The Limits of Satire in Karl Kraus, Elias Canetti and Else Lasker- Schüler
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
BETWEEN COMPLICITY AND CRITIQUE: THE LIMITS OF SATIRE IN KARL KRAUS, ELIAS CANETTI AND ELSE LASKER- SCHÜLER A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment for the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Ari Solomon Linden August 2013 © 2013 Ari Solomon Linden BETWEEN COMPLICITY AND CRITIQUE: THE LIMITS OF SATIRE IN KARL KRAUS, ELIAS CANETTI AND ELSE LASKER- SCHÜLER Ari Solomon Linden, Ph.D. Cornell University 2013 This dissertation addresses the discourse of twentieth-century German-language satire in three representative dramas: Karl Kraus’s Die letzten Tage der Menschheit (1915-1922), Elias Canetti’s Komödie der Eitelkeit (1934) and Else Lasker-Schüler’s IchundIch (1940-1941). Using a wide range of theoretical approaches – from critical theory to contemporary theories of satire, laughter, parody and irony – and situating these dramas against the background of the two World Wars, this dissertation isolates a particular historical moment (1915-1941) in order to illuminate the ethical problems raised by modernist satire and the related phenomenon of the laughable. It asks: what are the stakes involved in producing a satire without the guarantee of an Archimedean point of authority, and what is entailed in laughing at historical catastrophe? Guided by the observations of Walter Benjamin, Chapters 1 and 2 analyze Kraus’s “absolute” satire (Hermann Broch), and specifically the use of quotation and repetition in his dramatic lampoon of World War I, in order to show how the central figure of the text – the Nörgler – must be understood dialectically: his ability to critique the war is a direct function of his recognition, consumption and subsequent reproduction of its “language.” Chapter 3 shows how Canetti’s allegorical drama attempts to abandon the Krausian mold and produce a less annihilating satire of totalitarianism, only to expose the ambiguity of its laughter. Such laughter mimics the structures of power it aims to negate, similarly evoking the hermeneutic predicament introduced by Kraus. Chapter 4 shows how Lasker-Schüler’s grotesque parody of National Socialism and “high” German culture alike invokes a different form of laughter altogether. Writing from the perspective of exile – which also manifests itself in the drama’s aesthetics – Lasker-Schüler’s laughter is not the embittered, authoritative laughter we find in Kraus and Canetti, but rather one that both embraces and is informed by an expression of subjectivity not bound to the single, ostensibly exterior authorial position. IchundIch thereby provides a model of how the comic disposition can maintain its legitimacy in times of terror without formally capitulating to its object of critique, while still pointing to a key internal aporia that lies at the core of twentieth- century satire. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Ari Linden received his BA in History at the University of California, Berkeley, in 2005. From 2006 to 2013, Ari studied German literature at Cornell University, receiving his MA in 2009 and his PhD in 2013, and having spent a year as a research fellow at the Humboldt Universität in Berlin, Germany. In August 2013, Ari began teaching in the Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures at the University of Kansas as a Visiting Assistant Professor. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As is the case with all long-term projects, this dissertation is the result of a collaborative effort, beginning with the guidance of my committee. I am deeply indebted to my advisor at Cornell, Patrizia McBride, for all of the time and effort she has invested in my project. Patrizia listened to every idea, reviewed every draft, responded to every email, wrote every letter of recommendation, and met with me whenever it felt necessary. Anette Schwarz has been a constant source of support over the years, making me feel so welcome in the German department since the day I arrived. Geoff Waite and I have had some provocative conversations in his office; I always appreciate his way of challenging conventional scholarly modes of thinking. And over the last two years, Paul Fleming has been an invaluable interlocutor, encouraging me to make more defined scholarly interventions and providing excellent feedback. My gratitude goes out to other members of the German Studies department as well. Gunhild Lischke has shown me how to integrate my scholarly profile with my pedagogical inclinations. Leslie Adelson has taken an active role in my interest in German-Jewish studies, linking me to various networks that will be of great use as I pursue new academic endeavors. I have enjoyed arguing with Peter Gilgen about Karl Kraus, and credit him for piquing my interest in German Idealism. Peter Hohendahl took time to parse difficult passages of Adorno with me during my first year at Cornell; for that and similar gestures I am grateful. For being given the opportunity to spend a