, also without properties, without fame and immortality as possessions.”27 there are many and also earlier examples of the determination of the single individual as a “man on the edge” other than in this work, as will be made clear in what follows. Kassner’s elaborated physiognomy has the feature in common with the traditional physiognomy that it, in a broad sense, proceeds from a conception of the inner being made visible on the surface. it distinguishes itself from the tradition (namely, lavater) by the fact that it very consciously does not wish to be scientific, and by the fact that it speaks of “metamorphosis” (Verwandlung) and “expression” where one normally speaks of the parallel between the inner and the outer (between, respectively, soul and character and facial features). moreover, Kassner’s “rhythmic physiognomy,” as rudolf Kassner, Zahl und Gesicht. Nebst einer Einleitung: Der Umriss einer universalen Physiognomik, Wiesbaden: insel-verlag 1956, p. 9; cf. p. 157 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 3, p. 192; cf. p. 373). 25 rudolf Kassner, Der goldene Drachen, erlenbach-zurich and stuttgart: eugen rentsch 1957 (published also as “der goldene drachen. gleichnis und essay,” in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 10, pp. 187–203). 26 rudolf Kassner, Das Physiognomische Weltbild, munich: delphin-verlag 1930, p. 120 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 4, p. 408). cf. also p. 165; p. 222 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 4, p. 449; p. 503). 27 Kassner, Das Physiognomische Weltbild, p. 120 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 4, p. 408). 24

148

Steen Tullberg

he also called it, is not interested in the individual, but exclusively in types or kinds: in the physiognomically recognized type, being and significance, sign and signified, are one. in Kassner’s physiognomy the conception of the world is not distinguished in any essential way from the conception of art. they are both essentially emotional, personal, intuitive, antiscientific and antisystematic, subjective, holistic, and directed towards a knowledge of “forms.” Kassner as a physiognomist is not interested in causes and analyses but, by contrast, in “in-sight” (Ein-sicht), in meaning and syntheses. for this reason he replaces the “because” of the sciences with a physiognomical “how,” and he describes the in-sight won through physiognomy as the agreement between the inner and the outer, between content and form. the ideal physiognomical observation’s central category corresponds to the (synthetic) imagination (greek, φαντασία), which does not, as in Kant, produce concepts, but images, symbols and forms (Gestalten). the imagination is, according to Kassner, the ability to mediate and combine opposites, to sublate them in image and form, for which reason it alone is the guarantee for the “all-unity” of humanity, the universe and art. to this extent, the physiognomist in Kassner’s sense is always engaged in a kind of phenomenological Wesensschau (intuition of essences). He wins in-sight into things in that he interprets “the rhythm,” which connects every expression with a quality. Kassner’s physiognomy, which can be coarsely designated as an “esoteric universal hermeneutic” (he describes it sometimes as an “esoteric christianity”), can with this characterization be placed under the rubric of neo-mysticism, which was a widespread way of thinking in finde-siècle culture around the year 1900.28 It is perhaps clear from this rather superficial presentation that physiognomy in Kassner’s version adopts Kierkegaard’s existential perspective and, moreover, seems to direct attention to the fact that Kierkegaard thinks in and with forms and types—that is, in wholes and not in causal explanations. in The Concept of Anxiety freedom is thought, among other things, in psychosomatic terms, and Kierkegaard’s presentation of the progression in anxiety is tied to forms which have different relations to anxiety, and which together constitute sin: “the mood of psychology is that of a discovering anxiety, and in its anxiety psychology portrays sin, while again and again it is in anxiety over the portrayal that it itself brings forth.”29 anxiety in Kierkegaard is connected with nothingness, dizziness, and the demonic, and the section about the demonic is, according to Kassner, the greatest thing that Kierkegaard ever wrote. Here one finds, for example, the famous picture of mephistopheles, which Kierkegaard had from a bournonville ballet, where the demonic as the enclosed and sudden is depicted mimetically. Kassner himself writes profoundly about the demonic, which to him is not merely anxiety for the good but has to do with the unformed, chaotic, amorphous, and formless in the broadest sense. according to Kassner, the irrational should be formed, and psychology is an impediment for this because it weakens the mimetic. it is precisely the mimetic in Kierkegaard, the fact that the idea has a tendency to be “mimed,” to be “incarnated” for this account i stand in the debt of uwe spörl, Gottlose Mystik in der deutschen Literatur um die Jahrhundertwende, Paderborn: schöningh 1997, pp. 158–67. 29 SKS 4, 323 / CA, 15. 28

Rudolf Kassner: A Physiognomical Appropriation

149

and to receive a form in him, which points forward to Kassner’s physiognomy. this is due to the fact that psychology, according to Kassner, is always reductive and bound to a causally determinist paradigm, which his own thinking is a reaction against. Whereas psychology (that is, especially freud and psychoanalysis) traces the phenomena back to their causes, Kassner’s physiognomy operates with images and symbols, which in constant transitions, changes, and transfigurations point forward and represent wholes, which are more than the sum total of the individual parts. His writings are, for example, filled with animals, dolls, clowns, chimeras—figures which are grotesque deviations from the humane and at the same time represent an ideal side of it. What has no face, no unity, is to Kassner a number, and it is the power of the numerical and the quantitative, which has to be dealt with.30 Here one might think of Kierkegaard’s criticism of “the public” and “the crowd,” as critique of precisely the number, the numerical, but also of his notorious criticism of the natural sciences in the form of “physiology,” which is an expression of a criticism of the same reductionist paradigm. What Kierkegaard criticizes physiology of is to a large extent the same thing that he criticizes physiognomy of as a science.31 in The Concept of Irony there is a long footnote which discusses physiognomy’s problems (that is, lavater’s problems) of coming into agreement with socrates and his “ugly exterior.” the point is that physiognomy cannot work out the discrepancy between socrates’ wisdom and his outward appearance, because it has ahead of time ruled out irony and its negation of the phenomenal from its field: “The truth of the whole art of physiognomy…is based upon the thesis that essence is and is only insofar as it is in appearance, and that appearance is the truth of essence, essence is the truth of appearance,”32 and for irony the “phenomenon” does not exist to reveal “the essence,” but to conceal it. socrates with his unattractive exterior was not so much that which he was as he became what he was—and is therefore a stumbling block for physiognomy, which thinks statically, where one ought to think in terms of a process or dynamically. the “phenomenon” is thus here for Kierkegaard “the deception,” which points in the direction of fiction, play-acting, and role masks. By the power of the numerical is also expressed in the positivistic sciences and in the specialization of knowledge, which Kassner’s physiognomy is also a reaction against. two of his main works are thus named Transfiguration, erlenbach-zurich: eugen-rentsch verlag 1946 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 8, pp. 401–566), and Zahl und Gesicht. Nebst einer Einleitung: Der Umriß einer universalen Physiognomik, leipzig: insel 1919 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 3, pp. 185–378). Kassner himself believed that with his physiognomy he had done for the research on the faculty of the imagination what Kant had done for research on the faculty of reason. 31 see, for instance, the journal entries nb:70–87 in SKS 20, 58–74 / KJN 4, 57–73. Here Kierkegaard deals with the work of carl gustav carus, and expounds on the (mis)relationship between the philosopher carus and the physiologist carus. carus was another contemporary thinker who presented a morphological/physiognomical theory, and Han Ki-Sang points out that carus, with his concept of a “Symbolik der Idee,” in many ways was a forerunner of Kassner’s physiognomy. cf. Han Ki-sang, Physiognomik als technisches Darstellungsmittel im Werk Thomas Manns. Vom Naturalistisch-Realistischen zum Mythisch-Utopischen, Ph.d. thesis, giessen 1980, pp. 120ff. 32 SKS 1, 256, note / CI, 212, note. 30

150

Steen Tullberg

contrast, everything is transposed to the stage; the breakdown of the law of identity— which is another expression for the biblical fall—reveals the world as a deception, a stage, a theater, a playhouse. Here Kassner comes into the picture since he interprets Kierkegaard in the light of the problem of the actor and specifically in the light of the figure of Hamlet (see below). Kierkegaard himself also delivers a contrast to the search for causes and grounds in the natural sciences, namely, when he points to the characteristic form of knowing found in poetry: “all poetry transfigures life (cf. the Transfiguration) by the way it illuminates it (by it being illuminated, enlightened, developed, etc.). it is really remarkable that language has this double meaning.”33 in Kierkegaard’s understanding of poetry, as in Kassner’s physiognomy, the emphasis is placed on the “how” and not on the “why.”34 IV. Kassner’s Other Treatments of Kierkegaard’s Life and Work as was clear from the treatment of the long essay from 1906, it is a central element in this that Kierkegaard’s life and work restlessly merge and constitute an indivisible unity. this is also a constant feature of Kassner’s treatments of Kierkegaard after the first long drafts of a “universal physiognomy,” for instance in the work “das gottmenschentum und der einzelne” from 1923, which was published in Hofmannsthal’s Neue deutsche Beiträge and arose from work with a new edition of the essay from 1906. in “das gottmenschentum und der einzelne” Kassner undertakes an elaboration of his interpretation of Kierkegaard, among other things, against the background of central thoughts in his physiognomy, and above all against the background of an opposition of what he calls the “Welt des geistes” and the “Welt des seeles.” Kierkegaard is again presented as a “man on the edge,” an existence in extremis, which on the strength of his religion of spirit is radically distinguished from a medieval cloister and religious order of grace and, moreover, stands in a relation of opposition to the hedonistic crowd. the “cloister” and “the crowd” are juxtaposed once again to “the single individual,” or, what amounts to the same thing, the christian. for Kassner’s thinking there also comes the decisive notion of the imagination: the

see SKS 18, 10, EE:11 / KJN, 2, 6. Here there is an untranslatable play with the word forklaring in danish. 34 in addition to his incorporation of central Kierkegaardian concepts into his physiognomical thinking, Kassner also has a more traditional physiognomical interpretation of Kierkegaard’s face. in his work Physiognomik from 1932 one reads: “Kierkegaard’s face in youth and in old age. How the rich lips of his youth are later pressed together, now tasting bitterness and failure! they are sunken in like sails, folded together, and once they were full of the wind of youth and of longing. What despair in spite of all genius and spirit of inwardness! there is a hint of an insult in the face. a person who has exposed himself too much, who has gone too far and then and therefore has a terrible way ahead of him. someone who has learned that the equation only works out when you add despair.” rudolf Kassner, Physiognomik, munich: delphin-verlag 1932, p. 170 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 5, p. 149). 33

Rudolf Kassner: A Physiognomical Appropriation

151

christian needs the imagination—not in order to poeticize, but in order to live, and when he writes like Kierkegaard, then this writing precisely is life.35 the great danger for a type of person like Kierkegaard is that he pushes the demand for existence too hard such that “such a Geistesmensch, left to himself on the way to god, loses his balance and breaks into two, or becomes completely twisted around or that his world becomes rigid in a concept, fizzles out in an idea and he himself passes away in longing.”36 it is precisely to avoid this danger—the danger of the abyss, the break—that Kierkegaard’s religion of spirit has it innermost core in the god-man, das Gottmenschentum, because in the god-man the most distant is connected with the closest, thereby re-establishing the destroyed balance.37 behind the oppositions that Kassner operates with in “das gottmenschentum und der Einzelne” one finds, as noted, a more fundamental one, namely, that between the world of the soul and the world of spirit. in spirit’s and the single individual’s world it is exclusively a question of the imitation of the god-man in spirit, while in the world of the soul it is about the unity with god in the holy exaltation or ecstasy. in spirit and soul, existence and being, subject and object, europe and asia, faith and holiness are opposed. according to Kassner, it is our most important task in life and in thought to unite the worlds of the soul and spirit, and the goal lies neither in the past (Seele) nor in the future (Geist), but “in the ‘golden’ present.”38 it was this unification that, according to Kassner, Kierkegaard accomplished in an exemplary manner on the strength of his life and authorship. from Kassner’s perspective, Kierkegaard’s work is simply integral to his life. this is also a point in the introduction to a selection of Kierkegaard’s diaries in french, which Kassner wrote in 1927 and which was published in the journal Commerce, which was edited by, among others, Paul valéry. Here Kierkegaard is given credit for being the first to discover the father–son problem as a profoundly important relation—later fictional literature and later still psychoanalysis took over this concept. this is given a biographical explanation in Kierkegaard’s own relation to his father, whose inheritance in the form of the personal financial fortune is regarded as the sole adventitious element in Kierkegaard’s life. but even this adventitious element he managed, according to Kassner, to make inward, “and did so through the fact that after the death of his father he did not have someone look after his money but rather simply lived from it and gave it to others.”39 this rudolf Kassner, “das gottmenschentum und der einzelne,” in Neue deutsche Beiträge, vol. 1, munich: verlag der bremer Presse 1923, p. 106 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 214). 36 Kassner, “das gottmenschentum und der einzelne,” p. 105 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 213). 37 Kassner, “das gottmenschentum und der einzelne,” p. 108 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 216). 38 Kassner, “das gottmenschentum und der einzelne,” p. 111 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 220). on this see mathias mayer, “stadien auf dem lese-Weg. Kierkegaardlektüren im ausgang von rudolf Kassner,” in Rudolf Kassner. Physiognomik als Wissensform, ed. by gerhard neumann and ulrich ott, freiburg im breisgau: rombach 1999, pp. 109–22. 39 rudolf Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard,” in Commerce, cahier 12, Paris: librairie Henri leclerc 1927, p. 155 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 231). 35

152

Steen Tullberg

is symbolic for Kierkegaard’s life: everything outward in this life has been taken up and transformed—consumed by the fire of his soul’s inner glow. Therefore, according to Kassner, it would be a mistake to regard Kierkegaard as one of the nineteenth century’s great divided spirits; on the contrary, his life is harmonious, and the harmony lies “in the perfect course of an existence oriented toward god.”40 true to his habit, Kassner, as the essay progresses, brings more and more definitions of Kierkegaard into the analysis, for example, that his life was a drama, that he was a kind of “Hamlet of god-man thinking,”41 and a comparison with nietzsche aims to show that while nietzsche’s passion stemmed from a split in himself, Kierkegaard’s passion stemmed from a split in his relation to his father. Here he also carries out an analysis of the progression in Kierkegaard’s authorship, which is expressed in a characteristic manner. from the view of Kierkegaard as a human being, whose life was restlessly directed toward god at the same time as he understood christianity as a paradox and emphasized the incommensurability of faith and knowledge, spirit and history, immediacy and reflection, Kassner draws the following conclusion concerning the authorship: Kierkegaard had published all of his writings (the aesthetic ones, the religiouspsychological ones) under pseudonyms, and only “the moment” and the “attack on christendom” appeared under his real name, for these were, as stated, his act, the act of the new Hamlet. With this act the world of the imagination, of longing, of masks was overcome and reality was reached. Hence his own name.42

this recalls in its basic substance Kierkegaard’s own view of his authorship, but the whole thing is stamped by Kassner’s characteristic physiognomical vocabulary. in the short essay “zu sören Kierkegaard’s fünfundsiebzigstem todestag” from 1930 the notion of Kierkegaard’s life and work as a completed unity is attached to a personal recollection of a sailing trip on the volga river in the early summer of 1911. Here the steamer that Kassner is sailing on suddenly comes to a place in the river where the stream expands violently and is filled with pieces of wood that float by, upon which one sees the lumberjacks. on one of the rafts a little house is built (with a small Russian flag on it), on another a small church and on a third even a little dog kennel with accompanying dog. Kassner learns that all this was built for the purpose of surviving the spring’s powerful snow melt, which causes flooding of the area. The lumberjacks, who live on the wooden rafts, in this way defy the floods and are carried by the stream toward the caspian sea, where the rafts, the house, the church and the dog kennel are carefully disassembled in order to be reused. the rest, that is, the lumberjacks themselves, the little Russian flag on the house, and the dog, are sent back north with the next steamer in order to begin again from scratch with new rafts, and so on. When Kassner hears this, it occurs to him that a human life should be like this and only like this: just as these rafts and everything that is on them, right down to the dog kennel, merge with and are completely exhausted by their Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard,” pp. 155–6. (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, pp. 231–2). 41 Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard,” p. 160 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 236). 42 Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard,” p. 161 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, pp. 236–7). 40

Rudolf Kassner: A Physiognomical Appropriation

153

goal, so also everything in a human life should be used and entirely exhausted in a greater goal. When this occurs to him he comes to think of Kierkegaard. everything in Kierkegaard’s life was used up, in that it “merged”: his money, his life and his work, which ended with the attack on the church. in Kierkegaard everything was transformed into spirit—and what remained left over was, just as on the river volga, a little flag: the idea of his life and his immortality. Kassner continues the eulogy by declaring Kierkegaard the person who actually overcame romanticism, but Kassner emphasizes that the psychology which otherwise followed romanticism in Kierkegaard was a lived psychology, a formed psychology. Kassner then unfolds the idea that Kierkegaard’s life had its “ground” in the sexual, but that this ground remained ground, “so that life could raise itself upon it like a monument.”43 Here we find again Kassner’s physiognomical course of thought and its opposition to psychology, an opposition that, as previously mentioned, he found traces of in Kierkegaard in The Concept of Anxiety. Kierkegaard is compared with the (danish-born) german author of the same age friedrich Hebbel (1813–63): “Hebbel’s psychology was ultimately against the monumental or the monument, while Kierkegaard’s psychology was for the monumental. the expression of this unity is his book on anxiety, which belongs to the great works not just of the century but of all centuries.”44 by way of conclusion Kassner situates Kierkegaard between the two great tendencies of the nineteenth century, namely, between “the system” (Hegel), which dominated the first half of the century, and “heroism” (Nietzsche), which took over in the second half of the century. according to Kassner, Kierkegaard chose a via media between these; he “lived” the system, the system was the drama of his life, as opposed to arthur schopenhauer (1788–1860), who rather lived in opposition to the system, namely, his own (he preached asceticism but did not live it himself). thus situated, Kierkegaard is again held up—entirely in agreement with Kierkegaard’s own view—as one, whose life and work completely intertwined and constituted a unity, “the unity, the completely unheard of, famous and memorable between person and life or life and work.”45 Kassner’s last longer discussion of Kierkegaard is, interestingly enough, an account of where and how he for the first time came across Kierkegaard. This appears in the fine book of memoirs, Der goldene Drachen from 1957, in which there is an essay on Kierkegaard that was originally written a few years previous on occasion of the 100-year anniversary of Kierkegaard’s death.46 Kassner reports how he, in the final phase of work on his first book, Die Mystik, die Künstler und das Leben from 1900, sought peace and quiet to work at the country home of a friend and his family near Hamburg. Here for the first time in his life the catholic Kassner was introduced to a Protestant pastor’s family, and one of the substitute pastors, who was present at the meals in the vicarage, gave him a book rudolf Kassner, “zu sören Kierkegaards fünfundsiebzigstem todestag,” in Die literarische Welt. Unabhängiges Organ für das deutsche Schrifttum, ed. by Willy Haas, vol. 6, no. 46, november 14, berlin 1930, p. 3 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 299). 44 ibid., p. 3 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 299). 45 ibid. p. 4 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 301). 46 Kassner, Der goldene Drachen, pp. 169–84. 43

Steen Tullberg

154

by Kierkegaard as a gift. it was a volume with a translation of the writings from 1851–55, including The Moment and Kierkegaard’s writings on his authorship,47 and Kassner describes his joy in reading such dramatic texts in the very last year of the peaceful and spiritually comforted nineteenth century. the writings attacking the church and Kierkegaard’s various interpretations of his own authorship were, in other words, Kassner’s first encounter with Kierkegaard, which might help to explain his previously discussed emphasis on Kierkegaard’s speaking “in his own name” and his subsequent acceptance of Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous system. but the essay, which we have already drawn on above, also contains some interesting considerations of Kierkegaard’s placement in relation to the nineteenth century’s mimetics, psychology, and physiognomy. one of the guiding insights here is that Kierkegaard should be placed somewhere between the collapse of a surviving typology (baroque’s comic poetry and shakespeare’s and mozart’s drama) and the new psychology oriented on the individual (psychoanalysis and the new realistic literature and drama), which he at the same time overcomes. moreover, Kassner—in the following essay “ein Klümpchen erde”—has a good eye for the Kierkegaard reception which was dominant in the french existentialism of the age. With characteristic Kassner language and formulations, he rejects the idea that Kierkegaard has anything essentially in common with the new fashionable philosophy: Kierkegaard himself should not be counted among the existentialists because he, compared with a man of faith, designated himself as a poetic existence, which is something or should be something between abraham, who believes by virtue of the absurd, and any person whom we by chance meet in the street, one’s fellow man or the first, the best one. Kierkegaard, the poetic existence, loves the theater, often goes to the opera in order to hear no more than a melody, half an act from Don Giovanni. He has too much imagination to believe like abraham; he has so much that he knows that he can think himself into abraham’s situation, for the sake of actuality.48

Kierkegaard thus has nothing to do with sartre’s concept of freedom. according to Kassner, it does not make any sense to tear away Kierkegaard’s form of existentialism from the presuppositions of faith which were his, because existentialism is reduced to nothing, to nihilism, without these presuppositions. Translated by Jon Stewart

47 see Sören Kierkegaards Angriff auf die Christenheit, erster band: Die Akten: Sören Kierkegaards agitatorische Schriften und Aufsätze. 1851–1855, trans. and ed. by august dörner und christoph schrempf, stuttgart: frommann 1896. in the note apparatus to volume 10 of Kassner’s Sämtliche Werke, the editors entertain the possibility that Kassner contemplated the idea of translating a selection of Kierkegaard’s diaries at the time after his first encounter with Kierkegaard and, moreover, that he might have learned Danish after a brief stay in copenhagen and zealand in 1896. see Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 10, pp. 825–6. 48 Kassner, Der goldene Drachen, p. 196 (in Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 10, pp. 216–17).

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Kassner’s corpus Die Mystik, die Künstler und das Leben. Über englische Dichter und Maler im 19. Jahrhundert, leipzig: eugen diederichs 1900, p. 24 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 1, p. 33). “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” Die Neue Rundschau (Freie Bühne), Jahrgang 17, vol. 1, no. 3, berlin: s. fischer verlag 1906, pp. 513–43 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 2, pp. 39–97). “das gottmenschentum und der einzelne,” in Neue deutsche Beiträge, vol. 1, munich: verlag der bremer Presse 1923, pp. 105–16 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 6, pp. 213–27). “sören Kierkegaard. fragments d’un Journal,” traduit du danois par Jean gateau et précédés d’une introduction de rudolf Kassner, in Commerce, cahier 12, Paris: librairie Henri leclerc 1927, pp. 155–64 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 6, pp. 231–40). Das Physiognomische Weltbild, munich: delphin-verlag 1930, p. 120 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 4, p. 408). “zu sören Kierkegaards fünfundsiebzigstem todestag,” in Die literarische Welt. Unabhängiges Organ für das deutsche Schrifttum, ed. by Willy Haas, vol. 6, no. 46, november 14, berlin 1930, pp. 3–4 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 6, pp. 296–301). Physiognomik, munich: delphin-verlag 1932, p. 170 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 5, p. 149). “ueber Physiognomik,” in Der kleine Bund. Literarische Beilage des Bundes (ed. by max rychner), vol. 19, bern: fritz Pochon-Jent 1938, p. 75 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 6, p. 424). Sören Kierkegaard, Heidelberg: carl Pfeffer 1949. Der goldene Drachen, erlenbach-zurich and stuttgart: eugen rentsch 1957, pp. 169–84 (reprinted in rudolf Kassner, Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–10, ed. by

156

Steen Tullberg

ernst zinn and Klaus e. bohnenkamp, Pfullingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 10, pp. 187–203). II. Sources of Kassner’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard brandes, georg, Søren Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, leipzig: Johann ambrosius barth 1879. Kierkegaard, sören, Sören Kierkegaards Angriff auf die Christenheit, erster band: Die Akten: Sören Kierkegaard’s agitatorische Schriften und Aufsätze. 1851–1855, trans. and ed. by august dörner und christoph schrempf, stuttgart: frommann 1896. — Buch des Richters: Seine Tagebücher 1833–1855, trans. by Hermann gottsched, Jena and leipzig: diederichs 1905. III. Secondary Literature on Kassner’s Relation to Kierkegaard lukács, györgy, Die Seele und die Formen: Essays, berlin: fleischel 1911, pp. 50–51; p. 57. malik, Habib c., Receiving Søren Kierkegaard. The Early Impact and Transmission of His Thought, Washington, d.c.: catholic university of america Press 1997, pp. 357–61. mayer, mathias, “stadien auf dem lese-Weg. Kierkegaard-lektüren im ausgang von rudolf Kassner,” in Rudolf Kassner. Physiognomik als Wissensform, ed. by gerhard neumann and ulrich ott, freiburg: rombach 1999, pp. 109–22. schulz, Heiko, “rezeptionsgeschichtliche brocken oder die Brocken in der deutschen rezeption,” Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2004, pp. 418ff. — “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), pp. 322ff. steffensen, steffen, “Kassner und Kierkegaard. ein vortrag,” Orbis Litterarum, vol. 18, copenhagen: munksgaard 1963, pp. 80–90.

Karl Kraus: “the miracle of unison”—criticism of the Press and experiences of isolation Joachim grage

When the publicist bruno frei (1897–1988) spoke of the “viennese Kierkegaard, Karl Kraus”1 in an article in Die Weltbühne magazine in 1926, he obviously reckoned that his readers knew the real Kierkegaard—that is, the one from copenhagen. indeed, the impact of the great satirist, essayist, and poet Karl Kraus (1874–1936) did coincide chronologically with the general reception of Kierkegaard in the german-speaking countries. the phrase “viennese Kierkegaard” elevates Kraus to a writer as important as Kierkegaard; moreover, it hints at an affinity between the two authors and creates a connection between their spheres of activity. the name Karl Kraus is undeniably associated as much with the cultural milieu of the city, vienna, in the first decades of the twentieth century as Kierkegaard’s is with the culture of the Golden Age of copenhagen. Whether or not there are further parallels between the two and the way in which Karl Kraus refers to Kierkegaard in his work will be examined in the following article. Karl Kraus, a bohemian by birth, arrived in the capital city of the Habsburg monarchy when he was three years old. Here, he attended school and studied law, philosophy and german studies at the university without completing a degree. in 1899, he also founded the magazine Die Fackel (the torch), which he managed until his death in 1936 and of which he was the sole author from 1912 on. in addition to his satirical and polemical contributions to Die Fackel he wrote plays, aphorisms, and poems which were also frequently first published in the magazine. His often caustic criticism of literati, journalists, and corrupt cultural and political officials, from which year-long campaigns often developed, became the subject of numerous court cases. at the same time the viennese press tried as much as possible to ignore him and pretend he did not exist. With his journalistic life’s work Die Fackel and his legendary lectures, in which he read literary works from other authors as well as his own, Karl Kraus influenced an entire generation of intellectuals. those, such as elias canetti (1905–94), who cited from Die Fackel, nos. 743–50, 1926, p. 70. all quotations in this article (and the article itself) have been translated by rett rossi, except the quotations from Kierkegaard. the author would like to thank her for her invaluable cooperation, and also Julia Kielmann, for help with researching material. 1

158

Joachim Grage

underwent their intellectual socialization during the interwar years, had “Die Fackel im Ohr.”2 With this title of the second part of his autobiography, canetti hints at the peculiar fascination that Kraus’ polished language exerted on his audience as a read or spoken text. With the selection of poets and writers who were able to meet his critical gaze and whose works he impressively presented, Kraus created his own canon recognized by his audience as decisive. I. Kierkegaard in die fackel and in the Lectures in a “speech about Karl Kraus” the biochemist and author erwin chargaff (1905–2002) lists the authors whom he came to know in the lectures from Kraus and whom “his linguistic genius elevated onto a stage.”3 in addition to shakespeare, goethe, stifter, nestroy, Wedekind, brecht, Kant, and schopenhauer, the name of Kierkegaard is also to be found. As a highly influential intermediary, Kraus contributed to Kierkegaard establishing himself in the first decades of the twentieth century as a canonical author in the german-speaking countries. in the following i would like to examine how Kraus referred to Kierkegaard in Die Fackel, which texts he made public through quotations and lectures, and what image of Kierkegaard he thus formed. not every time Kierkegaard is mentioned in Die Fackel is it a direct reference from Kraus. rather, Kraus frequently cites other authors who draw on Kierkegaard or quote him in turn. thus in the spring of 1914, he presents his readers with excerpts from theodor Haecker’s book Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, which had been published the previous year. Here, Kraus comments on an ensuing public debate between Haecker and the author franz blei (1871–1942), whom Haecker attacked in his book and who “claims the right to Kierkegaard.”4 in the same year, Kraus reprints the conclusion from Haecker’s introduction to his translation of Kierkegaard’s “the thorn in the flesh”5 which was published in Der Brenner shortly before,6 and in which Haecker polemically reprimands the unholy alliance between liberal priests and journalists. in 1920, a text from ludwig von ficker, also previously published in Der Brenner and which ficker introduces with a long quotation from Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling, was published.7 finally, in 1921, Kraus printed passages from the article “augustinus, Pascal and Kierkegaard” 2

1980.

elias canetti, Die Fackel im Ohr. Lebensgeschichte 1921–1931, munich: Hanser

erwin chargaff, “rede über Karl Kraus (1925). nicht gehalten vor den sozialistischen mittelschülern am 15. dezember 1925,” cited from Aus großer Nähe. Karl Kraus in Berichten von Weggefährten und Widersachern, ed. by Friedrich Pfäfflin, Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag 2008 (Bibliothek Janowitz, vol. 16), p. 209. 4 Karl Kraus, “notizen,” Die Fackel, nos. 395–7, 1914, p. 20. 5 in danish, “Pælen i Kjødet,” in Fire opbyggelige Taler (1844), SKS 5, 317–34 / EUD, 327–46. 6 sören Kierkegaard, “der Pfahl im fleisch,” Der Brenner, vol. 4, no. 16, 1914, pp. 691–712, the passage quoted by Kraus is on pp. 700–705. 7 Karl Kraus, “innsbruck und anderes,” Die Fackel, nos. 531–43, 1920, pp. 188–91. 3

Karl Kraus: “The Miracle of Unison”

159

by carl dallago,8 in which dallago (like Haecker previously in his Kierkegaard book from 1913)9 creates a correlation between Kierkegaard and Kraus; this text was also taken from Der Brenner. the name “Kierkegaard” therefore, always coincides with authors from the periphery of this magazine where the danish philosopher was indeed intensively received.10 nonetheless, Kierkegaard himself is not the focus of Kraus’ interests when he cites the corresponding passages. rather, he obviously seems to be concerned with the polemical cultural critique that Haecker and ficker formulate based on Kierkegaard, as well as with the comments made by Der Brenner authors about Kraus himself which flatter him and which he therefore did not want to keep from his readership. this indirect Kierkegaard reception is an indication of the intellectual surroundings in which Kraus came into contact with Kierkegaard. more importantly, however, is a second level of the reception which develops through Kraus directly quoting Kierkegaard and expressing himself about Kierkegaard. it is on this level that Kraus’ function as a mediator of Kierkegaard first becomes effective. Nevertheless, he presents to the readers of Die Fackel and those listening to his lectures a very specific part of Kierkegaard’s work. He refers solely to Kierkegaard documents from the journals and notebooks that theodor Haecker selected, translated into german, and published in two volumes in 1923 titled Die Tagebücher.11 the passages selected by Kraus for Die Fackel and his lectures deal almost exclusively with Kierkegaard’s relationship to the press, in particular to goldschmidt and the Corsair. The first two quotations that Kraus cites under the title “Kierkegaard and the Journalists”12 on the first page of Die Fackel, nos. 418–22 from april 8, 1916, already set the tone. Kraus, who greatly valued the typographical layout and print design of his magazine, set them with spaced lettering, signaling a particular emphasis: Woe to the daily press! if christ came to the world today, as sure as i live he would not attack the high priests etc.—he would attack the journalists. god in heaven knows that blood-thirst is alien to my soul, and i believe that i also have a concept of a responsibility to god that is appalling, but yet, yet i would in the name of God take the responsibility for giving the order to first if I first of all, with the precaution of a most anxious conscience, had convinced myself that there was not one single other man facing the rifles—yes, not one single living creature other than— journalists.13

Karl Kraus, “die Kreuzelschreiber,” Die Fackel, nos. 568–71, 1921, pp. 51–5. theodor Haecker, Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, munich: schreiber 1913. 10 cf. Habib c. malik, Receiving Søren Kierkegaard: The Early Impact and Transmission of His Thought, Washington, d.c.: catholic university of america Press 1997, pp. 367–92. 11 sören Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, vols. 1–2, ed. and trans. by theodor Haecker, innsbruck: brenner-verlag 1923. 12 While this title appears in the table of contents, it does not appear above the quotations in the text itself. for this reason i have used brackets when referring to this title. 13 Karl Kraus, [“Kierkegaard über die Journalisten”], Die Fackel, nos. 418–22, 1916, p. 1. these quotations correspond to the entries SKS 21, 347, NB10:177 / JP 6, 6384 and SKS 21, 283–4, NB10:53 / JP 6, 6354. 8 9

160

Joachim Grage

The rest of the page is filled with a commentary by Kraus about the second quotation: seventy years after Kierkegaard there are seventy times as many journalists and gun barrels, thus, what Kierkegaard envisions is seventy times more desirable. However, in the meantime, the journalists no longer stand in front of the barrels, but are instead behind them. Kraus thus rereads Kierkegaard in view of World War i, for which he also makes the press responsible. the journalists helped load the barrels, watched “the shooting guns and the blood that runs,”14 and subsequently described the bloodshed. the press is therefore represented at the same time as a warmonger and beneficiary of the war. Kierkegaard is presented here as a severe critic of the press, and it is here that he meets up with Karl Kraus whose journalistic activities were directed against “journalists” and “the daily press” from the start.15 the ironic rereading of the bible in the first quotation and the militancy with which the journalists in the second quotation are separated out as the lowest category of living beings in order to execute them in spirit and by explicitly appealing to the name of god—correspond with the polemical stridency Kraus also embraced when he campaigned against the press. Kierkegaard thus has the status of a “star witness” such as Kraus frequently sought to find for this convictions. At the same time Kraus’ reception of Kierkegaard limited itself through quotations in Die Fackel to this aspect of the lonely and bitter fight against the press. This is absolutely typical of Kraus’ reception of philosophical authors. They often serve him “as mediators of a specific life sentiment or individual thoughts that are not central in their work as a whole.”16 Kraus’ actual knowledge of Kierkegaard at this point in time cannot in fact be reconstructed. theodor Haecker, who celebrated Kraus as the only living intellectual descendant of the danish philosopher,17 suspected in 1914 that he “probably—although i do not know—never read a word of Kierkegaard.”18 considering the intensive Kierkegaard reception at the time, especially in vienna, it is hard to believe, however, that he never took note of him up until the quotations in Die Fackel.19 alfred Pfabigan suspected Kraus was at least influenced by the text of “A” in Either/Or and its aesthetical philosophy; however, he failed to offer any proof of this.20 the journal entries that Kraus cites are found in Hermann gottsched’s anthology Buch des Richters (1905), the first and at the time only translation of the posthumous papers, in which they are printed one after the other, just as they are with Kraus.21 it seems probable that Haecker brought Kierkegaard’s attacks against journalists and the press to Kraus’ attention and referred him to the two quotations. although there Kraus, [“Kierkegaard über die Journalisten”], p. 1, “wie es schießt und fließt.” both “journalists” and “the daily press” were clearly charged terms for Kraus, which he only used polemically. 16 alfred Pfabigan, Karl Kraus und der Sozialismus. Eine politische Biographie, vienna: europaverlag 1976, p. 164. 17 see below, section ii. 18 Kraus, “notizen,” Die Fackel, nos. 395–7, 1914, p. 21. 19 cf. malik, Receiving Søren Kierkegaard, pp. 339–92. 20 Pfabigan, Karl Kraus und der Sozialismus, p. 164. 21 sören Kierkegaard, Buch des Richters. Seine Tagebücher 1833–1855, ed. and trans. by Hermann gottsched, Jena and leipzig: diederichs 1905, p. 60. 14 15

Karl Kraus: “The Miracle of Unison”

