Theodor W. Adorno, Siegfried Kracauer, and the Erotics of Friendship Johannes Von Moltke University of Michigan

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Theodor W. Adorno, Siegfried Kracauer, and the Erotics of Friendship Johannes Von Moltke University of Michigan Criticism Volume 51 | Issue 4 Article 6 2009 Teddie and Friedel: Theodor W. Adorno, Siegfried Kracauer, and the Erotics of Friendship Johannes von Moltke University of Michigan Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/criticism Recommended Citation von Moltke, Johannes (2009) "Teddie and Friedel: Theodor W. Adorno, Siegfried Kracauer, and the Erotics of Friendship," Criticism: Vol. 51: Iss. 4, Article 6. Available at: http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/criticism/vol51/iss4/6 TeDDIe aND My dear Teddie, my dear friend! FrIeDel: I arrived at noon today all TheoDor W. torn, wrapped up. Now I aDorNo, want to write straight away. SIegFrIeD During these two days, I again KracaUer, aND felt such an agonizing love for you that it seems to me as if I The eroTIcS oF could not endure alone. Sev- FrIeNDShIP ered from you, my existence Johannes von Moltke is stale, I don’t know how this can go on.1 The letter is dated 5 april 1923 “Der Riß der Welt geht auch durch and, under the letterhead of the mich”: Briefwechsel 1923–1966 by prestigious Frankfurter Zeitung (was Theodor W. adorno and Siegfried this written surreptitiously at the Kracauer, volume 7 of Briefe und office?!), its sender—Friedel— Briefwechsel, by Theodor W. ador- implores Teddie to “please read no, edited by Wolfgang Schopf. alone!” (B 9, emphasis in original). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, So tortured, so steamy is this love 2008. Pp. 772. 52.50 euros, cloth; letter that Friedel asks Teddie to 32.00 euros, paper. destroy it: “[I]n any case, no word of it, this is secret, who could be al- lowed to see me thus in my true gestalt?” (B 11). Fortunately for us, Teddie nei- ther destroyed this extraordinary confession nor lost it in the tumul- tuous decades that followed. Pre- served in the Theodor W. adorno archive in Frankfurt, the letter now stands as the first in a corre- spondence that spanned almost half a century and fills some seven hundred pages in the recently pub- lished and meticulously annotated Briefwechsel (correspondence) be- tween Theodor W. adorno and Siegfried Kracauer: Teddie and Friedel. These two key figures in the history of critical Theory had Criticism, Fall 2009, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 683–694. ISSN: 0011-1589. 683 © 2010 Wayne State University Press, Detroit, MI 48201-1309. 684 johaNNeS VoN MolTKe met through a mutual friend to- started out as a leading cultural ward the end of World War I. In critic during the years of the Wei- adorno’s understated recollection mar republic, when he worked for from the early 1960s, “an intensive the influential Frankfurter Zeitung, contact sprang up between” the editing its cultural section and two men after that initial meeting.2 supplying regular film reviews This contact would influence their alongside important essays (later respective distinguished careers as collected in The Mass Ornament7). two of the leading intellectuals of While he also managed to publish the twentieth century. a book on sociology and an auto- Both men have achieved a mea- biographical novel entitled Ginster sure of fame in the fields of philos- during these years, his stature ophy and cultural studies, though among intellectuals of his day was during their lifetimes the younger cemented by the influence he quickly came to outshine his men- wielded at the Frankfurter Zeitung: tor. Theodor adorno (1903–69), it was journalistic first and schol- the philosopher, was a member of arly second (though the lasting rel- the original Institute for Social re- evance of Kracauer’s work resides, search in Frankfurt and New York perhaps, in his ability to undo that city. Together with Max hork- opposition itself).8 The Nazi sei- heimer, he became the institute’s zure of power forced Kracauer director after its return to ger- into exile, first in Paris—where he many in 1949. adorno’s talent and completed but did not publish a his enormous productivity are second novel entitled Georg (more clearly in evidence throughout on this later), and published a “so- these letters: with evident satisfac- cial biography” of Jacques offen- tion he reports concluding multi- bach. The latter earned him severe ple major works, simultaneously criticism from adorno for what he embarking on new projects and considered its undialectical method publishing at a frenzied pace— and lack of attention to the formal, from his early monograph on aesthetic aspects of offenbach’s Kierkegaard3 through the famous music. In 1941, Kracauer managed Dialectic of Enlightenment4 to his to escape europe via lisbon and reckoning with