year as a research fellow at the Humboldt Universität in Berlin, I wish to thank Peter Hohendahl, Anette Schwarz, Miriam Zubal, Ursula Grawert, and all the others who support the infrastructure of this exchange. I would also like to thank Astrid Wallner from the Literaturhaus Wien and Thomas Ballhausen from the Filmarchiv Austria, who were generous with their time and allowed me to peruse their holdings during my year abroad. iv I wish to also thank the members of our dissertation writing group in 2010-2011 – Carl Gelderloos, Cecily Swanson, Ulas Ince and Sarah Pickle – for reading drafts of two chapters and providing precise feedback over delicious food and libations. On that note, I extend my thanks to Mary Ahl and the other members of the Society for the Humanities for providing the funding for this group. To the members of the Hegel Reading Group (too many to name): this has been one of the most rewarding experiences I have had as a graduate student. A very special thanks goes out to Carl Gelderloos (again), Paul Flaig and Katrina Nousek, who have not only been incredibly insightful colleagues and interlocutors, but more importantly, irreplaceable friends. I sincerely look forward to continuing our conversations from the past and starting new ones in the future. I extend a different kind of gratitude to my parents, Nancy and Jim, and my brother Seth, for the moral (and material) support they have given me over the years – I wouldn’t be here without them. Finally, I would like to thank my partner, Anna, who has been with me through moments of doubt and moments of great elation. Her support, love and discerning eye have been constant over the last three years. I could not ask for anything more. v TABLE OF CONTENTS BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv TABLE OF CONTENTS vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS viii INTRODUCTION 1 I. “Die fröhliche Apokalypse” and Absolute Satire 1 II. “Der heilige Haß”: Satire in the German Context 8 CHAPTER 1. Vernichtende Kritik: Walter Benjamin Reads Karl Kraus 32 I. Kraus and the Frankfurt School 32 II. Benjamin and Kraus: An “Elective” Affinity 36 III. Allmensch, Dämon, Unmensch: The Physiognomy of Satire 40 IV. Conclusion 66 CHAPTER 2. Repetition and Posterity in Kraus’s Die letzten Tage der Menschheit 68 I. Introduction 68 II. Heine and Nestroy 72 III. On the Prologue, Genre and Structure of Die letzten Tage 85 IV. The Linguistic Ruins of War: Quotation, Scenic Reprise, Tautology 92 V. Pledging to Posterity: The Case of the Nörlger 104 vi CHAPTER 3. Worte im Stande der Unschuld. Elias Canetti’s Komödie der Eitelkeit 120 I. Passing the Torch: The Satire of Self-Denunciation 120 II. The “Acoustic Mask” and Komödie’s Critique of Language 130 III. Politics, Power and Radical Secularization 137 IV. The Problem of Laughter and Laughability 148 V. Conclusion 154 CHAPTER 4. Satire Undone: Else Lasker-Schüler’s IchundIch 156 I. The Reality of Fascism and the End of Satire 156 II. “Nur Ewigkeit ist kein Exil”: Parody in Exile 165 III. Parody and the Grotesque 182 IV. Laughter in Exile 189 CODA 193 REFERENCES 199 vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ÄG Ästhetische Grundbegriffe GW Gesammelte Werke GS Gesammelte Schriften F Die Fackel DW Dritte Walpurgisnacht LTM Die letzten Tage der Menschheit GdW Das Gewissen der Worte MuM Masse und Macht viii INTRODUCTION I. “Die fröhliche Apokalypse” and Absolute Satire Toward the beginning of Dritte Walpurgisnacht—written on the eve of National Socialism though published posthumously—the Viennese satirist Karl Kraus reflects on his predicament at this precise historical moment: “Es waltet ein geheimnisvolles Einverständnis zwischen den Dingen, die sind, und ihrem Leugner: autarkisch stellen sie die Satire her, und der Stoff hat so völlig die Form, die ich ihm einst ersehen mußte, um ihn überliefbar, glaubhaft und doch unglaubhaft zu machen: daß es meiner nicht mehr bedarf und mir zu ihm nichts mehr einfällt.”1 In asserting that nothing more comes to mind regarding the historical events (the “Stoff”) that have just transpired, Kraus questions the very possibility of writing satire at this historical juncture: the moment of satire’s self-reflection thus marks the moment of its self- imposed limitation.2 For Kraus, the obscene conditions of reality already provide the form that satire once had to envision for it, rendering any attempt to satirize the National Socialists superfluous and “unbelievable.” He thereby brings to light a paradox: satire can no longer be written—effectively reversing Juvenal’s famous lament, “it is difficult not to write a satire”3— and yet it must be. Indeed, later on in this long essay Kraus admits: “im Zuge der Betrachtung vielleicht doch etwas eingefallen ist.”4 Kraus writes himself out of existence, and yet Dritte 1 See Karl Kraus, Dritte Walpurgisnacht (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1989), 27. 2 In this same passage Kraus also alludes to the notorious line that inaugurates the long essay: “zu Hitler fällt mir nichts ein.” See DW, 12.