161

are deviations from gottsched’s translation in the second quotation, it still agrees more with his version than with the translation Haecker later offered in his edition of the Tagebücher.22 furthermore, it is peculiar that Kraus explicitly dates both quotations to 1846 despite the fact that they actually stem from 1849. in gottsched’s edition they are undated but are found in the chapter entitled “Kierkegaard und der Korsar,” in which gottsched refers to the Corsair feud in 1846 in a footnote. in Haeckel’s edition both entries are later recorded under the year 1849.23 the second quotation in particular impressed Krause to such an extent that he printed it in its entirety another three times in later issues of Die Fackel, discussed it approximately 8–10 times in his lectures and frequently alluded to it; in total it was mentioned 17 times in Die Fackel. in 1917, he already reckoned that the quotation was known when he asked in Die Fackel: “When, according to Kierkegaard’s directives, will the government know what machine guns were discovered for?”24 similarly, in 1920, he alludes as a matter of course to the by now common saying: “it clearly concerns one of the cases which Kierkegaard wanted placed in front of the gun barrels.”25 also in 1920, he reports in Die Fackel about two readings in december 1919, during which he again railed against “the most cunning industry of betrayal in the country, the contrabandists of public opinion, in a word, the journalists of Jewish and anti-semitic caliber” and felt bound to “quote the vow that Kierkegaard had spoken in 1846 [!].”26 at the end of the Kierkegaard quotation he called out to the applause of the audience: “Écrasez l’infâme!” When he engages in debates about the possibility of reforming the press with gershom scholem,27 Walter benjamin explicitly refers to this call and agrees with Kraus. it was not until april 1923 that another more extensive quotation from Kierkegaard followed in Die Fackel. once again it concerns the role of the press. in Journal NB8 Kierkegaard writes on november 26, 1848, that the daily press gives rise to more misfortune than benefits and that a shift in thinking is therefore required in all social strata. The evil of the press exists in “that it is so bent on inflating the moment a thousand or ten-thousand times and thus making it more important than it already is.”28 the press’ misuse has to be brought to the general consciousness because “all moral education consists of being weaned from the immediate.”29 otherwise, there is a danger that europe’s development will come to a standstill. Kraus cites these journal entries within his text “vom mut vor der Presse,” which he had read for his audience previously at a lecture on february 15, 1923, and which cf. Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, vol. 2, p. 27 and pp. 37–8. The first quotation was reprinted again in the selection “Kierkegaard und der Korsar” (Die Fackel, nos. 706–11, p. 1–28, see p. 18), with the same wording as Haecker and with the correct dating. 24 Karl Kraus, “mörderin Presse,” Die Fackel, nos. 454–6, 1917, p. 22. 25 Karl Kraus, “vorlesungen,” Die Fackel, nos. 546–50, 1920, p. 29. 26 Karl Kraus, “ecrasez l’infâme,” Die Fackel, nos. 521–30, 1920, p. 7. 27 cf. gershom scholem, Walter Benjamin. Geschichte einer Freundschaft, frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp 1975, p. 105; cf. also Pfäfflin (ed.), Aus großer Nähe, p. 125. 28 Karl Kraus, “die letzte nacht. Wien. vom mut der Presse,” Die Fackel, nos. 613–21, 1923, p. 61. 29 ibid. 22 23

162

Joachim Grage

is part of a larger article about the reactions to the epilogue to his drama Die letzten Tage der Menschheit which was called Die letzte Nacht and which had its debut on february 4, 1923, in vienna. With the exception of three deviations, the citation follows Haecker’s translation which was to be published the same year by the brenner verlag in innsbruck.30 as Kraus wrote in a letter to a friend shortly after the lecture, he had received the proof of the Tagebücher in advance from ludwig von ficker.31 in the introduction to Kierkegaard’s quotation, Kraus once again alludes to his words about journalists at whom one is allowed to point the barrel of a gun when he presents Kierkegaard as the one who wanted to use gunpowder for this purpose. Kraus again uses Kierkegaard as confirmation; he feels “certified”32 by him. Kraus is concerned here with proving that Kierkegaard’s “prophecy”33 about the standstill of Europe as a result of the press has been fulfilled. the climax of Kierkegaard reception in Die Fackel is a 28-page comprehensive compilation of entries from Haecker’s translation of the Tagebücher published in december 1925 in Die Fackel, issues 706–711 under the title “Kierkegaard and The Corsair.”34 With this publication, Kierkegaard is definitively instrumentalized as a comrade-in-arms in the war against the daily press, which, in the meantime, has become sharpened into the fight against the Viennese journalist Imre Békessy (1887–1951). born in Hungary, békessy was relocated to vienna after 1919 when he was to be sentenced in his homeland by a military court for extortion. He had been publishing the newspaper Die Stunde in vienna since 1923 and with that became a target for Kraus, who time and time again denounced the unscrupulousness and extortionate methods of the tabloid. His call to “throw the scoundrel out of vienna”35 was legendary. He frequently concluded his lectures with it, and his listeners frequently shouted their approval.36 Kraus himself drew attention to the parallels between Kierkegaard and himself in the “Preliminary remarks to ‘Kierkegaard and The Corsair’ ” which he presented at the reading of the journal entries37: Whoever hears the following sentences will be seized with the miracle of a return of the same—in experience and in account, in all motives of the soul and reasoning, in the representation of the issue and the milieu—he will not be able to comprehend it and not really believe it, until he has read the sentences in the original, in Kierkegaard’s journals (selected and translated by theodor Haecker in the brenner verlag). Kierkegaard’s Die 30 cf. Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, vol. 1, pp. 422–3. Haecker shortened the journal entry that corresponds to SKS 21, 144–5, nb8:3 for the translation. 31 Cf. Pfäfflin (ed.), Aus großer Nähe, p. 126. 32 Kraus, “die letzte nacht. Wien. vom mut der Presse,” p. 60. 33 ibid., p. 61. 34 this title is already found in gottsched’s edition, see above. 35 For the first time in Karl Kraus, “Vorlesungen,” Die Fackel, nos. 691–6, 1925, p. 36. 36 cf. also the article with this title, “Hinaus aus Wien mit dem schuft,” in Die Fackel, nos. 697–705, 1925, pp. 145–76. 37 documented lectures include those on november 14, 1925 in vienna (“With Preliminary remarks,” cf. Karl Kraus, “vorlesungen,” Die Fackel, nos. 706–11, 1925, p. 94), on april 19, 1926 in Paris (excerpts, cf. Karl Kraus, “Paris,” Die Fackel, nos. 726–9, 1926, p. 74) and on may 21, 1928 in Prague (excerpts, cf. Karl Kraus, “notizen,” Die Fackel, nos. 800–805, 1929, p. 47).

Karl Kraus: “The Miracle of Unison”

163

Stunde is The Corsair, his bekessy, goldschmidt, and although—since the story took place eighty years ago in copenhagen—the essence of this scourge has to be seen as paradisiacal relief compared with what vienna currently offers, this unison belongs to the most wonderful events of intellectual history.38

The audience also seemed to find this the case. Kraus printed a reader’s letter in which an anonymous writer tells about his impressions at the first reading on November 14, 1925 and the “uncanny effect of their [sc. the journal passages’] eerie proximity to reality”: “a dead man sits in judgment on vienna, on all of us who sat in the hall.”39 the notes from Kierkegaard’s journals from 1846–54 do not go into the external events and finer details of the Corsair feud but rather contain reflections about the role of the public in this conflict, the role of the press in general (the quotation about the standstill of europe is also taken up here again), and about the development that Kierkegaard himself passes through during the feud up until he stylizes himself at the end as a martyr for the truth. They conclude with the affirmation that Goldschmidt left the city and the question of what price Kierkegaard had to pay for that. Kraus had at this point in time not yet achieved this success. in taking a closer look, the analogies are not as clear as Kraus found them to be. Both cases were actually concerned with the fight of one man against a newspaper and its editor; however, Kraus was not a victim in the same way Kierkegaard was. rather, Kraus was himself the challenger and knew he had a large group of similarly minded people behind him: the readers of Die Fackel and the audience at his lectures. this is a difference that Kraus also pointed out. in the January issue of 1926, he quotes from Haecker’s epilogue to “Kritik der gegenwart,”40 a translation of the section “the Present age” from A Literary Review of Two Ages which was published in July 1914 in two sections in Der Brenner and separately by the brenner verlag in august of the same year. in it Haecker describes how Kierkegaard once met goldschmidt on the street and had a serious talk with him, whereupon goldschmidt broke into tears, gave up the Corsair, and left the city. With regards to this comment Kraus noted that it was only a matter of time before “his Goldschmidt” (i.e., Békessy) fled from the city, but that this would not be the result of a personal meeting, which constituted “a considerable deviation from the model of a relationship, that otherwise repeated itself with eerie identity.”41 Kraus was to be proven right in the end and once more with reference to Kierkegaard was able to report in the article “die stunde des todes” in the august 1926 issue of Die Fackel that “the scoundrel is gone.”42 after the investigations against békessy were taken up concerning the charge of extortion, he never returned to vienna following a stay at a health resort. a few years later Kraus shares with the readers of Die Fackel two further quotations from Kierkegaard that one of the “listeners at the lecture on January 13th

Kraus, “vorlesungen,” Die Fackel, nos. 706–11, 1925, p. 95. ibid., p. 99. 40 Karl Kraus, “zum unterschied von Kierkegaard,” Die Fackel, nos. 712–16, 1926, pp. 69–70. 41 ibid., p. 69. 42 Karl Kraus, “die stunde des todes,” Die Fackel, nos. 732–4, 1926, p. 1. 38 39

Joachim Grage

164

[1928]”43 had pointed out to him. they, too, are taken from Haecker’s edition of the Tagebücher and for once do not present Kierkegaard as a critic of the press, but rather consider the position of the individual given the knowledge that the current development of society leads to its downfall—this too is a leitmotif in the lifework of Karl Kraus. the notes with the title “the sign by Which a given situation is recognized to be ripe for falling”44 deals with the discrepancy between official announcements and the collective private knowledge that these are lies. Kraus omits the last sentence of the notes in which Kierkegaard explicitly refers to the “situation in christendom, especially in Protestantism, especially in denmark,”45 and in doing so ascribes to Kierkegaard’s diagnosis a trans-historical and trans-national universality. the second quotation formulates a resigned knowledge that Kraus quite obviously clearly wants to relate to his own effectiveness: “one solitary man cannot help or save an age; he can only express that it is foundering.”46 this sentence gained special significance when in the same year Kraus prefaces his drama Die Unüberwindlichen with it as a motto. the motif of the individual and his position in his era returns in the last quotation from Kierkegaard which Kraus shares with his readers in may 1929. in a note he determines that he is increasingly politically isolated and that the “unified bourgeois front that was established against me now includes the social democrats as well.”47 in this position “the miracle of unison with Kierkegaard”48 returns once more after a reader draws his attention to a passage in Kierkegaard’s Judge for Yourself!: someone out in a blizzard dressed in the lightest summer clothes is not as exposed as one who wills to be a solitary human being in a world where everything is alliance and accordingly, with the selfishness of the alliance, demands that one ally oneself with it until the individual protects himself against several alliances by becoming a member of one alliance, whereas the solitary person, as soon as it has become obvious that he does not wish to enter into alliance with anyone, has all the alliances, joined together as one—a grandiose alliance!—against him.49

right from the start, the reception of Kierkegaard expressed through the quotations published in Die Fackel reveals Kraus’ identification with Kierkegaard. If the Danish philosopher is first cited as a witness in the fight against the daily press with the comparison of the Corsair feud with the campaign against békessy, then it is evident in the later quotations that Kraus discovered a kindred spirit in Kierkegaard whose 43 44

3736.

Karl Kraus, “Worte Kierkegaards,” Die Fackel, no. 777, 1928, p. 16. ibid. cf. Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, vol. 2, p. 367; SKS, 26, 135, NB32:24 / JP 3,

Kraus, “Worte Kierkegaards,” p. 16. ibid., p. 33. SKS 21, 304, NB10:93 / JP 4, 4157. 47 Karl Kraus, “letzten endes,” Die Fackel, nos. 806–9, 1929, p. 15. 48 ibid., “das Wunder der Übereinstimmung mit Kierkegaard.” 49 ibid., cf. SKS 16, 220 / JFY, 171. Here, however the “miracle of unison” is also based on the german translation, which turns the danish Sammenhold (alliance) into Partei (party), thus strengthening the political connotation that is also present in Kraus’ text, but the existential experience of exclusion from the community, formulated by Kierkegaard, is also conveyed in the german translation. 45 46

Karl Kraus: “The Miracle of Unison”

165

reflections about the loneliness of those who distance themselves and take a position against their surroundings mirrored experiences that Kraus had as well.50 II. Kraus as Kierkegaard’s Heir This identification with Kierkegaard reception is already prefigured even before Karl Kraus himself explicitly refers to him. as soon as the name “Kierkegaard” appears in Die Fackel for the first time in an anonymous printed letter from a reader in november 1913, he is named in the same breath as Karl Kraus. the unknown author refers to “Kierkegaard, the last great religious genius,” and then, addressing himself directly to Kraus, writes, “you keep me alert in a deadened world.”51 this quotation anticipates a great deal of what shaped the later reception of Kierkegaard through Kraus: Kierkegaard and Kraus are placed on a level as intellectuals and characterized as antipodes of a deadened, less sensitive milieu. the thinking and writing of both is perceived as an antidote to a metaphorical sleep that causes the “deadened world.” although the designation a “religious genius” cannot be transferred to Kraus, i will demonstrate that we can find a trace to the Viennese author here as well. six months later, in the spring of 1914, Kraus presents a quotation from theodor Haecker’s book Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit (1914) to his readers, in which he is mentioned together with Kierkegaard. Haecker is interested in contemporary authors whose works and personality exhibit a relationship to Kierkegaard. He can only think of one: Karl Kraus. the viennese author stands in the succession of the “productive subjective thinkers,”52 the group of authors that Kierkegaard created through his pseudonyms and who are all parts of him: some of the passages from Die Fackel are like continuations of the treatise of constantin constantius about the farce and the comical actor. other tenets could be part of the erotics’ speeches at the banquet “in vino veritas,” whereas some of his aphorisms are like variations of Διαψάλματα or frather taciturnus’ tenets about the pleasure of thinking and the miracle of language.53

a letter which Kraus sent his friend sidonie von nádherný for her 40th birthday on december 1, 1925 (that is, in the same year as the extensive selection from Haecker’s Tagebücher edition appeared in the Fackel) refers to this perception of Kierkegaard beyond the critique of the press. the letter consists only of a quotation from Kierkegaard—a journal entry from gilleleje in 1835: the sight of the sea in the melancholic evening mood allows the I to find harmony with itself and its fellow human beings, even though he stands “alone” against the “the world’s throng.” cf. Karl Kraus, Briefe an Sidonie Nádherný von Borutin. 1913–1936, vols. 1–2, göttingen: Wallstein verlag 2005 (Bibliothek Janowitz, vol. 6), vol. 1, p. 663; Kierkegaard, Die Tagebücher, vol. 1, p. 14; this corresponds to SKS, 17, 14, AA:6 / KJN 1, 9. 51 Karl Kraus, “zum gesamtbild der Kulturentwicklung,” Die Fackel, nos. 387–8, 1913, p. 17. 52 Kraus, “notizen,” Die Fackel, nos. 395–7, 1914, p. 19. 53 ibid. 50

166

Joachim Grage

Here, it is not the “religious genius” within whose vicinity Kraus is placed as the only legitimate heir, but rather the “literary” Kierkegaard who conceals himself and writes about aesthetic content. Haecker refers to numerous parallels between the two authors: they are distinct stylists and brilliant rhetoricians, and both write polished aphorisms; when he then characterizes Kraus as the one contemporary author who has “the strongest vis comica” that stands “in service to the idea,”54 it also throws light on Haecker’s image of Kierkegaard. since it is particularly the satirical character of Karl Kraus’ oeuvre that moves him into the dane’s proximity: He is the only great polemicist and satirist of the time who is covered by ethics. He alone, and no other, has the right to quote Kierkegaard’s horrible words about journalists. seen intellectually, Karl Kraus is the bravest man alive today, because he stands with his work in the piercing light of the public.55

frank field called Haecker’s words about Kraus “the most balanced comment,”56 since not only the sharpness of his polemical writings is considered, but also the ethical self-image that first justifies his verbal attack. Kraus wrote not for the sake of polemics and the fight, but rather for the sake of the issue. His stylistically brilliant attacks against the mediocre journalists and feuilletonists are no end in themselves, nor do they serve to shape his personal profile; instead, they are a consciously implemented means in order to achieve an ethically motivated goal. according to Haecker, the furor and the courage with which Kraus wrote are unique. Kraus obviously felt flattered and printed the praising words in extenso in Die Fackel—and as shown above, he would henceforth frequently cite “Kierkegaard’s horrible words about journalists” to which he was probably first referred by Haecker. From then on, Haecker belonged to those who were praised in Die Fackel.57 that Kraus was compared by one of his contemporaries with Kierkegaard or set in his tradition, was promoted by Kraus himself in that he continued to print such comparisons in Die Fackel. Without making any additional comment, he even shares with his readers that in “augustinus, Pascal and Kierkegaard,” carl dallago places him nearer to Kierkegaard in a religious sense. dallago describes him as a human, who like no other, fulfilled “what Kierkegaard once said of ‘Christians,’ namely that, according to god’s thinking, being a christian means living in the struggle, standing as an ‘individual’ in the struggle with ‘mankind’ ”58—and that despite Kraus being a Jew. obviously he did not know that Kraus was baptized in 1911 and was a member of the catholic church up until he left it in 1923, which, however, he never made public. edward timms is of the opinion that this in particular made him receptive ibid. ibid. 56 frank field, The Last Days of Mankind: Karl Kraus and his Vienna, london: macmillan and new York: st. martin’s Press 1967, p. 242. 57 Kraus, “notizen,” Die Fackel, nos. 400–403, 1914, p. 57, Kraus calls Haecker “the only man in Germany today, who finds polemical courage and polemical expression, without finding it necessary like the hordes of literary hysterics, to hide me as a source of style and opinion.” 58 Karl Kraus, “die Kreuzelschreiber,” Die Fackel, nos. 568–71, 1921, p. 51. 54 55

Karl Kraus: “The Miracle of Unison”

167

to Kierkegaard’s texts. He was a model for how one could be both a christian and a satirist: “if Kierkegaard can adopt a non-christian persona (for example, in the first part of Either/Or) in order to ‘deceive his readers into the truth,’ we should hardly be surprised to find a similar principle at work in the more explicitly satirical writings of less fervently christian authors.”59 When dallago interprets Kraus’ work as that of a basically christian author in the sense of Kierkegaard, and Kraus prints this interpretation in extenso in Die Fackel, this reading gains the status of a hidden self-commentary. Kraus also cites a contribution in a Czech newspaper in which his “fight against central europe’s civilization”60 is very critically presented; at the same time though, it says in it that he is “reminiscent of moral prophets in the style of Kierkegaard and Pascal.”61 bruno frei’s expression the “viennese Kierkegaard Karl Kraus” is also authorized by being cited in Die Fackel. many contemporaries followed in this track, without Kraus noticing it. His publisher Kurt Wolff (1887–1963) positions him in his memoir “as a thinker and aphorist” in the tradition of Kierkegaard and lichtenberg.62 theodor W. adorno (1903–69), who sat in the audience as Kraus threw békessy out of vienna in his lecture, wrote in Noten zur Literatur: “Since Kierkegaard’s fight against Christendom, no single person has so movingly perceived the interests of the whole against the whole.”63 finally, at a funeral service for him in november 1936, the catholic journalist georg moenius (1890–1953) called Kraus “the greatest occurrence of a moralist since Kierkegaard.”64 Translated by Rett Rossi

edward timms, Karl Kraus, Apocalyptic Satirist: Culture and Catastrophe in Habsburg Vienna, new Haven and london: Yale university Press 1986, p. 246. 60 Karl Kraus, “ein reinigungsprozeß,” Die Fackel, nos. 668–75, 1924, p. 76. 61 ibid., p. 77. 62 Cited in Pfäfflin (ed.), Aus großer Nähe, p. 98. 63 theodor W. adorno, Gesammelte Schriften, vols. 1–20, ed. by rolf tiedemann, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1970–86, vol. 11, 1974, p. 372. 64 georg moenius, Karl Kraus, der Zeitkämpfer sub specie aeterni, vienna: lányi, 1937, cited from caroline Kohn, Karl Kraus, stuttgart: metzler 1966, p. 309. 59

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Kraus’ corpus “zum gesamtbild der Kulturentwicklung,” Die Fackel, nos. 387–8, 1913, pp. 14–17. “notizen,” Die Fackel, nos. 395–7, 1914, pp. 19–21. “notizen,” Die Fackel, nos. 400–403, 1914, pp. 57–60. [“Kierkegaard über die Journalisten”], Die Fackel, nos. 418–22, 1916, p. 1. “vaterländischer Hilfsdienst,” Die Fackel, nos. 445–53, 1917, p. 22. “mörderin Presse,” Die Fackel, nos. 454–6, 1917, pp. 21–2. “ecrasez l’infâme,” Die Fackel, nos. 521–30, 1920, pp. 7–8. “innsbruck und anderes,” Die Fackel, nos. 531–43, 1920, pp. 1–208. “vorlesungen,” Die Fackel, nos. 546–50, 1920, pp. 3–33. “die Kreuzelschreiber,” Die Fackel, nos. 568–71, 1921, pp. 50–64. “notizen,” Die Fackel, nos. 601–7, 1922, pp. 82–99. “die letzte nacht. Wien. vom mut der Presse,” Die Fackel, nos. 613–21, 1923, pp. 59–145. “ein ganz großer,” Die Fackel, nos. 668–75, 1924, pp. 15–16. “ein neuer schmock,” Die Fackel, nos. 668–75, 1924, pp. 37–8. “shakespeare hat alles vorausgewußt,” Die Fackel, nos. 686–90, 1925, pp. 1–18. “entlarvt durch bekessy,” Die Fackel, nos. 691–6, 1925, pp. 68–128, see p. 101. “Kierkegaard und der Korsar,” Die Fackel, nos. 706–11, 1925, pp. 1–28. “vorlesungen,” Die Fackel, nos. 706–11, 1925, pp. 85–100. “zum unterschied von Kierkegaard,” Die Fackel, nos. 712–16, 1926, pp. 69–70. “die stunde des todes,” Die Fackel, nos. 732–4, 1926, pp. 1–56. “stimmen,” Die Fackel, nos. 743–50, 1926, pp. 70–73. “ich und wir,” Die Fackel, nos. 743–50, 1926, pp. 133–60, see p. 152. “Worte Kierkegaards,” Die Fackel, no. 777, 1928, p. 16. “blut und schmutz oder schober entlarvt durch bekessy,” Die Fackel, nos. 778–80, 1928, pp. 1–56, see p. 18 and p. 33. “rechenschaftsbericht,” Die Fackel, nos. 795–9, 1928, pp. 1–51, see pp. 41–4. “im dreißigsten Kriegsjahr,” Die Fackel, nos. 800–805, 1929, pp. 1–45. “letzten endes,” Die Fackel, nos. 806–9, 1929, pp. 12–16. “berlin,” Die Fackel, nos. 827–33, 1930, pp. 69–92. “Warum die fackel nicht erscheinen konnte,” Die Fackel, nos. 890–905, 1934, pp. 1–315, see p. 238. “verschwenderisches theater,” Die Fackel, nos. 909–11, 1935, pp. 50–51. “der zerrissene,” Die Fackel, nos. 917–22, 1936, pp. 69–73. Die Unüberwindlichen, in Schriften, vols. 1–12, ed. by christian Wagenknecht, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1986–89, vol. 11, pp. 221–346, see p. 225.

Karl Kraus: “The Miracle of Unison”

169

Briefe an Sidonie Nádherný von Borutin. 1913–1936, vols. 1–2, göttingen: Wallstein verlag 2005 (Bibliothek Janowitz, vol. 6), vol. 1, p. 663. II. Sources of Kraus’ Knowledge of Kierkegaard [boesen, emil and Hermann gottsched], “die letzten tage sören Kierkegaards,” Der Brenner, vol. 8, 1923, pp. 70–76. dallago, carl, “augustinus, Pascal und Kierkegaard (‘der große unwissende,’ ii. teil, Kap. 10),” Der Brenner, vol. 6, no. 9, 1921, pp. 641–734. Haecker, theodor, Sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der Innerlichkeit, munich: schreiber 1913. — “Vorworte / von Sören Kierkegaard. Vorbemerkungen des Übersetzers,” Der Brenner, vol. 4, no. 14, 1914, pp. 666–70. — “Der Pfahl im Fleisch / von Sören Kierkegaard. Vorwort des Übersetzers,” Der Brenner, vol. 4, no. 16, 1914, pp. 691–705. — “Kritik der gegenwart. nachwort,” Der Brenner, vol. 4, no. 20, 1914, pp. 886–908. — “Übersicht,” Der Brenner, vol. 6, no. 5, 1920, pp. 341–61. — “Kierkegaard am fuße des altars,” Der Brenner, vol. 7, no. 2, 1922, pp. 71–85. III. Secondary Literature on Kraus’ Relation to Kierkegaard field, frank, The Last Days of Mankind: Karl Kraus and His Vienna, london: macmillan and new York: st. martin’s Press 1967, pp. 23–4. Knepler, georg, Karl Kraus liest Offenbach, vienna: löcker verlag 1984, p. 241. Krysztofiak, Maria, “Die skandinavische Moderne in der Fackel von Karl Kraus,” Skandinavien und Mitteleuropa. Literarische Verwandtschaften, Wroclaw and görlitz: neisse verlag 2008 (Beihefte zum Orbis Linguarum, vol. 42), pp. 59–78. malik, Habib c., Receiving Søren Kierkegaard: The Early Impact and Transmission of His Thought, Washington, d.c.: catholic university of america Press 1997, pp. 368–82. Pfabigan, alfred, Karl Kraus und der Sozialismus. Eine politische Biographie, vienna: europaverlag 1976, pp. 164–5. timms, edward, Karl Kraus, Apocalyptic Satirist: Culture and Catastrophe in Habsburg Vienna, new Haven and london: Yale university Press 1986, pp. 246–7.

thomas mann: demons and daemons elisabete m. de sousa and ingrid basso

The present article is divided into three sections: in the first, we give an overview of thomas mann’s life, providing some information relevant for the works to be analyzed, especially Doktor Faustus, the novel where Kierkegaard’s work and name is abundantly mentioned. in the second, we survey the sources of mann’s knowledge of Kierkegaard until the genesis of Doktor Faustus; in particular, we address the omissions of mentions of the name of the danish thinker in thomas mann’s writings until that time, taking into account that in other novels from this period, among them The Magic Mountain and Joseph and his Brothers, one finds clear evidence of a treatment of issues that were commonly debated at this particular moment of the Kierkegaardian reception in germany. in the third part, we give an account of primary and secondary sources used during the genesis of Doktor Faustus, and we bring forth the presence of Kierkegaard’s thought in the texture of chapter XXv of this novel and in correlated essays or lectures. I. Some Biographical and Bibliographical Facts Concerning Thomas Mann thomas mann (lübeck, June 6, 1875–zurich, august 12, 1955) was born into a wealthy talented family, a background that he sketched in his celebrated first novel Buddenbrooks (1901).1 During his early years he witnessed the fall of the family firm, and the selling of the mansion he would later immortalize in Buddenbrooks, whereas in his later times, he would witness the ups and downs of the family he had raised with his wife Katia Pringsheim (1883–1980) after their marriage in 1905. though he thrived as writer early in life, he would be dispossessed of the recognition he had earned and deserved as representative of the post-goethean german culture which he would nonetheless bequeath to future generations.2 in fact, his maturity as a writer and intellectual were spent in exile in the usa from 1939 until 1952; his warnings in his native Germany against the rise of fascism, his criticism of the nazification of the work of richard Wagner (1813–83), and his wife’s Jewish ancestry, led him to exile thomas mann, Buddenbrooks, berlin: fischer 1901. for a detailed commentary on the agonic relation between thomas mann and Johann Wolfgang von goethe (1749–1832), see Harold bloom, “introduction,” in Thomas Mann, Modern Critical Views, ed. by Harold bloom, new York: chelsea House Publishers 1986, pp. 1–9.

1 2

172

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

in switzerland in 1933; he was deprived of his german citizenship in 1937 and lost all the honorary degrees he had received until then. mann would eventually gain american citizenship in 1940, at a time when he was taking active part in keeping the german spirit alive during World War ii; his radio broadcasts became famous (Deutsche Hörer!),3 and by then, he had left behind any nostalgia for a romanticized germany, as well as a certain contempt for politics, and had publicly taken as his main task the Bildung of the germans in political matters.4 In truth, this political engagement is another feature of his prolific activity as essayist, already patent in a string of lectures held across europe even before World War II, and later published, on great figures of German music, philosophy, and literature; these, in some cases, remain key instances of the reception of those musicians, philosophers, and poets. moreover, the collection of essays and lectures Leiden und Grösse der Meister (1935)5 is in a way the suffering and the greatness of mann himself, as heir to their legacy, facing now a nation on the verge of extinction; until the very end of his life, he would pursue this task with zeal, with Versuch über Schiller (1955) dating from the year of his death. after the war he frequently revisited europe: in 1949 he received the goethe Prizes of Weimar (east germany) and frankfurt am main (West germany); he regained his citizenship and all his former honorary degrees and decorations; he visited lübeck, his hometown, now in the newly founded Federal Republic of Germany. In January 1952 he finally settled in switzerland and died three years later in zurich. since he stopped attending school at the age of 15, thomas mann described himself as an autodidact; his father’s death and the subsequent liquidation of the family business hastened him to finish his studies at secondary school in order to join the family in Munich. He first held here a clerical position and, intending to take up journalism, attended lectures at the local university for a short period. However, during a one-year journey to italy with his brother Heinrich mann (1871–1950), his literary career was definitely launched with the successful publication of a first book of short stories, Der kleine Herr Friedemann,6 in 1898. shortly afterwards, fame in germany and europe arrived with the huge success and popularity of Buddenbrooks, which had sold over a million copies by the time he was awarded the nobel Prize for literature in 1929. in the meantime thomas mann had authored novellas and novels that became landmarks in german and Western culture, among them Tristan (1903),7 Königliche Hoheit (Royal Highness, 1909),8 Tod in Venedig (Death in Venice, 1912),9 Bekenntnisse des Hochstaplers Felix Krull (Confessions Published later as a book, Deutsche Hörer! 55 Radiosendungen nach Deutschland, stockholm: bermann-fischer 1945. 4 see Walter Horace bruford, “introduction,” in his The German Tradition of SelfCultivation: Bildung from Humboldt to Thomas Mann, cambridge: cambridge university Press 1975, pp. ix–x. 5 thomas mann, Leiden und Grösse der Meister, berlin: fischer 1935. 6 thomas mann, Der kleine Herr Friedemann, berlin: fischer 1898. 7 thomas mann, Tristan, berlin: fischer 1903. 8 thomas mann, Königliche Hoheit, berlin: fischer 1909. 9 thomas mann, Tod in Venedig, berlin: fischer 1913. 3

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

173

of Felix Krull, Confidence Man, 1922),10 Der Zauberberg (The Magic Mountain, 1924),11 and Mario und der Zauberer (Mario and the Magician, 1929).12 at the same time, mann published collections of essays and lectures, among them Betrachtungen eines Unpolitischen (Reflections of an Unpolitical Man, 1918),13 Rede und Antwort (Question and Answer, 1922),14 Bemühungen (Efforts, 1925)15 and Die Forderung des Tages (Order of the Day, 1930).16 despite an apparent duality in genre, the fact is that thomas mann’s novels, essays, or lectures from the period between the two World Wars share the subject matter and intention that reflect the concerns and ideas posited by an aestheticallyminded author with the clear perception that he was standing at the end of an era. as previously mentioned, mann had anticipated and warned against the rise of fascism during the Weimar Republic in lectures, essays, and also in fiction (Mario and the Magician), and he continued to combat it in many pamphlets and talks throughout the period of the nazi regime and World War ii.17 from this period onwards, aesthetics combined with his cultural and political concerns regarding germany and also the whole of Western civilization prevail in his writings. in different modes and types of narrative, his later production puts into evidence the master beams that structured his life and his thought in three novels where his ironic stance emerges each time in a singular way, since he ostensibly addresses Goethe’s influence each time in a different type of historical novel: a reconstruction of a past time, a mythical narrative, and a biography. in Lotte in Weimar (The Beloved Returns, 1939),18 goethe becomes a character and is portrayed in his old age, confronted by the return of the love of his youth whom he himself had fictionalized in Werther.19 in Joseph und seine Brüder (Joseph and his Brothers, 1933–43),20 the family epos of the old testament is narrated in four volumes, thus turning into reality a plan that goethe himself had nurtured. and in Doktor Faustus (1947),21 the reader is faced with the story of a musician who pays for the powers of genius with his complete destruction, thomas mann, Bekenntnisse des Hochstaplers Felix Krull, vienna, munich: rikola verlag 1922. 11 thomas mann, Der Zauberberg, berlin: fischer 1924. 12 thomas mann, Mario und der Zauberer, berlin: fischer 1930. 13 thomas mann, Betrachtungen eines Unpolitischen, berlin: fischer 1918. 14 thomas mann, Rede und Antwort, berlin: fischer 1922. 15 thomas mann, Bemühungen, berlin: fischer 1925. 16 thomas mann, Die Forderung des Tages. Reden und Aufsätze aus den Jahren 1925–1929, berlin: fischer 1930. 17 for a detailed account of the author’s relation to contemporary politics, see t.J. reed, “mann and History,” in The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Mann, ed. by ritchie robertson, cambridge: cambridge university Press 2004, pp. 1–21. 18 thomas mann, Lotte in Weimar, stockholm: bermann-fischer 1939. 19 Johann Wolfgang von goethe, Die Leiden des jungen Werthers, leipzig: Weygand 1774. 20 thomas mann, Die Geschichten Jaakobs, berlin: fischer 1933; Der junge Joseph, berlin: fischer 1934; Joseph in Ägypten, vienna: fischer 1936; Joseph, der Ernährer, stockholm: bermann-fischer 1943. 21 thomas mann, Doktor Faustus, stockholm: bermann-fischer 1947. 10

174

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

in mind, spirit, and body; leverkühn loses his soul when he makes a pact with the devil, but even before the pact, a succession of acts of creation had brought forth an entropic development marked by syphilis, the whole eventually destroying his body and consuming his creative spirit. and leverkühn’s uncanny cohabitation of art and physical, spiritual, and moral decadence evolves against the background of the political turmoil that agitated Germany during the first half of the twentieth century. II. Sources and Vestiges of Mann’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard Had it not been for the well-known chapter XXv and two or three other occurrences in Doktor Faustus, the case of thomas mann’s reception of Kierkegaard would apparently conveniently match the label “production without reception,” in the sense used by Heiko schulz in his article on the reception of the danish thinker in germany and austria.22 the actual truth is that mann’s explicit mentions of Kierkegaard deal mostly with Doktor Faustus and a few related essays to be discussed here in our last section. Hence, the vast majority of commentators, schulz included, has taken for granted that mann, even if he did read Kierkegaard, left no traces whatsoever in his journals or fiction of having done so. In our opinion, this is a somewhat hasty conclusion to draw from other factual information that has in the meanwhile been researched and made public. to be more precise, what dates exactly from the times of the genesis of Doktor Faustus is mann’s research and direct quotation of Kierkegaard’s philosophy and work (Either/Or in particular), but not his knowledge of Kierkegaard’s thought and his indirect quotation of other works, as we will hopefully demonstrate. mann’s knowledge of Kierkegaard dates back to the years 1909–11, as is the case with martin Heidegger (1889–1976), and this means that it dates from more than thirty years before the conception of Doktor Faustus. on its own, such a large lapse of time helps to explain how mann was able to produce in this novel such an elaborate construct using elements from Kierkegaard’s philosophy and life-view in general, and not only from Either/Or. The first two pieces of evidence concern the works we know that mann read; his edition of Either/Or, used in the preliminary stages of Doktor Faustus, is otto gleiss’ 1909 translation Entweder-Oder: Ein Lebensfragment, whose chapter on the musical erotic is profoundly annotated and underlined in different paragraphs and sections.23 One finds it hard to believe that mann kept the book unread for over three decades, all the more so, since this copy is the fifth reprint of a translation initially published in 1885; the date of the fifth 22 see Heiko schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception, tome i, Northern and Western Europe, ed. by Jon stewart, aldershot: ashgate 2009 (Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 8), pp. 307–419; for his reference chart, see p. 386. 23 sören Kierkegaard, Entweder-Oder. Ein Lebensfragment, ed. by viktor eremita, 5th printing, trans. by otto gleiss, dresden: ungelenk 1909 (1885). for a complete transcription of the underlined passages and marginalia, see thomas a. Kamla, “ ‘christliche Kunst mit negativen vorzeichen’: Kierkegaard und doktor faustus,” Neophilologus, vol. 63, 1967, pp. 583–7.

