ShiraMiron Unraveling Heimat – Recontextualizing Gertrud Kolmar’s Das preußische Wappenbuch

1Introduction: differenceand belonging

The call to “disseminate Jewishliteratures” posits achallengerooted in the dou- ble belongingofthe matter in question. While such an attempt seeks to remedy the dearth of scholarlywork on “Jewish literatures” from aseparation from liter- ary studies, it nevertheless continues to perceive them as marked by asignificant difference. However,the natureofthis differencevaries from case to case and affects each particularattempt at dissemination–both in regard to the discussed literarytext as well as its place within the wider discourse.Hence, in order to disseminate Jewishliteratures,one should first carefullyconsider boththe initial separating factors as well as the possibility of adual belonging. This should be done while remaining aware of the presumptions in play, which often serveas the origin and perpetuatingforceofthe ghettoization of the so-called Jewishlit- eratures. In the case of the German-Jewish poet Gertrud Kolmar,her decades-long ex- clusion from the corpus of Germanpoetry bringstogethermatters of historical circumstances, reception history,and literary traditions germane both to her own oeuvreaswellastothe literary discourse from which it was excluded. Her life as aJew in Germanyunderthe Nazi regime, her deportation from Ger- many, and murder in Auschwitz in 1943seemed until not too long agotobe the main lens for the interpretation of her works.¹ Thisbiographical mode of in- terpretation is adirect consequenceofthe fact that Kolmar’sworks werealmost entirelyposthumously published,aprocess thatstarted with the first publication of her last poetry cycle Welten (“Worlds”)in1947, adecade after it was written, and ended with the publicationofthe critical edition of her collected poetry in

 The first major studyofGertrudKolmar’sworkwhich was sinceoften described as adominant influenceonthe research dedicated to the poet written sincethen is Johanna Woltmann’sbio- graphical monograph (1995;cf. Heimann 2012,3,10–11). Arecent example to the biographical tendency is FriederikeHeimann’smonography, which despitearecognition of the problematic natureofsuch an approach (2012,5–31) cannot fullyunchain itself from it.

OpenAccess. ©2020 Shira Miron, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110619003-011 90 ShiraMiron

2003.² The belatedpublication was aresult of the fact thatKolmar,whose first poems werepublished in 1917, did not enter her main productive writing phase until 1927.Although the official ban of publications by Jewish writers was not issuedbythe Reich Chamber of Literature (Reichsschrifttumskammer, RSK) until 1935 (Barbian 2013,153–154,194–196), the political events and at- mosphere complicated the publication situation, as noted by Kolmar herself in aletter to her cousin (2014, 208/2004,159). From 1935 onwards, the few poems published duringKolmar’slifetime wereprinted onlyinJewish newspapers and appeared under her birth name GertrudChodziesner (a para- graph in the 1935 RSK orders prohibited Jewish authors from using apenname). In the years following the war,the publication of her work wasinevitably marked by this historical segregation, which further framed her work as Jewish and prevented its integration into the wider context of Germanpoetry and prose.³ So influential was this initial segregation of Kolmar’swork thatitwas not until the late 1990’sthat the predominantlyGermanlanguagescholarship on Kolmar’spoetry began to slowlyturn away from this biographical framework in favorofawider contextualized reading.⁴ The contributingfactors that led to the scholarlyemphasis on Kolmar’sdif- ferenceinthe Germanliterarylandscapeand consequentlytoher exclusion from the canon cannot be simply dismissed as irrelevant.Nevertheless, the first step in the establishment of an organic relation to the wider literarydiscourse should be acareful consideration and less immediate application of this difference when approaching Kolmar’swork. The following contribution suggests areading

