'Let's Be Human!' – on the Politics of the Inanimate

‘LET’S BE HUMAN!’ – ON THE POLITICS OF THE Human! INANIMATE [ KARIN SANDERS

ABSTRACT To Romantics the principle of life, its mystery and power, propelled a desire to ‘see into the life of things’ as William Wordsworth articulated it. This article examines how the relationship between life and non-life, the animate and the inanimate, humans and things, took on a new inﬂection in Romanticism, which differed in radical ways from the pragmatic and

economic relationship between persons and things in the 18th century. In Romanticism, the

] threshold between living and dead matter came to linger between divinity and monstrosity. In Denmark, Hans Christian Andersen had few rivals when it came to articulating associations between humans and things. This article narrows the scope of Andersen’s viviﬁcations to one speciﬁc subset: marionettes, dolls and automatons, asking how his surrogates oper- ated vis-à-vis Heinrich von Kleist’s, E. T. A. Hoffman’s and Mary Shelley’s. Each of these authors drew on the hyper-mimetic relationship that dolls, marionettes and automatons have to humans: Kleist used marionettes to examine consciousness through unconsciousness; Hoffmann used automatons to articulate the uncanny; and Shelley used a golem-like monster to ponder the ethics of man’s quests for generative powers. Andersen, in contrast, used dolls, marionettes and automatons in order to speak about social beings.’ 1 ...... KEYWORDS Hans Christian Andersen, humans and things, animate-inanimate, conscious-unconscious, the uncanny, monstrosity.

‘The result of aesthetic concentration is the animation of the soul, the part of us that rises from corporeal slumber to penetrate the life of things.’ Denise Gigante, Life: Organic Form and Romanticism 2

‘Nej, lad os nu være Mennesker!’ [Now, let’s be human!], a caged parrot repeatedly cries out in Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tale ‘Lykkens Kalosher’ [The Magic Galoshes 481] from 1838.2 A tiny lark repeats the command, ‘Let’s be human!’ in a mimicry that would be innocuous were it not for the fact that the reader recognizes that the lark is already human; namely a copyist who had wished to be a poet, and who in turn had wished to be a bird in order to escape the misery of the human condition. Repeating the wish to be human brings the bird/poet back to his former shape as copyist. Although the narrator remarks that the lark

KARIN SANDERS, Professor in Scandinavian Studies, Berkeley University Aarhus University Press, Romantik, 01, vol. 01, 2012, pages 29-47 29 human; Likewise, Likewise, 4 be 4). The change 4). The change In ‘Pengegrisen’ 11 3 human’ is tied to human’ is tied to play 4). 11 human’ to the human’ to performative ‘to 855, we find a slightly different combination of combination the in- different find a slightly 855, we 1 be 5 at being human may not be much, but as the doll acknowledges, it is but as the be much, doll acknowledges, not at being human may play The banalities of the everyday are observed by Andersen via the of mate- observed Andersen lure are by The banalities of the everyday These instances of escaping the be an innocent These instances (wishing to human condition The instructive irony at play here speaks not only to Andersen’s clever use of use of clever Andersen’s to only speaks not here at play The instructive irony rial spoon, match- a wooden and ink, objects: pencils and paper necks, bottle material other that things used as tropes peas, shoes, coins, and many are sticks, conflates humans and he never with out some kind of relation humans. Yet play material specific properties parses of given Andersen when things. say, That is to objects and assigns violates their human attributes unique them, to he rarely the of an inkwell, form (the or functionality pen-ness of a pen, the ink-ness soldier and so on). of a toy the of a bottle, bottle-ness steadfastness lark) and playing at being a human (the toy doll’s desire for movement) should be movement) for desire doll’s a human (the at being toy and playing lark) of the and distinctiveness mores investigation seen as part overall of Andersen’s His use of non-humans (things, precisely animals) is important of humanity. articulate and to him freedom vanity of human thebecause they follies allow our atten- focuses When Andersen social behaviors. expose humankind’s fraught he Kalosher’ as is the desires, case in ‘Lykkens tion on naïve and ‘Pengegrisen’, human in a broader to be to consider what it means way a readers his also offers being. as a social and psychological sense of the word, [The Piggy Bank], from [The Piggy Bank], from from the existential ‘to the ‘to existential from the detail that the doll (unlike the lark) already looks like a human and therefore a human and therefore looks like that already the the the lark) detail doll (unlike to human is not look to Yet out this mimicry. play needs to simply and to (‘Pengegrisen’ something’ ‘always he personifies animals according to their perceived characteristics: talkativeness talkativeness characteristics: their to perceived animals according he personifies (dogs), dignity and so forth. (swans) (cats), loyalty aloofness This sen- (parrots), his beyond far objects or animals resonates thesitivity to specificity of physical and poems. Yet descriptions, novels travel fairy tales and can be seen in his many it is in the fairy non-human forms to (things, tales that relationship Andersen’s in fairy tales the its own; of non-humans humanized actions animals) comes into seem ‘natural’. repeated the words ‘uden selv at tænke paa hvad han sagde’ [without reflecting paa hvad at tænke selv ‘uden therepeated words Kalosher’on what he said] (‘Lykkens what the said when it repeated 482) parrot which in the back wish himself human shape from did not (and thus presumably precisely humanness his wretched to is returned he had escaped), the copyist its act like That is, it must a lark. because he, in the like act form must of a lark, let’s be hu- ‘Now, species, ‘parrot’ words: the the and hence repeat fateful parrot, Kalosher’man!’ (‘Lykkens 482). examinations his constant of humans (their but also to and repetition copying human. of that is not which way by and characteristics) customs animate and the human. The story is set in a nursery full of toys. It is night, theanimate and the in a nursery It is night, human. The story is set full of toys. peeks out of a chest neck moon is shining and an old doll with a patched-up er jo altid No- det Mennesker, vi nu lege ‘Skal toys, her fellow and calls out to humans, that’s [Let’s (‘Pengegrisen’ play something] get!’ always

ROMANTIK · 0

01 3 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 1 3 Life: Or- of humans and there- 8th century, as Barbara M. M. as Barbara 8th century, 1 that is brought to life already already life to that is brought objects can act out more freely, freely, objects can act out more In the look the part 6 things. But because they are excluded things. excluded But because they are 9th centuries a plethora had yielded 1 8th century in the example form of (for morphic 1 by way of by way 8th and 1 When the something ‘sparked a preoccupation with self-generating and with a preoccupation self-generating ‘sparked In Romanticism, the threshold between living and In Romanticism, the threshold between 7 humans as . centric The threshold between the The threshold between In Romanticism, the vitality associated with life was implicitly related to the to related implicitly In Romanticism, the was vitality associated with life Hans Christian Andersen had few if any rivals articulating when it came to as- if any Christian had few Andersen Hans so-called ‘it-narratives’, also known as circulation novels, in which an inanimate in which novels, as circulation also known so-called ‘it-narratives’, object serves as narrator). Benedicts writes, things were seen as ‘the devils of the empirical age’. She contin- Benedicts writes, seen as ‘the of the devils things empirical age’. were ues: authenticity of the aesthetic. Art and life shared in a dynamism of essential en- authenticity shared Art of the aesthetic. and life in her study argued has recently Denise Gigante as and therefore, ergy, Especially in their mutability and fungibility, they possess supernatural power over in- over they supernatural possess power in theirEspecially mutability and fungibility, they can even themselves; and unmake identities; theydividual meanings and can make and consciousness. Because of their conscience and fundamental replicability over take to human possession or loss, embody things the terribleindifference of living in hazards material: absolute are They bodies without of soulless material souls. (39) powers. a world propelled the and power, principle its mystery of life, Romantics, however, To articulated it. In- of things’ the into ‘see life to a desire as William Wordsworth been deed, since the have beginning of Romanticism, as Larry ‘we notes, H. Peer or object out of its natu- concept, taking a word, culture: “thing-ing” in Western on it’ meanings, or explanations human values, and projecting (5). setting ral humans (the inflections that force moral distinctive Things-as-humans can have anthropocentricism. self-centered are see their That is, readers to own readers) see themselves made to anthropo a human code of ethics, from their critiques of the devastatingly), (and sometimes clearly and enunciate more anthropo and Romanticism, Form ganic aesthetics self-maintaining form’ – one that between served cross-pollinate to the animate and and non-life, life between sciences (5). The relationship and life in differed the inflection, which humans and things, inanimate, a new on took and persons the between and economic relationship pragmatic from ways radical things that been articulated had in the dead matter came to linger between divinity and monstrosity. between linger dead matter came to I however, the humans and things. purpose For of thissociations between essay, of anthropomorphisms, the the personifica- narrow plethora scope from to want tions and vivifications of material one specific to things his oeuvre or animals in ties because Andersen I do so, first, marionettes,subset: dolls and automatons. nota- Romantics, most other several by vision shared these a larger surrogates to A. and Mary Hoffman Shelley; second, because and, E. T. Kleist, Heinrich von bly already marionettes, dolls and automatons fore bring the distinction between human/non-human and human/ahuman to to human/non-human and human/ahuman bringfore the between distinction ways. in remarkable the fore resembles a human, we are afforded a particularly clear view into relation into the clear view a particularly afforded are a human, we resembles of ‘things’ and literary theorists. cultural for

