Arthur Schnitzler and Jakob Wassermann: a Struggle of German-Jewish Identities
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Cambridge Faculty of Modern and Medieval Languages Department of German and Dutch Arthur Schnitzler and Jakob Wassermann: A Struggle of German-Jewish Identities This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Max Matthias Walter Haberich Clare Hall Supervisor: Dr. David Midgley St. John’s College Easter Term 2013 Declaration of Originality I declare that this dissertation is the result of my own work. This thesis includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except where specifically indicated in the text. Signed: June 2013 Statement of Length With a total count of 77.996 words, this dissertation does not exceed the word limit as set by the Faculty of Modern and Medieval Languages, University of Cambridge. Signed: June 2013 Summary of Arthur Schnitzler and Jakob Wassermann: A Struggle of German- Jewish Identities by Max Matthias Walter Haberich The purpose of this dissertation is to contrast the differing responses to early political anti- Semitism by Arthur Schnitzler and Jakob Wassermann. By drawing on Schnitzler’s primary material, it becomes clear that he identified with certain characters in Der Weg ins Freie and Professor Bernhardi. Having established this, it is possible to trace the development of Schnitzler’s stance on the so-called ‘Jewish Question’: a concept one may term enlightened apolitical individualism. Enlightened for Schnitzler’s rejection of Jewish orthodoxy, apolitical because he always remained strongly averse to politics in general, and individualism because Schnitzler felt there was no general solution to the Jewish problem, only one for every individual. For him, this was mainly an ethical, not a political issue; and he defends his individualist position in Professor Bernhardi. Wassermann’s approach is entirely different. In the early stages of his literary career, he attempted to prove his authenticity as a German author by writing ‘Volksromane’ of Franconia. In the course of the First World War, he began to identify more strongly with his Jewish side. Already before the war, Wassermann had developed the notion of the Orientale, inspired by Nietzsche’s ‘Übermensch’: a charismatic leader of Jewish origin who would eventually reconcile the German and Jewish cultures. In the 1920’s, this figure was infused with elements of Christian and Jewish belief, notably self-sacrifice for one’s fellow man. Like Nietzsche, Wassermann offers a primarily aesthetic solution to a cultural, social, and political problem. This fusion of traditional and modern elements is representative for literary modernism as a whole, which cannot be categorised simply as ‘progressive’ or ‘conservative’. Comparing Schnitzler and Wassermann yields fascinating and rewarding results, as each author provides a unique perspective on the highly complex question of Jewish identity in Vienna in the early-20th century. This thesis is dedicated to the memory of two great writers of the 20th century, Arthur Schnitzler and Jakob Wassermann Acknowledgements I am deeply indebted to Dr. David Midgley for his tremendous support in supervising this thesis, from its initial conception in October 2009 until its completion. His patience, understanding and knowledge helped me to steer this project through its many motivational highs and lows. My gratitude also goes to Dr. Charlotte Woodford and Dr. Florian Krobb for their helpful and constructive criticism during and after the oral defence of this dissertation. My doctoral studies in Cambridge would not have been possible without the generous financial and moral support of my parents, to whom I am very grateful for this. Kai Schmelzle and Philipp Hirth deserve mention for the many stimulating and controversial discussions on German literature and culture in general, and specifically on Schnitzler, since M.A. days in Tübingen. Kai very kindly provided a roof over my head in Stuttgart during my research periods in the Marbach archives. The archivists and librarians from the Schnitzler Archive in the University Library, Cambridge, and the Deutsches Literaturarchiv, Marbach greatly helped to facilitate my research. The AHRC funded the last two years of my doctoral studies; whereas my college, Clare Hall, not only repeatedly placed research grants at my disposal, but also provided a genial and friendly social environment throughout my years in Cambridge. Max Haberich Cambridge, June 2013 Table of Contents Introduction I. Schnitzler’s and Wassermann’s Correspondence: Two Jewish Writers in Vienna p.1 I.a) Jakob Wassermann (1873-1934) p.7 I.b) Arthur Schnitzler (1862-1931) p.8 I.c) Schnitzler’s and Wassermann’s Correspondence p.10 II. Anti-Semitism in Late 19th-Century Germany p.20 III. Vienna – Multi-National Capital of