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

175

reprint allows us to locate the acquisition of the book during the period of the wide influence of Der Brenner, which had begun to be published in 1910. it was in this fortnightly cultural periodical that theodor Haecker (1879–1945), one of the early translators of Kierkegaard into german, spread the fame and word of the illustrious dane. besides Entweder-Oder, mann also owned christoph schrempf’s translation Der Begriff Angst, published in 1923 in the first Gesammelte Werke edition,24 and, as we shall see, this is of relevance for The Magic Mountain and Joseph and his Brothers. schulz also states that Heidegger and the mann brothers were in the group of the first recipients of Der Brenner, and he explains in detail the contribution of Haecker and carl dallago (1869–1949) in the making of Kierkegaard’s reputation as a master of inwardness in that periodical.25 the third piece of evidence belongs to the same period; it is also advanced by schulz and corroborated by Judith marcus in her work Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann,26 and it concerns the impact of lukács’ Die Seele und die Formen published in 1911.27 While schulz stresses the impact brought about by georg lukács (1885–1971) in his chapter on Kierkegaard in the german-speaking world, marcus highlights the scope of the influence of Die Seele und die Formen on mann’s work. in her opinion, the reading of “bürgerlichkeit and l’art pour l’art,” the piece on the writer theodor storm (1817–88), is already visible in Tonio Kröger and is still present in Death in Venice.28 by taking into account that a good number of mann’s novels and novellas represent different shades of morbidity in love, it is quite admissible that mann was also impressed, among other issues addressed by lukács, by the Hungarian philosopher’s account of Kierkegaard’s relinquished love for the sake of fulfilling a self-imposed destiny as religious writer. Though Schulz is of the opinion that “mann demonstrably took very little notice of Kierkegaard.”29 by contrast, in marcus’ perspective, Kierkegaard actually entered into mann’s thought and reasoning at this time, as becomes clearly evident in her commentary on mann’s correspondence with his brother Heinrich mann:

sören Kierkegaard, Der Begriff der Angst, trans. by christoph schrempf, Jena: diederichs 1923 (Gesammelte Werke, vol. 5). both this edition and the one mentioned in the previous note are now in the thomas mann archive in zurich. it remains unknown if thomas mann had more volumes of this edition of the Gesammelte Werke, or of previous editions, since many of his books were lost during the first years of his exile. We express our thanks to the librarian of the thomas mann archive, ms. gabi Hollander, who kindly provided this information. 25 see schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” pp. 327–31. 26 Judith marcus, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann, amherst: university of massachusetts Press 1987. 27 georg lukács, “das zerschellen der form am leben. sören Kierkegaard and regine olsen,” in Die Seele und die Formen, berlin: fleischel 1911, pp. 61–90. 28 see marcus, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann, p. 28. 29 see schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” p. 367. 24

176

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso What thomas mann has to say about his brother’s tendency toward “absolute” and “extreme” positions is of the utmost interest; the customary tones are at times mixed with those of envy….thomas mann who liked to describe himself as a man of the sowohl― als auch (one as well as the other), a “man of the middle,” was obviously determined not to give in to his fatal tendency. on the opposite pole, lukács was a man of the “eitheror,” a man of the extreme. the schöngeistige (aesthetic) lukács formulated this best in one of his youthful essays (on Kierkegaard), which was thinly disguised confessional writing. “the only essential difference between one life and another is the question whether a life is absolute or merely relative; …whether the life problems…arise in the form of an either-or, or whether ‘as well as’ is the proper formula.”30 in thomas mann’s fictional world, the “extreme” position was assigned to some key characters, among them that of leo naphta in The Magic Mountain.31

We believe The Magic Mountain to be the first true case of a receptive production of Kierkegaard’s thought. though neither the danish philosopher, nor any of his works are directly mentioned or quoted, one should not conclude that mann’s novel is not permeated with his thought. it requires little effort to realize why it is commonly accepted that friedrich nietzsche (1844–1900) is one of the major philosophers behind thomas mann’s novel,32 whereas the opposite happens with Kierkegaard. one of the reasons lies obviously in mann’s confessions, scattered throughout his diaries and lectures, that the German philosopher did influence him;33 the other is the amount of studies on mann and nietzsche, and the opposite scarcity of studies on Kierkegaard and mann. far from revealing any kind of bias, this state of affairs has a reliable double explanation: on the one hand, mann’s magnitude as writer and intellectual, in europe and in Western countries, reached its peak in the 1920s, well before Kierkegaard came to be recognized as a major influence in European modern thought, whereas nietzsche by that time was already regarded as a prophet of modernity. Kierkegaard’s oeuvre would have to wait for “the receptive years” of active research in germany,34 and for the rise of existentialism in france, to be recognized as a forerunner of modern european thought, at the exact moment death chose to put an end to mann’s life and career. on the other hand, all the literary studies on mann, before 1945, though some of them still make history to this day, obviously remain outside the line of great literary theorists who, after 1945, with 30 lukács, “das zerschellen der form am leben. sören Kierkegaard and regine olsen,” p. 69; this quotation in “the foundering of form against life: sören Kierkegaard and regine olsen,” in Soul and Form, p. 31. see also marcus, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann, ch. 2, note 18, p. 169. 31 see marcus, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann, p. 42. 32 see alexander nehamas, “nietzsche in The Magic Mountain,” in Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain, ed. by Harold bloom, new York: chelsea House Publishers 1986, pp. 105–16. 33 For an analysis of the evidence found in Mann’s writings (fiction and essays) of nietzsche’s presence, see also Paul bishop, “the intellectual World of thomas mann,” in The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Mann, ed. by ritchie robertson, cambridge: cambridge university Press 2004, pp. 22–42; section entitled “schopenhauer and nietzsche,” pp. 24–9. 34 see schulz, “germany and austria: a modest Head start: the german reception of Kierkegaard,” p. 369ff.

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

177

lesser or greater emphasis, have read an author with an eye to the explicit and implicit sources or vestiges of other authors in the targeted texts.35 not surprisingly, eric downing’s excellent comparative study of the poetic subject in ovid, Kierkegaard, and mann dates from 1993,36 and even so, it is aimed at comparing and not at drawing conclusions about eventual vestiges of influence. next to the commonly acknowledged presence of nietzsche and arthur schopenhauer (1788–1860), a closer reading of The Magic Mountain reveals the presence of Kierkegaard’s conceptions. in the form of Bildungsroman, The Magic Mountain describes the many (though suspended in time) discoveries of young Hans castorp, exposed as he is to the constant experience of death; these experiences lead him to develop a deep interest for life (a spiritual life actually) which becomes heightened due to the experience of physical disease.37 In the first part of the novel, focused on the protagonist’s arrival at the international sanatorium berghof in Davos, the young Hans Castorp shows features of Kierkegaard’s so-called first stage of existence, the aesthetic; he is thus defined in the opening paragraphs of this monumental work: two days’ travel separated the youth—he was still too young to have thrust his roots down firmly into life—from his own world, from all that he thought of as his own duties, interests care and prospects.…He had not meant to take the journey seriously or commit himself deeply to it; but to get it over quickly, since it had to be made, to return as he had gone, and to take up his life on the point where, for the moment, he had had to lay it down. 38

We refer not only to the american tradition (from northrop frye and Kenneth burke to Harold bloom), but also to the french structuralist movement (culminating with gérard genette), and to michael riffaterre in whom both the anglo-saxon and the french traditions come together; and in later decades, to deconstruction where Jacques derrida and Paul de Man stand as figures of major importance for literary analysis. Moreover, the emergence of comparative studies would only occur in the 1960s, and even ernst robert curtius’ landmark study on Western literature and thought did not come out until 1948 (Europäische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter, bern: francke 1948). 36 eric downing, Artificial I’s. The Self as Artwork in Ovid, Kierkegaard, and Thomas Mann, tübingen: max niemeyer verlag 1993. 37 the topic of disease is prevalent in all mann’s oeuvre. for its relevance in Doktor Faustus, see gunilla bergstern, Thomas Manns ‘Doktor Faustus’: Untersuchungen zu den Quellen und zur Struktur des Romans, stockholm: bonnier 1963. english translation: Thomas Mann’s ‘Doktor Faustus’. Sources and Structure of the Novel, trans. by Krishna Winston, chicago: university of chicago Press 1974; see especially pp. 71–2. bergstern lines up a series of well-known cases of syphilitic musicians and writers, as possible role models for mann’s construction of leverkuhn’s character. Kierkegaard is also included in this group, probably as a result of Mann’s reading of Brandes’ interpretation of “the thorn in the flesh” as a sign of infection by syphilis. 38 first edition: thomas mann, Der Zauberberg, berlin: fischer 1924, p. 12; Gesammelte Ausgabe in Einzelbänden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vols. 1–20, ed. by Peter de mendelssohn, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1980–86, vol. 5, p. 12. english translation: The Magic Mountain, trans. by H.t. lowe-Porter, london: martin secker 1928, pp. 3–4. 35

178

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

and in chapter iv, settembrini still talks to castorp in an ironic tone about his life-view: “if our engineer here has been making observations in harmony with my own, that only confirms my surmise that he is an intellectual amateur and up to the present, as is the wont of gifted youth, still experimenting with different points of view.”39 as the novel progresses, the topic of disease points to the correlated increase and decrease of the significance of the body, as flesh, and of the spirit: a diminutio of the former brings to an augmentatio of the latter in terms of awareness and consciousness. In truth, Hans Castorp, living up on a mountain defined as magic, looks with contempt at the healthy people who live down below (in the first and the second meaning of the word) as ignorant people, in a spiritual sense. many times castorp demonstrates their ignorance in regard of time by bringing forth his own notion of an elastic time; in the last section of chapter vi, entitled “a soldier and brave” (“als soldat und brav”), castorp talks about years that “had been neither long, nor short, but timeless, very eventful, yet ‘the sum of nothing.’ ”40 this statement conveys the idea that experiences of the normal, the common life, adventures, are nothing in comparison with the real experiences, that is, the experiences of the spirit, the thoughts. this shows some likeness to Kierkegaard’s idea about the width of consciousness as the real life: “Thus the more definitely conscience is developed in a person, the more expanded he is, even though in other respects he closes himself off from the whole world.”41 another analogy may be found here between the idea of sickness in the body and the sin in the spirit: as in Kierkegaard, only through the awareness of our sin do we come to the higher awareness of the truth, as is argued in The Concept of Anxiety and The Sickness unto Death. in the same way, only through the experience of the sickness can the protagonist of The Magic Mountain reach the higher concept of health. during a lecture on The Magic Mountain, thomas mann pointed out how Hans castorp learns to understand that “all higher sanity and health must have proceeded through the deep experiences of sickness and death—just as the knowledge of sin is a pre-requisite of redemption.”42 immediately afterwards, mann claims that more than a Bildungsroman, this is a novel of initiation: “it is this

mann, Der Zauberberg, p. 134; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 5, p. 141. The Magic Mountain, p. 100. 40 mann, Der Zauberberg, p. 655; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 5, p. 687. The Magic Mountain, p. 502. 41 SKS 4, 434–4 / CA, 134. 42 in “on my Work,” a lecture held at Princeton university, may 1939. first published as “einführung in Der Zauberberg,” in the 142th reprint of the novel in the stockholmer ausgabe in 1939. later published in Zeit und Werk in Gesammelte Werke in zwolf Bänden, berlin: aufbau-verlag 1955, vol. 12, and also in Der Zauberberg (ungekürzte sonderausgabe), frankfurt am main: s. fischer verlag 1970. this quotation is from Rede und Antwort, in Gesammelte Ausgabe in dreizehn Bänden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vols. 1–20, ed. by Peter de mendelssohn, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1986, vol. 16, p. 78. Here quoted from On Myself and Other Princeton Lectures, ed. by James n. bade, 2nd ed., frankfurt am main, Berlin and Bern: Grove/Atlantic 1997, p. 64. 39

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

179

notion of disease and death as a necessary route to knowledge, health and life that makes The Magic Mountain a novel of initiation.”43 in The Concept of Anxiety and in The Sickness unto Death, the description of the human being through the structural relationship between soul and body is illustrated by the wrong modes of this correlation in terms of the relation between finite and infinite. Similarly, in the first paragraph of chapter IV, Settembrini states that “a soul without a body is as inhuman and horrible as a body without a soul—though the latter is the rule and the former the exception.”44 moreover, settimbrini’s remarks recall the dysphoric statements in “diapsalmata” on the effects of “a soul that is dull and slack” and has “lost all…illusions” and thus “has lost possibility,”45 with the final result of such effects previously described as a deadly disease: “My soul is like the Dead Sea, over which no bird is able to fly; when it has come midway, it sinks down, exhausted, to death and destruction.”46 mann’s handling of time in this narrative is crucial for the diegesis, and it is partly based on the concepts of repetition, and of habit and routine. though mann does not speak of repetition in a Kierkegaardian sense, he does deal extensively with ways of passing time, and elaborates on the differences between monotony and tedium in statements that recall a’s theory of social prudence in “rotation of crops,”47 for example: “habituation is a falling asleep or fatiguing of the sense of time,” and “the intercalations of periods of change and novelty is the only means by which we can refresh our sense of time.”48 this is Hans castorp’s condition after the first months of his stay at the magic mountain―only when something hard-hitting (such as death or suffering) penetrates the quiet habits of berghof is the soul of the protagonist awakened and brought to a new level of awareness, by means of which he manages to repeat the same habits in a new spirit. in a way, repetition is depicted in The Magic Mountain by the repeated presence and awareness of death (which might be taken as an awareness of the eternal, since in thomas mann we do not have the sense of a transcendent god), thus allowing life, when lived at a spiritual level, to transform habit into a repetition in a Kierkegaardian sense: “and habit arises as soon as the eternal disappears from repetition.”49 before providing further evidence of Kierkegaard’s thought in Joseph and his Brothers, the tetralogy whose writing lasted for almost twenty years, attention must be paid to thomas mann’s readings of georg brandes (1842–1927). brandes’ piece on Kierkegaard is usually mentioned in connection with Doktor Faustus;50 see also On Myself and Other Princeton Lectures, ed. by James n. bade, p. 64. mann, Der Zauberberg, p. 134; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 5, pp. 140–41. The Magic Mountain, p. 100. 45 SKS 2, 28 / EO1, 41. 46 SKS 2, 24 / EO1, 37. 47 see especially SKS 2, 285ff. / EO1, 296ff. 48 mann, Der Zauberberg, p. 140; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 5, p. 147. The Magic Mountain, p. 104. 49 SKS 4, 448 / CA, 149. 50 georg brandes, Sören Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, leipzig, J.a. barth 1879. later published in vol. 2 of Georg Brandes gesammelte Schriften, vols. 1–10, munich: a. langen 1902–7. and also in J.P. Jacobsen und andere skandinavische 43 44

180

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

nonetheless, marcus draws our attention to mann’s commentaries on brandes already in 1920, which in her opinion were influential in the development of the character of leo naphta: georg brandes’ writings left a deep impression on mann. as he noted in his diary on July 5, 1920, “these past days have read brandes’ ‘the romantic school in germany’ with keen interest. staggered to discover ideas in novalis that had come to me as i penetrated into the world of The Magic Mountain, unaware that they might [have] occurred earlier to others.”51 accordingly, he marked the readings extensively, and even dated some of them (e.g., “read 1920”), or suggested references by jotting down “zbg.”52

marcus proceeds, putting forward further evidence of mann’s knowledge of Kierkegaard, which she herself emphasized: mann must have experienced this meeting of the minds even more acutely when he read another book by brandes, Skandinavische Persönlichkeiten. in the section devoted to Kierkegaard, mann marked the passage referring to Kierkegaard’s “Jesuitism”: “Kierkegaard…believes in the “acceptability of a teleological suspension of the ethical.” …one can sense a few sparks of such a Jesuitic tendency very early in Kierkegaard’s life. He was…in his inclination to let the religious break through the common ethical sphere a born Jesuit, a Protestant one to be sure, who was his own pope but who never really doubted that the ends justified the means if it were a question of the highest possible goals.53

marcus also transcribes and comments on the marginalia on brandes’ text on Kierkegaard, written in mann’s handwriting: Just as assiduously, mann put comments in the margin next to characterizations of Kierkegaard, such as “not a humane nature,” “he is contemptuous of the world,” and “he is immersed in Hegel up to his neck.” the following passage [in brandes’ text] is marked with an oversized exclamation point: “The highest dubious scientific nature [of theology], the genuine spiritual and intellectual interest it kindles without satisfying it, the perspective it opens, in many ways, on the Humaniora, are perhaps more stimulating Persönlichkeiten, dresden: reissner 1924. thomas mann mentions his reading of brandes in the following entries of his diaries, connected to the genesis of Doktor Faustus: Tagebücher 1944–1946, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1986, december 26, 1944 on pp. 139–40, december 31, 1944 on p. 142, January 1, 1945 on p. 145, and January 5, 1945 on p. 146. 51 thomas mann, Tagebücher 1918–1920, ed. by Peter von mendelssohn, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1979, p. 450. english translation: Diaries 1918–1939, ed. by Hermann Kesten, trans. by richard Winston and clara Winston, new York: alfred a. Knopf 1959, p. 100. brandes is quoted from georg brandes, The Romantic School in Germany, new York: boni liveright 1923. english translation from marcus, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann, note 116, chapter 6, p. 193. 52 see marcus, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann, p. 119. 53 see ibid. marcus translated brandes herself from Skandinavische Persönlichkeiten, vol. 2 of the series Dichterische Persönlichkeiten, munich: albert langen verlag für literatur und Kunst 1902, p. 368. see marcus, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann, chapter 6, note 117, p. 193.

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

181

and less of a hindrance for the independent and striving spirit [Geist] than this or that specialized discipline. furthermore, Kierkegaard’s talent, in spite of its penchant for respect, has the great advantage of being deeply and thoroughly combative.”54

When Mann had already published the first two volumes of Joseph and his Brothers, he delivered the lecture Freud und die Zukunft at the university of vienna for the celebration of freud’s 80th birthday (may 8, 1936); despite his claim that freud was not aware of the works of nietzsche, Kierkegaard, and schopenhauer (and also of novalis), mann actually admits that nietzsche anticipates freudian theories, and that the “christian courage” of Kierkegaard would have been relevant for the consideration of the “extreme” cases of freudian psychology.55 Hence, despite the exclamation marks and the rather contemptuous commentaries in the marginalia of brandes’ essay, the fact is that in 1936 he had already gained some insight into Kierkegaard’s thought and especially into the place held by the danish philosopher among philosophers who opened the way to modernity. at this time, mann is believed to have been involved in the study of sigmund freud’s (1856–39) and carl Jung’s (1875–1961) theories, and their influence on the tetralogy has been extensively documented.56 As we shall see, the influence of Kierkegaard should also be taken into account, despite the fact that mann hid his reading of The Concept of Anxiety. in the tetralogy, thomas mann moves away from the bourgeois and pretty european time of The Magic Mountain and tries to render a complete account of the biblical story of Joseph and his brothers, in the time of his full maturity, in an age in which the taste for the actuality of political moral matters recedes, and the everlasting biblical narratives that have shaped man attract his interest.57 myth becomes then the only way to understand origins, and it implies the start of a long journey looking for the traces of the distant past, better said, a past that is dead. but in its death the past gains eternity in the sense of omnipresence, in the sense that the omnipresence of the myth becomes a kind of eternal present.58 Wolf-daniel Hartwich thus describes the intercrossing of myth and the individual in mann: “the monotheistic idea of god is understood as part of a profound mythic dimension of the human personality, which is

see marcus, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann, p. 119. in thomas mann, “freud und die zukunft,” in Leiden und Grössen der Meister in Gesammelte Ausgabe in Einzelbänden Bänden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 8, p. 907. first published as Freud und die Zukunft, berlin: s. fischer 1936. also in Adel des Geistes in Stockholmer Gesamtausgabe der Werke von Thomas Mann, vols. 1–20, stockholm: bermannfisher 1939–65, vol. 2, p. 480. 56 For Jung’s influence, see Charlotte Nolte, Being and Meaning in Thomas Mann’s Joseph Novels, london: mHra and the institute of germanic studies 1996; as for freud’s, see William e. mcdonald, Thomas Mann’s ‘Joseph and his Brothers’: Writing, Performance, and the Politics of Loyalty, rochester, new York: camden House 1999. 57 see Thomas Mann and Ernst Bertram, Briefe aus den Jahren 1910–1955, Pfullingen: neske 1960, pp. 146–7. 58 for mann’s elaborations on myth, see “freud und die zukunft,” Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 8, pp. 920–25. 54 55

182

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

generated by a culture’s collective memory and preserves its intellectual advances.”59 Hartwich also draws our attention to the fact that “the patriarch appears in a mythical perspective…always associated with ‘depths,’ the ‘well of the past,’ ”60 an imagery that, in our view, is indebted to the Kierkegaardian categories of recollection and repetition, as becomes clear in this collection of passages taken from the Prologue to The Tales of Jacob, “Descent into Hell,” in the first volume of the tetralogy: 61 deep is the well of the past. should we not call it bottomless?62 …the experience consisted not so much in something out of the past being repeated, as in its becoming the present. but the attainment of such a present reality was based in the fact that the circumstances leading to it were present at all times.63 …but the form of timelessness is the now and the here.64…that is what old eliezer taught Jacob’s son, thus preserving the double meaning of “once” and achieving out of a mixture of saga and prediction a timeless presence in the present65…for it is, always is, though the common phrase may be: it was.66

this sort of elaborations is also recurrent in the last book, Joseph the Provider: “for the question is, the problem that i would like to present to the great thinkers of my father’s house is: whether what is singular and particular within time receives more value and dignity from eternity―or vice versa.”67 These lines and also the first pages of the same novel where Mann narrates the episode of Adam, the first man and the first sinner, bring to our mind the beginning of Kierkegaard’s The Concept of Anxiety. Here the role of the past in the present is examined by means of moving from the

Wolf-daniel Hartwich, “religion and culture: Joseph and his brothers,” in The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Mann, ed. by ritchie robertson, cambridge: cambridge university Press 2004, pp. 151–67; here, section “israel in egypt: cultural memory and its media,” p. 153. 60 ibid. 61 thomas mann, Joseph und seine Brüder. first editions: Die Geschichten Jaakobs, berlin: fischer 1933; Der junge Joseph, berlin: fischer 1934; Joseph in Ägypten, vienna: bermann-fischer 1936; Joseph, der Ernährer, stockholm: bermann-fischer 1943. also Joseph und seine Brüder in Stockholmer Ausgabe der Werke von Thomas Mann, vols. 5–7; Joseph und seine Brüder, in Frankfurter Ausgabe in dreizehn Bänden, vols. 9–12. english translation: Joseph and his Brothers, trans. by John e. Woods, everyman’s library, new York: alfred a. Knopf 2005. 62 mann, Die Geschichten Jaakobs, berlin 1933, p. iX; Stockholmer Gesamtausgabe, vol. 1, p. 9; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 9, p. 7. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 3. 63 mann, Die Geschichten Jaakobs, berlin 1933, p. XXXv; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 30; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 9, p. 28f. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 20. 64 mann, Die Geschichten Jaakobs, berlin 1933, p. XXXvi; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 31; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 9, p. 29. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 21. 65 mann, Die Geschichten Jaakobs, berlin 1933, p. XXXiX; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 34; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 9, p. 32. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 23. 66 mann, Die Geschichten Jaakobs, berlin 1933, p. lXiii; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 54; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 9, p. 52. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 39. 67 mann, Joseph, der Ernährer, stockholm 1943, pp. 195–6; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 2, p. 1438; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 12, p. 167. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 1171. 59

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

183

actual meaning of this past into the story of the individual, who is a synthesis of time and eternity: man, then, is…also a synthesis of the temporal and the eternal.…What, then, is the temporal? If time is correctly defined as an infinite succession, it most likely is also defined as the present, the past, and the future. This distinction, however, is incorrect if it is considered to be implicit in time itself, because the distinction appears only through the relation of time to eternity and through the reflection of eternity in time. If in the infinite succession of time a foothold could be found, i.e., a present, which was the dividing point, the division would be quite correct. However, precisely because every moment, as well as the sum of the moments, is a process (a passing by), no moment is a present, and accordingly there is in time neither present, nor past, nor future…. The present, however, is not a concept of time, except precisely as something infinitely contentless, which again is the infinite vanishing….Time is, then, infinite succession; the life that is in time and is only of time has no present. In order to define the sensuous life, it is usually said that it is in the moment and only in the moment.….the present is the eternal, or rather, the eternal is the present, and the present is full. in this sense the latin said of the deity that he is praesens (praesentes dii [the presence of the gods])…. let us now consider adam and also remember that every subsequent individual begins in the very same way, but within the quantitative difference that is the consequence of the relationship of generation and the historical relationship.…the difference between Adam and the subsequent individual is that for the latter the future is reflected more than for adam.68

Positing Kierkegaard as a possible source may eventually solve discrepancies pointed out by those same scholars who have taken only nietzsche and freud into account when commenting on the tetralogy; such is the case of Hartwich when he makes the following commentary: in regarding the invention of sin as the main feature of the Jewish religion, mann’s Joseph could invoke nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals. However, while nietzsche charges the theology of sin with betraying life, mann recognizes in it an essential deepening of the cultural definition of man that draws his attention to his natural imperfection and his transcendental potential: “god suffers too for our sins, and we suffer with Him” (v. 923).69

68 SKS 4, 388–94 / CA, 85–91. in the same line of reasoning, see also in chapter i of Philosophical Fragments (SKS 4, 226 / PF, 18) the concept of Tidens Fylde, fullness of time, which is actually the “moment” as the eternal present. also in Philosophical Fragments, see “mellemspil” (SKS 4, 272ff. / PF, 79ff.), especially § 4, “opfattelsen af det forbigangne” (SKS 4, 278ff. / PF, 79ff.), where the same reasoning is present. With special significance for the meaning of the eternal actuality of the past for the present times, the text claims that “organet for det Historiske maa være dannet i lighed med dette” (SKS 4, 280 / PF, 81): this “organ for the historical” is faith in the sense of free “decision” (Beslutning, which is an action) more than a static conclusion (Slutning) of a reasoning. one could compare this decision in movement as an opening to the still-present (eternal) past, the same that thomas mann suggested by returning to the ever-present past of humanity (that is, the eternal past as a past that is ever-present in the consciousness of the contemporaries). 69 see Hartwich, “religion and culture: Joseph and his brothers,” p. 158.

184

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

A few paragraphs later, while commenting on the influence of Freud’s essay on totemism, Hartwich remarks that “mann emphasizes not the perpetration of parricide but the prevention of the sacrifice of the son,” and understands this gesture as sign of “the patriarchs in the Joseph novels overcom[ing] totemism,” and as proof that “[t]heir blood relationship with their ancestor is replaced by their spiritual election by Yahweh.”70 Hartwich concludes this line of reasoning by stating that “mann reverses the significance which psychoanalysis gave the father-figure for the psychic life of the individual as well as the community.”71 these remarks would probably have been more insightful if they had been taken as symptoms of the presence of Kierkegaard’s philosophical and religious thought already in the introductory part of mann’s tetralogy Joseph and his Brothers. in the tetralogy’s third book, Joseph in Egypt, one can also find some aesthetical remarks close to Kierkegaard’s; the book depicts the singular history of the young Joseph, chosen by god for a mission, but also submitted to the temptation of the human world with its illusory beauty. the description of the amorous torments of the wife of Potiphar for Joseph, and Joseph’s renunciation because he was destined to a higher mission, actually resembles Kierkegaard’s own description of the deceptive— but no less tormenting—allurements of earthly joys, with love on top of them all, a theme dear to Judge William in Either/Or, Part 2. in the same line of allusions, and still in Joseph in Egypt, mann describes Joseph wearing a crown of myrtle that signifies “touch-me-not,”72 and he puts the following words in his mouth: “Youth and beauty…can also imply a more austere adornment than the wreath such a garden supplies the children of men.”73 He also adds that it would be a sin to disobey god;74 furthermore, in defense of God’s commandment there are two animals, the first is Scham (shame), the second is Schuld (guilt), and there is also a third element, which is interestingly called Spottgelächter (mocking laughter).75 one is immediately reminded of Kierkegaard’s description of that Trediemand, the “third party” who laughs at the lover: “i am saying that erotic love is comic for a third party—more i do not say….but this I do know, that reflection is always a third party, and therefore cannot love without also being a third party to myself in my reflection.”76 the lover is ridiculous just like someone is “ignorant” in The Magic Mountain, in the sense that he does not know that his mission is another one, and a higher one. the combination of the story of an individual with mythical narrative is put into practice by mann, by giving an idea of the paradoxical synthesis of the human being, as in the Prelude in Higher Echelons from Joseph the Provider, the last book of the ibid. ibid., p. 160. 72 mann, Joseph in Ägypten, vienna 1936, p. 317; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 2, p. 922; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 11, p. 257. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 747. 73 mann, Joseph in Ägypten, vienna 1936, p. 317; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 2, p. 922; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 11, p. 257. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 747. 74 mann, Joseph in Ägypten, vienna 1936, p. 319; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 2, p. 923; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 11, p. 258. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 748. 75 mann, Joseph in Ägypten, vienna 1936, p. 319; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 2, p. 924; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 11, p. 259. Joseph and his Brothers, p. 748. 76 SKS 6, 38 / SLW, 35. 70 71

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

185

tetralogy: “the angels…were created in our image, yet are not fruitful. Whereas, behold the beasts are fruitful, yet not after our likeness. We will create man―in the image of the angels, and yet fruitful! How absurd. Worse than gratuitous, injurious in fact, eccentric, and gravid with remorse and bitterness.”77 the character of adrian leverkühn, thomas mann’s version of the legend of faustus, demonstrates this absurdity, with motifs such as the fallen angel and topos such as fecundity playing a determinant part in leverkühn’s fate. III. doktor faustus Doktor Faustus, as mentioned before, unfolds the doomed destinies of both adrian leverkühn and germany, with serenus zeitblom, a friend of the protagonist, in the role of narrator; through zeitblom’s eyes and ears, the reader learns about leverkühn’s pursuit of the demonic since his student days, of his pact with the devil, of his infection with syphilis, of his career as a musician in search of a new kind of music. He also hears that leverkuhn’s music is just as deprived of feeling and spirit as the germany that saw him become a successful composer. the crossing of these two themes, the destruction of leverkühn and the destruction of germany, is then shown as a consequence of the hand of evil; this issue has spurred controversy ever since the publication Doktor Faustus, as Hans-rudolf vaget clearly outlines: Precisely this—the probing of the sinister political consequences of germany’s allegedly nonpolitical cult of music—became the chief project of Doktor Faustus. by the time the overall conception of the novel took shape in mann’s mind he was convinced that “german” music and german history were indeed interdependent….mann thus came to believe that a deep analysis of “german” music and of the spirit in which it was conceived, and received, would yield important keys to the understanding of german history.78

music is then the congregating element in Doktor Faustus, and there are a good number of essays on the role it plays in the construction of the novel, and also on the musicians that may have contributed to shape the work of leverkühn, from true composers79 to authors of musical novellas.80 theodor adorno (1903–69) formed mann, Joseph, der Ernährer, stockholm 1943, p. 10; Stockholmer Ausgabe, vol. 2, p. 1280; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 12, p. 8. Joseph and his Brothers, pp. 1042–3. 78 Hans rudolf vaget, “ ‘german’ music and german catastrophe: a re-reading of Doktor Faustus,” in A Companion to the Works of Thomas Mann, ed. by Herbert lehnert and eva Wessell, rochester: camdem House 2004, pp. 221–44; here p. 231. 79 derek Hughes, for example, convincingly claims that Doktor Faustus is mostly based on operatic works by carl maria von Weber (1786–1826) and Heinrich Marschner (1795–1861). see derek Hughes, “ ‘Wie die Hans Heilings’: Weber, marschner, and thomas mann’s ‘doktor faustus,’ ” Cambridge Opera Journal, vol. 10, no. 2, 1998, pp. 179–204. 80 see ingrid t. Hasselbach, “Paradigmatische musik. Wackenroders Joseph Berlinger als vorläufer von thomas manns Doktor Faustus,” in The Romantic Tradition: German Literature and Music in the Nineteenth Century, ed. by gerald chapple, frederick Hall and Hans schulte, lanham: university Press of america 1991, pp. 95–111. the protagonist’s 77

186

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

Mann’s view of Kierkegaard, and his influence goes beyond the verbal descriptions of various compositions included in the novel, which accidentally gave rise to a strong polemic between the two germans, with adorno accusing mann of plagiarism.81 mann left plenty of documents in his Nachlass that have been commented upon in several studies that usually rank adorno as the major secondary source of mann’s knowledge of the danish thinker.82 Paul tillich (1886–1965) played a minor role in mann’s attentiveness to Kierkegaard, but it is again brandes’ essay on Kierkegaard that is taken as the second most relevant secondary source for mann’s treatment of Kierkegaard in Doktor Faustus.83 What actually matters, though, is that music is at the heart of the doomed fate of leverkühn and germany, and it grips their destinies by means of its demonic power, allowing Mann to put forward the daemons and demons that afflicted him, by facing once more the dilemmas that afflicted him. In the novel, Leverkühn hands himself over, in his totality, to the fallen angel sammael who plays the part that mephistopheles does in the original faust legend. it is under this Stemning that Kierkegaard makes his entrance in chapter XXv: “i [leverkühn] sat alone here, by my lamp, nigh to the windows with shutters closed, before me the length of the hall, and read Kierkegaard on mozart’s don Juan.”84 throughout the chapter,

pursuit of a new kind of music is generally accepted to be modeled after arnold Schönberg (1874–1951); however, eminent musicologists have claimed that it is actually richard Wagner (1813–83), the omnipresent composer in mann’s life, and his music, that are behind leverkühn’s compositions, and in vaget’s opinion, it is of relevance to realize that the ambivalent feeling Mann held for Wagner finds a parallel in his feeling for Germany (see Hans rudolf vaget, “ ‘german’ music and german catastrophe: a re-reading of Doktor Faustus,” in A Companion to the Works of Thomas Mann, ed. by Herbert lehnert and eva Wessell, pp. 221–4). 81 see vaget, “ ‘german’ music and german catastrophe: a re-reading of Doktor Faustus,” pp. 221–44, especially the section “intellectual Properties,” pp. 235–8, where schönberg’s reactions are also discussed. 82 see especially, Hans-Joachim sandberg, “der Kierkegaard-Komplex in thomas manns roman Doktor Faustus. zur adaptation einer beziehungsreichen thematik,” Text & Kontext, vol. 6, copenhagen, 1978, pp. 257–74. sandberg provides a sample of adorno’s and mann’s correspondence, underscoring adorno’s contribution to musical descriptions, and also to mann’s readings of Kierkegaard, pp. 259–65. in a subsequent article, sandberg deals with the influence of Adorno’s view on Kierkegaard’s category of despair, in relation to leverkühn’s desperation. see Hans-Joachim sandberg, “Kierkegaard und leverkühn. zum Problem der Verzweiflung in Thomas Manns Roman Doktor Faustus,” Nerthus, vol. 4, 1979, pp. 93–107. 83 see also sandberg, “der Kierkegaard-Komplex in thomas manns roman Doktor Faustus. zur adaptation einer beziehungsreichen thematik,” pp. 265–9. 84 first edition: Doktor Faustus in Stockholmer Gesammtausgabe der Werke von Thomas Mann, vol. 4, p. 297. Doktor Faustus in Gesammelte Werke in dreizehn Bänden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 300. english translation: Doctor Faustus, The Life of the German Composer Adrian Leverkühn as Told by a Friend, trans. by H.t. lowe-Porter, new York: alfred a. Knopf 1948, p. 223.