and they :

9 Zeitgeist 8th century, in the8th century, 1 Mit Eget Eventyr uden Digtning Eventyr Mit Eget : Withheld Venetian Epigrams Withheld Venetian The Secret Life of Puppets The Secret 36-7) 1 ( In ein Puppenspiel hatt ich mich Knabe verliebet, mich In ein Puppenspiel hatt ich zerschlug. es endlich an, bis ich zog es mich Lange Puppe: gekreuzigten So griff der jung nach Lavater antgeht! ihm der Atem wenn sie noch, er betrogen Herz’ beings. social Goethe, who famously drew inspiration from his puppet theater, expressed expressed theater, puppet his from inspiration drew who famously Goethe, 8 Conscious Unconsciousness While puppet theaters enjoyed great popularity theaters enjoyed in theWhile puppet Hoffman had a direct influence on Andersen; this was not the case with was not influence on Andersen; Kleist this a direct had Hoffman 83). 9th century they were seen mostly as second-order entertainment.9th as second-order century As Victoria seen mostly they were 1 The simulacrum has always travelled both a high road and a low road in human culture – in human culture road and a low road a high both The simulacrum travelled has always form of entertainment – but it is the peculiarity and as lowest form of worship as highest one that joined into that have the two years of the three hundred culture last of Western it worshipped, no longer was Once the human likeness sea level. runs, below as it were, partaking an idol, became an idea, not of the insensible territory ‘imaginary’ of the instead (60) insensible territory ‘holy’. His childhood puppets are here implicitly conflated with the implicitly ‘puppet’ here are of the puppets cru-His childhood cified Christ that Goethe’s former Johann friend, and poet the physiognomist at. It grabs superstitious), see as being too came to (whom Goethe Kaspar Lavater it make is unsurprising did not demolished puppets that perhaps these profanely epigrams. the thepast censor into original rendering of Goethe’s Venetian 1 explains in Nelson a more sinister fascination in one of his fascination sinister a more ( between living bodies and inanimate ones that is contingent on similitude. A few A few on similitude. ones that bodies and inanimate living is contingent between an anthropomorphized will be a vivification of a machine, book and exceptions, with the engagement dynamics of Andersen’s underscore to used along the way humans and non-humans. part of the were Romantic and Shelley Kleist But and Shelley. Ro- experience childhood many a formative theaters for was with puppet Playing at Glæde var them: amongst ‘Min største Andersen mantics and pre-Romantics, Dukkeklæder’ sye as he writes autobiography in his helped form the cultural conversation that shaped Andersen’s aesthetics. Each of Each that aesthetics. shaped Andersen’s helped form conversation the cultural hyper-mimetic on the drew ways, these different authors, albeit in fundamentally used humans: Kleist to that have relationship dolls, marionettes and automatons unconsciousness; Hoffmann examinemarionettes to consciousness through articulate to the a golem- used and Shelley uncanny; as a way used automatons powers. creative for ponder the of man’s quests to ethics in order monster like speak to in order used dolls, marionettes and automatons in contrast, Andersen, about

ROMANTIK · 2

01 3 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 33 92) 1 0. Here a ballet dancer ﬁnds ulti- a ballet 0. Here ). They strike up a friendship. strike ). They But 1 1 8 9 1 1 (‘Marionettespilleren’ 12 , Andersen published an allegory, Andersen called 1 85 1 Inspired by a night of drinking, a night the by Inspired student 11 ). 1 9 1

