A Poetics of Care, Or Time and the Dasein of Modernism in Thomas
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Carolina Digital Repository A Poetics of Care , or Time and the Dasein of Modernism in Thomas Mann and Martin Heidegger (1924/1947) Kevin Parker Eubanks A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of English and Comparative Literature. Chapel Hill 2010 Approved by: Eric Downing Gregory Flaxman Clayton Koelb Federico Luisetti John McGowan ©2010 Kevin Parker Eubanks ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT A Poetics of Care , or Time and the Dasein of Modernism in Thomas Mann and Martin Heidegger (1924/1947) Kevin Parker Eubanks (Under the direction of Eric Downing) A Poetics of ‘Care’, or Time and the ‘Dasein’ of Modernism in Thomas Mann and Martin Heidegger (1924/1947) seeks to establish the usefulness of Martin Heidegger’s reformulation of time and subjectivity during the period from 1924-1947 for reconceptualizing interpretations of time and tragic experience across the spectrum of literary and philosophical modernism(s). Between the earliest expressions of his temporality in The Concept of Time [Der Begriff der Zeit ] (1924) and Being and Time [Sein und Zeit ] (1927) and its later incarnation(s) in, for example, The Origin of the Work of Art [Ursprung des Kunstwerkes ] (1936) and The Thinker as Poet [Aus der Erfahrung des Denkens ] (1947), Heidegger finds conventional modernist approaches to time either too subjectivist or too relativist in formulation. Heidegger not only rejects a conception of time as that in which subjectivity happens but also an idea of time as that toward which subjectivity is oriented from the outside. In neither case, according to Heidegger, do these framings capture the embeddedness of time for the subject. For Heidegger, time is much more than the object of a definable and radical, even playful, experimentalism with which we have come to associate modernism; it is neither comprised of stable modes (past, present, future), nor is it hierarchical, subjective or even a relation among other relations that, along with the question of time, are said to have preoccupied the modernists, most notably the questions of narrative, history and subjectivity. iii According to Heidegger, temporality is the relation of being itself, what he calls Dasein as being-there or being-in-the-world , and it is thus at Dasein that the very possibility of a distinctly modernist narrative, history or subjectivity is configured. In a much more fundamental sense, Heidegger proposes time as a phenomenon at which subjectivity is always already happening, and as early as 1924 even goes so far as to equate time with the subject, or with what he calls “human, historical Dasein .” Although it is the most conspicuous heir to the cultural obsession with time that is typically said to have dominated high modernism, the full scope of Heidegger’s remarkable study of temporality during the period from 1924-1947 has never been elaborated – neither in terms of its potential literary applications nor in terms of its engagement with the historical moment of modernism itself. Emphasizing the works of Heidegger’s contemporary and fellow German, Thomas Mann, namely The Magic Mountain [Der Zauberberg ] and Doctor Faustus [Doktor Faustus ], which bookend this crucial period in Mann’s own development toward what I would like to call a Heideggerian recognition, I trace the way in which Dasein , the historical moment at which time “temporalizes itself,” emerges as a construct capable of explaining these configurations and of fostering radically new interpretations of both the temporality of modernism as well as the modernism of temporality. In a final chapter, and taking into account Heidegger’s insistence that time or Dasein as being-there is also always a “ being- towards the possibility of its absolute impossibility,” I explore the “rumor” (Geulen) of the end of art that preoccupied a later modernism and ultimately argue that the distinguishing mark of both modernism and the modernist time-novel is the tragic recognition that modernism is the historical being-towards its own impossibility. iv To my wife, Stephanie, and my son, Becton v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to first acknowledge all of my esteemed committee members: Eric Downing, Gregory Flaxman, Clayton Koelb, Federico Luisetti and John McGowan. A special debt of gratitude is owed to my principal advisor, Eric Downing, without whose tender yet uncompromising guidance, support, criticism, and conversation I never would have reached the point of completion. And I want all of you to know how grateful I am and always will be not only for your support and encouragement along the way but for the exceptional examples you always are and have been . I also wish to sincerely thank the following faculty and graduate student colleagues at UNC and Duke: Edna Andrews, Inger Brodey, Diane Leonard, Valerie Bernhardt, James Rolleston, Carol Flath, Anne Marie Rasmussen, Thomas Spencer, Shelley