heidegger in The made his way to New York, where Jargon of Authenticity5 and his long- he would cobble together a living gestating philosophical summa, and a career by publishing journal Negative Dialectics,6 not to mention articles and securing grants to sup- the numerous anthologies of his port his work at the Museum of own essays that began to be pub- Modern art (MoMa) film library. lished regularly after his return to The latter would eventually lead to germany. Siegfried Kracauer (1889– the publication of the first of his 1966), on the other hand, had two best-known works, From Ca- ON aDorNo aND KracaUer’S BRiEFWEChsEl 685 ligari to hitler: A Psychological his- also affected their writing, and the tory of the German Film,9 which times during which this horizon is would be followed, about a decade lost from view in the exchange of later, by Theory of Film: The Re- petty formalities, or obscured by demption of Physical Reality;10 the bitterness of mutual recrimina- though both of these books have tions merely prove its enduring also received their share of criti- relevance ex negativo. Indeed, Frie- cism, they were innovative and del’s “first” letter not only inti- pathbreaking in their time, and re- mates the bonds that connect the main central to film studies curri- two men until their deaths in 1966 cula to this day. Kracauer’s final and 1969, respectively; it also spells book on historiography, which re- out the terms, indeed the erotics, of mained incomplete when he died the uneven, or “troubled” friend- unexpectedly of pneumonia in ship that will emerge:13 1966, was published posthumously as history: The last Things Before My condition is ghastly. I fear the last.11 so terribly the evanescence of that which is most dear to * * * me, what appears to me as the meaning or fulfillment of Voluminous though it is, this cor- my existence. Do you believe respondence remains incomplete, in the eternal duration of our since for unknown reasons many friendship? It would always of Kracauer’s letters in particular need to be presence, living have been lost. In other words, presence, and how could that Kracauer’s missive of 5 april 1923, be? I tremble out of fear for composed upon his return from a its endurance, you are 19, two-day sojourn with adorno in I am 34. You are taking a the aptly named southwestern turn, you need to traverse the town of amorbach, could hardly world, at 19 one cannot vouch have been the first letter exchanged for oneself, not even you. In between the two friends.12 Nor other words, it will break into can it be considered characteristic, pieces, and there I shall lie. pars pro toto, of the correspondence are you not much more con- whose tone would shift drastically sistent [geschlossen] than I? I and repeatedly over the following am an abyss and like a young decades. and yet, this letter sets up boy I lack a foothold. Never a utopian horizon of love— will I become a mature man, whether romantic, platonic, sexual, I know not what to do. (B 9) and/or intellectual—that inevita- bly affects the reading of all subse- love reverses the positions: Kra- quent exchanges; undoubtedly, it cauer, the older man and adorno’s 686 johaNNeS VoN MolTKe erstwhile mentor, becomes a flail- ing—and without knowing ing young boy and imputes to his anything about me—that I adolescent friend the maturity was homosexual and absent (consistency [Geschlossenheit]) of with a distant friend; and adulthood that he (Kracauer) will this at a moment when I never attain. The resulting insecu- was thinking of you very in- rity on Kracauer’s part, which sets tensely. In other words, I be- the tone for the letter, would per- lieve I am fanatically faithful sist in various forms—whether as to you, much more faithful the gnawing uncertainty about the than I would have thought relationship with adorno (which to be, since I was, after all, the latter names in subsequent let- beholden to your sugges- ters as based on a lack of trust); or, tion that it was now all over. in later years, as the apparent need (B 54) to control his own image, to rectify and limit the ways in which When adorno does report a bud- adorno (and others, by extension) ding affair to Kracauer from Vi- could read his works. enna the following month, The homosocial dimension of misogynist aspersions regarding this friendship, too, is sounded in the “literati girl” (literatenmäd- the first letter: the way in which chen) in question are coupled with the relationship between adorno the assurance that “she knows of us and Kracauer is triangulated, in- [i.e., Teddie and Friedel] and our tersected by women who simulta- bonds [Gebundenheit] what she, as neously sustain and threaten its a woman, can know—the fact that dynamic: “I must also tell you that she obstinately subsumes me under your report about your relation- §175 for this cannot be avoided” ship with gretel did pain me (B 88).