10 90). 1 Whether the spectator’sWhether new is ‘unusual’ because it mimics that response of Some forty years after in Kleist, Some forty years children (a naïve response) or because he comprehends the show at a level beyond beyond at a level the show or because he comprehends response) (a naïve children that of the usual audience, is left unsaid. In either decides to case, the puppeteer jeg hans Tilhører’attend the ‘nu var student’s I [now scientific demonstration: (‘Marionettespilleren’ became his spectator] unlike the science student’s implicit understanding of the the of puppeteer- nature science student’s understanding unlike implicit the fully scientific experiments comprehend seems unable to ing, our puppeteer magic of electromag- friend.of his new the nevertheless by Enthralled perceived the persuades theme scientist the of Andersen’s) puppeteer (a favorite netism with theater making him a real director his happiness by help him complete to ske- ne rigtigt et Men Trup, en levende for Theaterdirecteur ‘at blive living actors: sel skab’ (‘Marionettespilleren’ Det var ligesom Fluer i en Flaske, og jeg var midt i Flasken, jeg var Directeur. Veiret gik Veiret Directeur. jeg var midt i Flasken, og jeg var i en Flaske, Fluer ligesom var Det en ny var det blive, kan Menneske et saa elendig, som mig, jeg var gik fra mig, Hovedet fra dem Allesammen i Kas- at jeg havde imellem, jeg ønskede, kommen jeg var Menneskeslægt Directeur. sen igjen, og at jeg aldrig bleven var This shift from the holy to theThis shift the to imaginary holy from Kleist’s in can be found enigmatic ‘Über das Marionettentheater’treatise from ‘Marionettespilleren’ [The Puppeteer]. The story is as follows. On a steamer, sail- On a steamer, The story follows. is as [The Puppeteer]. ‘Marionettespilleren’ an older gentleman, a tra- meets our narrator the canals of Sweden, ing through Dane, who carries on of actors troupe and a fellow entire his ling puppeteer ve our to suggests exuberance of expression facial His box. – in a wooden his back thatnarrator this be the on earth. human man must happiest as the Indeed, two confirms only that not the he was puppeteer up a conversation, strike travelers born outlook with disposition but that had been strength- a joyful his positive of science. The pup- a student withened after an unusual spectator, a meeting the in black, from a man dressed the tells story one day peteer of their meeting: to responds He of children. an audience amidst sits down Institute, Polytechnic the appropriate; performance that fully ‘leer aldeles paa de rigtige he are in ways spil- (‘Marionette Tilskuer!’ en usædvanlig klapper aldeles rigtigt, var det Steder, le ren’ mate grace in wooden marionettes, contingent upon the marionettes, self-conscious- contingent loss of in wooden mate grace side-stories (the on un-self-consciousness story two of a by ness. As is illustrated intuitiveness looking in a mirror) and animal-like by his grace man losing young (the duel with story primal a bear), humans. of a fencing to innocence is lost has an eccentric whose manner of argument Kleist’s mathematical- dancer, To that or in consciousness lack in puppets only appears grace demiurgic inflection, human nor gods, Being neither who possess infinite consciousness. puppets gods the art from aesthetics. of graceful virtuallybodies are excluded hurls the puppeteer (along with his box of marionettes strapped on his back) on his back) of marionettes strapped (along with the his box hurls puppeteer and the out of the marionettes stumble spiral box, an electromagnetic through things this of dumb lifeless transformation humans. Predictably as real as alive speaking humans turns real into nightmarish: At this At 13 92). 1 ‘Lutret’ [purified] the by 14 92). 1 puppeteer is a buffoon. And unlike Kleist’s Andersen’s And unlike utopia, is a buffoon. puppeteer his Dolls can connote madness, but the madness, but puppeteer’sDolls can connote marionettes perform only In ‘Über das Marionettentheater’, as Karl Heinz Bohrer has suggested, the has suggested, Bohrer Heinz as Karl In ‘Über das Marionettentheater’, embodies a divine principle whose puppeteer (in the Kleist, form of Unlike one mad act, which is one of anger (‘and then anger they is one of killed me’).one mad act, which With this act the and his marionettes up, alive, wakes The puppeteer of things is restored: order humans – things things. are are But with this dead. Humans re- once again are ikke raisonnerer ‘mit Personale is also gone: the reason ability to order instated (‘Marionettespilleren’ publikum’ – og heller ikke very moment, the puppeteer wakes up from the ‘electromagnetic dream’ to find to dream’ the ‘electromagnetic up from very wakes the moment, puppeteer once again and the on thethe marionettes gone scattered student floor, science lifeless. ‘quasi-phenomenological precision’ that grows from marionettes illustrates how how marionettes illustrates from that precision’ grows ‘quasi-phenomenological an act of through precisely or achieved ‘happiness (charm, is … retained grace) the of unconscious conscious’ a state such tale reflect (208). But does Andersen’s the unconscious consciousness? Will his puppeteer’s delirious almost happiness of- argue, Andersen I would is no. Instead, bliss? The answer unreflective lead to in ‘Über das parsed and philosophical questions the to a corrective aesthetic fers Marionettentheater’. ‘happi- his self-proclaimed for the sympathy hand that lacks guides), Andersen est’ puppeteer; as soon as they are potency; art rather, the to elevate highest marionettes cannot thingness And when they to return (as mediocrity. into they plunge agency given and reason reflect Their inability to dull ‘dolls’. merely shapes), they are wooden an from Andersen by – the – is tranformed very Kleist thing by that is celebrated down breaks effectively He a critique possibility to of human behavior. aesthetic of a social model that the model of unconscious consciousness in favor Kleistian manner than pessimistic the in a more philo- human characteristics speaks to quasi-scientific experiment, Andersen’s puppeteer has regained complete sover- complete has regained experiment,quasi-scientific puppeteer Andersen’s a bliss so to professes nonsensical as he repeatedly strangely but appears eignty, is mentioned no less than nine times) that ‘happy’, ‘lykkelig’, (the word complete mad? gone the puppeteer be suspicious. Has the to reader it forces The marionettes-as-real-actors unleash a plethora of unattractive characteristics characteristics unattractive of a plethora unleash The marionettes-as-real-actors ‘actor’ on Each insists egos. now and overblown in the form of self-promotion their director:full attention from and ballerina The special treatment that claims the success of the performance with entire balance on her ability to or falls stands the lines that greatestexit applause, new guarantee wants thepointed toes, hero on and off one both the like be treated demands to an empress the playing actress and so forth. human consti- marionette to the Thus from stage, transformation The marionettes turn fronts: gentle dummies from on two grace from tutes a fall loses his much-professed and the puppeteer avatars; self-centered maliciously to thehappiness. Alive, marionettes neither are but hideously demonic nor divine, attention-seeking and nitpicky. pedestrian human – plain, greedy, and all too the puppe- utter triviality, into fall misery thisSuccumbing to precipitous over that their to ‘de igrunden faces straight dog alle informs his actors teer finally de mig ihjel!’ (‘Marionettespilleren’ Marionetter og saa sloge vare

ROMANTIK ·

01 34 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 35

, 18 ). 1 a rich Don Quixote I Sverrig, Here a puppeteer is giving a a puppeteer Here 17 (inanimate, speechless, emotionless) they emotionless) (inanimate, speechless, and later slightly revised as a freestanding tale as a freestanding revised and later slightly

things But before I turn incarnation this But before to remarkable 16 93) 1 92- 1 thing), as [In Sweden] 868. This provenance is important because is important 868. This provenance 1 , real I Sverrig Circumscribing the Uncanny 830, we find an inserted830, we marionette scenario. (‘Marionettespilleren’ Samlede Skrifter 1 15 and complicated engagement with modernity, introduces us to another breed of breed another us to introduces with modernity, engagement and complicated than one that larger those is infinitely in ‘The and that Puppeteer’‘puppet’, story, the inanimate and the the animate. threshold between ways in radical redefines Bloodless’. Its name is ‘Master in Andersen’s allegory, it should be mentioned, was originally it should be mentioned, was in the published allegory, Andersen’s book travel offer the possibility of absolute freedom. Andersen’s puppeteer uses this freedom puppeteer Andersen’s the possibility of absolute freedom. offer maintain the quo to inanimate minions status his once again over and power at real-life The stabs plays. performances forgotten of the stage and to vault from palpable: are theater life det heller, Publicum ikke ikke, raisonerer Personale mit Directeur, Jeg er en lykkelig af fornøier sammen. Jeg tager sig af Hjertens Grund; alle mine Stykker frit lave jeg selv kan foragtede som nu ere Stykker, ærgrer jeg vil, og Ingen sig derover. Bedste alle Comedier det Aar siden løb efter tredive tvinede over, og men som Publicum for Theatre, paa de store Fader ligesom jeg dem til de Smaa, og de Smaa de tvine jeg nu til mig, nu giver dem tager for men i Forkortning, og »Dyveke,« Montfaucon« »Johanna og Moder tvinede; jeg giver har Nu men gesvindt. de ville: ulykkeligt, Kjærligheds-Vrøvl, af langt de Smaa holde ikke og kjendes igjen kjender alle Mennesker og paa Vrangen, paa Retten Danmark jeg bereist …. sophical and aesthetic optimism and utopian vision we find in Kleist. What these What find in Kleist. we vision and utopian optimism aesthetic sophical and theater is that second-order if marionettes present authors do agree on, however, the not (they are in which Quixote, in full accordance with his inability to distinguish between between with distinguish to his inability in full accordance Quixote, in which pup- of other when an army himself on the puppets throws illusion and reality, (the a stranger however, version, In Andersen’s hero. the show’s endangers pets heals and only marionette and not dead man) rubsgrateful on the cracked salve The sharp of the clatter knak’) mimics the decapitation (‘[k]nik sound of wood that the doubt and stiff doll is a thing cannot made out of hard We breaking. Cervantes’ from here inspiration taken have material. may Andersen performance from the Old Testament (Queen Esther’s story) when an audience performance the Old Testament from member’s the and breaks Queen: ‘Knik, bulldog flies up on the knak! hvor stage og den arme var Marionetspiller thi sig gyseligt, jamrede det gik hun i Stykker, af’ bidt Hovedet 6 havde Prima-Donna, (‘Dødningen’ Hunden jo hans første If we look back at Andersen’s first attempt writing a fairy attempt tale, in a variation first at Andersen’s look back If we [The Dead] published on theof the dead called ‘Dødningen’ grateful folktale in of puppetry there is more to be said about Andersen’s early puppeteer stories, puppeteer early of puppetry be said about Andersen’s to there is more with E. and, consequently, with theand in particular they engage uncanny how A. Hoffmann. T.