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

187

Kierkegaard is named as “the christian”85 by the devil, and as the chapter ends, this epithet is also used by leverkühn: “i was sitting in my summer suit, by my lamp, the christian’s book on my knee. can’t be anything else; in my excitement i must have chased the losel out and carried my coat and rug back before schildknapp returned.”86 three chapters earlier, it had been Judge William’s turn to be evoked together with his proposal of concentric spheres of love in “the esthetic validity of marriage,”87 during a dialogue between zeitblom, the narrator, and leverkühn. at the same time, during this conversation, the two characters elaborate on desire, grabbing inspiration in the theory of the stages of the musical erotic:88 of course, love and sensuality are not to be separated. one best absolves love from the reproach of sensuality by identifying the love element in sensuality itself. the lust after strange flesh means a conquest of previously existing resistances, based on the strangeness of i and You, your own and the other person’s….now if all at once the strange flesh become the object of desire and lust, then the relation of the I and the you is altered in a way for which sensuality is only an empty word. no, one cannot get along without the concept of love, even when ostensibly there is nothing spiritual in play. every sensual act means tenderness, it is a give and take of desire, happiness through making happy, a manifestation of love.89

in the very long dialogue of chapter XXv, leverkühn progressively incarnates thomas mann’s idea of a modern faust, explicitly connecting music and christianity. this is not the only instance in mann’s writings where such association is made, and Mann would confirm this debt to Kierkegaard even more clearly in a later lecture: it is a grave error on the part of legend and story not to connect faust with music. He should have been musical, he should have been a musician. music is a demonic realm; søren Kierkegaard, a great christian, proved that most convincingly in his painfully enthusiastic essay on Mozart’s Don Juan. Music is Christian art with a negative prefix… the relation of the German to the world is abstract and mystical, that is musical, ―the relation of a professor with a touch of demonism….90 mann, Doktor Faustus, Stockholmer Ausgabe, p. 323; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 326. Doctor Faustus, p. 242. 86 mann, Doktor Faustus, Stockholmer Ausgabe, p. 333; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 336. Doctor Faustus, p. 250. 87 SKS 3, 37–8 / EO2, 29–3. 88 SKS 2, 80–92 / EO1, 73–87. in very brief words, cherubino (the Page in The Marriage of Figaro) represents latent desire, lived in self-contemplation, Papageno (The Magic Flute) searching desire, looking actively, and don Juan (Don Giovanni) desire as conquest and victory, materializing the I–You relationship. The stages are defined as metamorphoses of desire, which means that the second stage contains in itself the first, while the third also comprehends the first and the second; as a result, desire as victory involves searching and living desire as latency. 89 mann, Doktor Faustus in Stockholmer Ausgabe, p. 250; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 253. Doctor Faustus, pp. 187–8. 90 The English version, as Mann read it for the first time, is found in Thomas Mann, Addresses Delivered at the Library of Congress, 1942–1949, Washington, d.c.: library of congress 1963, p. 51. “deutschland und die deutschen,” in An die gesittete Welt in 85

188

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

the association of the demonic and music reaches such depths that the angel of death stands in this dialogue as the rightful interpreter of Kierkegaard, whereas leverkühn is more skeptical of the christian’s words. thus, it is the devil’s task to persuade leverkühn of his hermeneutics: the devil ought to know something about music. if i mistake not, you were reading just now in a book by a christian in love with aesthetics. He knew and understood my particular relation to this beautiful art—the most Christian of all arts, he finds—but christian in reverse as it were: introduced and developed by christianity indeed, but the rejected and banned as the divel’s Kingdom.…a highly theological business, music, the way sin is, the way i am. the passion of that christian for music is true passion, and as such knowledge and corruption of one.91

this excerpt condenses two lines of reasoning found in the introductory section of the chapter on the musical erotic. The first is related to the canonization of Mozart’s don giovanni and is carried out by a series of statements that posit the narrator, a confessed worshipper of mozart and music, as a creature who owes everything in this life and for eternity to god, as her creator.92 the second, in itself already dependent on the determination of music as the only medium capable of representing sensuality in its elemental condition, debates the introduction of sensuality into the world by christianity,93 and the extreme consequences that music may give rise to, for example, the danger of unlashing voluptuousness.94 the association of music and the demonic, recurring to lexical choices and the semantic correlation of mann’s choices to the ones used in Kierkegaard’s musical descriptions, is put forward at least in another two instances by the devil: “a genuine inspiration, immediate, absolute, unquestioned, ravishing, where there is no choice, no tinkering, no possible improvement.”95 the devil proceeds by actually giving what may be rightfully labeled as a paraphrase of the prevalent mood of a when he speaks of mozart and his Don Giovanni: “where all is a sacred mandate, a visitation received by the possessed one with faltering and stumbling step, with shudders of awe from head to foot. With tears of joy blinding his eyes….”96 and the angel of death concludes by reinstating the demonic in music: “no, that is not possible with god, who leaves the understanding too much to do. it comes but from the divel, Gesammelte Ausgabe in Einzelbänden Bänden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 18, p. 706. this lecture was delivered at the library of congress on may 29, 1945. the full text in german was first published in Die neue Rundschau, stockholm, no. 56, october 1945. in a book edition, first published in Schriftenreihe Ausblicke, stockholm: bergmann-fischer 1947, and later in the Stockholmer Ausgabe der Werke von Thomas Mann, vol. 17-ii, Reden und Aufsätze II. 91 mann, Doktor Faustus in Stockholmer Ausgabe, pp. 322–3; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 326. Doctor Faustus, p. 242. 92 SKS 2, 55–7 / EO1, 47–9. 93 SKS 2, 92–6 / EO1, 87–91. 94 SKS 2, 80 / EO1, 73. 95 mann, Doktor Faustus in Stockholmer Ausgabe, p. 317; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 1, p. 320. Doctor Faustus, p. 237. my emphasis. 96 ibid. my emphasis.

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

189

the true master and giver of such rapture.”97 in Doktor Faustus, Kierkegaard is also acknowledged as a master of inwardness, and his role in the pursuit of new forms of religiosity is commented on in chapter Xiv, in consequence by deutschlin in a dialogue with leverkühn, then a young student: religiosity, that is perhaps youth itself, it is the directness, the courage and the depth of the personal life, the will and the power, the natural and the daemonic side of being, as it has come into our consciousness again through Kierkegaard, to experience it in full vitality and to live through it.98

still in the same dialogue, adrian replies to deutschlin and adds a direct remark to Kierkegaard’s attack on christendom: i know of course that it is the most talented among you, those who have read Kierkegaard, who place truth, even ethical truth, entirely in the subjective, and reject with horror everything that savors of herd existence. but i cannot go with you in your radicalism…. in your separation, after Kierkegaard, of church and christianity.99

compared to mann’s literary treatment of Kierkegaard’s words and to his subtle but powerful appropriation of the theory of the musical erotic, the few scattered remarks in lectures sound dull or uninspired. in Die Entstehung des Doktor Faustus: Roman eines Romans (The Story of a Novel: The Genesis of Doctor Faustus, 1949), mann mentions Kierkegaard four times: once to claim that he did active research even before reading the danish thinker,100 another time to include a fairly long direct quotation, taken form adorno’s book on Kierkegaard,101 all the more so since it is preceded by mann’s avowal that it deserves to be singled out for the shrewdness and the soundness of the remarks on humor:102

ibid. for a more detailed approach of the close association between sensuality, spirituality and christianity, as it is discussed by Kierkegaard in the chapter on the musicalerotic and here by leverkühn, see Heinz gockel, “thomas manns faustus und Kierkegaards don Juan,” in Akten des VI. Internationalen Germanisten-Kongresss Basel 1980, ed. by Heinz rupp and Hans-gert roloff, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1980 (Jahrbuch für Internationale Germanistik, vol. 8), pp. 68–75. 98 mann, Doktor Faustus in Stockholmer Ausgabe, p. 160; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 1, p 161. Doctor Faustus, p. 118. 99 mann, Doktor Faustus in Stockholmer Ausgabe, pp. 160–61; Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 1, p 162. Doctor Faustus, p. 119. 100 mann, “die entstehung des doktor faustus: roman eines romans,” in Rede und Antwort in Gesammelte Ausgabe in Einzelbänden Bäden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vol. 16, pp. 130–288, here p. 187. mann adds that he has studied brandes’ essay on Kierkegaard and adorno’s book. However, mann had previously read adorno’s article “on Kierkegaard’s doctrine of love” (in Studies in Philosophy and Social Science, vol. 8, 1939, pp. 413–29) in 1940; see Tagebücher 1940–1943, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1982, august 14, 1940, p. 131. 101 see also mann, Tagebücher 1944–1946, november 28, 1944, p. 128. 102 ibid., p. 187. 97

190

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso the humorist continually (not in the sense of the pastor’s “always” but at every time of day, wherever he is and whatever he thinks or undertakes) joins the conception of god together with something else and brings out the contradiction―but he does not relate himself to god in religious passion stricte sic dictus [in the strict sense of the word]). He changes himself into a jesting and yet profound transition area for all these transactions, but he does not relate himself to god.103

it remains unknown whether mann went on with his readings of Kierkegaard’s works or not. in Die Entstehung des Doktor Faustus: Roman eines Romans, he openly admits the relations of the content of his novel to Kierkegaard’s Ideenwelt,104 a fact that we find here documented. Taking also into account that Mann is the last great heir of romantic irony, there must be more hidden links between mann and Kierkegaard still waiting to be found, all the more so since after the completion of Doktor Faustus, he kept making note of his readings about Kierkegaard.105

SKS 7, 458 / CUP1, 505. mann, Tagebücher 1944–1946, p. 200. 105 thomas mann, Tagebücher 1946–1948, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1989, march 3, 1947, p. 103, and July 10, 1947, p. 132; Tagebücher 1951–1953, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1993, June 3, 1951, p. 452; Tagebücher 1953–1955, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1995, may 19, 1953, p. 63. 103 104

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Thomas Mann’s corpus Doktor Faustus, stockholm: bermann-fischer 1947, p. 160; p. 161; p. 247; p. 250; p. 317; p. 322; p. 323; p. 333. “die entstehung des doktor faustus: roman eines romans,” in Rede und Antwort in Gesammelte Ausgabe in Einzelbänden Bänden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vols. 1–20, ed. by Peter de mendelssohn, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1980–86, vol. 16, p. 187; p. 199; p. 200. “freud und die zukunft,” in Leiden und Grössen der Meister in Gesammelte Ausgabe in Einzelbänden Bänden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vols. 1–20, ed. by Peter de mendelssohn, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1980–86; vol. 8, p. 907. “deutschland und die deutschen,” in An die gesittete Welt in Gesammelte Ausgabe in Einzelbänden Bänden, Frankfurter Ausgabe, vols. 1–20, ed. by Peter de mendelssohn, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1980–86; vol. 18, p. 706. Tagebücher 1940–1943, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1982, p. 131. Tagebücher 1944–1946, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1986, p. 128. Tagebücher 1946–1948, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1989, p. 103; p. 132. Tagebücher 1951–1953, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1993, p. 452. Tagebücher 1953–1955, ed. by inge Jens, frankfurt am main: s. fischer 1995, p. 63. II. Sources of Thomas Mann’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard adorno, theodor, Kierkegaard, Konstruktion des Ästhetischen, tübingen: mohr 1933. brandes, georg, Sören Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, leipzig, J.a. barth 1879. (reprinted in Georg Brandes gesammelte Schriften, vols. 1–10, munich: a. langen 1902–07, vol. 2; also in J.P. Jacobsen und andere skandinavische Persönlichkeiten, dresden: reissner 1924.) Kierkegaard, sören, Entweder-Oder. Ein Lebensfragment, trans. by otto gleiss, 5th ed., dresden: c. ludwig ungelenk 1909 (leipzig: J. lehmann 1885). — Der Begriff der Angst, trans. by christoph schrempf, Jena: diederichs 1923 (Gesammelte Werke, vol. 5). lukács, georg, “das zerschellen der form am leben. sören Kierkegaard und regine olsen,” in his Die Seele und die Formen, berlin: fleischel 1911, pp. 61–90.

192

Elisabete M. de Sousa and Ingrid Basso

III. Secondary Literature on Thomas Mann’s Relation to Kierkegaard assmann, dietrich, Thomas Manns Roman ‘Doktor Faustus’ und seiner Beziehungen zur Faust, dissertation, Helsinki 1975 (Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae, Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum, vol. 3), pp. 65–7. bergstern, gunilla, Thomas Manns ‘Doktor Faustus.’ Untersuchungen zu den Quellen und zur Struktur des Romans, stockholm: bonnier 1963, pp. 86–9. downing, eric, Artificial I’s: The Self as Artwork in Ovid, Kierkegaard, and Thomas Mann, tübingen: max niemeyer verlag 1993. fetzer, John f., Changing Perceptions of Thomas Mann’s Doctor Faustus: Criticism 1947–1992, columbia: camden House 1996, p. 81. gockel, Heinz, “thomas manns faustus und Kierkegaards don Juan,” in Akten des VI. Internationalen Germanisten-Kongresses Basel 1980, ed. by Heinz rupp and Hans-gert roloff, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1980 (Jahrbuch für Internationale Germanistik, vol. 8), pp. 68–75. Hamburger, Käte, “anachronistische symbolik: fragen zum thomas manns faustus-roman,” in her Kleine Schriften zur Literatur und Geistesgeschichte, stuttgart: akademischer verlag H.-d. Heinz 1976 (Stuttgarter Arbeiten zur Germanistik, vol. 25), pp. 239–63. Holthusen, Hans egon, “die Welt ohne transzendenz. eine studie zu thomas manns doktor faustus und seinen nebenschriften,” Merkur, vol. 3, 1949, pp. 38–58; pp. 161–80; also published as a book: Die Welt ohne Transzendenz. Eine Studie zu Thomas Manns Doktor Faustus und seinen Nebenschriften, Hamburg: Heinrich ellermann 1949. Kamla, thomas a., “ ‘christliche Kunst mit negativen vorzeichen’: Kierkegaard und doktor faustus,” Neophilologus, vol. 63, 1967, pp. 583–7. lewalter, christian e. and Paeschke, Hans, “thomas mann und Kierkegaard. ein briefwechsel über ‘dr. faustus,’ ” Merkur, vol. 3, 1949, pp. 925–36. lindemann, Karin, Das verschlossene Ich und seine Gegenwelt. Studien zu Thomas Mann, Sören Kierkegaard und E.T.A. Hoffmann, dissertation, erlangen 1964. marcus, Judith, Georg Lukács and Thomas Mann: A Study in the Sociology of Literature, amherst: university of massachusetts Press 1987, p. 14; p. 28; p. 42; p. 119; pp. 124–31; p. 139; p. 140; p. 195; p. 197; p. 199; p. 201; p. 203; p. 204. matthias, Klaus, Musik bei Thomas Mann und Hermann Hesse. Eine Studie über die Auffassung der Musik in der modernen Literatur, dissertation, Kiel 1956, pp. 142–5. — Thomas Mann und Skandinavien. Mit zwei Aufsätzen von Thomas Mann, lübeck: schmidt-römhild 1969 (Kultusverwaltung der Hansestadt Lübeck, vol. 3), pp. 27–8. Paci, enzo, Kierkegaard e Thomas Mann, milan: bompiani, dipartamento di Filosofia della Università degli Studi di Milano 1991. Redher, Helmut, “Thomas Mann―and Kierkegaard? Some Reflections on Irony and a letter,” in Saga og Språk, Studies in Language and Literature, ed. by John m. Weinstock, austin: Jenkins 1972, pp. 291–300.

Thomas Mann: Demons and Daemons

193

sandberg, Hans-Joachim, “der Kierkegaard-Komplex in thomas manns roman doktor faustus. zur adaptation einer beziehungsreichen thematik,” Text & Kontext, vol. 6, copenhagen 1978, pp. 257–74. — “Kierkegaard und Leverkühn. Zum Problem der Verzweiflung in Thomas Manns roman doktor faustus,” Nerthus, vol. 4, 1979, pp. 93–107. scaff, susan von rohr, “doktor faustus,” in The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Mann, ed. by ritchie robertson, cambridge: cambridge university Press 2004, pp. 168–83. schmidt, gérard, zum formgesetz des doktor faustus von thomas mann,” Studien zur Germanistik. Studienreihe Humanitas Athenaion, Wiesbaden 1976, pp. 41–2. steffensen, steffen, “thomas mann und dänemark,” ed. by rolf Wiecker, Gedenkschrift für Thomas Mann 1875–1975, copenhagen 1975 (Text & Kontext, sonderreihe, vol. 2), pp. 223–75, see pp. 242–7. — “die einwirkung Kierkegaards auf die deutschsprachige literatur des 20. Jahrhunderts,” in Akten des VI. Internationalen Germanisten-Kongresses Basel 1980, ed. by Heinz rupp and Hans-gert roloff, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 1980 (Jahrbuch für Internationale Germanistik, vol. 8), pp. 62–9.

robert musil: Kierkegaardian themes in The Man Without Qualities david d. Possen

I. Kierkegaard “in the Air” robert musil (1880–1942), the master novelist of twentieth-century austria, wrote almost nothing at all about Kierkegaard. this seems to have been a choice, a matter of principle, on his part. “i don’t like [Kierkegaard], i never liked him, and i don’t need him,” musil declared in the 1930s, dismissing the surge of interest in Kierkegaard after World War i as a matter of “youth and changing times.”1 musil had no need for Kierkegaard, he explained, because he had long ago absorbed, by cultural osmosis, what Kierkegaard was now presumed to offer: “the positive element that people derive from him today was already in the air back then [lag damals schon in der Luft], and i did not need Kierkegaard to supply it.”2 The present article will reflect on these last brusque words. Just what, I will ask, is the “positive element” that was “in the air back then”—back, that is, in the world of musil’s youth, the world before 1914—which the new thinkers of austria’s first republic, or of Weimar germany, could only strain to recover by appeal to Kierkegaard? might that “positive element” have had some connection to the mission of The Man Without Qualities, musil’s monumental work-in-progress, which promised to teach the lessons of 1914 to a fresh generation of germans?3

This article has benefited greatly from the comments of Emily Levine and Peter Brickey LeQuire. I thank them both. 1 robert musil, Tagebücher, vols. 1–2, ed. by adolf frisé, Hamburg: rowohlt 1976, vol. 1, pp. 901–2. this translation is adapted from robert musil, Diaries: 1899–1941, trans. by Philip Payne, ed. by mark mirsky, new York: basic books 1999, p. 432. 2 ibid. 3 see the draft preface at robert musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vols. 1–2, ed. by adolf frisé, Hamburg: rowohlt 1978, vol. 2, p. 1819: “i dedicate this novel to the german youth. not the youth of today—intellectual vacuum after the war—quite amusing swindlers— but the youth that will come after a time, and which will have to begin precisely where we stopped just before the war.” this translation is adapted from robert musil, The Man Without Qualities, vols. 1–2, trans. by sophie Wilkins and burton Pike, new York: vintage books 1995, vol. 2, p. 1723.

196

David D. Possen

it will take some detective work to answer these questions. for apart from the diary entry just cited, there exist only two other substantive references to Kierkegaard (to my knowledge) in musil’s entire oeuvre. one of these, from musil’s working notes to The Man Without Qualities, is little more than a note to the effect that “Either/Or vs. Both/And has a role in the modern philosophical debate (Kierkegaard, for example, vs. Hegel).”4 this refers to the commonplace view of Kierkegaard standing as a bulwark (“Either/Or!”) against Hegelian mediation.5 While this note might sound promising at first, we will see below that its actual function is to remind musil to shy away from the “modern philosophical debate” at issue: to prevent that debate from interfering with the orderly development of his novel and its characters. the remaining substantive Kierkegaard reference occurs in an earlier (1920s) diary entry. Here Musil responds to a boosterish profile of Kierkegaard by Rudolf Kassner (1873–1959), a prominent viennese literary critic.6 Kassner had called Kierkegaard “one of the three or four very great psychologists” of the nineteenth century—or indeed one of the top two, “matched solely by dostoyevsky.”7 this led musil to comment: “Where did the mania for psychology in literature, and its contrary movement, come from? from the fact that the departing nineteenth century counted several very great psychologists among its authors, three or four; and Kierkegaard and dostoyevsky were two of them.”8 this focus on Kierkegaard as a psychologist-author is perhaps our best clue to the 1930s diary entry with which we began, in which musil writes of a “positive element” that intellectuals were lately finding in Kierkegaard, but which had “already” been “in the air back then.” It is worth noting that one thinker whom musil cites in close proximity to that 1930s entry is martin Heidegger (1889–1976); and Heidegger’s famous 1929 citation of Kierkegaard (in Being and Time) appeals precisely to Kierkegaard’s psychological acuity as an analyst of anxiety.9 in addition, we have a 1933 letter to musil from the novelist Hermann broch (1886–1951), in which broch refers to Kierkegaard as a central source for Heidegger.10 taken as a whole, however, the direct evidence available—that is, the evidence from musil’s three substantive references to Kierkegaard—does not permit us to identify conclusively the Kierkegaardian “positive element” of which musil spoke. it permits us only to say that this “element” likely had to do with Kierkegaard’s contributions to philosophy via psychology, or, failing that, with Kierkegaard’s storied protest (“Either/Or!”) against abuses of mediation. musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 2, p. 1911, translation mine. see, for example, Karl Jaspers, Psychologie der Weltanschauungen, berlin: springer 1919, p. 329. in the note in question, musil refers to a newspaper article, “die entschiedenheit des realen und der moderne mensch,” that i have been unable to locate. 6 rudolf Kassner, “Kierkegaard,” in his Motive. Essays, berlin: fischer 1906, pp. 1–76. 7 ibid., p. 4. 8 musil, Tagebücher, vol. 1, p. 479, my translation. 9 martin Heidegger, Being and Time, trans. by John macquarrie and edward robinson, oxford: blackwell 1962, p. 492. 10 musil, Tagebücher, vol. 2, p. 1224. 4 5

Robert Musil: Kierkegaardian Themes in The Man Without Qualities

197

fortunately, there is also a good deal of indirect evidence to consider. there is, for example, a trove of thematic affinities between Musil’s and Kierkegaard’s writings. consider ulrich, the protagonist of The Man Without Qualities. ulrich is not only a clear Socrates figure,11 but in fact appears, in his role as “man without qualities,” to be cast specifically in the mold of Kierkegaard’s socrates, whose “position in life [i]s altogether predicateless.”12 like Kierkegaard’s socrates, musil’s ulrich is an “ironist,” a man of “negativity” dedicated to demolishing the social conventions and philosophical pretensions around him.13 in recent decades, several studies have appeared documenting this and other parallels between musil’s novel and Kierkegaard’s writings.14 these studies do not pretend to have uncovered signs of direct influence by Kierkegaard on Musil and The Man Without Qualities. All agree that we lack sufficient evidence to support such a claim. rather, what is at issue is the possibility of indirect influence, mediated through the “air” of the same prewar period that The Man Without Qualities chronicles. in the words of one musil scholar, the parallels between musil and Kierkegaard are “all the more impressive” precisely when we regard them as something other than “a matter of mere influence.”15 The remainder of this article will offer a tour of the clearest thematic affinities between musil’s writings—particularly The Man Without Qualities—and Kierkegaard’s thought, before circling back to the question of what musil might have meant in writing of a Kierkegaardian “positive element” that was also endemic in the prewar “air.” i will begin (in section ii) with a sketch of musil’s life and works; here i will take note of the curious parallels to Fear and Trembling in musil’s 1924 short story “tonka.” next i will proceed (in section iii) to The Man Without Qualities, where i will explore a group of themes—irony and negativity, leveling, the paradoxical figure of Abraham—central to the affinities between Kierkegaard and musil. i will conclude (in section iv) not only by returning to the question of Kierkegaard’s significance for Musil, but also by suggesting how the study of

as documented memorably in daniel J. brooks, “Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften with constant reference to socrates,” Modern Austrian Literature, vol. 22, no. 1, 1989, pp. 1–18, p. 1: “ulrich…proclaims a woman named diotima as his instructor in love, takes a stand against writing, is suspicious of music, and claims ignorance of any objective knowledge.” 12 SKS 1, 227 / CI, 180. 13 SKS 1, 239 / CI, 192. 14 götz müller, Ideologiekritik und Metasprache in Robert Musils Roman Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, munich: Wilhelm fink 1972 (Musil-Studien, vol. 2), pp. 113ff.; brooks, “Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften with constant reference to socrates”; daniel brooks, Musil’s Socratic Discourse in Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften: A Comparative Study of Ulrich and Socrates, new York: Peter lang 1989 (American University Studies, series i, Germanic Languages and Literature, vol. 81); sebastian Hüsch, Möglichkeit und Wirklichkeit. Eine vergleichende Studie zu Sören Kierkegaards “Entweder-Oder” und Robert Musils “Mann ohne Eigenschaften,” stuttgart: ibidem-verlag 2004; sebastian Hüsch, “Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften—ein roman ohne eigenschaften: Über die bedeutung der ironie in robert musils roman,” Modern Austrian Literature, vol. 39, no. 2, 2006, pp. 19–40. 15 brooks, Musil’s Socratic Discourse, pp. 62–3. 11

198

David D. Possen

Kierkegaard can benefit from reading The Man Without Qualities as a kind of Kierkegaardian novel. II. Musil’s Life and Works musil was born on november 6, 1880, in Klagenfurt, austria, and spent his early years in the austro-czech towns of Komotau and brünn (now chomutov and brno in the czech republic). musil’s father, albert, was an engineer descended distantly from the austro-czech lower nobility; his mother, Hermine née bergauer, was the daughter of a wealthy railroad engineer. from 1891 until his death in 1924, albert musil served as professor of mechanical engineering at brünn’s german technical university. in 1917, albert was granted a hereditary knighthood—making robert, his only son, an “edler von musil” as well. in his teens, robert musil attended a series of military schools; and in the fall of 1897, he began officers’ training at the Technical Military Academy in Vienna. Within a few months, however, he switched to the engineering program at his father’s university in brünn. after his 1901 graduation, musil enlisted for a year’s service in the austro-Hungarian infantry. He then moved to stuttgart, and eventually berlin, to pursue a doctorate in philosophy and psychology. in 1908, Ph.d. in hand, musil became more or less a full-time author—except in the years during and just after World War i, when he returned to military service. In 1906 Musil had published his first novel, The Confusions of Young Torless,16 to marked critical acclaim.17 Törless is a tale—drawn closely from experiences in musil’s own adolescence—of bullying and masochism, of sexual exploration and exploitation, and of moral and intellectual awakening among a group of teenage boys at an austrian military school. after the nazi defeat, Törless came to be seen as a prescient forecast of the ease with which a culture like austria’s could descend into fascism. such associations may be said to have begun with musil himself, who in the 1930s noted in his diary that “reising and boineburg”—the real bullies on whom the two chief sadists of Törless, reiting and beineberg, were thinly based—were “today’s dictators in nucleo.”18 musil’s next publications were a series of short stories and plays. many of these revolve around strong female characters inspired by his wife, martha marcovaldi née Heimann, whom he married in 1911. an exception is “tonka,” published in the 1924 collection Three Women—and which happens to be the story that occasioned the first scholarly comparisons of Musil to Kierkegaard. set in a grimy austro-Hungarian city, “tonka” recounts how a well-off young robert musil, Die Verwirrungen des Zöglings Törleß, vienna: Wiener verlag 1906. (english translation: The Confusions of Young Torless, trans. by shaun Whiteside, london: Penguin 2001.) 17 this was thanks in large part to its enthusiastic reception by the german critic alfred Kerr (1867–1948). on this see Karl corino, “robert musil und alfred Kerr: der dichter und sein Kritiker,” in Robert Musil. Studien zu seinem Werk, ed. by Karl dinklage et al., Hamburg: rowohlt 1970, pp. 236–83. 18 musil, Tagebücher, p. 914. (Diaries, p. 438.) 16

Robert Musil: Kierkegaardian Themes in The Man Without Qualities

199

ethnic german (r.) gradually takes a lower-class czech girl (tonka) as his lover. Eventually she becomes pregnant. R. reacts diffidently to the news of Tonka’s pregnancy, since medical evidence suggests that he cannot be the father. tonka nonetheless swears that there can be no other father; but to believe that, it seems to r., would be tantamount to believing in a new virgin birth. in the midst of her pregnancy, tonka dies, and r. holds himself responsible—a parallel to the real-life pregnancy and death, in 1907, of musil’s own mistress from his student days. in the secondary literature, “tonka” has been compared fruitfully to Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling: specifically, to Johannes de silentio’s discussion of the virgin pregnancy of mary, and to the “distress,” “agony,” and “paradox” that this miracle forced upon her.19 from the publication of Three Women until his death, musil occupied himself almost exclusively with The Man Without Qualities, the novel that would become his unfinished masterpiece. Set in 1913–14, The Man Without Qualities is a study of the collapsing austro-Hungarian empire, which musil wittily dubs “Kakania” (for its unsustainably double kaiserlich-königlich [imperial-royal] identity). this massive novel may be regarded as an ambitious work of social commentary, meant to provoke a new generation of german youth to learn from, and see past, the folly of their elders.20 Yet it is unusual as social commentary, for its primary focus is on individuals and the challenges they face in living authentically. the novel’s protagonist, ulrich, is a leisured ex-soldier and engineer who dedicates himself to a year of isolation from all social and moral entanglements. Within months, however, these plans are undone. ulrich becomes enmeshed in the “Parallel campaign,” an austro-Hungarian effort to outdo Prussia’s 30-year jubilee celebration of the accession of Kaiser Wilhelm ii, planned for 1918, by planning a 70-year jubilee in the same year for austria-Hungary’s own emperor franz Joseph i. the Parallel campaign brings ulrich into contact and confrontation with a host of viennese politicians, bureaucrats, businessmen, society ladies, academics, and littérateurs, whose pretensions and machinations he—as the sole “man without qualities”—continually exposes. there is a clear parallel here to the career of socrates, the man without knowledge, whose life is spent exposing his athenian interlocutors’ pretensions to knowledge. The first volume of The Man Without Qualities, comprising Parts one and two, appeared in 1930. it chronicles ulrich’s slow entanglement in the Parallel campaign and his emergence as its gadfly. The volume closes when Ulrich receives a telegram announcing his father’s death—an event that inserts a sharp caesura into ulrich’s experience of Austria-Hungary’s final year of peace. As Musil’s sketches indicate, the remainder of the novel was meant to show how ulrich would disentangle himself, slowly but surely, from the associations that were compromising his authenticity, all while Kakania slid inexorably toward war. SKS 4, 157–8 / FT, 64–5. cf. Walter H. sokel, “Kleist’s marquise of o., Kierkegaard’s abraham, and musil’s tonka: three stages of the absurd as the touchstone of faith,” Wisconsin Studies in Contemporary Literature, vol. 8, no. 4, 1967, pp. 505–16. 20 see, once again, the draft preface at musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 2, p. 1819. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, p. 1723.) 19

200

David D. Possen

In 1932, tight finances forced Musil to publish a second, much shorter Volume II containing the first 38 chapters of Part Three. Here we read how Ulrich, freshly arrived at his father’s house, is reunited with his sister agathe, who is herself in the process of cutting ties of inauthentic commitment (here those to her husband). after their father’s funeral, brother and sister retreat to ulrich’s vienna home and begin building a new life together. ulrich and agathe’s new joint spiritual and philosophical aspirations are meant to suggest a utopian alternative to the Parallel campaign, whose fashionable nonsense about peace is now dragging austriaHungary and Germany finally, and unavoidably, toward war.21 as musil continued work on further chapters of Part three, war loomed once more for austria and germany. and for musil personally—both because of his own well-known opposition to fascism, and because martha was Jewish-born—the steady rise of nazism posed a direct threat. in september 1938, months after Hitler’s annexation of Austria, Musil fled with Martha to Switzerland; by year’s end his books had been banned throughout the nazis’ reich. from 1939 until his death in 1942, musil lived in near-poverty in geneva, still laboring over draft chapters of The Man Without Qualities. a year after musil’s death, martha published a selection of his most polished draft chapters, in the hope of awakening new interest in the novel. but that was not to be. musil’s masterwork would have to wait in silence for its new generation of german youth to emerge, a generation better prepared to confront the lessons of its history. As it happens, sales of the novel lay flat until shortly after the 1968 season of student protests. they then vaulted upward, higher and higher, and spread worldwide.22 III. Kierkegaardian Themes in The Man Without Qualities i will now present three themes in The Man Without Qualities that can plausibly be regarded as Kierkegaardian. The first and most important of these is irony, a theme whose Kierkegaardian resonances are much discussed in the musil secondary literature. Here we will remain on well-trodden ground. by contrast, the ties to Kierkegaard of the other two themes—social criticism, or “leveling,” and Abraham, or the murderer as exception—have mostly gone unnoticed by scholars. there i will strike out on my own. A. Irony let us begin with a provocative set of data-points laid out by daniel brooks in his 1989 monograph Musil’s Socratic Discourse: 21 as musil’s notes make clear, “the Parallel campaign leads to War!” musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 2, p. 1902. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, p. 1755.) 22 on the postwar publication history of The Man Without Qualities, see timothy J. mehigan, The Critical Response to Robert Musil’s The Man Without Qualities, rochester, new York: camden House 2003, pp. 6–7.