Recommended publications
  • Hansen, Cinema and Experience: Siegfried Kracauer, Walter
    Cinema and Experience WEIMAR AND NOW: GERMAN CULTURAL CRITICISM Edward Dimendberg, Martin Jay, and Anton Kaes, General Editors Cinema and Experience Siegfried Kracauer, Walter Benjamin, and Th eodor W. Adorno Miriam Bratu Hansen UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS Berkeley Los Angeles London University of California Press, one of the most distinguished university presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 2012 by Th e Regents of the University of California Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hansen, Marian Bratu, 1949–2011. Cinema and experience : Siegfried Kracauer, Walter Benjamin, and Th eodor W. Adorno / Miriam Bratu Hansen. p. cm.—(Weimar and now: German cultural criticism ; 44) Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 978-0-520-26559-2 (cloth : alk. paper) isbn 978-0-520-26560-8 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Motion pictures. 2. Kracauer, Siegfried, 1889–1966—Criticism and interpretation. 3. Benjamin, Walter, 1892–1940—Criticism and interpretation. 4. Adorno, Th eodor W., 1903–1969—Criticism and interpretation. I. Title. PN1994.H265 2012 791.4309—dc23 2011017754 Manufactured in the United States of America 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 In keeping with a commitment to support environmentally responsible and sustainable printing practices, UC Press has printed this book on Rolland Enviro100, a 100 percent postconsumer fi ber paper that is FSC certifi ed, deinked, processed chlorine-free, and manufactured with renewable biogas energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Mediations: the Theoretical Space of Siegfried Kracauer's Ginster
    Eric Jarosinski Urban Mediations: The Theoretical Space of Siegfried Kracauer’s Ginster Siegfried Kracauer’s notion that “reality is a construction” serves as a starting point for an exploration of urban space in his 1928 novel Ginster. Focusing on the work’s central theoretical and spatial figure, the “mosaic”, this essay argues that Kracauer challenges us to think of urban space as multiply mediated, especially when it would seem to be represented or experienced most directly. The analysis focuses specifically on linguistic mediation, as the traffic between the city as mate- rial fact and as representation is articulated within literary space. Set in opposition to figures of transparency throughout the novel, primarily in the glass and steel of proto- Modernist architecture, language becomes the object, agent, and scene of a complex web of forces inscribed into and as urban space. These “spatial turns” of Kracauer’s metaphors and tropes speak to the current theoretical challenge of con- ceiving of urban space as both material and abstract. Ginster suggests that articu- lating the tensions between the two best defines a more illuminating and dynamic notion of space itself. “Where is Kracauer?” Walter Benjamin and Theodor W. Adorno pose this question frequently in their correspondence throughout the 1920s and 1930s as the two friends attempt to keep track of the location, both geographically and intellectually, of their longtime “extraterritorial” colleague and friend. While his work for the famed Frankfurter Zeitung may have given him the most public profile of the three, Siegfried Kracauer was indeed the hardest to situate precisely. His wide-ranging interests and distaste for the philo- sophically systematic and politically doctrinaire led to an extremely produc- tive intellectual exchange, but also misunderstanding and disagreement with friends Adorno, Benjamin, and others.
    [Show full text]
  • Film As Language: the Politics of Early Film Theory (1920-1960) the Case of Siegfried Kracauer As Émigré Intellectual
    Film as Language: The Politics of Early Film Theory (1920-1960) The case of Siegfried Kracauer as émigré intellectual Markus Rheindorf, with Alexandra Ganser and Julia Pühringeri IFK Internationales Forschungszentrum Kulturwissenschaften International Reserach Center for Cultural Studies Reichsratsstraße 17 1010 Vienna, Austria Tel.: (+43-1) 504 11 26-15 Fax: (+43-1) 504 11 32 [email protected] http://www.ifk.ac.at Department of Applied Linguistics University of Vienna Berggasse 11 1090 Vienna, Austria [email protected] www.univie.ac.at/linguistics http://homepage.univie.ac.at/Markus.Rheindorf/ That any given politics is largely constructed through and in language; that language and language use are always political and that therefore there is not only a language of politics but also a politics language; and that the sciences – whether social, natural, etc. – construct a politics inasmuch as they are a social phenomenon largely situated in the domain of language: these are three critical positions to which my argument here responds. Building on these, I would like to propose a new focus for research in the field of language and politics: the correspondence between a given political position (within the sciences) and a specific understanding and use of the notion of “language” as such. In this, I am taking a detour through a historically specific case: the discourse of early film theory, in particular the work of film critic and theorist Siegfried Kracauer (1889 – 1966). The early history of the now institutionalized discipline of film studies, as I shall argue, provides an intriguing example of the way in which the language of science and theory articulates a politics (and is articulated by politics) by way of its changing use of the term “language” – in this case, the “language of film”.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Fascist Aesthetics from Weimar to Moma: Siegfried Kracauer & the Promise of Abstraction for Critical Theory