19 (‘Das Unheimliche’ 268) (‘Das Unheimliche’ 20 21 ) 1 Freud’s remarks are perhaps too perfunctory. But unlike Hoffman’s fantastic fantastic Hoffman’s But unlike perfunctory. too perhaps are remarks Freud’s (‘Dødningen’ 6 (‘Dødningen’ tales (and we might remember that Freud used Hoffmann’s ‘Der Sandmann’ as a used Hoffmann’s that remember Freud might tales (and we ask his readers if ever fairyprime Andersen’s tales rarely of the example uncanny), that inanimate objects can produce imagine or experienceto feeling the uncanny but he is not of Hoffmann, be a student may humans. Andersen for if mistaken mute and in ‘Der Sandmann’, Olympia famous automata Hoffmann’s a follower. is of being human and thus uncanny, to decidedly close but deceptively elusive Even so we instinctively expect an experience of the uncanny when confronted an experience expect when confronted of the uncanny instinctively we so Even salve with the the in which scenes In ‘Dødningen’ magic life-giving dead return. an ‘undead’ man. The tale’scomes from the Johannes, had secured man’s hero, companion, as a traveling returns and the dead man’ now ‘grateful grave-peace (Johannes securing by ways Johannes’ his debt back fortunepaying in wondrous reiterates, as Freud marrywill ultimately a princess Yet, a kingdom). and gain wer of the aber wiederumre-animation sehr gewöhnlich; dead ‘ist im Märchen z. B. zu nennen, wenn es unheimlich wagte wieder die Augen Schneewittchen z. B. des in den Wundergeschichten, Toten von die Erweckung Auch aufschlägt? zu tun ruft mit dem Unheimlichen die nichts Gefühle hervor, Testaments, Neuen 269). haben’ (‘Das Unheimliche’ Das Märchen stellt sich überhaupt ganz offen auf den animistischen Standpunkt der auf den animistischen offen ganz überhaupt sich stellt Das Märchen zu Märchen echtes kein wüßte doch und ich und Wünschen, Gedanken Allmacht von Wir haben gehört, daß es in hohem vorkäme. Unheimliches nennen, in dem irgendetwas beleben, aber in den Puppen, sich Bilder, leblose Dinge, wenn wirkt, unheimlich Grade ist die Möbel, der Zinnsoldat, und nichts die Hausgeräte, leben Märchen Andersenschen des Pyg- Statue der schönen die Belebung Auch entfernter. Unheimlichen vom vielleicht empﬁnden. als unheimlich man kaum malion wird Alle Trædukkerne laae imellem hinanden, Kongen og alle Drabanterne, og det var dem, var og alle Drabanterne, og det laae imellem hinanden, Kongen Alle Trædukkerne de vilde saa gjerne Glas-Øine, for store stirrede og med deres saa ynkeligt som sukkede sig af sig selv. til at røre komme at de ogsaa kunde smurt Dronningen, blive lidt ligesom their beyond far eloquence dolls, capable of of the wooden eyes glass The large the eerie, wooden from sigh and the positively assumed deadness, are collective can the dead marionettes uneasiness about the creates How textual logic: box might Sigmund Freud The question, utter sounds when the living doll cannot? uncannier than be nothing hearing may There sounds from is moot. answer, maintains in ‘Das Unheimli- because fairy tales, as Freud dead, yet something speciﬁc on in fact is uncanniness. Freud from exempt defy logic, they are che’, this that as an and insists point while fairy out Andersen tales (and he singles in the uncanny’: striking least ‘not animation, they uses of make are example) repairs its broken shape but also gives it the ability to move its limbs. Alive, the its limbs. Alive, it the move ability to but also gives shape its broken repairs ‘she’ while soundless, remains thingonly ‘she’ Ironically, is ‘Mælet’ lacks – a voice. very in fact: inanimate marionettes audibly can sigh, the other,

ROMANTIK · 6

01 3 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 37 ], in Elix- , uden , then, Fodreise Hoffmann 29 (three hundred 29 (three hundred 1 80) 1

Fodreise ( 22 80), all of which is far from the uncanni- from is far 80), all of which 1

). The narrator finds himself in the company finds himself in the). The narrator company Fodreise fra Holmens Canal til Østpynten af Amager i Canal til Østpynten af Amager Holmens fra Fodreise Fodreise Fodreise Journey on foot from Holmens Canal to the East Point of Amager Canal to East Point the Journey from Holmens on foot [ 829 1 [The Devil’s Elixir] in his pocket, and at the stroke of midnight the midnight of and at the stroke Elixir] in his pocket, [The Devil’s ’s perambulating narrator happens to walk around with of a copy around walk happens to narrator ’s perambulating 828 og 1 Fodreise In the fictional travelogue In the fictional travelogue years after theyears publication of beings: of mechanical of a host ness brought on by a Hofmannesque ambiguity and liminality. In and liminality. ambiguity a Hofmannesque on by ness brought his mastery of Romantic demonstrated clearly most Andersen in which the work Romanticism’s darker by favored and genres of tropes using a plethora irony, critical of implicitly His brand of themodalities, he remains Romantic project. political than overtly Hoff- is more his use of Romantic irony, Romanticism, even text appropriates Andersen a Hoffmann observe example, how us, for mann’s. Let and demolishes its content. iere des Teufels unsurprisingly starts ‘spøge’novel to and ‘fortælle’ to [spook and speak]. Unable ‘høre’ the because of the of the decides to read, narrator darkness night, [listen] its story:to Mine første Erindringer – begyndte den – strække sig fra Bogtrykkeriet, hvor jeg først jeg først Bogtrykkeriet, hvor sig fra ErindringerMine første – begyndte den – strække underligt denne Tid, en lille Mand med et jeg endnu fra husker Som en Drøm saae Lyset paa en Snoer jeg hang i al Uskyldighed hvor ind i Stuen, Katte-Ansigt, der en Dag traadte Manuscript, jeg skylder det nok benævne jeg vel – saaledes tør at tørres. Min Moder, for Hofraad Fader, vor var – fortalte os Børn at det min Tilværelse om Natten, The automatons in this passage are wooden, but, once again, not uncanny. An- uncanny. not again, but, once wooden, in this are passage The automatons uses them the of expose thedersen to castle inhabitants (the social characteristics wooden au- boorishness,aristocracy): artificiality stiff are They and deceitfulness. ‘arrogant’ ‘sneering’ [udstuderet], [stolte], [snerrende] ‘affected’ and tomatons: … høflig(e)] ( ‘impolite’ [ikke En Mængde pyntede Herrer bevægede sig mechanisk op og ned ad Gulvet. De saae ud, som op og ned ad Gulvet. sig mechanisk Herrer bevægede pyntede En Mængde mig Jeg tiltalte den som kom i Klæderne Fold syntes udstuderet. Enhver dreiede. de vare Miner sin og gik med stolte mig Ryggen, vendte Ord, et ikke nærmest, men han svarede - Da høflig end den Første. mere ikke Gang. Jeg tiltalte en Anden, men han var sædvanlige og holdt ham fast jeg Taalmodigheden tabte mig Ryggen, ogsaa vilde vende nu den Tredie i med alle Lemmer, Bevægelser mange uhyre slem at holde og gjorde Armen. var ved Han jeg da, at hele Selskabet mærkede mig. Tilsidst ad underligt snerrede han tillige ganske det Aarhundredet Automater, Slags kunstige et fyldte med Damp; af lutter Træmænd, bestod med …. Forgemakkerne opfunden til at udpynte havde a type that is not to be found anywhere in Andersen’s oeuvre. A speaking doll or A speaking doll oeuvre. in Andersen’s anywhere be found to a type that is not Even in this way. overt uncanny is never world in Andersen’s pen or jackhammer of the free bewilderment or is it not?) (is it real, his use of marionettes navigates in doubt. – the is never reader of the uncanny Aarene which Andersen first sharpened his pen on the concept of unnatural life, a scene life, sharpened first of unnatural his pen on the Andersen which concept we find a clarify will help Here trope) this. Hoffmann (a key with automatons 2 inhabiting a castlefuturistic in the year aristocrats vision of 95). Yet, besides 95). Yet, 1

within the covers of within the covers in Danish translates in Danish translates Fodreise rådmand 8th century, in which the lives the in which lives 8th century, 1 , an arabesque with strong strokes strokes with strong , an arabesque Elixiere des Teufels Elixiere has become a tangible artifact: paper, artifact: has become a tangible paper, Fodreise 95) 1