Robert Musil: Kierkegaardian Themes in The Man Without Qualities

201

1. Kierkegaard’s The Concept of Irony first became available in German in 1929, with the publication of the Kütemeyer and schaeder translations.23 2. later the same year, musil began routinely using the terms Eigenschaftslosigkeit and der Mann ohne Eigenschaften to refer to ulrich and the novel as a whole.24 3. In the same period, we also find new references to Ulrich as bent on “abolish[ing] reality,” etc.25 Brooks is careful—and rightly so—not to try to deduce from these facts any definite Kierkegaardian influence on musil. instead, brooks argues merely that they point to an uncanny parallel, worthy of deeper examination, between Kierkegaard’s socrates and musil’s ulrich.26 Here, in brief, is what brooks’ investigation uncovers: [like Kierkegaard’s socrates,] ulrich too claims no absolute knowledge: in very socratic fashion he disputes what arnheim, diotima, clarisse, Hans sepp, gerda and leo fischel consider as accepted if not absolute truth; when pressed for his own view he responds with “i don’t know” or a shrug of the shoulders. it is a negative trait, “sucking out the content” of those truths that present society acknowledges without offering an alternative and therefore leaving only emptiness. like Kierkegaard’s socrates, he is a man who is not ignorant “in an empirical sense,” for he is trained in mathematics, a world of factual information, but in a factual sense. He is ignorant of the underlying reason for all existence while always in search for it….this knowledge of his ignorance makes ulrich wise, in a socratic sense, at least wiser than the other characters….the alienation of the ironic subject from society developed by Kierkegaard is a trait easily applied to ulrich, whose characteristic Eigenschaftslosigkeit consists precisely of the idea of distancing oneself from the actual world because of the nothingness on which it stands.27

brooks supports these claims with an impressive array of citations,28 of which i will here reproduce only one. this is a passage found early in musil’s novel, in which Ulrich boils down his entire philosophical outlook to a wry “Principle of Insufficient reason” or “PDUG” [Prinzip des unzureichenden Grundes]. this takes place in an exchange between ulrich and his friend leo fischel—a Jew, a bank director, and an erstwhile student of philosophy who still “enjoy[s] philosophizing, but only for ten minutes a day.”29 Knowing that fischel is (as ever) in a rush, ulrich explains his contrarian Principle to him as concisely as he can:

sören Kierkegaard, Der Begriff der Ironie mit ständiger Rücksicht auf Sokrates, trans. by Wilhelm Kütemeyer, munich: raiser 1929; Über den Begriff der Ironie mit ständiger Rücksicht auf Sokrates, trans. by Hans Heinrich schaeder, munich: r. oldenbourg 1929. 24 brooks, Musil’s Socratic Discourse, p. 62; but see also, p. 151, note 4. 25 The first of these is at Musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 289. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 312.) 26 brooks, Musil’s Socratic Discourse, p. 63. 27 ibid., pp. 69ff. 28 ibid., pp. 69–74. 29 musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 204. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 219.) 23

202

David D. Possen You must know from history that there has never been such a thing as the true faith, the true morality, and the true philosophy. but the wars, the viciousness, and the hatreds unleashed in their name have transformed the world in a fruitful way….i give you my solemn word…that neither i nor anyone else knows what “the true” anything is. but i can assure you that it is on the point of being realized.30

brooks interprets these lines, along with similar statements of ulrich’s drawn from elsewhere in volume i, as parallel to the way in which Kierkegaard’s socrates, without ever despairing of the possibility that the truth will manifest itself, presses onward from knowing his own ignorance to exposing the ignorance of all humanity.31 this means that musil’s ulrich, like Kierkegaard’s socrates, is a man of ironic negativity. His is a destructive mission: lacking pretensions, he reveals and uproots the pretensions of others. ulrich’s function in Kakanian society is precisely to be its gadfly, to probe its moorings and reveal their faults and instabilities. The above statements demand a caveat. They are indeed a smooth fit for the Ulrich of volume i (Parts one and two); but in volume ii (Part three), ulrich undergoes a momentous change. i mentioned earlier that, at the start of Part three, ulrich and his sister agathe are reunited at their deceased father’s house. this reunion sparks a new project, a new quest for truth, that brother and sister will partake in jointly. that new joint quest is heralded by an epiphany of sorts that comes to Ulrich on his first morning at his father’s house: there is a kind of recollection that evokes not the word itself but the atmosphere in which it was spoken, and so ulrich suddenly thought: “carbon…” and got the feeling, as if from nowhere, that at this instant all he needed to continue was to know the various states in which carbon occurred; but he could not remember, and thought instead: “the human being comes in twos. as man and as woman.” He paused at this for a while, evidently stunned with amazement, as if he had just made some earthshaking discovery…32

in the ensuing chapters, we meet a more constructive and arguably positive side of ulrich. He now yearns to reconstitute civil society on the basis of an enduring brother–sister bond. in his notes, musil referred to the state that union with agathe makes available to ulrich as “the other condition” [der andere Zustand], “other” in contrast to the emptiness of ordinary social existence.33 in the extant chapters of

musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, pp. 134–5. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 141, translation modified.) 31 cf. SKS 1, 98 / CI, 37: “socrates’ philosophy began with the presupposition that he knew nothing [and] ended with the presupposition that human beings know nothing at all.” 32 musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 687. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, p. 747.) 33 musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 2, p. 1882 (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, p. 1749), etc. ulrich himself speaks of “a certain alternative and uncommon condition of great importance”; see Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 766. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, p. 832.) 30

Robert Musil: Kierkegaardian Themes in The Man Without Qualities

203

volume ii, ulrich in fact seems to be domesticated by this “other condition.” it is Agathe, rather than Ulrich, who is the more negatively ironic figure there.34 brooks acknowledges this point. indeed, he makes room for it by adding a new twist to his Kierkegaardian interpretive model. Brooks identifies the Ulrich of volume ii as a Kierkegaardian-Platonic figure, in contradistinction to the Kierkegaardian-socratic ulrich of volume i.35 He then equates the “other condition,” inasmuch as it poses “an impossible task which has…only metaphorical validity,” with Kierkegaard’s conception of the “mythical/Platonic standpoint,” which yields not the idea itself but its “metaphor,” “not as the idea but as a mirroring [Afglans] of the idea.”36 brooks points out that, in the texts of volume ii that are extant, the plot gradually deteriorates as ulrich and agathe retreat further and further from society, engaging “in long, inconclusive dialogues,” which “seems in fact to bring into question the possibility of ending the novel at all.”37 This last suggestion is intriguing. But it is difficult to evaluate, as we simply know so little about how The Man Without Qualities was meant to end (presumably with a Part four that would bring the characters to the brink of war). given what we do know of Parts three and four, it certainly seems safe to say that musil did not mean ulrich to remain, like Kierkegaard’s socrates, a man of utter irony, of “infinite absolute negativity.”38 but what then is the fate of utter irony in the novel? this question is fruitfully discussed by sebastian Hüsch, a scholarly successor to brooks. Hüsch begins by denying that any direct influence by Kierkegaard on Musil is plausible. in fact, Hüsch mischaracterizes brooks as having asserted such an influence.39 somewhat incongruously, Hüsch proceeds to propose a new parallel to Kierkegaard that is more far-reaching than anything brooks had suggested. Hüsch describes The Man Without Qualities as itself a work of Kierkegaardian-socratic irony, a literary performance akin, in many respects, to Kierkegaard’s Either/Or.40 The Man Without Qualities, Hüsch suggests, is as a whole a novel without qualities, a socratic novel: like the ignorant socrates, it forces its interlocutor—its reader—to take a stand of his own at every turn. Here is the climax of Hüsch’s argumentation: the novel The Man Without Qualities is a “novel without qualities” precisely in the sense that, as an ironic novel [in the Kierkegaardian-socratic sense41], it says neither what it is nor what it means….every assertion or observation, once made, is compromised immediately by the subjunctive; and soon enough it is also, to an extent, this becomes especially clear in agathe’s encounters with Prof. august lindner, starting in ch. 31 of book three. 35 brooks, Musil’s Socratic Discourse, pp. 74–93. 36 ibid., p. 92; p. 88; SKS 1, 156 / CI, 103. 37 brooks, Musil’s Socratic Discourse, p. 92. 38 SKS 1, 307 / CI, 271. 39 Hüsch, “Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften—ein roman ohne eigenschaften,” p. 36, note 24; and Hüsch, Möglichkeit und Wirklichkeit, p. 27 and p. 31, note 55. 40 Hüsch expands on this in chapter 4 of his Möglichkeit und Wirklichkeit. 41 this follows an appeal to the “Kierkegaardian socrates interpretation” as a source for Hüsch’s own account of musilian irony. cf. Hüsch, “Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften—ein roman ohne eigenschaften,” pp. 30–31. 34

204

David D. Possen refuted ironically. the novel thereby escapes to the sphere of meaningful ambiguity. every attempt to set meaning in stone is immediately called into question, as there is virtually nothing at all in the novel that could confirm a particular interpretation authoritatively….Every interpretation, even if intersubjectively verifiable, is always at best possible. accordingly, irony is the essential element, the key to understanding the novel, insofar as it compels subjective appropriation on the part of the reader….unlike ulrich, the novel [as a whole] does not attempt to burst its own ironic negativity through positivity. for only by presenting itself as more or less a “novel without qualities” can The Man Without Qualities unfurl, to the reader, the spectrum of all possible meanings that can be inscribed in its ambivalence, or can be read out of it. only as a novel without qualities can it succeed in leading, or seducing, the reader to subjective appropriation.42

like brooks’ assertions about Kierkegaardian-Platonic irony in volume ii, this claim is similarly difficult to evaluate because of the truncated character of the text we have. true, volume ii casts plenty of aspersions on the “utopian” character of ulrich’s retreat to “the other condition.”43 but we know too little about the unwritten Part four to suppose, pace Hüsch, that the novel as a whole was certain to develop (unlike ulrich) without any recourse to positivity. nevertheless, Hüsch’s reading is valuable as a counterpoint to brooks’. for it teaches us to widen our search for Kierkegaardian-socratic irony in musil beyond the territory that brooks had mapped out (namely, the outlook and activity of ulrich in volume i). Hüsch provokes us to consider how the narrator and author of The Man Without Qualities, for example, may function as ironists as well; how the reader, too, may be implicated in that drama; and how the novel as a whole may be regarded as a kind of Socratic gadfly in book form. These provocations will prove useful in the next subsections, where i will offer my own account of a key dimension of novel’s irony: namely, its use in social commentary and criticism. B. Social Criticism one of the most obvious uses to which irony is put in The Man Without Qualities is criticism of “Kakania” (the austro-Hungarian empire) as a whole. in decades past, it was—not surprisingly—communist and marxist commentators who tended to emphasize this dimension of musil’s achievement.44 the marxist scholar götz Müller was the first to identify Kierkegaard as a crucial source for Musil’s socialcritical irony. müller did so by seizing on the reference to Kierkegaard in musil’s writing notes that we mentioned in section i. Here is the full text of that reference:

ibid., pp. 31–2, my translation. the last sentence contains a pun on the german words führen (lead) and verführen (seduce). 43 as musil explains in his note on “ulrich’s three utopias” at musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 2, p. 1885. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, p. 1753.) 44 see, for example, alexandr W. belobratow, “individuum und gesellschaft in robert musils roman Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften,” in Robert Musil—Literatur, Philosophie, Psychologie, ed. by Josef and Johann strutz, munich: Wilhelm fink 1984 (Musil-Studien, vol. 12), pp. 110–23. 42

Robert Musil: Kierkegaardian Themes in The Man Without Qualities

205

as for the subproblems that emerge between ulrich and agathe, hold them to their proper insignificance! For example, Either/Or vs. Both/And has a role in the modern philosophical debate (Kierkegaard, for example, vs. Hegel; see the newspaper article “die entschiedenheit des realen u. der moderne mensch,” Yellow notebook45); but for a thinker these subproblems are no more than pieces of a mosaic. they can be no more than pieces of the narration of an experience. so don’t let yourself get overly caught up in them.46

it is clear on inspection that the purpose of this note-to-self is to encourage musil to refrain from assimilating ulrich, or the novel as a whole, to some latter-day Kierkegaardian polemic against Hegel. müller, however, cavalierly takes this note as warrant for equating ulrich, in the grand scheme of things, with Kierkegaard’s call for existential decision (“Either/Or”); and for equating Kakanian society tout court with the Hegelian “Both/And.”47 müller declares: musil thematizes the problematic of the ironist in terms of the Kierkegaardian categories “Either/Or” contra “Both/And.”…With the irony of historicism, Ulrich destroys the “substantial morality” [of Kakania] without sublating it in the Hegelian sense. ulrich’s “experimental” disposition admits only actions with a “ ‘provisionally definitive’ character.”48 in Kierkegaard’s conception, ulrich has only “personal virtues” but not “civic virtue”; for inasmuch as the state and morality have lost their meaning, “all such virtues have reality for the individual only as imaginary constructions.”49 “they [lack] the deeper earnestness that every virtue acquires only when it is ordered in a totality.”50 the “disposition to experiment and revocation” describes this posture: it is “punctured seriousness.”51

müller here paints a vivid portrait of musil’s ulrich as a Kierkegaardian-socratic revolutionary, who tears down Kakania’s state apparatus and civic norms with all the vigor of (to borrow Kierkegaard’s image) samson in the Philistines’ temple.52 remarkably—even though, as we have just seen, they originate in a cavalier misreading of musil’s note-to-self—these claims by müller turn out to be not at all implausible. in a draft passage that müller himself suprisingly does not cite, musil himself suggests that Kakania is the land of “both-and,” fearful of and vulnerable to an avenging “either-or”: Kakania was inspired by a hereditary mistrust, acquired from great historical experiences, of every either-or, and always had a glimmering that there were in the world many more i was unable to identify this source. musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 2, p. 1911, translation mine. 47 müller, Ideologiekritik und Metasprache, p. 114. 48 musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 635. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 693.) 49 cf. SKS 1, 272, note / CI, 230, note. 50 ibid. 51 müller, Ideologiekritik und Metasprache, pp. 114–15, translation mine. the last citations are from musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 304; p. 636. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 329; p. 693.) 52 SKS 1, 102 / CI, 40. 45 46

206

David D. Possen contradictions than the one which ultimately led to its demise, and that a contradiction must be decisively resolved. the principle of its government was both-and; or even better, with wisest moderation, Neither/Nor.53

It would seem, then, that Kierkegaard’s “Either/Or” is indeed of relevance to the social criticism in musil’s novel. my own view is that müller was on to something—and that his proposed Kierkegaardian parallel runs deep. as i see it, the parallel goes beyond musil’s concept of irony, and beyond his call for an “Either/Or,” and extends to the theory of leveling that he offers in his review of thomasine gyllembourg’s Two Ages, in a text that might have been known to musil as “critique of the Present age.”54 Here is what i mean. in his review of Two Ages, Kierkegaard describes how a society “devoid of passion” can suck the life out of its own values and institutions, even as it preserves them outwardly.55 such a society “lets everything remain but subtly drains the meaning out of it.”56 as this process unfolds, social distinctions persist, but grow ever weaker and more arbitrary. It becomes difficult for human beings to relate to one another truly as fathers and sons, teachers and students, kings and subjects— indeed, as anything other than an anemic and confused “committee.”57 Kierkegaard explains: “the coiled springs of life-relationships, which are what they are only because of some qualitatively distinguishing passion, lose their resilience; the qualitative expression of difference between opposites is [now] no longer the law for the relation.”58 On a society-wide scale, in other words, Either/Ors are continually replaced by Both/Ands. This is what Kierkegaard calls “leveling,” the fruit of ascendant “envy.”59 i read much of the social commentary in The Man Without Qualities— particularly its extended, darkly satirical, accounts of the Parallel campaign’s unending committee meetings—as a narrative demonstration of leveling in Kakania and its consequences. Here musil’s careful portraits of Jews and anti-Semitism play a vital role. for the assimilation of Jews and their rise to high rank (as in the case of Paul arnheim, a character who represents Walter rathenau (1867–1922), the most prominent Jewish industrialist and politician of early twentieth-century germany60) is in Kakania a characteristically visible symbol of the erosion of old class and ethnic barriers. anti-semitism, meanwhile, is the murderous fruit of an effort to musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 2, p. 1445. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, p. 1481, emphasis added, translation modified.) 54 Part iii of Kierkegaard’s review of the novel A Literary Review of Two Ages: SKS 8, 58–106 / TA, 60–112. this text was available in german from 1914 as sören Kierkegaard, Kritik der Gegenwart, trans. by theodor Haecker, innsbruck: brenner-verlag 1914. 55 SKS 8, 74 / TA, 77. 56 ibid. 57 SKS 8, 76 / TA, 79. 58 SKS 8, 75 / TA, 78. 59 SKS 8, 80 / TA, 84. 60 On Rathenau’s political and social significance, see Gordon A. Craig, The Germans, new York: g.P. Putnam’s sons 1982, pp. 141–3. 53

Robert Musil: Kierkegaardian Themes in The Man Without Qualities

207

wish that erosion away. the pathos of this situation emerges in the humor of the following passage, in which count leinsdorf, an impatient aristocrat, both explains and brushes off the Jewish Question in one swoop: “i’ve nothing at all against the Jews…they are intelligent, hardworking, and reliable. but it was a great mistake to give them those unsuitable names. rosenberg and rosenthal, for instance, are aristocratic names; loew, baer, and all such creatures are originally heraldic beasts; meier derives from landed property; gelb, blau, roth, and gold are armorial colors. all those Jewish names,” His grace disclosed, to ulrich’s surprise, “are nothing but the insolence of our bureaucrats directed at the nobility….the whole socalled Jewish Question would disappear without a trace if the Jews would only make up their minds to speak Hebrew, go back to their old names, and wear eastern dress.”61

count leinsdorf is not a hater of Jews. but like many in the novel who fall prey to anti-Semitic thinking, Leinsdorf fails to regard the Jewish Question as animated by a deeper dilemma—call it the Kakanian Question—in which it is implicated, and without which it cannot possibly be answered. What is distinctive in ulrich, in this context, is his capacity to see the Jewish Question as inseparable from other, larger questions: not just the Kakanian Question, but also the ultimate question of the place of class, ethnic, and national identity alike in a world where all “qualities” are coming undone. musil makes this evident at the climax of his novel’s central funeral scene, on which pivots the novel’s fundamental divide between the negativity of volume i and the utopian hope of volume ii: For the first time [Ulrich] felt the upright attitude of tradition….He imagined how it would be if at this moment he were really striding forward in the original sense—half forgotten in the pomp it assumed in its present-day form—as the real heir of a great power….deeply moved as he was, however, ulrich could not help noticing that the director or undertaker who was leading this catholic funeral procession to the cemetery and keeping it in good order was a tall, muscular Jew in his thirties: graced with a long blond mustache, and carrying papers in his pocket like a courier, he dashed up and down, now straightening a horse’s harness, now whispering some instruction to the band…. all [ulrich] could feel now was the absurdity, the confused wavering nature of human order, and of himself. “now i’m all alone in the world,” he thought. “a mooring rope has snapped—up I go!” This echo of his first sensation on receiving the news of his father’s death now expressed his feelings once more as he walked on between the walls of people.62

from his place in the funeral procession, ulrich is struck by how the ceremony that surrounds him both echoes and betrays its age-old model, in which a king is laid to rest and his crown prince is immediately raised to the throne. (“the king is dead; long live the king!”) Here many outward trappings of that ceremony remain unchanged, but their substance has long since been adulterated; as Kierkegaard would put it, everything has stayed the same except for the meaning, which has musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, pp. 843–4. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, pp. 916–17.) 62 musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, pp. 709–11. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 2, pp. 770–72.) 61

208

David D. Possen

subtly been drained away. to ulrich, the funeral’s director—tall, blond, muscular, and even mustachioed, but a Jew nonetheless—is a symbol of this irony, a comic embodiment of Kakanian leveling. He looks the part, he fills a role, to which he is by tradition’s lights utterly unsuitable. like leinsdorf and other characters, ulrich sees the assimilated Jew as a symbol of corruption and inauthenticity. fortunately, ulrich—unlike those others—does not stop there. He presses on to draw a more general lesson from the funeral’s ironies: they reveal to him the “confused wavering nature of human order” itself, in which he “himself,” no less than the funeral director, is fully entwined as well. Had ulrich been a crown prince, his father’s death would have made him a king. but ulrich is no crown prince; he is an ironist in leveled Kakania. and so his father’s death does not grant him any new fixed role. On the contrary, it forces Ulrich to face life itself as a man without any qualities at all. the death of his father, in short, completes the leveling of ulrich’s identity. it both unmoors him and forces him “up” into the world. and precisely as such a figure, I believe musil is suggesting—precisely as a man without qualities condemned to be a man—ulrich represents Kakania’s best hope. for as Kierkegaard explains, leveling cannot but lead to a society’s death in “dizziness”; and there is no escape except by the “leap” of each individual, one by one.63 C. Abraham one further theme and passage deserve mention. this is a minor character in The Man Without Qualities named christian moosbrugger, an itinerant carpenter and sex murderer. moosbrugger has little to say for himself: he cannot explain his actions at all. but his story speaks volumes. it mesmerizes musil’s other characters—including, for a time, ulrich as well. in ulrich’s case, fascination with moosbrugger gradually gives way to a soberer assessment of his significance. Ulrich comes to regard Moosbrugger as “a rampant metaphor of order...part crystallization of meaning, part resurgence of the nonsense beneath.”64 others, however—particularly the nietzsche-crazed clarisse—continue viewing moosbrugger as something more: a projection of their own revengefantasies, an avatar of radical freedom and the will to power; or even a demonic savior-figure, a blend of Satan, Christ, and Zarathustra.65 at one point, ulrich has an

SKS 8, 102–3 / TA, 108–9: “then it will be said: ‘look, everything is ready; look, the cruelty of abstraction exposes the vanity of the finite in itself; look, the abyss of the infinite is opening up; look, the sharp scythe of leveling permits all, every single one, to leap over the blade—look, god is waiting! leap, then, into the arms of god.’ [but] they [i.e., the individuals] must make the leap by themselves.” 64 musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 653. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 712.) 65 cf. musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, pp. 144–7 and pp. 832–3. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, pp. 152–5 and vol. 2, pp. 904–5.) 63

Robert Musil: Kierkegaardian Themes in The Man Without Qualities

209

ominous intimation of Moosbrugger’s lasting significance to Kakania: “If mankind as a whole could dream,” he muses, “that dream would be moosbrugger.”66 late in volume i, a strikingly Kierkegaardian remark is made about Moosbrugger. The speaker is Paul Arnheim, the novel’s Walther Rathenau figure, a superbly assimilated Jew who seems to have all the answers at all times, irritating the otherwise unflappable Ulrich. (Musil, it seems, knew Rathenau personally, and found him insufferable.67) arnheim has this to say: that man [moosbrugger] must surely be stopped from doing further harm….and yet, when he is having one of his seizures, he is certainly a man possessed by the demonic, which in all virile epochs has been felt to be akin to the divine. in the old days such a man would have been sent into the wilderness. even then he might have committed murder, but perhaps in a visionary state, as abraham would have slaughtered his son isaac. there it is! We no longer have any idea of how to deal with such things, and there is no sincerity in what we do.68

this strikes ulrich as another case of arnheim being a know-it-all.69 but it might strike us as an echo of Fear and Trembling. after all, arnheim takes the trouble to hypothesize abraham’s potential killing of isaac—a killing that the Hebrew bible asserts did not happen, but which Fear and Trembling vividly imagines;70 and then he proceeds to say that “We no longer have any idea of how to deal with such things,” echoing Fear and Trembling’s verdict about abraham: “Who is able to understand him?”71 It is difficult to say whether this parallel is anything more than fortuitous. (The same may be said for the similarity, mentioned in section 3 above, between the silence and suffering of the title character in musil’s “tonka,” on the one hand, and Fear and Trembling’s account of abraham and the virgin mary.) What is more, even if arnheim’s comment is designed as an echo of Kierkegaard, ulrich’s reaction of annoyance could indicate that it is a critical echo, or even a parody. nevertheless, the parallel is strong enough to suggest that the notion of a sacred and terrifying exception to the universal ethical order—the notion that, in Fear and Trembling, links abraham and the virgin—is yet another Kierkegaardian idea at work in The Man Without Qualities.

musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 76. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 77, translation altered.) 67 cf. Philip Payne, “introduction: the symbiosis of robert musil’s life and Works,” in A Companion to the Works of Robert Musil, ed. by Philip Payne, graham bartram, and galin tihanov, rochester, new York: camden House 2007, pp. 38–9. 68 musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, pp. 636–7. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 694.) 69 musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vol. 1, p. 637. (The Man Without Qualities, vol. 1, p. 695: “He resented Arnheim’s flamboyance at making the most of the Moosbrugger problem.”) 70 SKS 4, 110 / FT, 13. 71 SKS 4, 111 / FT, 14. 66

210

David D. Possen

V. Musil for Kierkegaardians With this we return to our original question. Precisely what was the Kierkegaardian element (or, to be exact, the element found also in Kierkegaard) that musil had inhaled in the prewar “air” of his youth, and which his writings exhibit and exude? our survey has left us with several candidate themes. one is a negative irony that both refuses pretensions itself, but methodically exposes the pretensions around it. A second is an application of the first: a critique of the progressive leveling of distinctions, of Either/Ors, that signals a society in decay. A third is a fascination with limit-cases of paradox and silence—an ineffable murder reminiscent of abraham, or a woman pregnant by no man—for which ethics cannot adequately account. each of these themes in musil is recognizably Kierkegaardian. but we lack sufficient evidence to judge which of them, if any, owes a direct debt to Kierkegaard’s thought. taken as a group, however, and in view of their commonalities, these themes do reinforce the hypothesis with which we began in section i. this is that Kierkegaard’s distinctive mode of philosophical psychology—his focus on “single individuals” as vehicles of irony, as living indictments of a society’s decay, and as walking challenges to any universal ethics—is the Kierkegaardian element that most clearly shines through in The Man Without Qualities. i would like to close by drawing attention to a secondary and (until now) subliminal aim of this article: to commend musil as an object of study for scholars of Kierkegaard. in section iii we met several musil commentators—brooks, Hüsch, müller—whose research was greatly enriched by exposure to Kierkegaard. but the reverse case also holds much promise. Whatever musil’s exact intentions may have been, and despite its lack of an ending, The Man Without Qualities nonetheless offers Kierkegaardians a vast and wise literary thought-world to explore, a world in which versions of Kierkegaard’s most controversial and consequential ideas—irony as negativity, leveling, the “Either/Or,” the possibility of a teleological suspension of the ethical—are tested, sharpened, and critiqued. and for all those devoted to testing the coherence and plumbing the implications of Kierkegaard’s thinking, i submit that this is an achievement, and a resource, of inestimable value.

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Musil’s corpus Tagebücher, vols. 1–2, ed. by adolf frisé, Hamburg: rowohlt 1976, vol. 1, p. 479; pp. 901–2. (abridged english translation: robert musil, Diaries: 1899–1941, trans. by Philip Payne, ed. by mark mirsky, new York: basic books 1999.) Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, vols. 1–2, ed. by adolf frisé, new, revised and improved ed., Hamburg: rowohlt 1978 [berlin: rowohlt 1930–43], vol. 2, p. 1445; p. 1911. (english translation: robert musil, The Man Without Qualities, vols. 1–2, trans. by sophie Wilkins and burton Pike, new York: vintage books 1995, vol. 2, p. 1481. [note that the second passage is not reproduced in the english translation.]) II. Sources of Musil’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard undetermined. III. Secondary Literature on Musil’s Relation to Kierkegaard brooks, daniel J., “Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften with constant reference to socrates,” Modern Austrian Literature, vol. 22, no. 1, 1989, pp. 1–18. — Musil’s Socratic Discourse in der mann ohne eigenschaften: A Comparative Study of Ulrich and Socrates, new York: Peter lang 1989 (American University Studies, Series I: Germanic Languages and Literature, vol. 81), pp. 9–12; pp. 36–42; pp. 61–93; pp. 119–22; pp. 135–7; pp. 143–4. Hüsch, sebastian, Möglichkeit und Wirklichkeit. Eine vergleichende Studie zu Sören Kierkegaards “Entweder-Oder” und Robert Musils “Mann ohne Eigenschaften,” stuttgart: ibidem-verlag 2004. — “Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften—ein roman ohne eigenschaften: Über die bedeutung der ironie in robert musils roman,” Modern Austrian Literature, vol. 39, no. 2, 2006, pp. 19–40. müller, götz, Ideologiekritik und Metasprache in Robert Musils Roman Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, munich: Wilhelm fink 1972 (Musil-Studien, vol. 2), pp. 113ff. nagel, bert, “Kleist, Kierkegaard, musil,” in his Kafka und Goethe. Stufen der Wandlung von der Klassik zur Moderne, berlin: schmidt 1977, pp. 26–9. sokel, Walter H., “Kleist’s marquise of o., Kierkegaard’s abraham, and musil’s tonka. three stages of the absurd as the touchstone of faith,” in Festschrift

212

David D. Possen

für Bernhard Blume. Aufsätze zur deutschen und europäischen Literatur, ed. by egon schwarz et al., göttingen: vandenhoeck & ruprecht 1967, pp. 323–32 (also in Wisconsin Studies in Contemporary Literature, vol. 8, 1967, pp. 505–16; german version in Robert Musil. Studien zu seinem Werk, ed. by Karl dinklage, elisabeth albertsen and Karl corino, Hamburg: rowohlt 1970, pp. 57–70.) treiber, gerhard, Philosophie der Existenz. Das Entscheidungsproblem bei Kierkegaard, Jaspers, Heidegger, Sartre, Camus. Literarische Erkundung von Kundera, Céline, Broch, Musil, frankfurt am main: Peter lang 2000.

rainer maria rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living leonardo f. lisi

rainer maria rilke’s encounter with Kierkegaard occurred in the context of the general fascination with all things scandinavian that prevailed in europe at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century.1 like contemporaries of his such as miguel de unamuno (1864–1936), franz Kafka (1883–1924), or Wystan Hugh auden (1907–73) later in the century, rilke read Kierkegaard extensively and felt a strong attraction to him. Unlike most of such other figures, however, Rilke did not leave behind a detailed record of his reception of the danish thinker. on the contrary, not a single mention of Kierkegaard can be found in any of the poetry or prose published during rilke’s own lifetime, and only a few sporadic references exist in his otherwise voluminous private correspondence. the combination of these two factors—on the one hand rilke’s obvious admiration for Kierkegaard and on the other the lack of information about the form this admiration took—has meant that the secondary literature on the relation between these figures has tended to focus primarily on similarities at the level of abstract concepts such as “death,” “shame,” or “existence.”2 While this approach has made it possible for an influential figure such as Otto Bollnow to go so far as to claim that, “no thinker ever exercised an influence of even approximately similar importance on [rilke],”3 such abstract conceptual correspondences could equally well be traced to other writers and artists close to rilke’s heart, like leo tolstoy (1828–1910), auguste rodin (1840–1917), or Jens Peter Jacobsen (1847–85), and accordingly do little to define his understanding of Kierkegaard more specifically. On the pervasive influence of Scandinavian thought and letters during this period, see my article on scandinavian modernism in The Cambridge Companion to European Modernism, ed. by Pericles lewis, cambridge: cambridge university Press 2010. 2 although especially ambitious in its scope, engebretsen’s summary is representative of the general critical attitude in this respect: “among the correspondences [between rilke and Kierkegaard] can be mentioned the issue of the variable and invariable (movementrest, time, space, death), the concept of god, the unreality of sense perception, the quest for authentic self-understanding, recollection, transformation, the reciprocity of the poet and the hero, poverty (Armut).” rune alf engebretsen, Kierkegaard and Poet-Existence with Special Reference to Germany and Rilke, Ph.d. thesis, stanford university 1980, pp. 222–3. 3 otto friedrich bollnow, Rilke, 2nd expanded edition, stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer 1951, p. 24. unless otherwise noted, all translations in this article are my own. 1

214

Leonardo F. Lisi

However, this predicament is not as inevitable as previous scholarship might suggest. it is important to note, for example, that although several studies on the relationship between Kierkegaard and rilke exist, no comprehensive review of all references to Kierkegaard in rilke’s oeuvre has ever been made, something that has only become increasingly necessary as ever more material has become available over recent years. Most significantly, no prior study has taken into full consideration rilke’s extensive correspondence with his danish publisher axel Juncker, in which it emerges that rilke in fact was deeply involved in the publication of raphael meyer’s (1869–1925) german translation of Kierkegaard’s letters to regine in 1904.4 further, rilke’s own translation of those letters, also produced in 1904, has only lately become accessible to the general public and has accordingly likewise been neglected up until this point. such evidence of rilke’s early reception is crucial since it predates his encounter with the influential Kierkegaard scholar Rudolf Kassner (1873–1959) in 1907, as well as the general Kierkegaard frenzy in germany during the 1910s and 1920s, and shows how he developed his unique appreciation of the Dane. While it would seem difficult to claim that Kierkegaard was the central influence in Rilke’s life without which his development as a poet would not have been possible, in this context it nevertheless becomes apparent that rilke clearly recognized in Kierkegaard central aspects of his own poetic project and viewed him as an ally in his own pursuits. after a brief biographical sketch of rilke, in what follows i support this claim by drawing on all direct references to Kierkegaard available in rilke’s corpus, as it currently stands. This includes three kinds of material: first, the copies of Kierkegaard’s works that have reportedly survived in rilke’s private library; second, the remarks about Kierkegaard in rilke’s private correspondence; and third, the translation rilke himself made of Kierkegaard’s letters to regine. on the basis of the density of references, i divide rilke’s reception of Kierkegaard into four periods: first, the early and most sustained engagement with Kierkegaard during several months in 1904, covering rilke’s own stay in denmark and sweden; second, several references during 1906 and 1907, including Rilke’s first mention of Rudolf Kassner’s seminal 1906 essay on Kierkegaard; third, a more loosely defined group stretching from 1909 to 1912; and finally 1915, when the publication of Kierkegaard’s “At a graveside” in the avant-garde journal Der Brenner again brings rilke back to the danish thinker. i end by offering a conclusion about the nature of rilke’s reception of Kierkegaard on the basis of this evidence. I. Life rainer maria rilke was born in Prague in 1875 and died in muzot, switzerland in 1926. the Prague in which he spent the early years of his youth was the complex metropolitan point of convergence between german, czech, and Jewish communities to my knowledge, the only study to take parts of rilke’s correspondence with Juncker into consideration is Habib c. malik, Receiving Søren Kierkegaard: The Early Impact and Transition of His Thought, Washington d.c.: catholic university of america Press 1997, see pp. 360–64. 4

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

215

in the already multicultural Habsburg empire that would meet its end in 1918. after what he always considered a traumatic upbringing by a tyrannical mother, a failed military education, and a stint at studying law, rilke decided to follow his poetic calling and in 1896 moved to munich. there he met lou andreas-salomé (1861–1937), the writer and art-critic, who had previously enchanted friedrich nietzsche (1844–1900) and would subsequently be among the earliest followers of Sigmund Freud (1856–1939). Rilke’s amorous relation to Lou became a defining moment in his poetic development, as did their two journeys to russia in 1899 and 1900. in munich rilke was also introduced to the works of the danish writer J.P. Jacobsen, who became one of the lasting influences of his life, and the gateway for rilke’s fascination with scandinavia.5 Having married clara Westhoff (1878–1954) in 1901, the two were rapidly estranged. rilke went on to spend most of his life travelling around europe, changing abode in accordance with the invitations he received from various rich patrons who largely belonged to the european nobility. in 1904 he was thus asked to stay at borgeby gård, the estate of the swedish artist ernst norlind (1877–1951), near malmö in southern sweden. immediately prior to this voyage rilke began to learn danish in order to read Jacobsen and Kierkegaard in the original,6 and he took advantage of his trip to visit copenhagen. While in the danish capital, rilke was eager to meet familiar names in person, amongst them georg brandes (1842–1927), with whom he spent significant time.7 in 1902 rilke went to Paris to meet rodin, on whom he was to write a famous monograph, and under whose influence his mature poetic style began to develop. Having already completed the celebrated collection of poems Das Stundenbuch in 1903 and Das Buch der Bilder in 1906, 1907 saw the publication of his Neue Gedichte, which marked a radical departure not only within his own oeuvre but in European poetry at large. By 1910 Rilke finished his novel Malte Laurids Brigge, named after the danish hero of the book, which likewise became a central accomplishment of modernist literature. two years later rilke began his magnum opus, the Duino Elegies, but after an initial burst of inspiration he fell victim to a long period of unproductivity that lasted throughout the horror of World War i. not until several years later, during a few legendary weeks in switzerland in 1922, did rilke complete the Elegies along with the additional collection Die Sonette an Orpheus, two of the most significant and influential works of poetry in the twentieth century.

on rilke’s relation to J.P. Jacobsen, see Werner Kohlschmidt, “rilke und Jacobsen,” Rilke-Interpretationen, lahr: von moritz schauenburg 1948, pp. 9–36; steffen steffensen, Rilke und Skandinavien. Zwei Vorträge, copenhagen: munksgaard 1957, pp. 37–47. 6 rainer maria rilke and lou andreas-salomé, Briefwechsel, ed. by ernst Pfeiffer, frankfurt am main: insel 1979, p. 161; cf. the discussion of this letter below. 7 On Rilke’s relation to Brandes, cf. George Schoolfield, “Rilke and Brandes,” Probleme der Komparatistik und Interpretation. Festschrift für André von Gronicka zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. by Walter H. sokel, albert a. Kipa and Hans ternes, bonn: bouvier verlag Herbert grundmann 1978. 5

216

Leonardo F. Lisi

II. Rilke’s Library the inventory of rilke’s personal library is unfortunately still incomplete, and far from all his books survived the many peregrinations of his life. according to two sources, Werner Kohlschmidt and Hans Jansson,8 rilke owned at least the following works by Kierkegaard: a selection from Christian Discourses containing the first two parts, “the cares of the Pagans,” and “states of mind in the strife of suffering” and which carries the inscription “spring rome 1904”;9 the separately published The Diary of the Seducer;10 a german translation of a selection of letters and documents pertaining to Kierkegaard’s engagement and published by his niece Henriette lund (1829–1909);11 a danish edition of another selection of letters and documents concerning Kierkegaard’s engagement published by raphael meyer, the pages of which are still uncut;12 a copy of Either/Or without publication date but with the inscription “rainer maria rilke borgeby gård July 1904”;13 Fear and Trembling and Repetition;14 Concluding Unscientific Postscript;15 Stages on Life’s Way;16 and The Book on Adler and Two Ethical-Religious Essays published together as Der Begriff des Auserwählten [The Concept of the Chosen One].17 according to Kohlschmidt, several of these copies have marginalia and underlining in Rilke’s hand, but it is difficult to draw any significant conclusion on the basis of the description provided.18 the fact that rilke owned these copies nevertheless offers highly useful information when combined with his statements about Kierkegaard in his private correspondences, from which more insight can be gained. Werner Kohlschmidt, “rilke und Kierkegaard,” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, series 4:1, vol. 63, no. 4, 1950–51, pp. 192–3; Hans Jansson, “rilke’s bibliothek,” Philobiblon, vol. 33, no. 4, 1989, p. 307. 9 sören Kierkegaard, Ausgewählte christliche Reden. Mit einem Anhang über Kierkegaards Familie und Privatleben nach den persönlichen Erinnerungen seiner Nichte, Fräulein Lund, giessen: ricker 1901. 10 søren Kierkegaard, Das Tagebuch des Verführers, trans. by max dauthendey, leipzig: insel 1903 (2nd ed., 1905). 11 søren Kierkegaard, Sören Kierkegaards Verhältnis zu seiner Braut. Briefe und Aufzeichnungen aus seinem Nachlaß, trans. by e. rohr, ed. by Henriette lund; leipzig: insel 1904. 12 søren Kierkegaard, Kierkegaardske Papirer. Forlovelsen. Udgivne for Fru Regine Schlegel af Raphael Meyer, copenhagen: gyldendal 1904. 13 sören Kierkegaard, Entweder-Oder, trans. by otto gleiss, dresden, n.d. 14 sören Kierkegaard, Furcht und Zittern. Wiederholung, vol. 3 in Gesammelte Werke, vols. 1–12, trans. and ed. by Hermann gottsched and christoph schrempf, Jena: diederichs 1909–22. 15 sören Kierkegaard, Abschließende unwissenschaftliche Nachschrift, vol. 7 in Gesammelte Werke, trans. and ed. by gottsched and schrempf. 16 sören Kierkegaard, Stadien auf dem Lebensweg, vol. 4 in Gesammelte Werke, trans. and ed. by gottsched and schrempf. 17 sören Kierkegaard, Der Begriff des Auserwählten, trans. by theodor Haecker, Hellerau: Hegner 1917. 18 cf. Kohlschmidt, “rilke und Kierkegaard,” pp. 194–5. 8