 Foradetailed and most updated discussion of Kolmar’sposthumous publications see Nörte- mann (2005).  An earlyexample is the first publicationofthe 1939 written novella Susanna in an anthology of prose by Jewish writers (Otten 1959). To that kind of publicationsjoins the later discussionof works written by German-Jewish authors under the Nazi regime, which was often founded on an implicit premise that perceivedthe historical circumstances as the keytothe understandingand appreciation of such works. An explicit stanceofsuch aperception that calls for adifferent mode of apprehension of works by German-Jewish authors that werewritten under the Nazi re- gime could be found in Henry Wassermann’sintroduction to the bibliography of Jewish litera- ture written under the third Reich: “Es [the creation under the totalitarian regime and amongst it the Jewish literatureunder the Nazis] kannnur gewertet werden aufdem Hintergrund der po- litischen, sozialen, wirtschaftlichen und religiösen Umstände in Nazi Deutschland.” (Wasser- mann 1989,xii, and cf. Schoor 2010,11–36).  Afirst example of an attempt at awider contextualization of Kolmar’spoetry was offered by Birgit R. Erdle’smonograph Antlitz – Mord – Gesetz: Figuren des Anderen bei Gertrud Kolmar und Emanuel Lévinas (1994). Amorerecent example which traces in Kolmar’spoetry aline of poetic development rather than an autobiographical mirroring sequenceisSilkeNowak’smonograph Sprechende Bilder:Zur Lyrik und Poetik Gertrud Kolmars (2007). Recontextualizing Gertrud Kolmar 91 of Gertrud Kolmar’s1927opening poem of the collection Das preußische Wappen- buch that willseektodefer this difference, thus allowing for aconsideration of an active dialogue from within the wider literary discourse unrestricted to the realm of “Jewishliterature.” Hence, the differentiating, utterlybiographical ele- ments will not be read as the foundation of the understanding of atext unless the readingproves them to be so. In otherwords, the dissemination will be prior to the separation. Such an approach enables the disclosure of mutualaffin- ities that challenges the categorical separation of “Jewishliterature” from “Ger- man literature.”

2First hindrances on the waytoan interpretation of Das preußische Wappenbuch

In the winter of 1927/1928, Kolmar wroteher first major poetic work, acollection of 53 poems titled Das preußische Wappenbuch [The Book of Prussian Coats of Arms]. Each of the poems, arranged in thirteen groups named after Prussian provinces, carries the name of acoat of arms of aPrussian city or village.Kol- mar’simmediate, seemingly prosaic sourceofinspiration for this collection was astamp booklet distributed as an advertisement by the German coffee brand Kaffee Haag,inwhich customers collected small stamps featuring illustra- tions of Prussian coats of arms drawnbythe GermanartistOtto Hupp. One of the booklets, which werewidelypopular in Germanybetween the wars, belonged to GeorgChodziesner,Komlar’syounger brother (Woltmann 1993, 67– 78;Kolmar 2003,III. 134–136). Each poem opens with amotto-like description of the coat of armsthat ap- pears to be adistilled version of Hupp’sown descriptions that wereprinted on the backside of the stamp (Woltmann 1993, 72; Sauder 1996,45–46). Thus, Kol- mar further plays off of the expectations of the reader,who, after reading the col- lection title, the poem title and the short description, anticipates apoem that will verballycapturethe mute emblem. Such apresupposition of the poem as offer- ing amode of deciphering in the form of “art writing” is grounded in the wide- spread understanding of the reciprocal relations between picture and language, which had adeep influenceonEuropean pictorial aesthetics (Mitchell 1986,116– 121). In the words of Simonides of Ceos, “apoem is apainting thatspeaks, and a painting is amute poem.” This intimate relation between wordand imageserves as the coreofheraldic poetry (in the Wappendichtung and in some instancesof the Blason)developed in medieval Europe (Fürbeth 2007). However,aswas al- readypointed out in the few previous discussions of the collection, the poems 92 ShiraMiron deviate from the heraldic literary tradition, as each of them abandons,ignores, or further develops the visual elements appearingonthe coat of arms to such a degree that they no longer serveasmere poetic descriptions (Erdle 1994,185; Sauder 1996,53). While such adeviation appears to be aconspicuous dimension of the collec- tion, it would be wrongtoreduce Kolmar’sinterest in the coats of arms to amere aesthetic fascination (Sauder 1996,52).Such aclaim empties the Wappenbuch of its historical, local, and traditional meanings, reducing Kolmar’snotion of the coat of armstoareference to her brother’sbooklet,devoid of anyconnection to the heraldic tradition. Yet, it is Kolmar’swords themselvesthatcontradict this position. In aletter written in December 1940 to her sister Hilde Wenzel, who since 1938 had livedinexile in Switzerland, Kolmar refers directlytoher own idea of the coat of arms by quoting aletterofRainer MariaRilke.⁵ In aletter to Baron Rolf vonUngern-Sternbergwritten in 1922 at the ChâteaudeMuzot,⁶ Rilke admiresthe Baron’sfamilycoat of arms appearingonthe seal of the letter he receivedfrom him, remarking that “mirsagen Wappen außerordentlich viel, es ließe sich ausihnen viel mehr schließen und wahr-sagen, als je versucht wor- den ist” [coats of arms are extraordinarilyexpressive to me,one could draw much from them and tell the truth much better thanhas been attempted] ) Rilke 2002,96; Kolmar 2004,64). To this, Kolmar adds “Ichhab’ es versucht und diese Worte gar nichtgekannt “ [I have tried it without even knowing these words] (2014, 102/2004,64). Her notion of the coat of arms is by no means purelytechnicalorsimplyaesthetic. Rather,itstands in aclose affinity to Rilke’simageofcoat of arms,⁷ while continuously alludingtothe old tradition of heraldic poetry.Thus, anew relation between the pictorial sourceand the poem is created. An additional noteworthyobstacle for the reception and interpretation of the collection has to do with its relation to the German regional traditions of Heimat- kunst and Heimatlyrik,which are oftenassociatedwith jingoistic, nationalist,