Elixiere des Teufels Elixiere Fodreise ( 23 With this rather humorous if impertinent domestication of his GermanWith domestication if impertinent this idol, humorous rather As we listen along with our narrator, we are presented with unusual presented a rather are we with along listen narrator, our As we Hoffmann. to homage of the meaning print, emptied It has morphed binding. an object-biography into are There Romantic story full of madness and doppelgängers. it had as a dark of the elixir devil’s no signs left powers the of a monk succumbing to seductive on its journey manuscript bookbind- to from taken are and so forth. we Instead the to placed in a lending humiliation of being in bookstores a life ing and from by the doubling of the alliteration, Hoffmann, as is suggested Hoffraad library. ‘Hoff’ with linking of ‘raad’ ‘man’ ( and the implicit hvem hun endnu havde været et reent ubeskrevet Papiir, og vi aldrig seet Lyset – Nysgjær- og vi aldrig Lyset seet Papiir, ubeskrevet reent et været endnu havde hun hvem sig i vort bevægede der de Syner, rigt hun fortalte om ham, hvorledes os hørte vi Alt hvad og sad og arbeidede, Vinter-Nætter lange ham, naar han i de for sig lyslevende viste Indre, med sin Strik- der satte sig hos ham op af Sengen, at han da ofte sin Kone maatte kalde sig altfor Phantasien tog Mand, naar til den underlige over venligt og nikkede kestrømpe, Herredømme. meget neutered alderman),to is pulled apart, strangely and in the reassembled process and ‘impregnates’ a manu- the into exhibits his potency as he blank page even becomes explicit when the anthropomorphicscript. that His fecundity ‘words’ with knowingly a paternity plays story Andersen narrate their make claim. life it contains the essence life, comes to automaton thatthe when ‘a Hofmann fact and is often relation passed off as biological in a trueof its creator father-child 65). The anthropomor- observes (see Nelson as Victoria astutely Nelson child’, Hoffmann link to a genetic such precisely tale claim in Andersen’s phized ‘words’ the manuscript, them has told that because their without mother, she would him Papiir’ ( page] unwritten [a pure ubeskrevet ‘reent be still Andersen not only ﬂaunts his own literary historical knowledge (in this (in case of literary historical knowledge ﬂaunts his own only not Andersen himself duringto scare propensity the storiesthe about Hoffmann’s circulating poignant (if indirect) remarkably a readers his writing but also offers process) An- imitate. Clearly, to criticism want that to he claims of the kind of literature way and should be seen as a couched is ironically tributedersen’s Hoffmann to Hoffmann’s from manner, himself, in a roundabout he could distance in which On the one hand of the fantastic. brand taking hold of the devil from pastiches, is full of Hoffmann of Romantic irony, become an authorthe enterprise and enticing him to (a devilish narrator in- and talking objects. On the hand, as can other motifs doppelgänger deed), to be seen in the audacious incorporation of at arm’skept to be – only is embraced Hofmann’ book, ‘Hoffraad own Andersen’s into the kind of ‘it-narrative’ novel length. has transcribed Hoffmann’s Andersen during the favored was that, as mentioned above, his paper-mistress, Hoffmann also has a (house)wife, who knits while she brings who also has a (house)wife, Hoffmann his paper-mistress, imagination (and his virile his rampant from reality to spouse back her fanciful of virgin paper). impregnation of things became narratives about commoditization and circulation. In his own In his own and circulation. about commoditization of things became narratives

ROMANTIK · 8

01 3 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 39 8) subscribed 1 8 1 ( 90). These creative forces, forces, 90). These creative 1 9th century) these ‘Underværker’ [wonders] 1 , Romanticism’s fixation with the power of life is of life , Romanticism’s fixation with the power Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus or, Frankenstein; her suggestion that her husband Percy Bysshe Shelley was was Bysshe Shelley that her husband Percy her suggestion Frankenstein and In 24 Monstrous Machines Monstrous Machines To illustrate this, let me return briefly to what appeared to be a paradoxical briefly be a paradoxical me return this, to what appeared let to illustrate To are but ‘Hverdagsting’ [everyday occurrences], setting him amongst mere mor- mere him amongst occurrences], setting [everyday but ‘Hverdagsting’ are as they ‘blew even of electromagnetism, the workings tal humans. Subsequently, the mind’ (‘løftede of the Hjerneskallen skull]), puppeteer paa mig’ [lifted my notori- explained. Andersen fully never exactlyremain miracles, that: everyday electromag- on University at Copenhagen lectures H. C. Ørsted’s missed ously purposes aesthetic use the he – though later to phenomenon for only netism in the the grasp his interest fully it. Nevertheless, science behind never would animate the field used to the marionettes veryvitality of electromagnetism, force in the vital- Romantic interest with a universal dovetails in ‘Marionettespilleren’, exactly’, electricity ‘Neither life nor magnetism constituted forces. ity of creative dynamic aspects of a polar, considered both has argued, ‘but they were as Gigante ( the characterize equilibrium to living world’ thought to a version of Romantic monstrosity that was alien to Andersen. Her avatar is is avatar Her Andersen. that alien to was monstrosity of Romantic a version to from created a golem way, beings in an explicitly human psychical to sutured on Shelley’s commented directly have seems to dead body parts. never Andersen who friend Ingemann, his close to his response B. S. from know but we novel, appeal stories, that did not morbidity in one of his fantastic had used cadavers Andersen. to as seen in Shelley’s monster, can become uncontainable and hence monstrous, can become uncontainable and hence monstrous, monster, as seen in Shelley’s or, the gods from fire steal To the dream. flipside of the Romantic Promethean Far more morbid than Hoffmann’s uncanny automatons or Kleist’s automatons aloof mari- uncanny than morbid Hoffmann’s more Far Maryonettes, Shelley’s brand of ingenious puppetry, Andersen essentially rewrites the essentially Andersen script and ‘plays’ puppetry, of ingenious brand to expose the pro- with his puppet) puppeteer (as a master text with Hoffmann’s politics of book markets. saic (and non-Romantic) quotidian-Promethean effort in ‘Marionettespilleren’. Here we learned Here that the effort in ‘Marionettespilleren’. quotidian-Promethean him gloryscience student’s during brought experiments the time of could have burned have with It would the concord him into gods. Moses, and thus brought with concord him into duringhim on the the brought and stake Middle Ages, in the (the present mid- Yet devils. portrayed in Victor Frankenstein; a point that is important because it suggests a point that because it suggests is important Frankenstein; in Victor portrayed of po- of a particular forces kind, one associated witha monstrosity the creative Gigante’s borrow to words. of monstrosity’, Romantic version is a ‘distinctly ets) formal constraints, If the exceed object in Romanticism ‘threatened sublime to actual, animated pow- theory imagined into from when it slid from praxis, into of Romantic version out of the it could slide a distinctly sublime and into er, Andersen for and astonishment of wonder a source (5). Science was monstrosity’ science- him, such to But inspiration. a constant was potential and its aesthetic small miracles. like and more less monstrous looked fuelled aesthetics forcefully articulated, and Shelley’s interest in natural philosophy and animation philosophy in natural articulated, interest and Shelley’s forcefully ( via galvanism , der Blodløs ,« der drak Liv ,« der drak Blodløs 26 spinder den gloende Stang. See Stang. spinder den gloende her ud en af sine favnelange Fing- her ud en af sine favnelange monstrous. To Andersen, the Andersen, To monstrous. Blodløs really 8) Blodløs 1 ’s calculated intermingling of nature