Hay, Bess Dawson, Derek Thiess, Bobby Blankenship, John Ribo, Henry Veggian, Al Miller, Marc Cohen, Anna Panszczyk, Catherine Clark, Kara Getrost, Michael Rulon, Will Taylor, and Jasmine McKewen, among others. For being-there for me through it all (in one indispensable way or another) I wish to acknowledge my very best friends: Carrie and Tedd, Kevin and Karin, Joe, Big Alex, Andy, Vittles, Mo, and Black. Finally, I’d like to thank my family, and especially those to whom this project is dedicated, for their enduring love, faith and support. vi PREFACE Thomas Mann is arguably Germany’s most revered novelist. This is due not only to the ingenious facility of his art but also and in part to a sort of literary heroism with which he is typically associated, a liberal-humanist, democratic activism that suffuses every one of his most notable works and that in its own way has always stood in strong resistance to the conservative forces in art and politics that achieved their ultimate expression in National Socialist Germany during World War II. Thomas Mann’s active resistance against fascism in Germany, his forced exile, and his emotional struggle with that history is for the most part well-known and well-respected. The memory of Martin Heidegger, on the other hand, is always bathed in the light of disapproval because of his complicity with the National Socialists during the tumultuous years of the Second World War and because of his apparent unwillingness to come publicly to terms with this past in the years following the war. His short-lived tenure as a Nazi party member and life-long silence on the issue, along with the corresponding resentment these realities have provoked, have placed his work, permanently it would seem, on trial. Despite these well-known differences, it is nevertheless surprising that literary scholars in Germany and the United States have thoroughly neglected the very real correspondences in the works of Mann and Heidegger, especially during the period from 1924-1947, which one could argue frames the most important span of their respective professional development, and in this very real, historical sense Mann and Heidegger are powerful contemporaries. The front end of this period marks the publication of Mann’s self- vii described Zeitroman or time-novel, The Magic Mountain [Der Zauberberg ] (1924), as well as Heidegger’s The Concept of Time [Der Begriff der Zeit ] (1924), a critical preparatory work toward the monumental Being and Time [Sein und Zeit ] (1927), in which Heidegger first introduces readers to his modernist reformulation of time and the subject that he calls Dasein . The latter end of this time period not only marks an important moment in the definitive maturation of shared ideas first developed in The Magic Mountain and Being and Time , but it also culminates in the publication of the so-called greatest efforts of both writers, Mann’s Doctor Faustus (1947) and Heidegger’s The Thinker as Poet [Aus der Erfahrung des Denkens ] (1947) and The Letter on Humanism [Der Brief über den Humanismus ] (1947), in which both Mann and Heidegger seek explicitly, and with a sympathetic emotional intensity that grows out of their mutual proximity to the events themselves, to come to terms with the contemporary events in German history that more than anything else determined the respective fates of their lives and work. In Mann’s late work Doctor Faustus , the protagonist Adrian Leverkühn, much like Heidegger himself, violates everything around him – himself, his nation, his art, his friends and family, and even history itself – and yet scholars still debate whether in the end he is condemned or saved for his hubris. 1 In fact, Mann claims that Adrian “bore the suffering of the epoch” [“das Leid der Epoche trägt”] and confesses that he has never loved any “creature of [his] imagination” more than Adrian Leverkühn [“da β ich nie eine Imagination […] geliebt hätte wie ihn”] ( Story 88/ Entstehung 81). What strikes me most here is that contemporary scholars already predisposed against Heidegger, and who call for a continued 1 Rüdiger Safranski in Martin Heidegger: Between Good and Evil [Trans. Ewald Osers. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1998] not only recognizes this correspondence between the real-life tragic fate of Martin Heidegger and the fictional tragedy of Adrian Leverkühn depicted in Thomas Mann’s Doctor Faustus , but he also organizes Heidegger’s biography around Mann’s fictional model. viii engagement of his philosophy in light of his infamous political ties, ultimately blame Heidegger’s downfall on precisely the same cultural-historical milieu with which Mann so clearly identifies his most beloved character. Thus the gist of my project is to explore this unlikely affiliation and to demonstrate that if “it was through a ‘definite orientation of his thought that Heidegger fell into the proximity of National Socialism’” (Wolin 6), then it was this same orientation through which Thomas Mann fell away from such proximity.