 Although Kolmar’spoetry was often compared to Rilke’s(Kolmar 2003,III. 346;Nowak 2007, 279), the affinity to Rilkewas not the result of influence. As she herself declared, she came to know his poetry “toolate” and onlyafter her own poetic voicewas alreadyformed (2014, 88/ 2004,53).  In aletter from July 1940 Kolmar shares with Hilde her fascination from Rilke’s Briefe aus Muzot which she came to know through an acquaintance. In this later letterfrom15th December 1940,fivedaysafter her 46th birthday, Kolmar tells her sister that she askedand receivedacopy of Rilke’s Briefe aus Muzot as abirthdaypresent from her father and that she finds it to be “eine wahreSchatzkammer” [a true treasure] (2014, 77–78,87/2004,64).  Rilkepoeticallyexpressed this idea earlier in his 1907poem “Das Wappen” (2006,533). Recontextualizing Gertrud Kolmar 93 and anti-Semitic elements.⁸ Studies of the collection tend to avoid addressingthe relation between the preußisches Wappenbuch and the tradition of Heimatlitera- tur,assuming the collection could not be connected to aliterarymovement that expresses asense of rootedness and belonging. This exclusion stems from the positioning of Kolmar’swork within the context of German-Jewishliterature, a perception thatdoes not allow aGerman-Jewishpoet to speak of aGerman Hei- mat. It is again Kolmar’sown words that render the dismissalofthe role of this tradition in das preußische Wappenbuch impossible. In 1934,shortlyafter the publication of aselection of twenty poems from the collection, Kolmar stated in the aforementioned letter to Walter Benjamin that she had insistedoninclud- ing the date of origin on one of the first pages of the book and explains: “Iwant- ed to make clear that Icomposed the ‘Wappen’ at atime when regional poetry [Heimatlyrik]was not yetall the rage” (2014, 208/ 2004,153). Thiscomment, which waspreviouslydismissed by scholars as an expression of involuntary sar- casm (Erdle 1994,185)orasareference to the historicalexpulsion of Kolmar and her father from the familyhouse deservescloser attention.⁹ By suspending this biographical covering-lawand instead reading Kolmar’spoems in awider liter- ary context,the following discussion of the opening poem of the collection will uncover aless unequivocal idea of Heimat in Kolmar’s Das preußische Wappen- buch.

3 Heimat reconsidered

Wappen von Allenburg [Coat of Arms of] Allenburg

Ein rotes Elchhaupt auf Silbergrund, aus On asilverground, ared elk’shead emerges from grünem Röhricht steigend. green reeds.

Ichgeh’ durch Erde, die schon nicht mehr ist; Itread forgotten earth now long deceased; Denn meine Erde ist nur Teil vonmir, Forthis lost land is but apart of me, Wieich mit Schaufel, Haupt und Widerrist Ashy and clumsy,terrifyingbeast, Ein blödes,grauses, ungeschlachtes Tier. With haunches,head, and shovel-antlered tree.