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School March 2019 Anti-Fascist Aesthetics from Weimar to MoMA: Siegfried Kracauer & the Promise of Abstraction for Critical Theory Maxximilian Seijo University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the Film and Media Studies Commons Scholar Commons Citation Seijo, Maxximilian, "Anti-Fascist Aesthetics from Weimar to MoMA: Siegfried Kracauer & the Promise of Abstraction for Critical Theory" (2019). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/7933 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Anti-Fascist Aesthetics from Weimar to MoMA: Siegfried Kracauer & the Promise of Abstraction for Critical Theory by Maxximilian Seijo A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts with a concentration in Film Studies Department of Humanities and Cultural Studies College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Scott Ferguson, Ph.D Andrew Berish, Ph.D Brendan Cook, Ph.D Date of Approval: March 8, 2019 Keywords: Fascism, German Studies, MMT, Film, Modernism, Midcentury, Marxism Copyright © 2019, Maxximilian Seijo Table of Contents Abstract ...........................................................................................................................................iii
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Cinema and Culture of the Weimar
    Cinema and Culture of the Weimar Republic Draft Syllabus Instructor: Dr Axel Bangert [email protected] Course Description: Weimar cinema is not only a defining period in German and, in fact, international film history, but also a key to understanding fundamental aspects of German society and culture in the interwar period. This course will trace the extraordinary development of German film between 1919 and 1933 while at the same time situating Weimar cinema in its historical moment and relating it to other forms of cultural expression, most importantly, literature. Firstly, we will look at Weimar cinema in terms of the experimentation with and innovation of film language, with the influence of Expressionism as well as the introduction of sound as major points of reference. And we will see how the development of Weimar cinema was accompanied by critical as well as theoretical debates about what film is or should be, both as art form and political medium. Secondly, we will look at Weimar cinema as interacting with broader transformations in society and culture. For instance, film was both part of and shaped by the modernisation of life occurring in interwar Germany, reflecting deep changes in social relationships, not least in terms of gender and sexuality. Finally, we will discuss historical interpretations of Weimar cinema as bearing the imprint of the traumas of the First World War as well as foreshadowing the rise of Adolf Hitler as charismatic leader. As a course in “Expressive Culture”, “Cinema and Culture of the Weimar Republic” seeks to introduce you to the study and appreciation of artistic creation and to foster your ongoing engagement with the arts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Philosophy in Siegfried Kracauer's
    PECULIAR THEORY: THE PROBLEM OF PHILOSOPHY IN SIEGFRIED KRACAUER’S THEORY OF FILM Nicholas Alexander Warr Submitted for the qualification of PhD University Of East Anglia School of Film, Television and Media Studies 2013 © “This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that no quotation from the thesis, nor any information derived therefrom, may be published without the author’s prior, written consent”. ABSTRACT The republication of Theory of Film: The Redemption of Physical Reality by Siegfried Kracauer (1889 – 1966) in 1997 marked not just the highpoint of a period of renewed interest in his work, a period initiated by a series of events organized to mark the centenary of his birth, but also the limit of his scholarly influence. Though enthusiasm for his early sociological and cultural criticism written in Frankfurt and Berlin during the 1920s and 1930s continues to permeate research in numerous other disciplines within the humanities, his film theory continues to have little or no impact on the debates that currently define film studies. The reason for this, I argue, relates to the problematic role of philosophy in his film theory. Focusing primarily on Theory of Film, I examine in detail what makes Kracauer’s theory peculiar; peculiar in the sense that it belongs specifically to the film medium and peculiar in regard to the ambiguous philosophical claims that distinguish it from subsequent methods of film analysis. The contemporary image of Kracauer as a cultural philosopher, I argue, restricts how we read the relationship between film and philosophy in his work.