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

217

III. 1904 rilke’s earliest and most extensive direct references to Kierkegaard occur in 1904, in his correspondence with his danish publisher axel Juncker. at that time rilke was working for Junker as a Lektor, “a position combing the tasks of procuring and judging manuscripts.”19 The first appearance of Kierkegaard’s name is found in a letter written in rome and dated march 1: about 3 years ago i borrowed the german translation of a short biography of soeren Kierkegaard from someone—i no longer know whom. i recall that the biography was written by a sister of Kierkegaard and very good. now i would like to own this book in the same german translation, but know neither the publishing house nor the translator. if you should be able to, then please buy this short book for me and send it to me. It should not be difficult for you to discover it, maybe you even know it? You do me a great favor. (it could also be that the short biography i have in mind stands as a preface to a book containing a number of Kierkegaard’s sermons.…) might there not be something else good by Kierkegaard to publish in german? His “diary of a seducer” which appeared with “insel” is a strange and very noteworthy book.20

from rilke’s next letter to Juncker, dated march 23, it becomes clear that the text he is referring to is the above-mentioned selection of Christian Discourses, which had appeared in 1901 with an appendix by Kierkegaard’s niece, Henriette lund: I thank you for sending the desired and insufficiently described book by Soeren Kierkegaard; it came into my hands already some two weeks ago, was the right one and is tremendously dear to me. these accounts by Kierkegaard’s niece, which constitute the appendix, are very charming and done as though by a great poet. do you know anything about this miss lund?—one should publish other things from her papers as well, if more can be found; for there are not many who know to narrate like that [denn es gibt nicht viele, die so zu erzählen wissen].21

the earlier letter from march 1 also suggests, however, that the selection from Christian Discourses was not the first text by Kierkegaard that Rilke studied (assuming that in 1901 he only read the biographical appendix, since it is all he mentions), given that he already knew the edition of The Diary of a Seducer that had appeared with insel as a separate publication in 1903.22

ralph freedman, Life of a Poet: Rainer Maria Rilke, new York: farrar, straus and giroux 1996, p. 206. the collaboration ended abruptly in the fall of 1907, when Juncker discovered that rilke had begun publishing his works with insel instead. 20 rainer maria rilke, Briefe an Axel Juncker, ed. by renate scharffenberg, frankfurt am main: insel 1979, pp. 117–18. 21 rilke, Briefe an Axel Juncker, p. 129. 22 Kierkegaard, Das Tagebuch des Verführers. 19

218

Leonardo F. Lisi

in a response to a letter from Juncker dated april 23,23 rilke returns to the possibility of publishing Kierkegaard in German, and for the first time expresses interest in the letters to regine that he himself would translate: You can imagine that i now want to direct your attention to Kierkegaard’s love letters and the letters from his youth, the imminent publication of which by miss lund you mention in your kind letter. that keeps on ringing in my ears; they must be strangely beautiful letters [seltsam schöne Briefe], and i think you should procure the german edition before insel, who might go after it and take it away from us. (i was very interested to learn in this context that miss lund is still living! at a later occasion i would very much like, if possible, to enter into written correspondence with this woman (whose Kierkegaard memoirs affected me so strongly).…)24

The specific reference is to the letters and journal entries relating to Kierkegaard’s engagement to regine edited by Henriette lund,25 which indeed were published in german by insel that same year.26 Juncker nevertheless did manage to obtain the rights to the german translation of the rival edition of Kierkegaard’s letters to regine edited by raphael meyer, likewise published in 1904.27 in a letter written to Juncker from sweden and dated July 15, rilke responds to this news: “something that brings me the greatest joy is your acquisition of the Kierkegaard letters. good luck! We will make sure to continue in this way, then people will learn to value our publishing house. naturally i am ready to look over the translation most thoroughly at any time!”28 on september 9, 1904, rilke again writes Juncker about this project. the letter makes it clear that rilke has had the manuscript of the german translation of meyer’s edition (made by meyer himself) in his possession since the 19th or 20th of august, but has failed to return it as promised.29 rilke opens by apologizing for this delay: “i in her introduction to the edition of rilke’s correspondence with anton Kippenberg, ingeborg schnack mistakenly dates this letter a year early (april 23, 1903), which would otherwise make it the earliest reference to Kierkegaard in rilke’s correspondences; cf. ingeborg schnack, “zu den briefen,” in rainer maria rilke, Briefwechsel mit Anton Kippenberg. 1906–1926, vols. 1–2, ed. by ingeborg schnack and renate scharffenberg, frankfurt am main: insel 1995, vol. 1, p. 16. 24 rilke, Briefe an Axel Juncker, p. 134. 25 søren Kierkegaard, Mit Forhold til Hende. Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer, ed. by Henriette lund. copenhagen: gyldendal 1904. 26 Kierkegaard, Søren Kierkegaards Verhältnis zu seiner Braut. 27 Kierkegaard, Kierkegaardske Papirer. Forlovelsen. Udgivne for Fru Regine Schlegel af Raphael Meyer. 28 rilke, Briefe an Axel Juncker, pp. 151–2. 29 in the letter rilke writes: “meine frau kam am tage nachdem ich das manuscript empfing hier ziemlich leidend an.” See Rilke, Briefe an Axel Juncker, p. 152. from the 19th to the 20th of august rilke visited copenhagen in order to meet clara and accompany her back to borgeby gård. cf. freedman, Life of a Poet, p. 217. for the precise dating of this trip, see rainer maria rilke, Briefe aus den Jahren 1902 bis 1906, ed. by ruth sieber-rilke and carl sieber, leipzig: insel 1930, pp. 215–16. it must accordingly have been during these two days that he saw Juncker and received the manuscript from him. 23

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

219

accuse myself of serious dereliction of duty: i have still not been able to look over the manuscript of the Kierkegaard translation. but please hear the reasons.”30 He proceeds to list these reasons (the arrival and illness of his wife; the visit by ellen Key (1849–1926); the trip to gothenburg) but assures Juncker that he can make up for lost time by simply checking the final proofs, since “quick glances here and there have convinced me that not much will have to be changed in the text.”31 rilke adds a final word of advice about the title, which Juncker would eventually ignore: “As far as the title is concerned, i think the best option would be parallel with the meyer edition, that is, to call the book: From S. Kierkegaard’s Papers. The Engagement.” 32 Work on the meyer translation continued throughout october, and already on the tenth of that month rilke retracted his initial claim that few corrections would be necessary.33 in a following letter dated october 16, he begins to distance himself somewhat from the project, although he proposes to write a review of the finished product, which unfortunately never materialized: dear mr. axel Juncker, no, as i telegraphed to you, it is completely impossible to associate my name with the Kierkegaard book; it would simply be an untruth and highly ridiculous. the work that i have done on it was laborious, but in its nature such that any middle-school student could have done it. and we do not want to display names as advertising stunts, at least not my name, which is only to be placed where i have really been a full participant….i will presumably write an extensive review of the book—that is all that i can do for it.34

two days later rilke writes to Juncker one last time on the question of meyer’s translation and again exhibits his growing irritation with the publication process: dear mr. axel Juncker, From a letter by Mr. Raph.[ael] Meyer I perceive that you have sent in the final proofs by telegraph, so that he had to send them off without looking through them, and that the introduction now likewise must go to press without proof-reading….because of the hurry to have the book appear in time one should not forget that first of all it must be faultless and good. Whatever might eventually be gained by a “timely” publication would otherwise quickly be lost again through the faults of hasty carelessness. all work requires time and must have time. i therefore ask you, for the sake of your publishing house, to look through the final sheet of corrections sent by Mr. Meyer with great care.…35

it is not possible to determine whether rilke’s stern request was heeded by Juncker, but it is clear that the former’s enthusiasm for the project had declined: in stark contrast rilke, Briefe an Axel Juncker, p. 152. ibid., p. 153. 32 ibid. the volume instead appeared as, Søren Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr.” Aus nachgelassenen Papieren, trans. and ed. by raphael meyer, stuttgart: Juncker 1905. i am deeply grateful to ms. cynthia lund of the Kierkegaard library, st. olaf college, minnesota for having made a copy of meyer’s german translation available to me. 33 rilke, Briefe an Axel Juncker, p. 157. 34 ibid., pp. 157–8. 35 ibid., pp. 159–60. 30 31

220

Leonardo F. Lisi

to the hopes for “unseren Verlag” [“our publishing house”] expressed in his June 12 letter, by mid-october the Juncker publishing house has instead become “Ihr Verlag” [“your publishing house”]. the following day, october 19, rilke nevertheless writes to ellen Key to ask about the possibility of acquiring the rights for the german translation of verner von Hedeinstam’s novel Karolinerna for Juncker, and alerts her to the forthcoming appearance of the german translation of Kierkegaard’s letters.36 alongside his correspondence with Juncker during these months, rilke also told lou andreas-salomé about his study of Kierkegaard. in a letter dated march 17, 1904, and written shortly after receiving the selection of Christian Discourses in rome, rilke tells lou: “i am reading soeren Kierkegaard. and this summer i will learn danish in order to read him and Jacobsen in their language.”37as early as may 12 rilke had begun this language training, as he makes clear to lou in another letter: “already now i am starting to learn danish, for the time being so as to read Jacobsen and some things by Kierkegaard directly [unmittelbar].”38 after rilke passed through copenhagen on his way to sweden less than two months later, he again mentions Kierkegaard in a letter to lou detailing his impressions of the danish capital. as he sums up his account: “one senses J.P. Jacobsen, Kierkegaard, hears the language as an explanation of all that.”39 at the time of writing his next letter to lou from sweden, dated august 16, rilke was already involved with the publication of meyer’s translation of Kierkegaard’s letters, and for the first time mentions the existence of his own translation of that same text: “i haven’t done much; i have learned to read a bit of danish by means of books by Jacobsen and Hermann bang and by means of the letters Kierkegaard wrote to his fiancée; to translate these letters has been almost my only work.”40 rilke’s translation has only recently become available as part of volume seven of his complete works.41 it is worth noting that although rilke was at the time invested in the publication of meyer’s rival edition of Kierkegaard’s letters, and in rainer maria rilke and ellen Key, Briefwechsel. Mit Briefen von und an Clara Westhoff, ed. by theodore fiedler, frankfurt am main: insel 1993, p. 112. 37 rilke and andreas-salomé, Briefwechsel, p. 139. on the basis of his letters to Juncker, it seems clear that rilke at this time was reading the selection from Christian Discourses he had just received. Wolfgang lepmann’s claim accordingly appears to be mistaken: “in rome [rilke] bought himself a danish grammar book, read the ‘diary of a seducer’ in Kierkegaard’s Either/Or, and worked out the plan of a book on Jacobsen.” see Wolfgang leppmann, Rilke. A Life, trans. by russell m. stockman, new York: fromm international 1984, p. 193. leppmann does not provide any reference for this claim, but on the basis of rilke’s march 1 letter to Juncker it appears that he had read the separately published “diary of a seducer” before coming to rome. further, since rilke’s personal copy of Either/Or carries the inscription “borgeby gård July 1904,” it would seem that he only obtained this work in its entirety when he reached sweden a few months later. 38 rilke and andreas-salomé, Briefwechsel, p. 161. 39 ibid., p. 178; letter from July 3, 1904. 40 ibid., p. 180. 41 rainer maria rilke, Die Übertragungen, ed. by Walter simon and Karin Wais, vol. 7 in Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–7, ed. by the rilke-archiv in cooperation with ruth sieber-rilke, and ernst zinn, frankfurt am main: insel 1955–97, pp. 1042–83. 36

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

221

his october 16 letter clearly claims it to be the superior version, he nevertheless used Henriette lund’s edition for his own translation.42 rilke’s translation encompasses the entirety of the first 14 letters in the Lund edition and the beginning of no. 15 (its heading and opening lines of verse), as well as the stanza from n.f.s. grundtvig’s (1783–1872) poem “biskop vilhelm og Kong svend” found in no. 21st.43 simon and Wais report that in the copy of the lund edition he was working on, rilke noted that he completed the translation between the July 26 and 31.44 given that, according to the letter of may 12 quoted above, he had at this point been learning danish for a little more than two months, rilke’s mastery of the language and of Kierkegaard’s particular style is truly astounding.45 a number of the stylistic features of rilke’s translation are worth pointing out. First of all, it seems clear that, unlike the subsequently influential translation by Emanuel Hirsch (1888–1972), Rilke is not invested in a specific religious reading of the letters. for example, when Kierkegaard writes to regine that he is not proud of the thought that she belongs to him, “thi hvad har jeg, uden hvad der blev mig givet,”46 Hirsch renders this as, “denn was hab ich, das ich nicht empfangen hätte” [“for what do i have that i have not received ” (my emphasis)] and adds a footnote to 1 corinthians 4:7,47 which in the luther translation reads, “Was hast du, das du nicht empfangen hast?” [“What do you have that you have not received ” (my emphasis)]. the danish givet, however, does not in fact contain this allusion,48 and rilke correctly translates the sentence as “denn was habe ich außer das mir gegeben worden ist” [“for what do i have except what has been given me” (my emphasis)].49 It is, of course, more difficult to establish comparisons to Raphael Meyer’s translation since, as has been shown above, Rilke was engaged in producing its final version. the two differ primarily in minor points of diction and syntax, but it seems possible to claim that for the most part rilke in fact stays closer to Kierkegaard’s cf. simon and Wais’ editorial notes in rilke, Die Übertragungen, p. 1319. the difference between meyer and lund’s edition is visible both in the sequence of the letters and in a number of textual incongruities, in which rilke always follows lund. as mentioned in section ii above, Kohlschmidt reports that rilke’s personal library did in fact contain a copy of meyer’s danish edition of the letters, but notes that it is uncut. 43 Kierkegaard, Mit Forhold til Hende, p. 59. 44 rilke, Die Übertragungen, p. 1319. 45 Linguistically, Rilke only makes one significant mistake. Where the Danish text states, “thi da mit egentlige Liv ikke er i den udvortes og synlige Verden, men dybt nede i Sjælens Hemmelighedsfuldhed (og hvilket Billede herfor er vel skønnere og mere træffende end Havet),” rilke renders the simile as a contrast: “denn da mein eigentümliches Leben nicht in der äußeren und sichtbaren Welt ist, sondern tief unten in der Seele hundert Geheimnissen (und dieses Bild hierfür ist wohl schöner und treffender als das Meer).” see rilke, Die Übertragungen, pp. 1062–63. 46 Kierkegaard, Mit Forhold til Hende, p. 36. 47 sören Kierkegaard, Gesammelte Werke, abteilungen 1–36, trans. by emanuel Hirsch, düsseldorf: diederichs 1951–68, abteilung 35: Briefe, p. 53. 48 the equivalent passage in the 1819 danish translation of the new testament reads: “og hvad har du, som du ikke har annammet?” (my emphasis). 49 rilke, Die Übertragungen, p. 1061. 42

222

Leonardo F. Lisi

danish than meyer does.50 stylistically rilke’s rendering also tends to aim at a less convoluted sentence structure,51 and occasionally adds a rhythmic quality absent not only in meyer but in Kierkegaard too. for example, translating Kierkegaard’s “Il, du min Overbringer, il min Tanke” [“Hurry, you my messenger, hurry my thought”],52 rilke renders it in trochaic feet: “eile, du mein Überbringer, eile mein Gedanke.”53 meyer’s version, more faithful to the original in this instance, notably lacks any such musicality: “Beeile dich, mein Überbringer, beeile dich, mein Gedanke.”54 taken together with rilke’s statements on Kierkegaard in his correspondence during 1904, these features of his translations make it possible to draw some preliminary conclusions. during these months it seems clear that rilke’s interest in Kierkegaard was primarily biographical and literary, rather than philosophical or theological. it is Henriette lund’s biographical appendix that he is eager to obtain, and seemingly the only text by Kierkegaard that he knows prior to receiving the selection from Christian Discourses in 1904 is “the diary of the seducer,” itself one of Kierkegaard’s most literary creations. the suggestion that Kierkegaard’s letters to regine would be worth publishing, in turn, is supported only with the assumption that they must be “beautiful.” indeed, the very fact that he encouraged and pursued the publication of these letters at the same time that another translation of them was set to appear, and while many other works by Kierkegaard had still not been rendered into german, suggests that rilke considered the literary and biographical aspects of this work of sufficient interest and significance to make the venture meaningful. one can therefore conjecture that Kierkegaard’s appeal for rilke at this early point was primarily as a literary author defined by his unhappy love (an image this is visible on two levels. on the one hand, in the choice of particular words, as when rilke, renders Kierkegaard’s “Bedøvelse” (Kierkegaard, Mit Forhold til Hende, p. 49) as “Betäubung” (rilke, Die Übertragungen, p. 1081) rather than meyer’s “Rausch” (Kierkegaard, Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr,” p. 34). on the other hand, in longer sentences, like Kierkegaard’s, “naar jeg derfor spatierer de ovenfor skrevne Ord, saa tænker jeg, at jeg skal trække dem saa langt ud, at en Sætter formodentlig vilde tabe Taalmodigheden, da han efter al Sandsynlighed ikke vilde komme til at sætte mere i hele sit Liv” (Kierkegaard, Mit Forhold til Hende, pp. 27–8), which rilke translates as, “wenn ich also sperren sollte das obenan geschriebene Wort, ich denke ich würde es so lange ausziehen, daß ein Setzer vermutlich die Geduld verlieren würde, weil er, aller Wahrscheinlichkeit nach, nicht dazukommen würde noch mehr zu setzen sein ganzes Leben lang” (rilke, Die Übertragungen, vol. 7, p. 1045), and meyer as, “Wenn ich daher die obigen Worte sperre, gedenke ich sie so weit auszudehnen, daß ein Setzer die Geduld verlieren würde, da er aller Wahrscheinlichkeit nach sein Leben lang daran zu setzen haben würde” (Kierkegaard, Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr,” p. 3). 51 cf., for example, rilke: “Du glaubtest vielleicht, daß ich es nicht hörte, oder vielleicht glaubtest Du, es wäre meinem Ohre vorbeigegangen, wie so vieles Andere, das darin nicht widerhallt” (rilke, Die Übertragungen, p. 1057); and meyer: “Du glaubtest vielleicht, daß ich es nicht gehört, oder Du glaubtest vielleicht, es sei wie so manches andere, das nicht im inneren Ohre wiederhallt, an meinem Ohr vorbeigegangen” (Kierkegaard, Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr,” p. 10). 52 Kierkegaard, Mit Forhold til Hende, p. 35; rilke, Die Übertragungen, p. 1056. 53 rilke, Die Übertragungen, p. 1057 (my emphases). 54 Kierkegaard, Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr,” p. 10. 50

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

223

Henriette lund’s particularly sentimental portrait would easily have furthered).55 Kierkegaard would in that case fit well with Rilke’s life-long fascination for similar figures, such as the Italian poetess Gaspara Stampa (1523–54) or the Portuguese nun mariana alcoforado (1640–1723), whose letters he likewise translated a few years later. the celebration of unhappy lovers such as these is a central theme of rilke’s poetry, which views them as embodying a more authentic mode of being. as a famous passage in the first of the Duino Elegies puts it: for have you thought enough of gaspara stampa, so that some girl who lost her beloved, can feel at the heightened example of this lover: that i might be like her? Should these oldest of pains not finally become more fruitful to us? is it not time, that, loving, we free us from the beloved and quivering endure it: as the arrow endures the bowstring, to be more than itself together in the release. for staying is nowhere.56

that rilke indeed viewed Kierkegaard as one of the artist-visionaries in this tradition of unsatisfied love is further supported by his 1909 letter to Georg Brandes, discussed below. IV. 1906–7 rilke’s next references to Kierkegaard occur in 1906. in a letter to his wife, clara rilke, written in Paris on may 25, 1906, he describes ellen Key’s impracticality and miserliness [Geiz] (a particularly acute problem for rilke, who was eternally dependent on others’ generosity). He nevertheless proceeds to qualify his account, and describes his admiration for their common friend: she has made something joyful from an unsuccessful life [Sie hat aus einem nicht geglückten Leben etwas Glückliches gemacht]; she has placed herself in relation to very important things and has fallen in love with life and placed confidence in life with a readiness and a careless cheerfulness like that of the bird that “does not know this sorrow” [wie der Vogel, der “diese Sorge nicht hat”].57

cf., for example, Kierkegaard, Ausgewählte christliche Reden, pp. 139–40. rainer maria rilke, Duineser Elegien, ed. by ernst zinn, vol. 1 in Sämtliche Werke, pp. 686–7: “Hast du der Gaspara Stampa / denn genügend gedacht, daß irgend ein Mädchen, / dem der Geliebte entging, am gesteigerten Beispiel / dieser Liebenden fühlt: daß ich würde wie sie? / Sollen nicht endlich uns diese ältesten Schmerzen / Fruchtbarer werden? Ist es nicht Zeit, daß wir liebend / Uns vom Geliebten befrein und es bebend bestehn: / Wie der Pfeil die Sehne besteht, um gesammelt im Absprung / mehr zu sein als er selbst. Denn Bleiben ist nirgends.” 57 rilke and Key, Briefwechsel, p. 274. 55 56

224

Leonardo F. Lisi

the quotation comes from Kierkegaard’s “the care of Poverty” in the Christian Discourses, which in the 1901 edition that Juncker sent rilke begins with the statement, “Diese Sorge hat der Vogel nicht” [“the bird does not have this sorrow”].58 in the opening pages of that text, Kierkegaard describes how the bird differs from the pagan by the fact that its poverty does not affect it. While the bird is poor because it only has what it needs to sustain its livelihood, it nevertheless does not have the sorrow brought by poverty since it lacks the consciousness that makes the pagan worry for the future or wish it could be otherwise.59 a similar use of this same phrase from “the care of Poverty” occurs over a year later, in another letter to clara, dated september 13, 1907. describing himself rather than another this time, rilke writes: in everything i am disposed to waiting, to the not-making-provisions which in Kierkegaard the bird holds as an advantage over us; the daily work, done blindly, willingly, with absolute patience and with the Obstacle qui excite l’ardeur as motto, is the only kind of provision that does not interfere with god’s prerogative.60

unfortunately, the entirety of this letter has not yet been published, and the precise context of Rilke’s statement is thus uncertain. However, the unreflective confidence of Kierkegaard’s bird, which lives only in the present, is here again clearly evoked in contrast to human worries for the future. the emphasis on a blind and patient commitment to his work, moreover, evokes rilke’s favorite saying by his “cher maître,” rodin: “il faut travailler, rien que travailler” [“it is necessary to work, only to work”].61 The artist’s work is his only possibility for overcoming the conflicts and worries of everyday life, which defines the world of the pagan. Only in work, as rilke wrote to rodin in 1902, can we live as though we knew no death: “Je sens que travailler c’est vivre sans mourir.”62 in both these instances rilke thus draws on Kierkegaard’s image and conception of the bird in the context of some of his most persisting poetic and existential concerns: the bridging of the gap between art and life, order and chaos, immediacy and reflection. Further, and although this cannot be taken to constitute conclusive evidence for direct influence, it is notable that the bird is not associated with this problematic in any of rilke’s poems written prior to 1904, the year he read Kierkegaard’s Christian Discourses. in the opening of the fourth of the Duino Elegies, composed in 1915, Rilke returns to this configuration of questions by means of the same figure:

Kierkegaard, Ausgewählte Christliche Reden, p. 5. SKS 10, 25 / CD, 13. Kierkegaard, Ausgewählte Christliche Reden, p. 6. SKS 10, 26 / CD, 14. 60 rainer maria rilke, Briefe aus den Jahren 1906–1907, ed. by ruth sieber-rilke and carl sieber, leipzig: insel 1930, p. 332. 61 ibid., p. 36. 62 rainer maria rilke, Lettres à Rodin, Paris: emile-Paul freres 1931, p. 16. 58

59

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

225

o trees of life, o when winterly? We are not in concord. are not like the migratory birds in agreement. overtaken and late, we suddenly impose ourselves on winds and collapse upon an unparticipating pond.63

as rilke goes on to elaborate, we differ from the immediacy of animals because our reflexive mode of cognition means that we can be conscious of something only through its relation of difference to something else. our simultaneous awareness of past, present, and future thus dictates that we remain inevitably alienated from experience, unable to grasp it outside the discursive relations we impose. but if rilke, on the one hand, clearly approaches the condition of the bird from the perspective of the less fortunate pagan, rather than that of the christian who exceeds it (in the above letter he speaks of “das Nicht-Vorsorgen, das der Vogel…vor uns voraus hat” [“the not—making—provisions which…the bird holds as an advantage over us”] (my emphasis)), then, on the other hand, in the Elegies too, as in Kierkegaard, the bird’s pure immediacy ultimately defines its limitation. As the Elegies repeatedly celebrate, it is the very awareness of our finitude that provides us with the possibility of praising this world, which rilke sees as the poet’s proper task.64 analogously in Kierkegaard, while the bird stands above the pagan, it is not fully alive because it is unable to relate to god in gratitude for having given it existence.65 1906 also sees the first documented reference by Rilke to Kassner’s influential essay on Kierkegaard, published that same year.66 in a letter written from Paris on July 23, rilke tells mathilde vollmoeller, finally an issue of the Rundschau arrived; Kassner’s essay is very beautiful (the best thing that has been written about Kierkegaard, in spite of brandes’ excellent study from long ago). but it is an essay “about” and therefore i would not have dared to send you

rilke, Duineser Elegien, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 1, p. 697: “O Bäume Lebens, o wann winterlich? / Wir sind nicht einig. Sind nicht wie die Zug- / vögel verständigt. Überholt und spät, / so drängen wir uns plötzlich Winden auf / und fallen ein auf teilnahmslosen Teich.” 64 see ibid., vol. 1, for example, p. 686 and p. 719. 65 Kierkegaard, Ausgewählte Christliche Reden, pp. 12–13. SKS 10, 27–8 / CD, 15–16. 66 Kassner’s essay appeared as “Sören Kierkegaard/Aphorismen von Rudolf Kassner,” Neuen Rundschau, may 1906, pp. 513–43. rilke’s attention might in fact have been directed back to Kierkegaard’s discussion of the bird by this work where Kassner likewise draws on it to describe the religious stage of existence: “In einer Welt des Unglücks aber selbst unglücklich und dennoch froh sein wie ein Kind, wie ein Vogel, wie ein Fisch—das ist Kunst, das kann nur der Gläubige.” see rudolf Kassner, “sören Kierkegaard. aphoristisch,” Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–9, ed. by ernst zinn, tübingen: neske 1969–91, vol. 2, p. 88. However, clara rilke also invokes the figure of the bird to much the same effect as Rilke in a letter to Georg Brandes already on february 8, 1906, making her into another likely source: “wir leben jeder [rilke and herself], wo es am besten geht und versuchen nach Sören Kierkegaards Rat, nicht zu sorgen für den folgenden Morgen—sondern genug zu haben an eines jeden Tages eigener Plage.” see georg brandes, Correspondance de Georg Brandes, vols. 1–4, ed. by Paul Krüger, copenhagen: rosenkilde og bagger 1952–66, vol. 3, p. 487. 63

226

Leonardo F. Lisi the mentioned issue, were it not that it contained a late story by tolstoy, which i found to be made in such a touching way.67

rilke was to meet Kassner personally only in november of the following year,68 at which point the two authors began a long friendship (the eighth of the Duino Elegies is dedicated to Kassner). unfortunately, the present letter does not tell us much about what rilke found of interest in Kassner’s essay, although it seems possible to claim on the basis of other material in rilke’s corpus that Kassner’s discussion of the hero might have influenced him.69 it is in any case interesting to note that even though rilke clearly praises Kassner’s work highly, and continued to express admiration for it later on,70 he nevertheless prefers a direct engagement with Kierkegaard’s texts to a scholarly exegesis. it should also be pointed out that the July 23, 1906, letter to vollmoeller makes clear that rilke knew brandes’ seminal monograph on Kierkegaard, which had been published in german as early as 1879, two years after its appearance in denmark.71 this text might in fact have been among rilke’s earliest introductions to Kierkegaard, since Brandes was a towering figure in German intellectual life at the end of the nineteenth century, and Rilke clearly knew his works and even had briefly met him personally already in late 1897 or early 1898.72 The specific literary and biographical interest that rilke’s early approach to Kierkegaard exhibits might in this way well have been influenced by Brandes, whose own study likewise emphasizes these aspects. V. 1909–12 the direct references to Kierkegaard grouped under this third period occur in a number of different contexts. otto bollnow cites a still unpublished letter to clara rainer maria rilke and mathilde vollmoeller, Briefwechsel. 1906–1914, ed. by barbara glauert-Hesse, frankfurt am main: insel 1993, p. 29. 68 rainer maria rilke and rudolf Kassner, Freunde im Gespräch. Briefe und Dokumente, ed. by Klaus e. bohnenkamp, frankfurt am main: insel 1997, p. 12. 69 cf. Kassner’s comments in “sören Kierkegaard. aphoristisch,” Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, pp. 72–4, and rilke and Kassner, Freunde im Gespräch, p. 22 for its possible influence on Rilke. The question of where the influence of Kassner ends and that of Kierkegaard begins in a topic such as this is, of course, difficult, if not impossible, to determine with any certainty. since rilke does not explicitly mention Kierkegaard or any of his works in the context of his discussion of heroes, i have chosen not to focus on it here. for the claim that rilke’s conception of the hero is to be equated with Kierkegaard’s Knight of faith, cf. rudolf Jancke, “rilke und Kierkegaard,” Dichtung und Volkstum, vol. 39, 1939, pp. 315–16. 70 in letter to samuel fischer dated march 19, 1908, rilke thus writes: “Ich bin dabei, Kassners ‘Kierkegaard’ wieder zu lesen, aufs neue erstaunt und fast bestürzt über die Geistesgegenwart seines Denkens.” see samuel fischer and Hedwig fischer, Briefwechsel mit Autoren, ed. by dierk rodewald and corinna fiedler, frankfurt am main: fischer 1989, p. 578. 71 georg brandes, Sören Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, trans. by adolf strodtmann, leipzig: barth 1879. 72 Schoolfield, “Rilke and Brandes,” p. 165. 67

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

227

from october 30, 1909, in which rilke expresses concern that his wife seemingly has been unable to find the two editions of Kierkegaard’s letters to Regine that they owned (those by insel and Junker), as well as his own translation of them.73 a subsequent reference occurs on november 28 of that same year, when rilke writes georg brandes, who is hospitalized at the time, and sends him andré gide’s (1869–1951) recently published La porte étroite for his entertainment. enthusiastically describing gide‘s novel, rilke explains: “i go so far as to assume that this book in some way steps out of the rotation of french conceptions of love and, under the influence of a profound force of gravity, attempts a new curve into the open…(Would Kierkegaard not have recognized these notes and honored them?).”74 the particular interest rilke might have felt in gide’s novel has been usefully described by George Schoolfield: rilke had felt, he said, a certain “Wesensverwandtschaft” with the novel, and any reader of Malte will know what he means; alissa in gide’s book, like abelone in rilke’s, is one of those women—so much better than men—who are capable of carrying out “der Liebe ganz große Aufgabe,” in possessionless love.75

Complementing Schoolfield’s observation with the discussion of the material from 1904 above, it becomes clear that the further connection rilke saw between gide and Kierkegaard is grounded on his view of the latter as another representative of this form of possessionless love (a concept brandes would have been unlikely to share). rilke’s next documented period of engagement with Kierkegaard begins with a letter to his friend and patron marie von thurn und taxis, dated august 30, 1910. at the conclusion of his letter, rilke states: “now i am reading Kierkegaard, it is wonderful, true splendor, he has never grasped me like this before.”76 this is followed seven days later by another unpublished letter to clara cited by otto bollnow: Yesterday I sent you a volume of Kierkegaard. Your letter today confirms for me that precisely now he will be remarkable to you as well, maybe even useful and steadfast in the true sense. I am now finished with this volume, and think it possible that I will at once start over again from the beginning.77

unfortunately we cannot know for certain which volume of Kierkegaard’s rilke was reading at the time, although the fact that his library contained a copy of the 1910 edition of the Concluding Unscientific Postscript suggests this might have been the volume in question. in any case, a few days later, on september 13, rilke confesses to his friend sidonie nádherný that the memory of his recent stay with her at Janowitz is interfering with his reading: “Kierkegaard has not even had his turn yet, due to the roses from Janowitz; i have needed them, and will use them up, scent see bollnow, Rilke, p. 23. brandes, Correspondance de Georg Brandes, vol. 3. pp. 491–2. 75 Schoolfield, “Rilke and Brandes,” p. 180. 76 rainer maria rilke and marie von thurn und taxis, Briefwechsel, vols. 1–2, ed. by ernst zinn, frankfurt am main: insel 1986, vol. 1, p. 28. 77 bollnow, Rilke, p. 23. 73 74

228

Leonardo F. Lisi

by scent.”78 the distraction seemingly continues toward the end of that same month, when rilke on september 30 again refers to Kierkegaard in a further unpublished letter to clara cited by bollnow: “due to all the experiences i have not even had a chance to read; even Kierkegaard has remained in the suitcase downstairs, as much as i might otherwise need him.”79 not until almost a year and a half later does Kierkegaard’s name reappear in rilke’s correspondence, this time in another letter to lou andreas-salomé, dated february 7, 1912, in which rilke again discusses rudolf Kassner: [Kassner] is undoubtedly—something he would acknowledge himself—a spiritual child of Kierkegaard….i imagine that what his “melancholy” was to Kierkegaard, his affliction is to Kassner. And as it was a kind of advantage for Kierkegaard to have, instead of so many incalculable inhibitions, only this one immense, larger—than—life melancholy, in front of which continually new battle formations would erect themselves, so Kassner somehow also prevails because all oppositions come together for him in one inhibition: this provides him with concentration and calmness; nothing can, so to speak, attack him from behind. but his indescribable admiration for Kierkegaard may again derive from the fact that Kierkegaard’s opponent was more mystical, inexhaustible, more dangerous, in some sense handed over from the beyond by the father, while that which he, Kassner, spiritually overcomes at each moment is even a merit, celestially speaking. (Kierkegaard’s melancholy is an inhibition even in heaven.)80

it is clear that rilke here again views Kierkegaard in terms of his particular biography (his melancholy, his relationship to his father), and that this biography is defined in terms of a continual struggle against an overwhelming enemy. Where Kassner’s opponent is ultimately a positive attribute when viewed from the perspective of eternity, Kierkegaard’s is uncompromising and therefore more extreme. This view already prefigures the language of the category of the sublime which rilke again associates with Kierkegaard a few months later. in a letter dated april 3, 1912, he writes to someone identified only as “N. N.,” and whom he addresses in the letter as “dear child.” apparently having been asked for advice about further reading, rilke reluctantly points to works by dostoevsky, whom he seems to doubt his addressee is quite ready for, and states that Kierkegaard and Kassner would be better left aside for now: “leave Kassner for the time being; later i will tell you with which passage you should try your hand at Kierkegaard: he is of sublime greatness and humility (also to me one of the greatest).”81 during this period, the biographical and aesthetic qualities of Kierkegaard’s writings, such as his melancholy and sublimity, are in this way still central to rilke’s appreciation of him. it is also clear that rilke in these years is engaged in a renewed study of Kierkegaard’s writings, and that he insists on a direct encounter with him, rainer maria rilke and sidonie nádherný von borutin, Briefwechsel. 1906–1926, ed. by Joachim W. Storck with the collaboration of Waltraud and Friedrich Pfäfflin, Göttingen: Wallstein 2007, p. 105. 79 bollnow, Rilke, p. 24. 80 rilke and andreas-salomé, Briefwechsel, pp. 256–7. 81 rainer maria rilke, Briefe aus den Jahren 1907–1914, ed. by ruth sieber-rilke and carl sieber, leipzig: insel 1933, p. 223. 78

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

229

rather than one mediated by scholarly interpretation. the advice to “n. n.” to leave aside Kassner and await rilke’s own indications about which works by Kierkegaard to read might even be taken to suggest that, in spite of all his admiration for Kassner’s essay, he does not consider it an adequate representation of the dane. VI. 1915 With the outbreak of the World War i, rilke appears to have returned to another sustained engagement with Kierkegaard. in a letter dated february 8, 1915 and addressed to Ludwig von Ficker (1880–1967), the editor of the influential expressionist journal Der Brenner, rilke responds to the request for a contribution to the next issue of the journal, which was fated to be the last until the end of the war. in an addendum to the main part of his letter, rilke begins by stating: “only yesterday evening did I find Trakl’s Helian in the envelope from which i had taken the Kierkegaard.”82 The precise reference here is difficult to determine, since it is unclear what rilke has received. it is possible that along with georg trakl’s (1837–1910) poem von ficker sent rilke copies of three texts by Kierkegaard that had previously appeared in Der Brenner, making it likely that rilke by 1915 knew these texts as well: an excerpt from Prefaces, “the thorn in the flesh,” from Four Upbuilding Discourses, and another excerpt from A Literary Review.83 that rilke at this time might have been reading Kierkegaard anew is further suggested by a letter written three days later to his close friend Katharina Kippenberg, wife of anton Kippenberg, the head of the insel publishing house. Here, in midst of the devastations of the war, Rilke finds reason for hope from Kierkegaard, Jacobsen, and the now utterly forgotten aage von Kohl (1877–1946): “there might still, after all, in time also come something good from the little denmark, since large, growing consequences have not yet been worked out [sind herausgearbeitet worden] from that which is strong in Jacobsen…nor fully from the terribly great Kierkegaard.”84 on august 2, 1915, rilke comments to sidonie nádherný on the most recently published issue of Der Brenner. besides the verse that von ficker had requested from rilke, the issue also contained further poems by trakl, an essay by theodor Haecker, and the latter’s translation of Kierkegaard’s “at a graveside,” from Three

rainer maria rilke, Briefe aus den Jahren 1914–1921, leipzig: insel 1937, pp. 34–5. sören Kierkegaard, “vorworte,” trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, may 1, 1914, pp. 666–82; “der Pfahl im fleisch,” trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, may 15, 1904, pp. 691–711 and June 15, 1914, pp. 797–814; “Kritik der gegenwart,” trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, July 1, 1914, pp. 815–49 and July 15, 1914, pp. 869–908. Der Brenner was a central organ for Kierkegaard’s works in germany during the year 1914. besides these translations, in the february issue it also published theodor Haecker’s article “f. blei und Kierkegaard,” followed by carl dallago’s article on Haecker’s study of Kierkegaard, “ueber eine schrift ‘sören Kierkegaard und die Philosophie der innerlichkeit,’ ” which was published in three installments, from march to april. 84 rainer maria rilke and Katharina Kippenberg, Briefwechsel, Wiesbaden: insel 1954, pp. 94–5. 82