 On Heimatkunst and the anti-Semitecontext see Kilcher (2012), XI-XIII, for the recent discus- sion on Heimatliteratur in Europe based on acomparatist approach see VanUffelen (2009).  Sauder drawsaconnection between the absenceofhome in the collection and the historical homelessness Kolmar and her father wereforced intoin1938(“Sie waren mitten in schon heimatlos”), thus imposinglater biographical facts on previouslywritten works (1996,52). 94 ShiraMiron

Sie klatscht um meine Kniee als ein Sumpf, It laps about my knees,amurky swamp, Hängt vonder trägen Lippe als ein Schlamm, Hangs from my sluggish lips like dripping Hockt,Nebelschlange,feucht am roten phlegm, Rumpf, Wraps ‘round red flanks asnakeoffog and Schiebt unters Maul den flechtenblassen damp, Stamm. And feeds my mouth the lichen crustedstem

Ichbin, die war,die ferngestorbne Zeit, Iamwhatwas, the far departed age Die wüst im großenWäldermoorgehaust, That,wild, in giant woodedmoors oncehoused, In tiefe FlockenWölfe hingeschneit, That blew the wolves along when blizzards Mit dunklem Sturm den Uhu hergebraust. raged, And, dark with storms, the sleepingowlsonce roused.

Ichbin das Wilde, Dumpfe, das man schlug, Iamthe dumb, the wild, the things now dead Das man erschlagen, weil es fremd und That men have killed for beingmuteand stumm; strange, Wasschlauund müde Karrenschleppt und That draggedthe heavy plough and spurred the Pflug, sled, Dem legt der Mörder bunten Halsschmuck um. Adorned by murderers with charmingchains.

Mir ward, die ihre Öde klagt und schnarrt, And when the barren darkness wailed and Die Nacht des Raben freundlich zugesellt, moaned, Die im Geröhre ächzt,inBirkenknarrt Iwas the friend of ravens in the night, Undvor dem Licht der warmen Dörfer hält. Who rasped in reeds and in the birches groaned, And halted at the villages’ warm light.

Mir wardein Regenhimmel,graulich schwer, Formethe rainysky,whose heavy gray Der zäh und stickigniederplumpt ins Luch, Fell thick and stiflingdown upon the fen, Das Fell am Leib, an meinem Hirn die Wehr, Became my fur,myantlers’ stiff array – Nicht Hand noch Peitsche, Stall und Trog und Not hand, not whip,nor stall, nor trough,nor Tuch. pen.

Das tierisch Mächtige hat sie entsetzt, The mighty beasts struck terrorinto man. Das arglos Fromme meucheltihre List: With cunningtricks he hunted innocence, Daß es verende, wund und totgehetzt, And wounded it,and slew it as it ran: Die Erdenkindheit.Die doch nicht mehr ist. In earthlychildhood. That has passed long (,II. –) since. (, –) Recontextualizing Gertrud Kolmar 95