I Sverrig I Sverrig ( 25 , speaks to deep ethical concerns deep ethical , speaks to about human/non-

Frankenstein

has limbs and fingers that spring from ‘human thought’, and the vital- that spring has limbs and fingers ‘human thought’, from vital- and there is no ‘uncontrollable run a monster , then, is not rampant og gjennem de store Haller og Stuer strækker han sine haarde Lemmer, hvis Led og hvis Lemmer, han sine haarde strækker og Stuer Haller og gjennem de store Surely, not every ostentatious Romantic trope is cut to size in Andersen’s size in Andersen’s is cut to Romantic trope every ostentatious not Surely, puppetry way. of modernity in its own is enchanted Bloodless alone’ that ity described ‘man’ who ‘stands the single is so forceful is positively ‘Everythingdwarfed. as a giant marionette, is living’ – that is, the is alive machine dizzy confused, who stands as it silences ‘man’, the by human mind even directed man-made technology. celebrates The passage of ‘his’ creature. own and in awe Bloodless this ‘imagined into giant machine-marionette’s In fact, from ity’ here. transition actual, animated power’ 5) is not (Gigante Hvad der dikker i Uhret, slaaer her med stærke Hammerslag. Det er » Det Hammerslag. slaaer her med stærke i Uhret, der dikker Hvad af Mennesketanken, og ved den fik Lemmer af Metaller, af Steen og Træ; det er det og Træ; af Steen den fik Lemmer af Metaller, og ved af Mennesketanken, as in the case of ‘Marionettespilleren’, from science, and give it to humans, or to to humans, or it to science, and give from as in the case of ‘Marionettespilleren’, so imagi- with fire, This fire. in inanimate objects, is, indeed, playing life ask for Romanticism, and with with’ the devastating throughout most ‘played natively in consequences find Bloodless’, ‘Master the to return aforementioned finally do, to We oeuvre. proportions and monstrous of a sublime nature vitality elements of grandiose far encoun- so sort we have different than in this But it is of a rather those figure. ‘Bloodless’tered. is located within human thresholds and responsibilities. To Andersen, being twirled through the through twirled being Andersen, To human thresholds and responsibilities. a god into puppeteer his transform did not experimental spiral electromagnetic turned be edifying: The puppeteer the to out Instead, whole exercise or a devil. turned merely out to about vivifications. After dreaming avatars all, his stopped mimic ordinary human behavior. sidder I Motala eier. physisk selv Mennesket som ikke Kræfter, vandt Mennesketanken ved Blodløs de herind og see hvor Jerntraade. – Træd og tykke Stænger Hjul, Kjæder, Hjul ved Dele ere Jernstænger, til lange presses Jernstykker gloende Vandet af og stopper! og stiller kun staaer Mennesket Alt og haler afsted. er levende, re sig, staaer at see derpaa,springer sig, man vender ved man dreier af Fingerspidserne En ud den menneske- for Ærbødighed af bare sige man skal hvad selv ikke og veed bukker stille, der her har Jernlemmer …. Tanke, lige and technology, imagination and science. As early as his first stop into Sweden at Sweden into stop as his first imagination and science. As early and technology, us draws narrator the by great our traveling manufactory in Motala, Trollhättan, of machinery: theinto sublime life i det var og saa blødt, som stille klipper saa Metalplader, klipper i de tunge Saxen hvor de tykke knækker han Ambolten! see hvor fra Gnisterne flyve hamrer, han Papir; hør hvor Lak der brødes. en Stang det som var gaaer, efter det Længde-Maal, knækker Jernstænger, dig dreie i Spaaner; Jernplader høvles foran Jernstykker, de lange rasle dine Fødder Foran Jernsnore, tunge Jerntraade, svære, levende løbe dit Hoved Hjul, og hen over sig de store Kjædler omkastede mellem store du ud i den aabne Gaard, og søger surrer, det hamrer, det ogsaa da strækker og Bane-Vogne, til Dampskibe

0 ROMANTIK ·

01 4 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 1 4

to see Andersen’s see Andersen’s to Pinocchio’s Progeny: Progeny: Pinocchio’s not [uncanny] prospect, albeit of a dif- prospect, [uncanny] unheimlich ons, and if at first sight they become surprisingly sight ons, and if at first ordinary, ), Andersen’s marionettes become instruments), Andersen’s of illusion used The Sway of Travesty The Sway If divine or daemonic potentials seem to evaporate in Andersen’s various in Andersen’s mario- evaporate seem to If divine or daemonic potentials Less philosophical than Kleist, less daemonic than Hoffmann and less mo- Less philosophical than less daemonic than Kleist, Hoffmann 995), can be a response to a deep need to see ourselves as a ourselves see need to a deep to 995), can be a response 1 nettes and automat nettes In is certainly out of the shown, ordinary. this ordinariness, have as I hope to articulate to a critique uses the Andersen of the fantastic mundane. words, other the mathematical of Kleist’s, sophistication have not His marionette stories may principle,whose lines and curves an aesthetic constitute and spatial calculations nor, and material articulation liminality, of Hoffmann’s of psychic nor the power ferent order than the variety we know from Hoffmann; it might even be seen as a even it might Hoffmann; from know than the order we variety ferent of fairyas uncanny. tales pre-empting prescriptive Freud’s to corrective avatars as ‘something’ that behaves and acts out like us. Yet this does not reduce reduce this does not us. Yet and acts out like that as ‘something’ behaves avatars also speak mirrors. Things-as-persons mere use of marionettes to Andersen’s about persons-as-things. The terrifying silence his unruly used to ac- utterance turns be a double-sided critique out to that not marionettes’, just are ‘You tors, things like people can be treated how but also shows grace from a fall unveils only This, in turn, is an in the world. real rose than Shelley, Andersen in effect disenchanted the very enchantment we have verywe have disenchanted the enchantment in effect Andersen than Shelley, rose on his personhood bestows Romanticism. When Andersen expect from come to themmarionettes, recognizable he makes as individuals, withall the ordinari- Kleist’s in recognize easily themselves do not If readers persons. ness of everyday an ideal in art-making), such and if they reach to if they aspire ideal (even abstract fear a that such if they (even automaton in Hoffmann’s see themselves cannot and if Shelley’s possibility in their neighbor), be a veiled demonic possibility may to (in spite of thecreation it articulates) very monstrous human emotions is too hard-pressed they are withresonate readers’ familiarity, real projection of the with like- with obsession of human beings projection image, their their own own ness, the that artistic obsession the and the portraiture, underlies building of statues, a it reveals profoundly, More ordinary and enduring popularity of photography. extra (4) life. master to god, play yearning to marionettes, but often in Andersen’s reflected see themselves do in fact Humans and Kleist, Unlike the element of wonder. downplays He in the form of travesty. contend that ‘there is later would who generations Bernard Shaw, George unlike head- and speaking, but that moving wooden in a living actor wonderful nothing palls’ed dolls should do so is a marvel 4), but also unlike that in Segel (qtd. never century as Ed- (such Kleist twentieth that in the celebrated early the avant-garde Schlemmer’s and the or Oskar ‘The Über-Marionette’ Actor Craig’s Gordon ward Ballett Triadisches that mundane, reality surrounded ultimately him. yet the complicated, unveil to Fascination with puppets, as Harold Segel has suggested in has suggested Segel as Harold with puppets, Fascination Puppets, Marionettes, Drama Automatons, and Robotsin Modernist and Avant-Garde ( 8th that 1 Persons and Things Persons 8th century that had been 1