83

230

Leonardo F. Lisi

Discourses on Imagined Occasions:85 “to me too the entire brenner-Jahrbuch is a blissful relief; through trakl’s devastating poems, through the glorious Kierkegaard and th[eodor] Haecker’s excellent essay.”86 already a few days earlier, on July 27, rilke had in fact written to editha Klipstein with the request that she forward a copy of the issue to their common friend ilse erdman, with the explicit hope that the text by Kierkegaard might help her cope with the pain from an illness that would eventually take her life: “together with this i send you the brenner-Jahrbuch and ask that, after looking through it, you pass it on to your friend ilse e.; the poems by trakl as well as Kierkegaard’s essay ‘on death’ in particular must touch a cord with her [müssen ihr fühlbar sein].”87 this request is followed by a letter to ilse herself on august 18, in which Kierkegaard again is central: Yesterday evening, by my lamp, i read out Kierkegaard to you, Kierkegaard’s discourse on death; I imagined you were there and read. Since your first letter I had wished to speak to you like this, now it touches me in my innermost that i was allowed to send you this text….do you know Kierkegaard? Here is christianity, if it still is anywhere; this truly inner man radiates it into the future. i have never read him much and cannot flip through him from time to time; to read him is to live in him, and it is a pathos, voice and lonely landscape, an infinite demand on the heart, a thunder and a silence, like the silence of flowers.88

the claim that he has not read much of Kierkegaard is clearly misleading. even more remarkable is that Rilke here for the first time emphasizes Kierkegaard’s christianity, given that in the text in question it is notably absent or at best only implied. at the same time he clearly continues to emphasize the rhetorical features of Kierkegaard’s work: its pathos, voice, the sublimity of its thunder, and its silence. the day after his letter to ilse erdman, rilke comments on the reading from the night before in another letter to sidonie nádherný and asks for further information about Haecker. He concludes by stating, “i am thrilled to see still other translations by [Haecker] advertised; through him it will in this way be possible to nurse and deepen the relation to Kierkegaard that is so important. He is one of the few for whom i retain a tremendous thirst.”89 remaining fairly unconvinced, ilse erdman returns to Kierkegaard a number of times in her subsequent letters to rilke,90 finally bringing the latter to address the question one last time on september 10: but to appropriate earthly means, to achieve a certain completeness of our relations to the world, to be here unsayably, indescribably, breathlessly: would that not be the only way sören Kierkegaard, “vom tode,” trans. by theodor Haecker, Der Brenner, spring, 1915, pp. 15–55. 86 rilke and von borutin, Briefwechsel, p. 244. 87 rainer maria rilke, Briefwechsel mit Regina Ullmann und Ellen Delp, frankfurt am main: insel 1987, p. 37. 88 ilse erdmann and rainer maria rilke, Ein Briefwechsel, Waldkirch: Waldkircher verlag 1998, p. 40. 89 rilke and von borutin, Briefwechsel, p. 247. 90 erdmann and rilke, Ein Briefwechsel, p. 47; p. 49; p. 59. 85

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

231

for us finally to prepare to become more than just worldly? I mean, we must experience the immeasurable through our inability to measure even the measurable. that is why Kierkegaard brings us into the earnestness of death without attributing a time span or eternal future to us over and beyond it [Darum schließt auch Kierkegaard uns in den Ernst des Todes ein, ohne darüber hinaus uns Frist oder ewige Zukunft zuzuschreiben]. to understand and passionately exhaust being here as a side of being in general, that would be death’s challenge to us, while life, when one is only conscious of it, is all of life at every point.91

the topic of death in Kierkegaard’s text would naturally be of immediate concern to rilke, who dealt with it throughout his oeuvre.92 What interests rilke in “at a graveside” in particular, however, is the fact that Kierkegaard here does not approach death as a passageway to another life beyond it, but rather as an absolute end that can teach us how to live the lives we have on earth. by focusing on this aspect of the text, rilke is again reading Kierkegaard in terms of a problematic central to his own authorship. as he would go to great lengths to show in his mature works, the relation to that which remains inexplicable (unerklärlich in Haecker’s translation of Kierkegaard’s text93), should not carry us beyond the world, but return us to it with renewed intensity: because being here is much, and because seemingly all that is here, this fading that strangely concerns us, requires us. us, the most fading of all. One time each, only one time. One time and no more. and we also one time. never again. but to have been this one time, even if only one time: to have been worldly, seems irrevocable.94

the relation to what rilke calls “the unsayable” (das Unsägliche) cannot be an end in itself, but only a means for a proper relation to the sayable itself. the precise nature and implications of this project for rilke is a complex issue that exceeds the parameters of the present study, but it is clear that he understood Kierkegaard as an ally in its pursuit.

ibid., pp. 73–4. the relation between Kierkegaard and rilke in terms of their shared conceptions of death has been investigated in particular by getrude schuelke, Kierkegaard and Rilke: A Study in Relationship, Ph.d. dissertation, stanford university 1950. 93 Kierkegaard, “vom tode,” Der Brenner, spring, 1915, p. 53. 94 rilke, Duineser Elegien, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 1, p. 717: “weil Hiersein viel ist, und weil uns scheinbar / alles das Hiesige braucht, dieses Schwindende, das / seltsam uns angeht. Uns, die Schwindendsten. ein Mal / jedes, nur / ein Mal. ein Mal und nichtmehr. Und wir auch ein Mal. Nie wieder. Aber dieses / ein Mal gewesen zu sein, wenn auch nur ein Mal: / irdisch gewesen zu sein, scheint nicht widerrufbar.” 91 92

232

Leonardo F. Lisi

VII. Conclusion in his account of rilke’s 1925 stay in Paris, less than two years before his death from leukemia, maurice betz recounts: during his stay in Paris at that time, rilke was also much preoccupied with sören Kierkegaard; he had brought a few volumes in octavo of a new german edition of the author of Either/Or. back then i knew the magister from copenhagen only little and missed the opportunity to ask rilke about the most remarkable of all danish authors.95

the statement is important primarily as a reminder that rilke’s engagement with Kierkegaard undoubtedly extends beyond what is recorded in the direct references to him discussed here.96 rilke clearly had extensive access to and familiarity with Kierkegaard’s works, both through the texts we know he owned, or that he likely would have come across, and through his close familiarity with some of the most important early interpreters of Kierkegaard, such as rudolf Kassner and theodor Haecker. What is striking against that background, however, is that given this vast amount of information that rilke could have drawn on, in his explicit references to Kierkegaard he in fact only addresses a small set of issues, all of which have direct bearing on his own poetic project: the concept of unsatisfied love, the immediacy of animals in contrast to the reflexivity of humans, the relation to the transcendent as a means for living authentically in finitude. Of all the Kierkegaards that Rilke could have constructed, he clearly chose the one that shared his own convictions.

maurice betz, Rilke in Paris, trans. by Willi reich, zurich: verlag der arche 1948. Indirect references are nevertheless frequently more difficult to determine. In Malte Laurids Brigge, for example, the title hero contemplates: “Und es genügt auch noch nicht, daß man Erinnerungen hat. Man muß sie vergessen können.” see rilke, Die Aufzeichnungen des Malte Laurids Brigge, in Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6, p. 724. as engebretsen has already noted, this would seem to be a clear allusion to Either/Or, where a in the “rotation of crops” describes his project of living poetically in similar terms (SKS 2, 282–3 / EO1, 292–3). see engebretsen, Kierkegaard and Poet-Existence, p. 128, note 207. in spite of correspondences in wording, however, the nature of the two statements is radically different. Where to a forgetting is an active art used to secure a necessary distance to experience, for malte it leads to passive waiting and a renewed closeness with the world. 95 96

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Rilke’s corpus Briefe aus den Jahren 1906–1907, ed. by ruth sieber-rilke and carl sieber, leipzig: insel 1930, p. 332. Briefe aus den Jahren 1907–1914, ed. by ruth sieber-rilke and carl sieber, leipzig: insel 1933, p. 223. Briefe aus den Jahren 1914–1921, ed. by ruth sieber-rilke and carl sieber, leipzig: insel 1937, pp. 34-5. bollnow, otto friedrich, Rilke, 2nd revised ed., stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer 1951, pp. 23–4. Correspondance de Georg Brandes, vols. 1–4, ed. by Paul Krüger, copenhagen: rosenkilde and bagger 1952–66, vol. 3, pp. 491–2. Briefwechsel. Rainer Maria Rilke, Katharina Kippenberg, ed. by bettina von bornhard, Wiesbaden: insel 1954, pp. 94–5. Übertragungen. Sämtliche Werke, vols. 1–7, ed. by Walter simon and Karin Wais, frankfurt am main: insel 1955–97, vol. 7, pp. 1042–83. Briefe an Axel Juncker, ed. by renate scharffenberg, frankfurt am main: insel 1979, pp. 117–18; p. 129; p. 134; pp. 151–3; pp. 157–60. Rainer Maria Rilke, Lou Andreas-Salomé. Briefwechsel, ed. by ernst Pfeiffer, frankfurt am main: insel 1979, p. 139; p. 161; p. 178; p. 180; pp. 256–7. Rainer Maria Rilke, Marie von Thurn und Taxis. Briefwechsel, vols. 1–2, ed. by ernst zinn, frankfurt am main: insel 1986, vol. 1, p. 28. Briefwechsel mit Regina Ullmann und Ellen Delp, ed. by Walter simon, frankfurt am main: insel 1987, p. 37. Samuel Fischer and Hedwig Fischer. Briefwechsel mit Autoren, ed. by dierk rodewald and corinna fiedler, frankfurt am main: fischer 1989, p. 578. Rainer Maria Rilke, Ellen Key. Briefwechsel. Mit Briefen von und an Clara Westhoff, ed. by theodore fiedler, frankfurt am main: insel 1993, p. 112; p. 274. Rainer Maria Rilke, Mathilde Vollmoeller. Briefwechsel. 1906–1914, ed. by barbara glauert-Hesse, frankfurt am main: insel 1993, p. 29. Ein Briefwechsel. Ilse Erdmann, Rainer Maria Rilke, ed. by Wihelm Kölmel, Waldkirch: Waldkircher verlag 1998, p. 40; pp. 73–4. Rainer Maria Rilke, Sidonie Nádherný von Borutin. Briefwechsel. 1906–1926, ed. by Joachim W. Storck with the collaboration of Waltraud and Friedrich Pfäfflin, göttingen: Wallstein verlag 2007, p. 105; p. 244; p. 247.

234

Leonardo F. Lisi

II. Sources of Rilke’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard brandes, georg, Søren Kierkegaard. Ein literarisches Charakterbild, trans. by adolf strodtmann, leipzig: barth 1879. Kassner, rudolf, “sören Kierkegaard. aphorismen,” Die Neue Rundschau (Freie Bühne), vol. 1, no. 3, berlin: s. fischer verlag 1906, pp. 513–43. lund, Henriette, “s. Kierkegaard’s familie und Privatleben,” in sören Kierkegaard, Ausgewählte christliche Reden. Mit einem Anhang über Kierkegaards Familie und Privatleben nach den persönlichen Erinnerungen seiner Nichte, Fräulein Lund, giessen: ricker 1901, pp. 121–58. meyer, raphael, “einleitung,” in Sören Kierkegaard und sein Verhältnis zu “ihr.” Aus nachgelassenen Papieren, stuttgart: axel Juncker verlag 1905, pp. iii–viii. III. Secondary Literature on Rilke’s Relation to Kierkegaard bollnow, otto friedrich, Rilke, 2nd enlarged ed., stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer 1951, pp. 22–6. carballo, J. rof, “el problema del seductor en Kierkegaard, Proust y rilke,” Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos, no. 102, 1958, pp. 353–78 and no. 103, 1958, pp. 5–30. cardinal, clive H., “rilke and Kierkegaard: some relationships between Poet and theologian,” Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Languages Association, vol. 23, 1969, pp. 34–9. engebretsen, rune alf, Kierkegaard and Poet Existence with Special Reference to Germany and Rilke, Ph.d. thesis, stanford university, Palo alto, california 1980. frowen, irina, “rilke’s ‘Ölbaum-garten’ zwischen Kierkegaards ‘entweder-oder,’ ” Blätter der Rilke-Gesellschaft, nos. 16–17, 1989–90, pp. 177–87. gullón, ricardo, “rilke y Kierkegaard,” Ínsula: Revista Bibliográfica de Ciencias y Letras, vol. 75, 1952, p. 2. Hale, geoffrey a., “Fragmentary Extravagance.” Modernist Readings of Kierkegaard in Kafka, Rilke and Adorno, Ph.d. thesis, Johns Hopkins university, baltimore, maryland 1996. — “Affirmation: ‘Death’s Decision’ and the Figural Imperative in Rilke and Kierkegaard,” in his Kierkegaard and the Ends of Language, minneapolis and london: university of minnesota Press 2002, pp. 73–108. Hauser, alfred William, “rilke und Kierkegaard,” Rilke und die Religion, m.a. thesis, university of manitoba 1965, pp. 122–32. Jancke, rudolf, “rilke und Kierkegaard,” in Dichtung und Volkstum, vol. 39, 1938, pp. 314–29. Kohlschmidt, Werner, “rilke und Kierkegaard,” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, series 4:1, vol. 63, 1950–51, pp. 189–97. — “rilke und Kierkegaard,” Die entzweite Welt. Studien zum Menschenbild in der neueren Dichtung, gladbeck: freizeiten-verlag 1953, pp. 88–97.

Rainer Maria Rilke: Unsatisfied Love and the Poetry of Living

235

malik, Habib c., Receiving Søren Kierkegaard: The Early Impact and Transmission of His Thought, Washington d.c.: catholic university of america Press 1997, pp. 360–64. mustard, Helen m., “sören Kierkegaard in german literary Periodicals, 1860–1930,” Germanic Review, vol. 26, no. 2, 1951, pp. 95–6. schuelke, getrude, Kierkegaard and Rilke: A Study in Relationships, Ph.d. thesis, stanford university, Palo alto, california 1950. steffensen, steffen, “rilke og Kierkegaard,” Meddelelser af Søren Kierkegaard Selskabet, vol. 4, no. 4, 1953, pp. 10–11. — Rilke und Skandinavien, copenhagen: munksgaard 1957, pp. 54–8.

martin Walser: the (un-)certainty of reading sophie Wennerscheid

I. Martin Walser’s Life and Work martin Walser was born on march 24, 1927 in Wasserburg am bodensee, near lake constance. after his schooldays he studied literature, history and philosophy in regensburg and tübingen. in 1951 he obtained his doctorate for his thesis on Kafka. He became famous for his first novel Ehen in Philippsburg, published in 1957.1 His greatest success was Ein fliehendes Pferd from 1978,2 in which Kierkegaard plays an important role. since the late 1980s he has repeatedly given rise to political debates on german national identity, for example in the debate on the german division (1988) and in the so-called Walser–bubis debate (1998). Walser is a member of the “akademie der Künste,” the “deutsche akademie für sprache und dichtung,” and the german P.e.n. He has received several honorary doctorates and won several important literature prizes, amongst others, the Preis der gruppe 47 (1955), the georg-büchner-Preis (1981), the friedrich-Hölderlin-Preis (1996), and the friedenspreis des deutschen buchhandels (1998). II. Kierkegaard’s Impact on Martin Walser’s Works Kierkegaard’s impact on the literary and essayistic work of martin Walser has not been adequately analyzed up to now. so far, research has almost solely referred to Walser’s novella Ein fliehendes Pferd, and other texts have not attracted any attention. still, the traces Kierkegaard left in Walser’s literary output are numerous and complex. of particular importance for Walser in this context is Kierkegaard’s treatment of indirect communication and irony. at what time Walser started reading Kierkegaard cannot be determined exactly. in his thesis Beschreibung einer Form. Versuch über Franz Kafka from 1951 there are no obvious references to Kierkegaard.3 but in 1960 Walser wrote a radio feature for bayrischer rundfunk titled “das Prinzip Hoffnung. Über natur, tod und

1 2 3

1961.

martin Walser, Ehen in Philippsburg, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1957. martin Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1978. martin Walser, Beschreibung einer Form. Versuch über Franz Kafka, munich: Hanser

238

Sophie Wennerscheid

religion bei ernst bloch,”4 where he compared bloch’s concept of “experience of being” [Daseins-Empfinden] with Kierkegaard’s concept of “self-understanding-inexistence” [Sich-in-Existenz-verstehen].5 in Walser’s early literary texts from this time and later on one cannot find any direct influence of a Kierkegaard reception, either in Ehen in Philippsburg (1957) or in the so-called Kristlein trilogy, consisting of Halbzeit from 1960,6 Das Einhorn from 1966,7 and Der Sturz from 1973.8 However, these texts only show a certain theoretical proximity to the problem of becoming oneself which Kierkegaard treated, insofar as Walser’s first-person narrators always try to play several roles whereas they are never at ease or find their own selves.9 from 1973 on, however, an explicit and intensive engagement with Kierkegaard, most notably with The Concept of Irony and the Concluding Unscientific Postscript, can be found. at this point Walser starts to examine different concepts of irony, thus going back to Kierkegaard. The first evidence of Walser’s discussion of Kierkegaard can be found in a text from 1974, called Wer ist ein Schriftsteller?10 in this text Walser refers to Kierkegaard and Karl marx in the same breath in order to explain his motivation for writing. both of them are supposed to be “sons of the unique Hegel” and both are supposed to be dialecticians, whereas one has introduced the act of suffering and the other one the act as dialectical subject matter.11 In this context, the importance of Kierkegaard can be exemplified on the level of aesthetic reception as well as on the level of aesthetic production. on the one hand, Walser refers, as he repeatedly will do in his later texts, to Kierkegaard’s concept of indirect communication, which, similarly to bertolt brecht’s (1898–1956) technique of alienation, aims at getting the reader to read independently. equally important for Walser is Kierkegaard’s reflection upon terms like “negativity” and “positivity.” 4 martin Walser, “das Prinzip Hoffnung. Über natur, tod und religion bei ernst bloch,” unpublished manuscript. the feature was broadcast on bayerischer rundfunk, July 8, 1960. for providing insight into the manuscript i would like to thank bayrischer rundfunk. 5 ibid., p. 19. a few pages later Walser defends bloch’s tone “against the hurdy-gurdytone of ‘Geworfenheit,’ against the secularised Kierkegaard.” ibid., p. 26. in his Walserbiography Jörg magenau also refers to this radio feature and states that Walser sees ernst bloch in the tradition of Kierkegaard and Hölderlin. see Jörg magenau, Martin Walser, reinbek bei Hamburg: rowohlt 2005, p. 157. 6 martin Walser, Halbzeit, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1960. 7 martin Walser, Das Einhorn, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1966. 8 martin Walser, Der Sturz, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1973. 9 Willy michel tries to read Walser’s novel The Unicorn against the background of Kierkegaard’s thoughts. see Willy michel, “Poetische transformationen Kierkegaardscher Denkfiguren im neueren deutschen Roman. Eine wirkungsgeschichtliche Betrachtung zu max frisch, ‘stiller’ und ‘mein name sei gantenbein,’ Peter Härtling, ‘niembsch oder der stillstand,’ gabriele Wohmann, ‘ernste absicht’ und martin Walser, ‘das einhorn,’ ” Festschrift für Friedrich Kienecker zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. by gerd michel, Heidelberg: Julius groos verlag 1980, pp. 153–77. 10 martin Walser, Wer ist ein Schriftsteller? Aufsätze und Reden, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1979. 11 ibid., p. 41.

Martin Walser: The (Un-)Certainty of Reading

239

Walser himself interprets negativity as “uncertainty and weakness of identity,”12 as a wound and defect of the individual. according to Walser, this wound must not be closed by writers by resorting to something positive, for example, assumed knowledge, because that would be a “betrayal of the negativity of existence,” and the only thing that would be left would be “a beautiful scar in the face of world literary history.”13 in his lecture on poetry at frankfurt university, Selbstbewußtsein und Ironie,14 which he gave in october and november 1980 and which was published by suhrkamp in 1981, Walser intensivly comments on Kierkegaard’s concept of irony. His concern with this subject matter, however, goes back to the early 1970s.15 Walser’s lectures begin with an examination of the romantic irony developed by friedrich schlegel (1772–1829). as irony’s central task within schlegel’s theory, Walser points out its relativizing power that enables the ironist to soar endlessly above everything limited. to this sort of irony, which, according to him, is continued in thomas mann’s “middle-class” or “bourgeois irony” (bürgerliche Ironie), Walser opposes irony in the socratic sense. but not as schlegel interprets socratic irony, that is, as “transcendental buffoonery,”16 which aims at deceiving, but as the kind of irony which is expressed in the sentence, “i know that i do not know anything.” socrates’ irony is not rhetorical irony, but rather “a conversational technique,” as Walser quotes Kierkegaard,17 but it arises from the awareness of oneself as notknowing. this, however, is supposed to be “the beginning of becoming to know.”18 this “becoming knowing” aims at a change which was not intended this way by either the romantic or the middle-class ironist. the middle-class ironist much rather accepts his anti-social behavior by ironically smiling about his own deficiencies and by enjoying himself with nostalgia and resignation. along with Kierkegaard, Walser feels annoyed by this “attempt to create the poetic life as an elitist self-enjoyment.”19 instead of remaining in the assumed unchangeable, Walser wants to use irony as “infinite, absolute negativity,”20 as “dialectical negative energy,”21 in order to reveal

ibid., p. 44. ibid., p. 45. 14 martin Walser, Selbstbewußtsein und Ironie. Frankfurter Vorlesungen, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1981. 15 in a note to the published lectures Walser points out that he was concerned with this subject as early as 1973, when he taught at middlebury college (vermont) and at the university of texas. see Walser, Selbstbewußtsein und Ironie, p. 211. 16 see ibid., p. 27; Walser quotes from friedrich schlegel, Schriften zur Literatur, ed. by Wolfdietrich rasch, munich: dtv 1972, p. 12. 17 Walser, Selbstbewußtsein und Ironie, p. 32. Walser quotes from Kierkegaard, Über den Begriff der Ironie, trans. by Heinrich schaeder, munich and berlin: oldenbourg 1929, p. 225. SKS 1, 306 / CI, 269. 18 see Walser, Selbstbewußtsein und Ironie, p. 32. 19 ibid., p. 58. 20 ibid., p. 82. Walser quotes from Kierkegaard, Über den Begriff der Ironie, trans. by Heinrich schaeder, munich and berlin: oldenbourg 1929, p. 219. SKS 1, 299 / CI, 261. 21 Walser, Selbstbewußtsein und Ironie, p. 113. 12 13

240

Sophie Wennerscheid

assumed knowledge as non-knowledge. Walser quotes from Kierkegaard’s The Concept of Irony: “irony as the negative is the way; it is not the truth but the way.”22 martin Walser recognizes this kind of negativity in texts by the german-speaking swiss writer robert Walser and in the work of franz Kafka. robert Walser’s and Kafka’s narrators show negative self-awareness and thus support exactly those conditions which suppress and harass them. they say yes to what says no to them. according to martin Walser, in order to understand this negativity of existence, Kierkegaard is needed, however, not the Kierkegaard from the irony paper but the one from the Concluding Unscientific Postscript, “for whom the question of faith turned more and more into a question of language.”23 also Walser sees a problem of speech when talking about faith, because here the inner and the outer are incommensurable; accordingly faith has “no positive performance of conversation” but only a negative, dialectically articulated one which at that point hints at something positive. Walser quotes Kierkegaard: “the certitude of faith is indeed distinguishable by uncertainty.”24 Walser translates this dialectical relationship into what he calls negative self-awareness and by doing so exceeds by far Kierkegaard’s mental world. this negative self-awareness arises from an experience of inferiority that is not only typical for the Jewish experience of being a minority but especially for the experience of being a petty bourgeois, the “experience of bourgeois.” the awareness of belonging to the petty bourgeoisie is an awareness which questions its own existence but, at the same time, supports the effective environment and the existing conditions even if, or especially if these conditions negate the petty bourgeois individual. Walser understands this discrepancy as a concept of irony which literally does not support or affirm the conditions but rather criticizes them in a radical way. He declares: “if anybody collapses under certain circumstances… singing during his collapse the praises of the circumstances causing his collapse, then that leads to this ironic sound. and this sound draws from these circumstances probably more justification than any direct criticism.”25 thus, Kierkegaard’s theory of indirect communication is translated by Walser into a theory of indirect criticism. to what extent Walser uses this theory in his literature and in what way Kierkegaard claims a central position here too, can be shown in Walser’s novella Ein fliehendes Pferd.26 it becomes clear that Kierkegaard plays an important and maybe even central role for the novella, that was published in 1978 and is one of Walser’s best and most celebrated texts, because Walser, similarly to how frisch did it 20 years before in See ibid., p. 60. Quoted from Sören Kierkegaard, Über den Begriff der Ironie, trans. by Heinrich schaeder, munich and berlin: oldenbourg 1929, pp. 274. SKS 1, 356 / CI, 327. 23 see Walser, Selbstbewußtsein und Ironie, pp. 187–8. 24 see ibid., p. 187; Walser quotes from sören Kierkegaard, Abschließende unwissenschaftliche Nachschrift, vols. 1–2, ed. by emanuel Hirsch, düsseldorf and cologne: diederichs 1957, vol. 2, p. 215. SKS 7, 459 / CUP1, 506. 25 see Walser, Selbstbewußtsein und Ironie, pp. 195–6. 26 martin Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1978. (english translation: “a runaway Horse,” in Friedrich Christian Delius, Peter Schneider, Martin Walser: Three Contemporary German Novellas, trans. by leila vennewitz, ed. by a. leslie Willson, new York: continuum 2001 (The German Library, vol. 88), pp. 79–156.) 22

Martin Walser: The (Un-)Certainty of Reading

241

his novel Stiller, places an epigraph from Either/Or before his text. unlike frisch however, Walser does not use a motto from the second part of Either/Or, which consists of ethical texts which call for self-choice, but from the preface of victor eremita, the pseudonymous editor. Just as eremita’s preface functions as a sort of annotation on the following texts of the characters a and b, the motto chosen by Walser also has a metapoetic function. the motto is: from time to time one comes across novellas in which certain persons expound opposing philosophies. a preferred ending is for one of these persons to convince the other. thus, instead of the philosophy having to speak for itself, the reader is favored with the historical result that the other person has been convinced. i regard it as a blessing that in this respect these papers afford no enlightenment. sören Kierkegaard, Either/Or27

The motto clearly identifies a literary program which says that a literary text is not a communication of knowledge but a communication of existence and therefore is perfectly suited as a motto for a text like Walser’s Ein fliehendes Pferd. for just as in Either/Or two characters, a and b, represent two opposing philosophies, in Walser’s text two main male characters appear who seem to be the opposite of each other. in the course of reading, however, it becomes clear that, first, these two characters— the teacher Helmut Halm and the freelance writer Klaus buch—are more similar to each other than the reader originally assumed and that, second, it cannot be clearly identified which one of them is committed to an aesthetic or an ethical view of life.28 apart from this formal aspect, which by the way not only follows the structure of Either/Or but also seems to quote frisch’s novel Stiller, there is another aspect which makes Kierkegaard important for this Walser text: Helmut Halm, the male protagonist and the third-person-narrator of the novella, is introduced as a Kierkegaard reader. He states he has taken Kierkegaard’s journals along with him on his holidays in order to study them:29 He had planned to read Kierkegaard’s diaries and had brought along all five volumes. and may the lord have mercy on you, sabina, if he gets through only four. He hadn’t the faintest idea what Kierkegaard had entered in his diaries. unimaginable that Kierkegaard 27

14.

Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, p. 7; “a runaway Horse,” p. 80. see SKS 2, 21 / EO1,

One of the first critics who comments in passing on Kierkegaard’s impact on Walser’s novella was Knorr. See Herbert Knorr, “Gezähmter Löwe–fliehendes Pferd. Zu Novellen von goethe und martin Walser,” Literatur für Leser, vol. 2, 1979, pp. 139–57, see p. 155. see also Hans-erich struck, Martin Walser. ‘Ein fliehendes Pferd,’ münchen: oldenbourg 1988, pp. 40–5 and Siegfried Weing, “Kierkegaardian Reflections in Martin Walser’s ‘Ein fliehendes Pferd,’ ” Colloquia Germanica, vol. 25, nos. 3–4, 1992, pp. 275–88. 29 the meaning of reading is explained by maria behre. see maria behre, “erzählen zwischen Kierkegaard- und Nietzsche-Lektüre in Martin Walsers Novelle ‘Ein fliehendes Pferd,’ ” Literatur in Wissenschaft und Unterricht 23, cologne: böhlau 1990, pp. 3–18. behre explains that, for Halm, reading is an existential need but at the same time a refuge from real life. apart from reading Kierkegaard, behre analyzes Halm reading nietzsche as well and demonstrates the meaning the movement of memory has for the novella. 28

242

Sophie Wennerscheid could have jotted down anything private. He yearned to get closer to Kierkegaard. Perhaps he was only yearning so that he could be disappointed. He visualized those many hours of daily disappointment while reading Kierkegaard’s diaries as something enjoyable. like rainy day on vacation. if these diaries permitted no proximity, as he feared (and still more hoped), his yearning to get closer to this man would increase. a diary devoid of anything private: what could be more fascinating?30

Three aspects of this passage are remarkable. The first one is the fact that Walser explicitly describes the journals’ materiality. By saying that it is about five black volumes, he lets the reader know that Halm is reading Hayo gerdes’ translation, which was published between 1962 and 1974. second, it is obvious that Halm presents himself as not being a Kierkegaardian, by which Walser again refers to frisch’s Stiller in which the prosecutor rolf admits never to have been “an expert in Kierkegaard.”31 and third, it is remarkable that Halm is fascinated by the thought of the fact that reading someone’s journal does not bring this person nearer to the reader but on the contrary makes him even less identifiable. Halm, who proudly regards himself as petty bourgeois, wants this discrepancy between the internal and the external for himself. “Incognito: that was his dearest image.”32 and when he runs the risk of being exposed, Halm tries to excape. “to run away, away, away,”33 says his mind in this situation; he wants to remain a mystery to others just as Kierkegaard always will remain a mystery for his readers. What Kierkegaard possibly managed to do with his journals is on the verge of failing in Halm’s life because the confrontation with his former schoolmate, the vital, Klaus buch, bursting with good health, causes to collapse the façade of the intellectual, who is satisfied in his dissatisfaction. Since he is not able to escape, he gets rid of his “friend” in another way. during a sailing trip a mysterious accident happens, Klaus falls overboard and disappears into the stormy waters. after this incident, which makes Walser’s text a novella in the traditional sense, Halm again reaches for Kierkegaard’s journals. He takes “the first volume of Kierkegaard”34 but cannot bring himself to read it. a little later, however, he opens “his black Kierkegaard book” and reads the following passage: “during my sojourn here in Gilleleie i visited esrum, fredensborg, frederiksvaerk, and tidsvilde. the latter is known chiefly for St. Helen’s Spring, to which the entire local population makes a pilgrimage on midsummer day.”35 But after reading these first sentences from Kierkegaard’s famous gilleleie entries Halm closes the book again. the following events do not seem to have anything to do with this reading, but, on closer Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, pp. 10–11; “a runaway Horse,” p. 82. max frisch, Stiller, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1954, p. 519. (english translation: I’m not Stiller, trans. by michael bullock, san diego: Harcourt brace 1994, p. 345.) 32 Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, p. 12; “a runaway Horse,” p. 83. 33 Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, p. 12; “a runaway Horse,” p. 83. 34 Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, p. 126; “a runaway Horse,” p. 142. 35 Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, p. 128; “a runaway Horse,” p. 143; SKS 17, 7, aa:1 / KJN 1, 3: “Under mit Ophold her paa Gilleleie har jeg besøgt Esrom, Fredensborg, Frederiksværk, Tidsvilde. Den sidste By er fornemlig bekjendt ved Helene-Kilde...til hvilken hele Omegnen valfarter ved St. Hansdags Tider.” 30 31

Martin Walser: The (Un-)Certainty of Reading

243

examination, they seem extremely important.36 Helene buch appears and reports that the drowned one has hidden a miserable, failed existence behind the face of a successful man. When Helene hardly has finished her speech, the person believed to be drowned reappears and asks Helene to go with him, which she does. after these events Helmut Hahn again reaches for “his black Kierkegaard book”37 and reads the same passage as before, closes the book and suggests to his wife sabine to go on a cycling tour instead. the novella ends a few pages later with Helmut’s promise to reveal everything and to tell everything “about this fellow Helmut, this woman sabina.”38 like the last sentence, the first sentence of the novella follows—and releases the reader into the uncertainty of how to interpret what he has just read, like Helmut Halm’s leap into life or like an endless narrative loop. During the 1970s Walser fixed his thoughts on indirect communication in a socio-critical discourse. since the 1980s this more left-oriented discourse was more and more replaced by right-oriented undertones; however, Kierkegaard remained important.39 especially when Walser thinks about the special effect of literary language, he often refers to him. thus, when asked about his important readings in a Spiegel interview from 1995, Walser refers to authors like nietzsche and Kierkegaard. He declares, You always must have such a saint in your house, i guess. for me it was Kierkegaard for a long time. It must be an author who confides in language as a wealth that is impossible to command. i do not like reading just to notice something, but to be something.40

on the occasion of receiving an honorary doctorate from the university of Hildesheim, Walser gave a speech in which he differentiates between those texts behre acts on the assumption that Helmut stops reading because the keyword Helene reminds him of his own “crisis.” behre, “erzählen zwischen Kierkegaard- und nietzscheLektüre in Martin Walsers Novelle ‘Ein fliehendes Pferd,’ ” p. 5. Bärbel Westphal offers an extraordinary interpretation of this scene. see bärbel Westphal, “Was hat Klaus mit der heiligen Helene zu tun? Kierkegaards Tagebücher und Martin Walsers ‘Ein fliehendes Pferd,’ ” in Beiträge zur sechsten Arbeitstagung schwedischer Germanisten in Göteborg 23.-24. April 2004, ed. by J. alexander bareis and izabela Karhiaho, göteborg: acta universitatis gothoburgensis 2005, pp. 195–203. Westphal puts forward that the legend of Helen refers to a woman who— like Klaus buch—drowns in the sea, whose body, however, reappears. suddenly, Klaus no longer seems to be a loser but like someone who has been miraculously rescued. through the intertextual reference to Kierkegaard and the legend of Helen Klaus’ character is being upgraded and thereby contributes to the fact that in accordance with the Kierkegaard motto it cannot be determined which position is the “victorious” one. 37 Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, p. 147; “a runaway Horse,” p. 153. 38 Walser, Ein fliehendes Pferd, p. 151; “a runaway Horse,” p. 154. Weing regards this as Helmut’s leap out of his despair and into the ethical stage. see Weing, “Kierkegaardian Reflections,” p. 286. 39 see two interviews from the 1980s. ulf erdmann ziegler, “der lächerlichkeit die Würde zurückerobern,” taz, september 30, 1985, p. 12. volker Hage, “Woher die Kraft und der stoff und die lust,” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, magazin, october 11, 1985, p. 14. 40 see martin Walser, “man bleibt wunschbereit. interview,” Der Spiegel, vol. 36, 1995. 36

244

Sophie Wennerscheid

which convey information and want to be “true” and those in which the author commits himself to the mystery of language. in this speech Walser distinguishes between the language of knowledge, which consists of information and formula and makes the reader passive, and literary language, which is “picture, metaphor, expression, thus an indirect announcement” and thereby has “an appealing energy that gets me going.”41 for Walser, Kierkegaard’s language is such a language and therefore has never stopped working inside him.42 in another text Walser makes clear that this understanding of language has a religious dimension for him. the difference Walser makes in this text is the one between language and vocabulary. He differentiates: “language can be experienced. vocabulary is understandable. language speaks to existing beings. vocabulary is addressed to initiates.”43 Here, Kierkegaard serves as an example for a religious thinker who never transformed his religious experience into theology, that is, into something positive and something that can be known, but who was always afraid of “vocabulary.” at this point, Walser consequently advocates authentic language which results from personal experience and which, for that matter, can never be communicated directly, but only indirectly, that is, by means of literature.44 Walser also links literature and religion very closely in an interview with radio vatican on the occasion of his 80th birthday.45 by again referring to Kierkegaard’s statement that faith only can be recognized in the dimension of uncertainty, he defines faith as “a permanent movement, endangered, but necessary.” He continues: “this is neither a pure positivity nor a pure negativity. it is simply the movement. Yes, religion is insofar the most beautiful thing as it is the capability to imagine something that is beyond provability.”46 in Walser’s later literary works, Kierkegaard appears every now and then but does not have a central role. in 1985, Walser writes his aphoristic text Meßmers Gedanken, in which he again addresses the theme of hiding oneself and praises the ideal of a “language of divesture-concealment” [Entblößungsverbergungssprache],47 which he compares with the language of the “unhappy consciousness.”48 in 2003 he takes up this topic again and writes Meßmers Reisen as a kind of sequel. Here, he explicitly see martin Walser, “die stimmung, das Wissen, die sprache,” in Martin Walser. Reden-Schreiben-Vertonen, ed. by silvio vietta, Hildesheim: georg olms verlag 1996, pp. 26–35, see pp. 28–9. 42 ibid., p. 31. 43 martin Walser, “lieber schön als wahr. eine rede über Hölderlin, Kierkegaard und die zeit, über Wörter der macht und solche, die eine begegnung mit dem religiösen ermöglichen,” DIE ZEIT, april 2003. 44 the background against which Walser holds this view supposedly results from the attacks which Walser repeatedly suffered from whenever he personally expressed his view about political affairs, such as the german process of coming to terms with their past or the reunification. 45 martin Walser, “benedikt ist eine Überraschung,” radio vatican, June 8, 2007. see http://www.oecumene.radiovaticana.org/ted/Articolo.asp?c=138212 46 see ibid. 47 see martin Walser, Meßmers Gedanken, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1985, p. 9. 48 ibid., p. 48. 41

Martin Walser: The (Un-)Certainty of Reading

245

refers to Kierkegaard’s text “the unhappiest one”49 and quotes: “the unhappy one is always absent from himself, he is never aware of himself.”50 III. Reading as Journeys to Selfhood Walser very emphatically talks about the wonderful opportunity to meet oneself while reading a book in the epilogue of the collection of selected texts, entitled Wer kennt sich schon, from 1995.51 for Walser, reading is an activity which enables the reader to reach a higher awareness of himself while at the same time allowing him to disappear. in conclusion, Walser calls this paradox an immense “enhancement of life” and declares: “the time you spent with books—this is a glowing track into the past tending towards darkness.”52 it is hardly surprising that, according to the search for and collection of clues accomplished above, Kierkegaard plays an important part in this work. out of 117 quotations with which Walser looks back into his readings, as many as 23, thus about 20 per cent, come from Kierkegaard, namely, from Either/ Or, The Sickness unto Death, The Point of View for My Work as an Author, and the journals and papers.