With the opening pronoun, the subject of the poem becomesthe speaker.The elk, burstingout of the coat of arms, negates its very existenceasitdescribes itself walking through aland that has ceased to exist (“die schon nicht mehr ist”). Time and space, which are frozen together in the two-dimensional coat of arms, are torn apart in the poem, whose mixture of past and present sets the imageinmotion.¹⁰ The harmonious, almostorganic relation to the land cap- tured in the coat of arms and its opening description (“Ein rotes Elchhaupt auf Silbergrund,aus grünem Röhricht steigend”)isundermined as the speaker de- clares the land to be apart of its bodywhile at the sametime recognizingit as contributingtoits designation as “blödes, grauses, ungeschlachtes Tier” [A shyand clumsy,terrifying beast]. As in manyofKolmar’spoems written in first person, it is unclear whether the elk describes his ownself-perception or whether it observes itself from the outside.¹¹ This divergent perception is further deepenedinthe fourth stanza, which shifts from the “ich”[I] to the self-descrip- tion from the outside as “es” [it]—“Ich bin das Wilde, Dumpfe, das man schlug, Das man erschalgen, weil es fremd und stumm.” In the second stanza, the extinct land is evoked through the bodilypresence of the subject.The depiction of earth, the supposed Heimat,mergeswith the neg- ative self-imageofthe elk in the closing lines of the first stanza and turnsinto a “Sumpf”,aswamp that strangles its inhabitant,and “Schlamm” [sludge]. Though it is negatively expressed, the interdependence between the elk and the land is deepened; it is not onlythe elk who emergesfrom the greenreeds, but also the earth that grips its body. The belongingofthe elk to the land in the form of a Heimat is further com- plicated by its forced domestication, described in the first stanza and carried out by new inhabitants who no longer speak the languageof“die ferngestorbne Zeit” [the far departed age]. The imageofthe unified unanimous men who ex- ploit the elk challenges the relation between the symbolic elk on the coat of arms and the people who use it as their identifying mark. The rupture between the lyrical Iand the crowdisthematized, as in otherworks by Kolmar,bythe impossibility of communication, which renders the elk, the carrier of the poetic voice, mute and strangeinthe eyes of the others.¹² Onlyinthe fifth and sixth stanzas does the elk find rest,assky falls and mixes with earth in the form of astormthat transforms the land back into the primal world before God separated earth from sky as in Genesis 1,1. This is a

 About the unique temporal structureinDas preußische Wappenbuch cf. Hausmann (2012).  As for example in the poem Die Kröte fromthe year 1933 (2003,II. 358–359).  This theme serves as the coreofKolmar’slatework with the prominent example of the 1937 poem Kunst that seals the cycle Welten (2003,II. 545) and the 1939 novella Susanna (1993). 96 ShiraMiron world untouched by the men who appeared in the last stanza and whose ab- sence is encapsulated here by the lack of their means of control over the land (the hand, the whip, the stall, the trough,and the pen). Onlythen do sky and land merge into the elk’sown bodyand shelter him as atrue Heimat (“Mir ward ein Regenhimmel[…]Das Fell am Leib, an meinem Hirn die Wehr”). The struggle ends with the disappearance of the speaker in the last stanza and the description of its death in the third person. The closing line (“Die Erden- kindheit.Die doch nicht mehr ist”)undermines the existenceofthe elk and the poem itself, while at the sametime evoking it once again. The Heimat,then, is present and absentatthe same time, while being experienced by the speaker as well as by the voice of the others who wish to house it and consequentlydis- inheritit. Thus, the Heimat turnsfrom astable imageinthe formofthe coats of arms into arelative term. So are also foreignness and belonging, two poles which throughout Kolmar’swork are constantlychallenged. The opening poem of Kolmar’scollection reveals the Wappenbuch as aproof of the belongingofthe depicted and as aremainder from times long gone that challenges the present.Just like the figure of loyal Mortimer in Friedrich Schil- ler’sdrama Maria Stuart,who seeks proof of the identity of the true queen by consulting manyold heraldry books (“Viel alteWappenbücher schlugich nach”;Schiller 2008, 27), here as well the poet turns to the Wappenbuch as a sourceestablishing identity,belonging, and proof of origin from ancient times. These,asitbecomes clear in the opening poem, are never absolute and getre- fracted through the voices claiming them as theirown. Perplexed by Kolmar’schoice of title and sourceofinspiration which did not seem to befit the grand narrativeofthe connection between Kolmar’swork and life, previous interpretations tried to sand down the contradiction between Das preußische Wappenbuch and the European and German tradition of Heimatkunst in different ways.Some interpretations have offered acompromise by focusing on the Zivilisations- and Modernekritik expressed in some of the collection’s poems, acritical view that served as one of the foundations of the literary instan- tiations of Heimatkunst (Erdle 1994,185;Schumann 2002,21; Hausmann 2012, 248). This critical standpoint towardsmodernity appears in Wappen von Allen- burg in the form of the struggle between mankind and nature,yet it does not seem to replacethe dimension of Heimat and belongingasits core. Other read- ingstend to solve what they recognize as aconflict between Jewish and German literatures, defining Kolmar’spoems as a “countermovement to the logic of the national-anti-Semitic construction of identity” (Nowak 2007,30, my translation). An additional interpretationofthe poem suggests that the “elk” is “the Jew,” thus defining it as the ultimate representative of the Other and overlooking Recontextualizing Gertrud Kolmar 97 the interrelation of othernessand belongingwithin the poem (Schumann 2002, 184–193).¹³ It is again Kolmar’swords that turn us in adifferent direction and lead us back to the poem itself. In asecond letter to Walter Benjamin Kolmar reveals the sourceofinspiration for the poetic figureofthe elk as “anatural offspring of Leconote de Lisle’smighty bird in ‘Le Sommeil du Condor’” (2014, 210/ 2004,155;2003,II. 138;Sauder 1996,50). In de Lisle’spoem,the great bird is de- picted soaring abovethe southAmerican continent in agrand gesture thatal- lows the bird to grasp it in its whole (“Le vaste Oiseau[…]Regarde l’Amérique et l’espace en silence.” 1976,166–167). Like de Lisle’scondor,Kolmar’selk is part of the landscape in away that makes it irreducible to amere oppressed Other.Kolmar’snotion of land and Heimat is abroad and nonlocal one; thus, her collection gatheringtogetherall the Prussian provinces and cities is an at- tempt to look upon the Prussian landscapeand more broadlyonthe idea of Hei- mat from above, as one turningpages in aWappenbuch oras Lencote de Lisle’s condor.Kolmar’s Heimatlyrik is indeednot the traditional Heimatlyrik to which Robert Musil refers as “local” and recognizesits blossom as symptomatic of the decayofliterature (1974,133). Kolmar’spoetry,which emphasizes the fragility and ephemerality of Heimat both as an idea and astate of mind, suggests a Hei- matliteratur of adifferent kind. Areading of Kolmar’s Wappenbuch basedonher later biographical homelessness, or,moregenerally, on the premise of the lack of belongingascharacteristic of “Jewishliteratures” will not be able to uncover Kolmar’sunique approach to this themesand results in asimplistic, inflexible understating of Heimat thatthe collection itself negates.