    [Show full text]
  • Siegfried Kracauer, Walter Benjamin, and Theodor W. Adorno 2012
    Repositorium für die Medienwissenschaft Malte Hagener Cinema and experience – Siegfried Kracauer, Walter Benjamin, and Theodor W. Adorno 2012 https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/15066 Veröffentlichungsversion / published version Rezension / review Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Hagener, Malte: Cinema and experience – Siegfried Kracauer, Walter Benjamin, and Theodor W. Adorno. In: NECSUS. European Journal of Media Studies, Jg. 1 (2012), Nr. 2, S. 333–337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/15066. Erstmalig hier erschienen / Initial publication here: https://doi.org/10.5117/NECSUS2012.2.HAGE Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Creative Commons - This document is made available under a creative commons - Namensnennung - Nicht kommerziell - Keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 Attribution - Non Commercial - No Derivatives 4.0 License. For Lizenz zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu dieser Lizenz more information see: finden Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 Book RevIEWS Notes 1. European Nightmares. An International Conference on European Horror Cinema, MIRIAD and Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, 1-2 June 2006. Although the conference is not mentioned anywhere in the book, the core of the collection comes from the speakers’ presentations. With respect to the conference programme, the collection broadens its area of investigation to Northern and Eastern Europe. 2. See, for instance: Ken Gelder (ed.), The Horror Reader (London-New York: Routledge, 2000); Mark Jancovich (ed.), Horror: The Film Reader (London-New York: Routledge, 2002); Stephen Prince (ed.), The Horror Film (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2004); Steffen Hantke (ed.), Horror Cinema: Creating and Marketing Fear (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2004); Richard Bégin and Laurent Guido (eds), L’horreur au cinema (Special Issue of CINéMAS, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Adorno, Benjamin, and Kracauer on the Politics of Sensory Perception Graça P
    Adorno, Benjamin, and Kracauer on the Politics of Sensory Perception Graça P. Corrêa1 Hansen, Miriam Bratu. 2012. Cinema and Experience: Siegfried Kracauer, Walter Benjamin and Theodor W. Adorno. Berkeley: University of California Press, 380 pp. Miriam Hansen’s thorough investigation and close reading of the writings on film and mass culture by Siegfried Kracauer, Walter Ben- jamin and Theodor W. Adorno, makes her book a major contribution to contemporary Film and Media Studies, given that it defies commonly held assumptions and reveals novel theorizations by these three key thinkers from the Frankfurt School of critical theory. Hansen’s critical exploration of Siegfried Kracauer’s theories is particularly welcome, since—apart from his canonical book, Theo- ry of Film (1960), which often appears in Cinema Studies programs— his writings are barely known outside of German-language critical debates, and may bring timely ideas to the discussion on the fate of film and photography in our current digital media world. As Hansen explains in Part I and IV of the book, Kracauer’s film theory has its motor in a particular relationship to the world of things, within a singular sort of materialism inspired by a combina- tion of Jewish messianism, Gnosticism, and Marxist thought. Beyond revealing things in their habitual interdependence with human life, and capturing the traces of social, psychic, erotic relations, film is capable of rendering objects in their material thingness, “of giving the presumably dead world of things a form of speech” (16). Film and photography are therefore the most suitable media to express the Gnostic vision of creation and transformation given the material connection of their images with the world represented, as well as the mortification, fragmentation, framing, and reconfiguration in- volved in cinematic editing and photographic exposure.
    [Show full text]
  • Kracauer on and in Weimar Modernity
    INTRODUCTION 12 Kracauer on and in Weimar Modernity What religion do I confess? None of all those that you have named. And why none? Out of religion. —Goethe, “Xenien,” in Goethe und die Religion, 21 First the Zionist Congress in Basel, then the day before yester- day Lourdes: again and again I come across profound adepts in that kind of demonstrativeness that is called religious.1 —Kracauer to Werner Thormann, 22 September 1927 n the fall of 1927, Siegfried Kracauer was in Basel to report on the fifteenth I Zionist Congress. By this time, Kracauer was a respected writer and editor who was known to have leftist sympathies; he also had carved out his niche as a film critic. He had shown little inclination toward Zionism, and it is uncertain why his employer, the Frankfurter Zeitung (FZ), chose him for this assignment. The year before, his severe criticism of a new translation of the Bible by Franz Rosenzweig and Martin Buber had angered many Jewish intellectuals. Indeed, so Kracauer later recollected, Buber had snubbed him during a chance encoun- ter at the conference.2 In general, Kracauer had an ambiguous impression of the congress, and though he recognized the energy and variety of the Zionist movement, his final dispatch struck a skeptical tone. Zionism, he suggested, would find it hard not to become a nationalist movement, and he could not see this as the way forward.3 After filing his report from Basel, Kracauer spent little time reckoning with the dilemmas raised at the Zionist conference, at least in print.