the Habsburg Empire p.22 Der Weg ins Freie: Schnitzler’s Exploration of the ‘Jewish Question’ I. Introduction p.33 I.a) More than a ‘Judenroman’ p.36 I.b) Sympathy without Commitment: Schnitzler’s Stance on Zionism p.37 I.c) “[Einer der] wenigen vermeidbaren Ursachen des Antisemitismus” – against Orthodoxy and the ‘Renegat’ p.42 I.d) Hugo von Hofmannsthal’s Curious Response p.45 I.e) A Provocative Publication – Schnitzler’s Public Acknowledgement of His Jewish Background p.48 II. “Es ist etwas Unfreies in Allem” – Der Weg ins Freie in Contemporary Reviews II.a) No ‘Jewish Question’ at All: Raoul Auernheimer’s Review (‘Neue Freie Presse’) p.51 II.b) “Das Buch des Judentums” p.53 II.c) “Nicht um Haaresbreite vorwärts” – No Solution to the ‘Jewish Question’ p.54 II.d) Otto Stoessel’s Review in the ‘Oesterreichische Rundschau’ p.57 II.e) Scholarship p.59 III. Jewish Solidarity and ‘Jüdischer Snobismus’ III.a) The Militant Jew: Salomon Ehrenberg p.65 III.b) The Zionist: Leo Golowski p.68 III.c) The Snob: Oskar Ehrenberg p.69 IV. Apolitical Liberalism – A Contradiction in Terms? IV.a) The Jews of Vienna and German Liberalism p.72 IV.b) Berthold Stauber and His Father p.74 IV.c) Heinrich Bermann and His Father p.77 V. Heinrich Bermann as Schnitzler’s Alter Ego: Jewish Individualism and Attachment to ‘Heimat’ p.79 VI. Pre-empting Professor Bernhardi – Anti-Politics and ‘das Richtige tun’ p.84 Professor Bernhardi – Anti-Semitism on the Stage and in Reality I. Introduction p.88 I.a) Schnitzler’s and Bernhardi’s Shared Aversion to Politics: Apolitical Individualism p.90 I.b) Scholarship p.93 II. Anti-Semitism on the Stage and in Reality II.a) Hermann Bahr’s Der Antisemitismus (1893) p.97 II.b) “Wie es sich zugetragen haben könnte” – Schnitzler’s Father as Director of the Wiener Allgemeine Poliklinik p.99 II.c) Institutional Anti-Semitism and Other Sources of Inspiration p.102 III. “Nostra ipsissima res agitur” – the Reception of the Play III.a) Professor Bernhardi Seen by Stefan Zweig, Felix Salten, Karl Kraus p.107 III.b) The Play’s Reception until 1918 p.109 III.c) The Play’s Reception in Austria after 1918 p.111 III.d) A Mirror of Institutional Anti-Semitism: Censorship of the Play p.112 IV. Determined Anti-Semites IV.a) Dr. Schreimann p.116 IV.b) Dr. Filitz p.117 IV.c) Dr. Ebenwald p.118 IV.d) Hochroitzpointner p.119 V. Undecided Anti-Semites and ‘Renegaten’ V.a) Dr. Adler p.121 V.b) Dr. Goldenthal p.122 V.c) Dr. Flint p.122 VI. Bernhardi’s Supporters: Determined Jews VI.a) Dr. Cyprian p.124 VI.b) Dr. Löwenstein and Dr. Pflugfelder p.125 VI.c) Kulka p.125 VII. ‘Glaube’ versus ‘Wissenschaft’? p.127 VIII. ‘Eine Komödie in höherem Sinn’? Comic and Serious Elements in Professor Bernhardi p.133 IX. Summary p.139 Jakob Wassermann: A Bridge between German and Jewish Cultures I. Introduction p.140 I.a) A True Author of the Franconian ‘Volk’ p.141 I.b) ‘Lebensreform’ and ‘Heimatkunst’ p.148 I.c) Deutsche Charaktere und Begebenheiten I.c) i) Volume 1 (1915) p.154 I.c) ii) Volume 2 (1924) p.155 I.d) Breakthrough of Jewish Identity p.156 II. The ‘Orientale’ II.a) The Influence of Martin Buber p.161 II.b) The Influence of Nietzsche II.b) i) Concepts of Europe, Hellas, and the Orient p.167 II.b) ii) The ‘Übermensch’ p.173 III. From the ‘Orientale’ to the ‘New Man’ III.a) Die Juden von Zirndorf (1897) III.a) i) The Novel as a Social Panorama p.178 III.a) ii) Agathon Geyer as a Messianic Figure p.183 III.b) Christian Wahnschaffe (1919) – A Fusion of Influences from Judaism and Christianity p.186 IV. Wassermann’s Later Works: A Mystical Notion of ‘Humanität’ p.193 Conclusion p.198 Bibliography p.201 Introduction I. Schnitzler’s and Wassermann’s Correspondence: Two Jewish Writers in Vienna In the first third of the 20th century, Arthur Schnitzler and Jakob Wassermann were two of the most prominent literary figures in Europe. Wassermann’s works, especially Der Fall Maurizius (1928), were among the most widely-discussed novels of the Weimar Republic, to the point that Thomas Mann called him the “Weltstar des Romans”.1 Schnitzler was one of the first writers to delve deep into his characters’ psyche to explore their rational and irrational motives. He introduced the stream-of-consciousness technique into German literature twenty years before Ulysses (1922). His work was translated into English, French, Italian, Swedish, Russian, and Japanese. MGM Studios used a novella of his, Spiel im Morgengrauen (1926), for one of their early movies, Daybreak (1931). Schnitzler lived in Vienna his entire life, from 1862 until 1931. He read medicine at the University of Vienna and obtained his medical degreewhen he was twenty-three. Coming from an assimilated upper middle-class background, he took after his father, who was a renowned laryngologist. Johann Schnitzler treated the singers and actors of the main Viennese theatres.