 Schuman concludes her reading proclaimingthat: “Durchdie Austauschbarkeit vonElch und Jude impliziert das Gedicht Wappen von Allenburg einen Zusammenhang zwischen der Jahr- hundertewährenden Geschichteder Verfolgung (und Vernichtung) der Juden und einer Zivilisa- tion, die aufdem gewalttätigenAusschluß des fremden basiert.” The poem’sretrospective un- derstanding,which is symptomatic of the research on Kolmar until recently(see fn. 1and 9), is marked by the shade of the Holocaust which leads Schumann to her problematic interpreta- tion of apoem, written on 1927,asone that deals with the extermination of the Jews,anevent Kolmar could not possiblyimagine at the time. Asimilar,albeit morecarefullyformulated stance, appears in Erdle’sinterpretation of the poem as centered aroundthe oppression and murder of the elk, which is finallyconnected by Erdle to the persecutionofthe Jews (1994, 192–193), cf. Sauder’srejection of Erdle’sposition (1996,52). 98 ShiraMiron

4Conclusion

In the case of the poetic work of the German-Jewishpoet Gertrud Kolmar,the act of dissemination turns out to be arecontextualization back into the wider dis- course her work originatesfrom. Such an approach not onlyrenders amore com- prehensive understanding of the poetic text but also provides awider definition of the literary sources thatinfluenceit. By consideringthe Wappenbuch in light of the tradition of Heimatliteratur and in the broader context of German and Eu- ropean literarytraditions, as suggested by Kolmar herself, rather thanthinking of such attribution as aconflictthatshould be resolved, bothsides of the equa- tion – the idea of “Jewish” literatureand the wider literary discourse of Heimat – are unraveled. Kolmar’srelativized yetoverarching notion of Heimat embodied in the poem Wappenvon Allenburg givesrise to aless rigid idea of Heimat and consequentlyalessconservative and naïvedefinition of Heimatkunst than the one Robert Musil encapsulates in the term Lokaldichtung. As aresult, the ef- fort towards dissemination takes shape as adouble-endedprocess thatfinally turns the initial separating discursive differenceinto areciprocal connecting force.