). 1

8th century. This challenge, as well as the reactions against ‘cold’ secular- as the against reactions as well This challenge, 8th century. 1 The early Romantics challenged the of empiricismscientific advances and Romantics challenged The early There is, then, an important and pervasive paradox in Andersen’s work. He He work. in Andersen’s is, then,There paradox and pervasive an important It seems that puppets do for some observers resemble divinities in contrast to fallen, self- fallen, to divinities in contrast some observers resemble for do It seems that puppets dimension, in fact, of contact with a transcendent human beings. The aura aggrandizing eerie. puppets (85) is what renders uncanny escaped both have seem to shown, marionettes, as I have But Andersen’s with associations; his mario- its latent sacred associations and demiurgic control a for the potential found instead Andersen de-sacralized. essentially are nettes What schema. by metaphysical than social agenda those more offered decidedly concept to the tragic-doll in advance a counter-story offers Andersen is more, later articulate thatthat when he noted Mikhail Bakhtin would for that matter, the impact of Shelley’s Frankensteinian, monstrous freakishness. freakishness. monstrous Frankensteinian, of Shelley’s the impact that matter, for as use of marionettes and puppets in Andersen’s there is a kind of buoyancy Yet bridges only that Romanti- not that humans an aesthetic surrogates to points for cism and modernity but also made about Andersen) that (a point frequently is elements of rationalism. to points back the century, ‘reestablish[es] the of the importance ‘reestablish[es] things very in which relationship century, in and social responsibility conviction of moral intervene, the and urge[s] role identity’ (2 personal overruled by the Romantics in favor of a more metaphysical model. Andersen’s model. Andersen’s metaphysical of a more overruled the by in favor Romantics and his specific kind of empiricalideas about humans and non-humans, atti- of hu- of his negotiation our understanding to tude, serve key as an important he is positioned on how appreciate us to non-human and also allows man versus seeing to become accustomed have varioushistorical and literary thresholds. We about material and suspicion disenchantment an inherent objects in modernity, that objects thatbased on the once had a particular hypothesis meaning in a the by indi- down patterns broken are with firmly hierarchal society established in Romanticism the Withvidualism and multiplicity that marks age. one foot no saw Andersen modernity, into out (leaping, it seems) and the stretched other in modernity – enchanted in this age him was threat of disenchantment to new on instinctively draw he seems to suggested, as I have right. Similarly, its own M. Benedict’s Barbara examination from of the that, borrow to a mindset makes use of tropes favored by the Romantics but for a purpose the by Romantics but for that extends, or favored of tropes use makes variant In an eccentric the of that Romantic program. of any complicates, at least many leaving simultaneously Romanticism while to homage he pays maneuver in Johnson notes behind. Barbara of Romanticism’s claims ism and consumer culture, is complicated in Andersen’s work. In some respects, In some respects, work. in Andersen’s complicated is culture, ism and consumer the up a thread empiricism from of the he picked

2 ROMANTIK ·

01 4 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 43 , which , which the puppet as the victim of alien inhuman force the victim of alien inhuman the puppet as 853 essay ‘A Philosophy of Toys’, in which the in which child’s of Toys’, Philosophy ‘A 853 essay 1 (40; my italics) (40; my 27 . Andersen gives his readers a different kind of epistemological insight. Playing Playing insight. kind of epistemological a different his readers gives Andersen He also seems to have implicitly countered the gloomy prognosis that occupied the countered gloomy implicitly have to also seems He his in Baudelaire Charles in Romanticism thein Romanticism is placed on accent rules over men by turning them into marionettes. This is completely unknown in folk in folk unknown turningrules men by them marionettes. This is completely into over theme the of find the peculiar grotesque do we in Romanticism only Moreover, culture. doll tragic at being human, as the doll proposed to do in ‘Pengegrisen’, is no trivial matter do in ‘Pengegrisen’, to at being human, as the doll proposed His demystifica- if it permits expose human triviality. to him even Andersen for uncanniness grace, vitality, injection of life, fantastic tion of Romanticism’s more inanimate forms into that humans, and his insistence resemble or monstrosity sound very comes to observation pragmatic materiality, of naïvely on an almost But his broken the puppets. sharp like much ‘[k]nik, of broken knak!’ clatter about filled with they are ‘sociability’ and speak volumes empty; forms never are of things’. the ‘lives (human) desire to break open toys is seen as a need to ‘to get at and see [its] soul’, only to to only at and see [its] soul’, get ‘to is seen as a need to toys open break to desire soullessness. Destruction then of dolls, Goethe’s (recalling find a sad and empty tendency’ (202-203). metaphysical becomes the epigram) child’s ‘first Venetian 78. 994. 1 - 1 6. 1 . 1 6 - 1 1 . 829 . 1 11 1 86. 1 9-42. 948. 1 828 og . Trans. Jona- . Trans. 1 Ed. Larry H. 1 62- 1 . Trans. L. R. Lind. . Trans. 77-333. 1 ) Trans. Ruth Crowley. Ruth Crowley. ) Trans. 93. 974. 6. 1 1 1 1 98 1 90- . Copenhagen: Museum Tuscu- . Copenhagen: 1 . ( A Bilingual Text 995. 1 . . Vol. . Vol. . Copenhagen: Høst og søn, 2005. Høst . Copenhagen: SV 5. 8). London: Dover Publications, 8). London: Dover Hans Christian Andersen und die Hetero- Hans . 460-485. . 1 1 1 . Vol 3. . Vol 11 8 1 Frankfurt am Main: S Fischer Verlag, Verlag, am Main: S Fischer Frankfurt 4- SV 846) 1 11 33. Romanticism and the Object. . 52-7 1 0). Berlin: Streuben Verlag, Verlag, Streuben 0). Berlin: . Vol. . Vol. . ( - Middlesex: Echo Library, 2006. 4-27. 2006. 4-27. Library, Middlesex: Echo 1 1