49 50 51 52

SKS 2, 213ff. / EO1, 217ff. see martin Walser, Meßmers Reisen, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 2003, p. 180. martin Walser, Wer kennt sich schon, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1992. see ibid., p. 149.

bibliography I. References to or Uses of Kierkegaard in Walser’s corpus “das Prinzip Hoffnung. Über natur, tod und religion bei ernst bloch,” 1960, p. 19; p. 26, unpublished manuscript. Ein fliehendes Pferd, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1978, p. 7; pp. 10–12; p. 21; p. 126; p. 128; p 147. (english translation: A Runaway Horse, in Friedrich Christian Delius, Peter Schneider, Martin Walser. Three Contemporary German Novellas, trans. by leila vennewitz, ed. by a. leslie Willson, new York: continuum 2001 (The German Library, vol. 88), p. 80; pp. 82–3; pp. 142–3; pp. 153–4. Wer ist ein Schriftsteller? Aufsätze und Reden, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1979, pp. 40–42; p. 44. Selbstbewusstsein und Ironie, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1981, p. 31; pp. 58–60; p. 82; p. 112; p. 113; p. 127; p. 173; pp. 187–90; p. 195. Meßmers Gedanken, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1985, p. 9; p. 48. Wer kennt sich schon, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1992, p. 15; p. 18; p. 29; p. 42; pp. 46–8; p. 54; p. 56; p. 60; p. 61; p. 64; p. 72; p. 76; p. 84; p. 89; p. 92; p. 97; p. 110; pp. 115–19; p. 122; p. 142. “die stimmung, das Wissen, die sprache,” Martin Walser. Reden-SchreibenVertonen, ed. by silvio vietta, Hildesheim: georg olms verlag 1996, pp. 26–35, see p. 26, p. 31. Meßmers Reisen, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 2003, p. 180. II. Sources of Walser’s Knowledge of Kierkegaard max frisch, Stiller, frankfurt am main: suhrkamp 1954. III. Secondary Literature on Walser’s Relation to Kierkegaard behre, maria, “erzählen zwischen Kierkegaard- und nietzsche-lektüre in martin Walsers Novelle ‘Ein fliehendes Pferd,’ ” Literatur in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, vol. 23, cologne: böhlau 1990, pp. 3–18. Knorr, Herbert, “Gezähmter Löwe–fliehendes Pferd. Zu Novellen von Goethe und martin Walser,” Literatur für Leser, vol. 2, 1979, pp. 139–57. magenau, Jörg, Martin Walser. Eine Biographie, reinbek bei Hamburg: rowohlt 2005, p. 157.

Martin Walser: The (Un-)Certainty of Reading

247

Michel, Willy, “Poetische Transformationen Kierkegaardscher Denkfiguren im neueren deutschen roman. eine wirkungsgeschichtliche betrachtung zu max frisch, ‘stiller’ und ‘mein name sei gantenbein,’ Peter Härtling, ‘niembsch oder der stillstand,’ gabriele Wohmann, ‘ernste absicht’ und martin Walser, ‘das einhorn,’ ” in Festschrift für Friedrich Kienecker zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. by gerd michel, Heidelberg: Julius groos verlag 1980, pp. 153–77. struck, Hans-erich, Martin Walser. Ein fliehendes Pferd, munich: oldenbourg 1988, p. 37; pp. 41–4; p. 58; p. 77; p. 93; p. 106; p. 109. Weing, Siegfried, “Kierkegaardian Reflections in Martin Walser’s ‘Ein fliehendes Pferd,’ ” Colloquia Germanica, vol. 25, nos. 3–4, 1992, pp. 275–88. Westphal, bärbel, “Was hat Klaus mit der heiligen Helene zu tun? Kierkegaards Tagebücher und Martin Walsers ‘Ein fliehendes Pferd,’ ” in Beiträge zur sechsten Arbeitstagung schwedischer Germanisten in Göteborg 23.-24. April 2004, ed. by J. alexander bareis and izabela Karhiaho, göteborg: acta universitatis gothoburgensis 2005, pp. 195–203.

index of Persons

abraham, 123–7, 131, 154, 197, 209, 210. adam, 182, 183. adorno, theodor W. (1903–69), german philosopher, 4, 96, 167, 185, 186, 189. ahlin, lars (1915–96), swedish author, xii. alcoforado, mariana (1640–1723), Portuguese nun, 223. andersch, alfred (1914–80), german author, 1–13. andersen, Hans christian (1805–75), danish poet, novelist and writer of fairy tales, xi. anderson, Paul irving, 63, 69, 72, 73. andreas-salomé, lou (1861–1937), russianborn psychoanalyst and author, 215, 220, 228. arnim, ludwig achim von (1781–1831), german poet, xi. auden, W.H. (1907–73), english-born american poet, xii, 213. baggesen, Jens (1764–1826), danish poet, xi. bakhtin, mikhail (1895–1975), russian writer and thinker, xiii. baldwin, James (1924–87), american author, xii. bang, Herman (1857–1912), danish critic and journalist, 220. barber, samuel (1910–81), american composer, xii. barlach, ernst, 10. barth, Karl (1886–1968), swiss Protestant theologian, 44, 55, 129. bärthold, albert (1804–92), german Protestant pastor and theologian, 62.

bauer, felice, 119, 122. baum, oskar, 121, 122. baumann, Julius, 33. békessy, imre (1887–1951), austrianHungarian journalist, 162–4, 167. benedictsson, victoria (1850–88), swedish author, xii. benjamin, Walter (1892–1940), germanJewish philosopher and literary critic, 161. bergson, Henri (1859–1941), french philosopher, 105. bernhard, thomas (1931–89), austrian author, xi, 15–29. bernstorff, Wilhelm von, 66. betz, maurice, 232. billeter, fritz, 130. binder, Hartmut, 118. bjørnson, bjørnstjerne (1832–1910), norwegian author, xii. blake, William (1757–1827), english poet and artist, 143. blanchot, maurice (1907–2003), french philosopher and writer, 129. blecher, max (1909–38), romanian writer, xiii. blei, franz (1871–1942), austrian-born author and translator, 98, 158. blicher, steen steensen (1782–1848), danish author, xi. blixen, Karen (1885–1962), danish author, xii. bloch, ernst (1885–1977), german philosopher, 31, 238. bloom, Harold (b. 1930), american literary critic, xii. bohnenkamp, Klaus e., 143.

250

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

boisdeffre, Pierre de, 129. böll, Heinrich (1917–85), german author, 97. bollnow, otto, 213, 226–8. borges, Jorge luis (1899–1986), argentinian author, xii. bournonville, august (1805–79), danish ballet master and choreographer, 148. brandes, georg (1842–1927), danish author and literary critic, xi, 61, 63, 65, 69, 70, 72, 145, 179–81, 186, 215, 223–7 passim. brandt, Willy (1913–92), german politician and chancellor, 4. brecht, bertolt (1898–1956), german dramatist, 39, 158, 238. broch, Hermann (1886–1951), austrian author, xi, 31–41, 141, 196. brod, max (1884–1968), german-speaking czech Jewish author and composer, 118, 121–5, 129, 130. brooks, daniel, 200, 204, 210. buber, martin (1878–1965), german philosopher, 96, 122. buch, Helene, 243. byron, george gordon noel (1788–1824), english poet, xi. calvin, John (1509–64), french Protestant theologian, 129. camus, albert (1903–60), french author, 4, 87. canetti, elias (1905–94), bulgarian-born swiss author, 31, 157, 158. carnap, rudolf (1891–1970), german-born american philosopher, 31. castellani, leonardo (1899–1981), argentinian author, xii. celan, Paul (1920–70), romanian poet and translator, 4. cervantes, miguel de (1547–1616), spanish author, xi. chargaff, erwin (1905–2002), austrian-born american biochemist, 158.

christ, 23, 107, 125, 143, 208. cohen, Hermann (1842–1918), german philosopher, 37. dalgas, ernesto (1871–99), danish author, xi. dallago, carl (1869–1949), austrian author, 105, 118, 159, 166, 167, 175. daniel-rops, J.c., 129. david, claude, 130. delillo, don (b. 1936), american author, xii. descartes, rené (1596–1650), french philosopher, 37. desdemona, xi. dewitz, auguste von, 66. diem, Hermann (1900–75), german Protestant theologian, 46. dilthey, Wilhelm (1833–1911), german philosopher, 92. don Juan, 72, 74, 82, 186, 187. Don Quixote, xi, 51, 127. dostoevsky, fyodor mikhailovich (1821–81), russian author, 146, 196, 228. downing, eric, 177. dürrenmatt, friedrich (1921–90), swiss author, xi, 43–59, 81, 142. ebner, ferdinand (1882–1931), austrian philosopher, 141. edwards, brian f.m., 119, 120, 127, 130, 131. eichendorff, Joseph freiherr von (1788–1857), german poet and author, xi, 64. eilittä, leena, 118, 121–31 passim. einstein, albert (1879–1955), german physicist, 31. eliot, t.s. (1888–1965), american-born english author, 97. erasmus montanus, x. erdrich, louise (b. 1954), american author, xii. esterházy, Péter (b. 1950), Hungarian author, xiii.

Index of Persons ewald, Johannes (1743–81), danish poet, xi. faulkner, William (1897–1962), american writer, 4. faust, 75, 185–7. federn, Paul (1871–1950), austrian physician, 36. ficker, ludwig von (1880–1967), german author and publisher, 31, 33, 93, 158, 162, 229. field, frank, 166. fontane, theodor (1819–98), german author, xi, 61–77. francis of assisi (1181–1226), founder of the franciscan order, 144. franz Joseph i (1830–1916), austrian emperor, 199. frei, bruno (1897–1988), austrian publicist, 157, 167. freud, sigmund (1856–1939), austrian psychologist, 36, 149, 181, 183, 184, 215. frisch, max (1911–91), swiss author, xi, 48, 54, 79–90, 241, 242. fuentes, carlos (b. 1928), mexican writer, xii. gerdes, Hayo, 242. gide, andré (1869–1951), french author, 32, 227. gleiss, otto, 174. goethe, Johann Wolfgang von (1749–1832), german poet, author, scientist and diplomat, x, xi, 158, 173. goldschmidt, meïr aaron (1819–87), danish author, 159, 163. gombrowicz, Witold (1904–69), Polish writer, xiii. goth, maja (1923–99), 115, 129. gottsched, Hermann (1848–1916), german Protestant theologian, 117, 119, 125, 141, 160, 161. grangier, eduard, 129. grass, günther (b. 1927), german author, 4.

251

grawe, christian, 67. gray, richard t., 128. grundtvig, nicolai frederik severin (1783–1872), danish theologian, historian, poet and author, 74, 221. gulliver, xi, 49. gyllembourg-ehrensvärd, thomasine christine (1773–1856), danish author, xi, 102, 206. gyllensten, lars (1921–2006), swedish author, xii. Haas, Willy (1891–1973), german publicist, 117. Haecker, theodor (1879–1945), german author and critic, xi, 32, 33, 46, 91–114, 117, 118, 141, 158–66 passim, 175, 229–32. Halsall, robert, 33. Hamann, Johann georg (1730–88), german philosopher, x. Hamlet, xi, 150, 152. Hamsun, Knut (1859–1952), norwegian author, 36. Hansen, martin a. (1909–55), danish author, xii. Hartwich, Wolf-daniel, 181–4. Hauch, carsten (1790–1872), danish poet and dramatist, xi. Hauptmann, gerhart (1862–1946), german poet, 105. Hebbel, friedrich (1813–63), german dramatist, 153. Hedeinstam, verner von (1859–1940), swedish author, 220. Hegel, georg Wilhelm friedrich (1770–1831), german philosopher, 19, 55, 101, 115, 124, 153, 180, 196, 205. Heiberg, Johan ludvig (1791–1860), danish poet, playwright, critic and philosopher, x. Heidegger, martin (1889–1976), german philosopher, 35, 36, 38, 87, 96, 97, 141, 174, 175, 196.

252

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

Heine, Heinrich (1797–1856), german poet and author, 75. Hemingway, ernest (1899–1961), american writer, 4. Hendriksen, Jørgen, 68. Himmler, Heinrich (1900–45), 2. Hirsch, emanuel (1888–1972), german Protestant theologian, 46, 63, 221. Hitler, adolf (1889–1945), 2, 3, 200. Høffding, Harald (1843–1931), danish philosopher, 32, 33. Hofmannsthal, Hugo von (1874–1929), german author, 62, 141, 142, 150. Holberg, ludvig (1684–1754), danish dramatist and historian, x. Hotho, Heinrich gustav (1802–73), german historian, x. Hüsch, sebastian, 203, 204, 210. Husserl, edmund (1859–1938), german philosopher, 37. ibsen, Henrik (1828–1906), norwegian playwright, xii, 65, 105. Jacobsen, Jens Peter (1847–85), danish author, xi, 213, 215, 220, 229. Jansson, Hans, 216. Jaspers, Karl (1883–1969), german philosopher, 141. Jean Paul, i.e., Johann Paul friedrich richter (1763–1825), german author, xi. Jeppe of the Hill, x. Jessen, Karsten, 68. Joyce, James (1882–1941), irish author, xii, 31. Juncker, axel, 214, 217–20, 224. Jung, carl (1875–1961), swiss psychologist, 181. Kafka, franz (1883–1924), czech-austrian novelist, xi, 31, 39, 53, 55, 62, 115–40, 213, 237, 240. Kant, immanuel (1724–1804), german philosopher, 37, 55, 148, 158.

Kassner, rudolf (1873–1959), austrian philosopher, author and critic, xi, 55, 117, 122, 141–56, 196, 214, 225, 226, 229, 232. Keller, gottfried (1819–90), swiss author, 64. Kelly, John, 129. Key, ellen (1849–1926), swedish feminist writer, 219, 220, 223. Kidde, Harald (1878–1918), danish author, xi. Kierkegaard, søren aabye (1813–55) From the Papers of One Still Living (1838), x. The Concept of Irony (1841), ix, x, 47, 48, 50, 99, 149, 201, 203, 238, 240. Either/Or (1843), ix, 1, 7, 10, 11, 20, 24, 47, 54, 63, 71, 74, 83–5, 116, 121, 122, 124, 127, 145, 160, 167, 174, 175, 179, 184, 187, 196, 203, 205, 206, 210, 216, 217, 232, 241, 245. Repetition (1843), ix, 73, 85, 116, 121, 123, 216. Fear and Trembling (1843), 19, 46, 54, 63, 73, 85, 116, 121, 123, 131, 158, 197, 199, 209, 216. Four Upbuilding Discourses (1844), 116, 127, 158, 229. Prefaces (1844), ix, x, 101, 229. Philosophical Fragments (1844), 52. The Concept of Anxiety (1844), 17, 46, 73, 75, 116, 127, 146–8, 153, 175, 178, 179, 181, 182. Stages on Life’s Way (1845), ix, 63, 72–4, 116, 122, 123, 124, 127, 216. Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845), 214, 230, 231. Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), ix, 19, 21, 22, 24, 27, 44, 47, 49, 54, 55, 107, 216, 227, 238, 240. A Literary Review of Two Ages (1846), x, 102, 141, 163, 206, 229. The Book on Adler (ca. 1846–47), 98, 102, 103, 216.

Index of Persons Christian Discourses (1848), ix, 216, 217, 220, 222, 224. On My Activity as a Writer (ca. 1848), 104. The Point of View for My Work as an Author (ca. 1848), 245. The Sickness unto Death (1849), 8, 16, 17, 46, 47, 53, 85, 116, 127, 128, 178, 179, 245. Two Ethical-Religious Essays (1849), 216. Practice in Christianity (1850), ix. Judge for Yourself! (1851–52, published posthumously in 1876), 164. The Moment (1855), 46, 116, 123, 152, 154. Journals, notebooks, Nachlaß, 80, 85, 105, 117, 119, 121, 125, 151, 159, 161–3, 241, 242, 245. Kippenberg, Katharina, 229. Klíma, ivan (b. 1931), czech novelist, xiii. Klipstein, editha, 230. Klopstock, robert (1899–1972), 126. Klug, christian, 23. Kobel, erwin, 63, 70–2, 74, 75. Kohl, aage von (1877–1946), danish author, 229. Kohlschmidt, Werner, 216. Kraft, Werner (1896–1991), german-israeli author and critic, 39. Kraus, Karl (1874–1936), austrian author and philosopher, xi, 31, 38, 93, 105, 157–69. Kütemeyer, Wilhelm, 201. lagerlöf, selma (1858–1949), swedish author, xii. lange, Wolfgang, 130. lavater, Johann Kaspar (1741–1801), swiss poet, 147, 149. leibniz, baron gottfried Wilhelm von (1646–1716), german philosopher and mathematician, 37. lepel, bernhard von (1818–85), german author, 64.

253

lequier, Jules (1814–62), french philosopher, 3. lessing, gotthold ephraim (1729–81), german writer and philosopher, x, 50, 55. lichtenberg, georg christoph (1742–99), german physicist and writer, 167. liszt, franz (1811–86), Hungarian composer, 16. lodge, david (b. 1935), english novelist, xii. lukács, georg (1885–1971), Hungarian philosopher, novelist and literary critic, 141, 142, 175, 176. lund, Henriette (1829–1909), niece of søren Kierkegaard, 117, 216–23 passim. luther, martin (1483–1546), german Protestant theologian, 32. magnussen, rikard, 107. maltzahn, carl Hans friedrich (1797–1868), 66. manger, Philip, 84. mann, Heinrich (1871–1950), german author, 172, 175. mann, thomas (1875–1955), german author, xi, 33, 171–93, 239. marcus, Judith, 175, 180. marx, Karl (1818–83), german philosopher and economist, 238. mayer, Hans, 84, 86. mephistopheles, 148, 186. merrill, reed, 130. meyer, raphael, 117, 214–22 passim. miethe, Helge, 118, 132. mingels, annette, 48. minotaur, 54. moenius, georg (1890–1953), german catholic journalist, 167. molière, i.e., Jean baptiste Poquelin (1622–73), french dramatist, x. monrad, olaf Peder, 117, 121. mozart, Wolfgang amadeus (1756–91), austrian composer, 82, 154, 186–8.

254

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

müller, götz, 204, 205, 210. munch, edvard (1863–1944), norwegian painter, xii. musil, robert (1880–1942), austrian author, xi, 31, 36, 195–212. muth, carl (1867–1944), german publicist, 93. nádas, Péter (b. 1942), Hungarian author, xiii. nádherný von broutin, sidonie (1885–1950), 227, 229, 230. nebuchadnezzar, 52. nestroy, Johann nepomuk (1801–62), austrian dramatist and actor, 58. newman, John Henry (1801–90), english cardinal, 94, 103, 104, 108. nietzsche, friedrich (1844–1900), german philosopher, 38, 105, 142, 143, 152, 153, 176, 177, 181, 183, 208, 215, 243. norlind, ernst (1877–1951), swedish artist, 215. novalis, baron friedrich von Hardenberg (1772–1801), german lyric poet, 180. o’conner, flannery (1925–64), american author, xii. oehlenschläger, adam (1779–1850), danish poet, x. oeser, oscar a. (1904–83), australian psychologist, 37. olafson, frederick a., american philosopher, 131. olsen, regine (1822–1904), xi, 117, 119, 120, 127, 142, 214, 218, 221, 222, 227. ovid, 177. Pascal, blaise (1623–62), french mathematician, physicist and philosopher, 104, 105, 144, 167. Percy, Walker (1916–90), american author, xii.

Pessoa, fernando (1888–1935), Portuguese writer, xii. Peterson, erik (1890–1960), german catholic theologian, 98. Pfabigan, alfred, 160. Picard, max (1888–1965), swiss philosopher, 146. Plato, 55, 144, 203, 204. Pringsheim, Katia (1883–1980), 171. Proust, marcel (1871–1922), french novelist, 32. Quehl, Ryno (1821–64), German politician and author, 61, 62, 70, 72. raabe, anne, 1. rathenau, Walter (1867–1922), german author and politician, 206, 209. reinhardt, stephan, 5. rest, Walter, 46. richter, Hans Werner (1908–93), german writer, 3. ries, Wiebrecht, 130. rilke, rainer maria (1875–1926), german poet, xi, 62, 141, 142, 213–35. robertson, ritchie, 130. rodenberg, Julius (1831–1914), german publisher, 61, 66. rodin, auguste (1840–1917), french sculptor, 213, 215, 224. rougemont, denis de (1906–85), swiss writer, 142. rusterholz, Peter, 48. sábato, ernesto (1911–2011), argentinian writer, xii. sadeh, Pinhas (1929–94), Polish-born israeli novelist, xiii. sartre, Jean-Paul (1905–80), french philosopher, 87, 115, 129, 154. savonarola, girolamo (1452–98), italian religious reformer, 38. schaeder, Hans Heinrich, 201. schaufelberger, fritz, 130.

Index of Persons scheler, max (1874–1928), german philosopher, 36, 93, 105. schelling, friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von (1775–1854), german philosopher, 124. schiller, friedrich von (1759–1805), german poet, x, xi. schlegel, august Wilhelm von (1767–1845), german critic, 68. schlegel, friedrich von (1772–1829), german romantic writer, xi, 239. schlick, moritz (1882–1936), german philosopher, 31. schmiedinger, Heinrich, 23. schmitt, carl (1888–1985), german jurist and philosopher, 98. scholem, gershom (1897–1982), germanborn israeli philosopher, 161. Schoolfield, George, 227. schopenhauer, arthur (1788–1860), german philosopher, 153, 158, 177, 181. schreiber, ferdinand (1877–1942), 92. schrempf, christoph (1860–1944), german Protestant theologian, 46, 63, 84, 93, 99, 116, 141, 175. schulz, Heiko, 118, 124, 128, 174, 175. scribe, augustin eugène (1791–1861), french dramatic author, x. seewald, richard (1889–1976), 98. shakespeare, William (1564–1616), english dramatist, x, 49, 154, 158. sheppard, richard W., 124, 128. sisyphus, 25. socrates, x, 48, 55, 103, 126, 149, 197, 199, 202–4. sokel, Walter H., 131. solger, Karl Wilhelm ferdinand (1780–1819), german philosopher and aesthetic theorist, x. sørensen, villy (1929–2001), danish author, xii. spinoza, baruch (1632–77), dutch philosopher, 37. stampa, gaspara (1523–54), italian poet, 223.

255

steiner, george (b. 1929), american literary critic, xii. stifter, adalbert (1805–68), austrian writer, 158. storm, theodor (1817–88), german author, 64, 175. strelitz, Princess caroline of (1821–76), 66. strindberg, august (1849–1912), swedish author, xii, 105. strowick, elisabeth, 20. styron, William (1925–2006), american author, xii. tauber, Herbert, 129. tieck, Johann ludwig (1773–1853), german poet, xi. till eulenspiegel, xi. tillich, Paul (1886–1965), german-american Protestant theologian, 186. timm, edward, 166. tolstoy, leo (1828–1909), russian author, 105, 213, 226. trakl, georg (1887–1914), austrian poet, 229. unamuno, miguel de (1864–1936), spanish philosopher, novelist and essayist, 213. untermeyer, Jean starr (1886–1970), american writer and translator, 39. vaget, Hans-rudolf, 185. valéry, Paul (1871–1945), french poet, 151. varlin, i.e., Willy guggenheim (1900–77), swiss painter, 49, 50. virchow, rudolf (1821–1902), german physician, 92. virgil, 94, 95, 100. vollmoeller, mathilde (1876–1943), german painter, 225, 226. Waggerl, Karl Heinrich (1897–1973), austrian author, 36. Wagner, richard (1813–83), german composer, 171.

256

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

Wahl, Jean (1888–1974), french philosopher, 129. Waiblinger, Wilhelm (1804–30), german poet, 70, 73. Walser, martin (b. 1927), german author, xi, 237–47. Walser, robert (1878–1956), german speaking swiss writer, 240. Wedekind, frank (1864–1918), german playwright, 158. Wessel, Johan Herman (1742–85), danish playwright and poet, x. Westhoff, clara (1878–1954), 215. Wijkmark, carl-Henning (b. 1934), swedish author, xii.

Wilamowitz-moellendorff, ulrich von (1848–1931), german philologist, 92. Wilhelm ii (1859–1941), german emperor, 199. Winther, christian (1796–1876), danish poet, xi. Wittgenstein, ludwig (1889–1951), austrian philosopher, 96, 141. Wolff, Kurt (1887–1963), german publisher, 167. zambrano, maría (1904–91), spanish essayist and philosopher, xiii. zinn, ernst, 143.

index of subjects

absolute, 25–7, 32, 38, 102. absolute and relative, 26, 176. absurd, 22, 79, 104, 129, 154, 185, 207. acoustical illusion, 26. aesthetics, the aesthetic, 2, 9, 11, 12, 25, 34, 35, 38, 48, 71, 72, 76, 80–87, 95, 96, 101, 103, 105, 147, 152, 160, 166, 173, 177, 188, 238, 241. alienation, 19, 119, 201, 225, 238. ambiguity, 26, 204. anguish, see “anxiety.” anthropology, 17, 109n, 144. anti-semitism, 161, 206, 207. anxiety, xii, 33, 36, 73, 75, 76, 146, 148, 153, 196. appropriation, 204. approximation, 20. attack on christendom, 62, 152, 153, 189. authenticity, 123, 199, 208, 223, 232. authority, x, 99, 106. bible, 123, 127, 150, 160, 181, 209. boredom, 24, 25, 82. care, 223, 224. catholicism, 94, 98, 109, 166. choice, 7, 10, 11, 67, 71, 76, 80, 81, 83, 84, 129, 188, 241. christendom, 62, 106, 108, 143, 152, 164, 167, 189. christianity, 21, 23, 24, 39, 51, 53, 82, 94, 95, 103, 105, 107, 123, 143, 144, 146, 148, 152, 166, 167, 187, 188, 230. christology, 52. comedy, 20–22, 49, 51.

communication, 20, 25, 103, 105, 106, 143, 241. indirect, 21, 55, 126, 237, 238, 240, 243. community, 104n, 184. conscience, 38, 106, 159, 178. contradiction, 21–25, 46, 103, 145, 190, 206. Corsair, The, 69, 102, 159, 161–4. creation, 51. credo quia absurdum, 50. crowd, 149, 150. death, 15, 17, 18, 24, 177, 179, 181, 188, 213, 230, 231. death of the author, ix. deception, 24, 149, 150. decision (see also “choice”), 6–11, 21, 26, 46, 49, 54, 86, 106–8, 123, 205. democracy, 64. demonic, the, 148, 185–8, 208, 209. Der Brenner, xi, 31, 33, 93, 96, 101, 117, 141, 158, 159, 163, 175, 214, 229. desire, 187. despair, 11, 15–18, 22, 24, 49, 74, 82–5 passim, 122, 128. devil, 174, 185–8. Die Fackel, 31, 157–67. dizziness, 75, 76, 148, 208. see also “vertigo.” double-reflection, 21. drama, x, 44, 50, 54, 143, 152–4. duty, 10, 11, 72, 74, 219. earnestness, 205, 231. either-or, 176, 205. envy, 206.

258

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

eternity, 25, 179, 181–3, 188, 228, 231. ethics, the ethical, 2, 9–12, 21, 34, 35, 38, 48, 69, 71–6, 82–7, 101, 103, 105, 123, 130, 147, 166, 180, 189, 209, 210, 241. evil, 35, 36, 76, 185. exception, 104, 200, 209. existence, 2, 7, 8, 16–25, 71, 72, 76, 79, 82, 86, 87, 106, 130, 143, 150, 151, 154, 177, 201, 213, 239–41. existentialism, 81, 87, 115, 129, 154, 176. Fædrelandet, 62. faith, 22–6, 44, 53, 54, 69, 72–4, 83, 94, 103, 106–8, 124, 127, 131, 147, 151–4, 202, 240, 244. fall, the, 150. fascism, 171, 173, 198, 200. fear, 17, 32, 73–6, 85. finitude/infinity, 21, 25–7, 50–52, 75, 124, 179, 183, 225, 232. freedom, 2–11, 64, 75, 76, 80–84, 120, 148, 154, 208. gadfly, 199, 202, 204. god, 24, 27, 32, 34, 38, 39, 49, 51, 54, 74, 76, 95, 103, 104, 107, 120, 124, 125, 145, 151, 152, 159, 166, 179, 181–4, 188, 190, 224. god-man, 50, 147, 151, 152. grace, 52, 53. guilt, 3, 6, 76, 85, 86, 128, 144, 146, 184.

immediacy/reflection, 11, 72, 106, 152, 224, 225, 232. immortality, 153. inauthenticity, 200, 208. incarnation, 24, 148. incognito, 52, 242. indirect communication, see “communication.” individual, the, 4–10, 48, 54, 145–8, 166, 199, 208. see also “single individual.” individualism, individuality, 53. infinite, absolute negativity, 203, 239. infinity, see “finitude.” inner and outer, 26, 34, 147, 148, 240. innocence, 73. inwardness, 105, 130, 175, 189. irony, 16, 38, 39, 48, 50, 126, 127, 130, 149, 197, 200, 204–10, 237–40. romantic, 190, 239. socratic, 203, 204, 239. irrationalism, irrationality, 102, 107. isolation, 10, 84, 94, 199. jest, 190. joy, 73, 75, 184. Judaism, Jews, 123, 206, 207. Kantianism, 34, 35, 37. Kitsch, 35. knight of faith, 73, 124.

happiness, 69, 76, 84, 187. Hegelianism, 19, 101, 196, 205. hero, 16–18, 25, 27, 48, 50, 131, 153. history, 6, 50, 152, 185, 200, 202, 237. Hochland, 93. hope, 23, 25, 51, 129. humor, 21–3, 27, 39, 48–50, 145, 189, 207.

language, 20, 38, 100, 165, 240, 234, 244. last Judgment, 125. leap, 74, 83, 103, 107, 127, 208. leveling, 102, 197, 200, 206, 208, 210. life-view, 10, 71, 72, 103, 174. logos, 94. love, 51, 52, 72, 106, 187, 227. erotic, 184. of god, 125.

idealism, german, 37. illness, see “sickness.” imitation, 151.

madness, 15, 18, 27. marriage, 69, 82, 119, 121, 123, 131. martyrdom, 163.

Index of Subjects marxism, 204. meaning, meaningfulness, ix, x, 9, 79, 204–6. mediation, 196. melancholy, 70–73, 83, 123, 142, 146, 228. miracles, 162–5. modern breakthrough, xi, xii. modernism, 65. modernity, 38, 63, 79, 98, 99, 176, 181. moment, the, 8, 25, 26, 183. morality, 202, 205. music, 82, 174, 185–9, 222. mysticism, mystics, 148. national socialism, 31, 95. naturalism, 65. negativity, negation, 21, 22, 123, 197, 202–4, 207, 210, 238–40, 244. nihilism, 3, 23, 154. nothingness, nothing, 36, 49, 73, 148, 201. novel, ix, 6, 24, 38, 39, 63, 66, 83, 175, 203. offense, 53. paradox, 53, 54, 74, 103, 106, 143–7, 152, 199, 210. passion, 10, 11, 16, 84, 107, 190, 206. phenomenology, 148. philistine, bourgeois, 35. philosophy of history, 31, 34, 37. physiognomy, 143, 146–54. poetry, 25, 39, 65, 150, 154, 215. politics, 67, 96, 172. positivism, 31, 37. possibility, 4, 6, 7, 23, 26, 27, 84, 202. postmodernism, ix. press, the, 69, 159, 160–64. proofs of god’s existence, 39. Protestantism, 32, 84, 164. pseudonymity, pseudonyms, ix, x, xiii, 24, 107. psychoanalysis, 149, 151, 184. psychology, 31, 36, 66, 68, 146–9, 153, 154, 196, 210. public, the, 149, 163, 166.

259

qualitative difference, 206. rationalism, rationality, reason, 34, 94, 131. recollection, 86, 182. reconciliation, 79, 87. redemption, 7, 8, 178. reflection, see “immediacy/reflection.” repetition, 26, 82–5, 105, 130, 179, 182. resignation, 73, 239. resoluteness, 96. responsibility, 3, 6, 10, 11, 76, 81, 144, 159. resurrection, 24. revelation, 24–7, 94, 107. revocation, 22, 205. revolution of 1848, 61, 64, 67. romanticism, 153. royal theater, the, x. sacrifice, 24, 27, 124, 127, 184. scandal, see “offense.” schleswig Wars, 62, 65, 67. secularization, 37. seducer, seduction, 74, 75, 82. seriousness, 22, 27, 39, 205. shame, 184, 213. sickness unto death, 15–18, 72, 74, 178. sin, 26, 50, 53, 76, 148, 178, 183. original, 147. sincerity, 108, 209. single individual, the, 143–7, 150, 151, 210. skepticism, 50. socratic method, 103. solitude, 7, 10, 11, 54, 121, 130. speculative philosophy, 34, 54. spirit, 37, 63, 70, 99, 100, 126, 150–53, 174, 178. stages, 1, 2, 71, 85, 105, 177, 187. subjective thinking, subjective thinker, 54, 165. subjective truth, 7. subjectivism, 107. subjectivity, 38, 44, 53–5, 94, 106, 107. suffering, 130, 179, 209, 238. suicide, 15, 66, 74. suspension, see “teleological suspension.”

260

Kierkegaard’s Influence on Literature, Criticism and Art

system, systematic philosophy, 19, 153.

unhappy consciousness, 244.

teleological suspension, 180, 210. theater, 17, 21, 44–54, 71, 82, 144, 150, 154. thought and being, 19. time, 25, 178, 179, 183. tragedy, 20–22, 49, 50.

value, 31–7, 94, 102. vertigo, 75.

uncertainty, 4, 239, 240, 244.

women, 86. World War i, xi, 2, 31, 32, 95, 98, 146, 160, 195, 198, 215, 229. World War ii, 5, 6, 172, 173.