Bibliography

Barbian, Jan-Pieter. The Politics of LiteratureinNazi Germany. Books in the Media Dictatorship. New York and London: Bloomsbury Academics, 2013. Erdle, BirgitR.Antlitz – Mord – Gesetz: Figuren des Anderen bei Gertrud Kolmar und Emanuel Lévinas. Wien: Passagen,1994. Fürbeth, Frank. “Heraldische Dichtung.” Metzler Lexikon Literatur.Begriffe und Definitionen. Ed.Günther Schweikle and Dieter Burdorf.Stuttgart: Metzler,2007.312. Hausmann, Sibylla. “Vergangenheit und Gegenwart ‘im Buch undBilde‘:Zeitstrukturen und BildbezügeinDas Preußische Wappenbuch vonGertrud Kolmar.” Sand in den Schuhen Kommender: Gertrud Kolmar Werk im Dialog. Ed. Chryssoula Kambas and Marion Brandt. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2012. 239–250. Heimann, Friederike. Beziehung und Bruch in der Poetik Gertrud Kolmars: verborgene deutsch-jüdische DiskurseimGedicht. Berlin: De Gruyter,2012. Kilcher,AndreasB.“Einleitung.” Metzler Lexikon der deutsch-jüdischen Literatur. Stuttgart: Metzler,2012. VI–XXVII. Kolmar,Gertrud. Briefe. Ed.JohannaWoltmann. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2014. Kolmar,Gertrud. DarkSoliloquy. The Selected Poems of Gertrud Kolmar. Trans. HenryA. Smith. New York: Seabury, 1975. Kolmar,Gertrud. Das lyrische Werk. Ed.Regina Nörtemann. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2003. 3 Volumes. Recontextualizing Gertrud Kolmar 99

Kolmar,Gertrud. My Gaze is Turned Inward. Letters, 1934–1943. Trans. BrigitteM.Goldstein. Evanston:Northwestern, 2004. Kolmar,Gertrud. Susanna. Frankfurt am Main: Jüdischer Verlag im Suhrkamp Verlag, 1993. Leconte de Lisle. Œuvres. Ed. EdgardPich. Vol. 2 Poe`mes barbares,: Belle lettres,1976. Mitchell, W. J. T. Iconology: Image, Text,Ideology. : University of ChicagoPress,1986. Musil, Robert. DreiFrauen. Rowohlt: , 1974. Nörtemann, Regina. “ZurWiederentdeckung undRezeption des Werksvon GertrudKolmarin der BRD und DDR.” Fremdes Heimatland. Remigration und literarisches Leben nach 1945. Ed.Irmela vonder Lühe and Claus-Dieter Krohn. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2005. 199–215. Nowak, Silke. Sprechende Bilder: ZurLyrik und Poetik Gertrud Kolmars. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2007. Otten, Karl (ed.). Das leereHaus. Prosajüdischer Dichter. Stuttgart: Cotta, 1959. Rilke, Rainer Maria. Die Gedichte. Frankfurt am Main: Insel, 2006. Rilke, Rainer Maria. Briefwechsel mit Rolf von Ungern-Sternberg und weitere Dokumente. Ed. Konrad Kratzsch. Frankfurt am Main: Insel, 2002. Sauder,Gerhard. “Gertrud KolmarsWappengedichte.” Widerstehen im Wort. Studienzuden Dichtungen Gertrud Kolmars. Ed.Karin Lorenz-Lindemann. Göttingen: Wallstein, 1996. Schoor,Kerstin. Vomliterarischen Zentrum zum literarischen Ghetto. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2010. Schumann,Annegret. ,Bilderrätsel‘ statt Heimatlyrik,. München: Iudicium, 2002. VanUffelen, Herbert et al. Heimatliteratur 1900–1950, regional, national, international. Wien: Praesens, 2009. Wassermann, Henry(ed.). Bibliographie des Jüdischen Schrifttums in Deutschland 1933–1943. Munich: K.G. Saur, 1989. Woltmann, Johanna(ed.) “GertudKolmar 1894–1943.” Marbacher Magazin 63, (1993). Woltmann, Johanna(ed.). Gertrud Kolmar: Leben und Werk. Göttingen: Wallstein, 1995.