    [Show full text]
  • Peter Szondi's Essays and Lectures on Hölderlin
    DIETER BURDORF What is Different is Good: Peter Szondi’s Essays and Lectures on Hölderlin Friedrich Hölderlin is the only poet to whom Peter Szondi exclusively dedicated one of the four books that he published during his short lifetime, Hölderlin-Studien,1 five essays published by Insel-Verlag in 1967. Three essays Celan-Studien,2 on the poet Paul Celan, were pub- lished posthumously in 1972. Christoph König stressed that Szondi followed Hölderlin’s own theory when he claimed the “priority of lyrical poetry in modern literature” (“Vorrang des Gedichts in der Moderne”).3 In the following paper I will outline the development, the essential features, and the importance of Szondi’s Hölderlin-Studien as well as his university lectures on Hölderlin’s œuvre from 1961 to 1971. Szondi is the last of the intellectuals that can be called “textual scholars”4 in the field of Critical Theory. He was in close contact with other prominent Jewish scholars, including Georg Lukács, Ernst Bloch, Theodor W. Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Siegfried Kracauer, and Ger- shom Scholem. Szondi played an important role together with Adorno and Scholem in preparing the new editions of the works and letters of Walter Benjamin during the 1960s. Born in 1929 in Budapest and a survivor of the Holocaust, Szondi was the youngest of the “textual scholars,” starting his career in the early 1950s. Coming from the mar- gins a lateral entrant, so to speak, he studied Romance and German literatures at the University of Zürich, attending lectures and seminars 1 Peter Szondi, Schriften I, ed. by Jean Bollack et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays / Siegfried Kracauer ; Translated, Edited, and with an Introduction by Thomas Y
    Siegfried Kracauer was one of the twentieth century's most brilliant cultural crit­ ics, a bold and prolific scholar, and an incisive theorist of film. In this volume his important early writings on modern society during the Weimar Republic make their long-awaited appearance in English. This book is a celebration of the masses—their tastes, amusements, and every­ day lives. Taking up the master themes of modernity, such as isolation and alienation, mass culture and urban experience, and the relation between the group and the individual, Kracauer explores a kaleidoscope of topics: shop­ ping arcades, the cinema, bestsellers and their readers, photography, dance, hotel lobbies, Kafka, the Bible, and boredom. For Kracauer, the most revela­ tory facets of modern metropolitan life lie on the surface, in the ephemeral and the marginal. The Mass Ornament today remains a refreshing tribute to popu­ lar culture, and its impressively interdisciplinary essays continue to shed light not only on Kracauer's later work but also on the ideas of the Frankfurt School, the genealogy of film theory and cultural studies, Weimar cultural politics, and, not least, the exigencies of intellectual exile. This volume presents the full scope of his gifts as one of the most wide-ranging and penetrating interpreters of modern life. "Known to the English-language public for the books he wrote after he reached America in 1941, most famously for From Caligari to Hitler, Siegfried Krac­ auer is best understood as a charter member of that extraordinary constella­ tion of Weimar-era intellectuals which has been dubbed retroactively (and mis- leadingly) the Frankfurt School.
    [Show full text]
  • John F. Kennedy-Institut Für Nordamerikastudien
    JOHN F. KENNEDY-INSTITUT FÜR NORDAMERIKASTUDIEN ABTEILUNG FÜR KULTUR Working Paper No. 72/1994 Miriam Bratu Hansen AMERICA, PARIS, THE ALPS: KRACAUER (AND BENJAMIN) ON CINEMA AND MODERNITY Copyright c 1994 by Miriam. Bratu HanSe~ i University of Chicago Chicago, m., U.S.A. AMERICA, PARIS, THE ALPS: KRACAUER (AND BENJAMIN) ON CINEMA AND MODERNITY Miriam Bratu Hansen Genealogies of Modemity On the threshold to the twenty-first century, the cinema may weil seem to be an invention "without a future," as Louis Lumiere had predicted somewhat prematurely in 1896.1 But it is surely not an invention without a past, or pasts, at least judging from the proliferation of events, publications and broadcasts occasioned by the cinema's centennial. What actually constitutes this past, however, and how it figures in history - and helps to figure history -­ remains very much a matter of debate, if not invention. For more than a decade now scholars of early cinema have been shifting the image of that past, from one of a prologue or evolutionary stepping-stone to the cinema that followed (that is, classical Hollywood cinema and its international counterparts) to one of a cinema in its own right, a different kind of cinema. 2 This shift has yielded detailed studies of early conventions of representation and address, of paradigmatically distinct modes of production, exhibition and reception. At the same time, it has opened up the focus of investigation from a more narrowly defined institutional approach to a cross-disciplinary inquiry into modemity, aiming to situate the cinema within a larger set of social, economic, political, and cultural transformations.
    [Show full text]