. 8 /68). 11 SV 1 1 5. . 3rd ed. ( . 3rd . New Haven and London: Yale UP, 2009. UP, Yale and London: Haven . New 85 1 . Vol. . Vol. . Vol. 2. . Vol. 1 -7. . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 20 Press, of Chicago University . Chicago: 838). 8 vols. Ed. Klaus P. Mortensen. Det Danske Sprog- Sprog- Mortensen. Danske Det Ed. Klaus P. 8 vols. 1 1 1 SV SV ]. . Trans. David McLintock. London: Penguin Books. Penguin London: McLintock. David . Trans. . Vol. . Vol. The Secret Life of Things. Animals, Objects, and It-Narratives The Secret Life of Things. Animals, Objects, and It-Narratives 994. Nachtstücke The Painter of Modern Other Essays Life and The Painter SV 855) 964. 1 SV 830). [ 1 1 1 ). 6). . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 200 Press, University . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard 1 . Trans. Helene Iswolsky. Bloomington: Indiana University Indiana University Bloomington: Iswolsky. Helene . Trans. 1 The Secret Life of Things. Animals, Objects, and It-Narratives in The Secret Life of Things. Animals, Objects, and It-Narratives 8 85 1 Studienausgabe, Band IV. Studienausgabe, 1 . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2008. Press, University . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard . ( . Ed. Bill Brown. Chicago and London: Chicago UP, 2004. 2004. UP, and London: Chicago Chicago . Ed. Bill Brown. The Uncanny . Ed. Mark Blackwell. Lewisburg: Bucknell UP, 2007. 2007. UP, Bucknell Lewisburg: Blackwell. . Ed. Mark Roman Elegies and Venetian Epigrams Roman Elegies and Venetian . Ed. Mark Blackwell. Lewisburg: Bucknell UP, 2007. 2007. UP, Bucknell Lewisburg: Blackwell. . Ed. Mark Things Mit Eget Eventyr uden Digtning Eventyr Mit Eget I Sverrig Samlede Værker. Fodreise fra Holmens Canal til Østpynten af Amager i Aarene Canal til Østpynten af Amager Holmens fra Fodreise . Ed. Klaus Müller-Wille. Tübingen and Basel: A Francke Verlag, 2009. Verlag, and Basel: A Francke Tübingen . Ed. Klaus Müller-Wille. 65-257. 1 Suddenness: On the Moment of Aesthetic Appearance 997. Persons and Things Persons Rabelais and His World Forvaldlingens pris, H. C. Andersen og hans eventyr Forvaldlingens 1 The Secret Life of Puppets Life: Organic Form and Romanticism Form Life: Organic . Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, Press, University The Johns Hopkins . Baltimore: Puppets. An Essay on Uncanny Life Uncanny on Puppets. An Essay Pinocchio’s Progeny: Puppets, Marionettes, Progeny: Automatons, and Robots in ModernistPinocchio’s and Avant- Konturer: skulptur og dødsbilleder fra guldalderlitteraturen og dødsbilleder fra skulptur Konturer: Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus Frankenstein, . Vol. 9. . Vol. -282. 1 984. SV 1 62. 1 - 1 829). 2 970. 24 Literature 1 Press, Press, genität der Moderne lanum Press, lanum Press, in Eighteenth-Century England Eighteenth-Century England Peer. New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 2009. Palgrave York: New Peer. og Litteraturselskab. Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 2003-2007. Copenhagen: og Litteraturselskab. Manhattan and Wichita: The University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, of Kansas, Lawrence, Press The University Manhattan and Wichita: 1 1 Garde Drama than Mayne. London: Phaidon Press, London: Phaidon Press, than Mayne. New York: Columbia University Press, Press, Columbia University York: New ( Andersen, Hans Christian. ‘Lykkens Kalosher’. ( Kalosher’. Christian. ‘Lykkens Hans Andersen, Andersen, Hans Christian. Hans Andersen, Bakhtin, Mikhail. Mylius, Johan de. Christian und die Dinge’. Andersen Klaus. ‘Hans Müller-Wille, Andersen, Hans Christian. ‘Pengegrisen’. ( Christian. ‘Pengegrisen’. Hans Andersen, Andersen, Hans Christian. ‘Marionettespilleren’. ( Christian. ‘Marionettespilleren’. Hans Andersen, Brown, Bill. ‘Thing Theory’. Bill. ‘Thing Theory’. Brown, Karin.Sanders, Benedict, Barbara M. ‘The Spirit of Things’. M. ‘The SpiritBenedict, Barbara of Things’. Andersen, Hans Christian. ‘Dødningen’. ( Christian. ‘Dødningen’. Hans Andersen, Flint, Christopher. ‘Speaking Objects’. ‘Speaking Objects’. Flint, Christopher. Peer, Larry Romanticizing the Object.’ H. ‘Introduction. Peer, Andersen, Hans Christian. Hans Andersen, Hoffmann, E. T. A. ‘Der Sandmann’. ( T. A. ‘Der Sandmann’. E. Hoffmann, Shelley, Mary. Mary. Shelley, Gross, Kenneth. Kenneth. Gross, Andersen, Hans Christian. Hans Andersen, Nelson, Victoria.Nelson, Freud, Sigmund. ‘Das Unheimliche’. Sigmund. ‘Das Unheimliche’. Freud, Bohrer, Karl Heinz. Heinz. Karl Bohrer, Johnson, Barbara. Johnson, Barbara. ( ‘Über das Marionettentheater’. Heinrich von. Kleist, Andersen, Hans Christian. Hans Andersen, Gigante, Denise. Gigante, von. Johann Wolfgang Goethe, Segel, Harold B. Harold Segel, Freud, Sigmund. ‘The Uncanny’. Sigmund. ‘TheFreud, Uncanny’. Baudelaire, Charles. ‘A Philosophy of Toys’. of Toys’. Philosophy ‘A Charles. Baudelaire,

ROMANTIK ·

01 44 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 45 , Christopher Flint explains: complained: ‘this mode … is complained: The Critical Review The Secret Life of Things 4. 1 The Lives of Things in Hans Christian Material Andersen’s of Things in Hans Imagi- The Lives the British periodical 1 78 1 65). In Britain alone, between the early eighteenth century eighteenth the65). In Britain early and the late nine- alone, between 1 68). In 1 67- 1 . Projected publication date is 20 publication . Projected Notes ‘As items of clothing, jewelry, furniture, transportation, currency, and so on, narrating objects furniture, transportation, currency, jewelry, items of clothing, ‘As grounding in the their experiences narratives human of vulnerable physicality, evoke invariably to human storyteller as a its proximity derivesbodies. The speaking objects’ from effectiveness beings’ ( tasies that cause misery old time (the of living in another than dreams good rather pleasure: the flying to someone else. moon, or being days), the he is tin of which like is steadfast example, for formed. they are The littlewhich tin soldier, made and so on; see Mylius 73. conventions. genre objects as dictated by confront begin to definition that ‘we Bill Brown’s follow to and it has become commonplace story The of objects asserting us …. for them-the thingness working they of objects when stop as things, the then, to human subject and thus is the relationship selves the story of a changed the names less an object thanstory thing a particular of how really subject-object relationship’ discussion of thing theory an excellent 4). For as it concerns see Klaus (Brown H. C. Andersen, Christian und die Dinge’ article Andersen ‘Hans (2009). Müller-Wille’s these the oftentheir stories objects recount inanimate objects as narrators, used letting noun ‘it’, narrates its story human intermediaries, to The speaking object regularly autobiographies. so in manu- that Often the the involved experience agents of the object is communicated indirectly. facturing objects, the and the commodity culture spiritualization was commodity culture of ‘Speaking Objects’ In his chapter in at stake. The air went out of me, my head was spinning, and I was as miserable as any human being as any as miserable spinning, and I was head was out of me, my The air went in back species of humans. I wished they all were a new amongst myself be. I found could ever become director.’ and that I had never box my ity. The working title of the book is The working ity. nation teenth century, we find a series of novels that use coins or bank notes as narrators. Many are by by are Many as narrators. that find a series use coins or bank notes we novels of teenth century, literature. as high regarded not was authors and the genre women or lesser-known anonymous as he at the crucified hug it, deceived snatched he still while young, puppet: / May / So Lavater, breath.’ his last draws grown so fashionable, that few months pass which do not bring months do not pass which one of them that under our inspec- few so fashionable, grown in Flint tion’ (qtd. human one’ a real troupe, of a live be theater ‘to director 0 at all the right ‘laughs places, applauds at the right moment; this an unusual spectator!’ was 2 the in the of the and I was I was midst theater flies in a bottle, bottle, director. like ‘They were real- use of physical H. C. Andersen’s I investigate is part which in This essay of a book project 2 mine. are English Danish to from translations otherwise noted Unless 3 fan- humans in trap inevitably and desires dreams reckless ‘The how Galoshes’ Magic reveals 4 with dead things the animated in accordance are material how Johan de Mylius notes from 5 that use of material the Andersen’s should interpret one, suggests reader de Mylius, for Johan 6 of ‘thing’ and ‘object’ The nomenclature theories in numerous has been discussed in later years, 7 the During by pro- As suggested the century eighteenth in vogue. so-called ‘it-narratives’ were 1 11 1 1 8 clothes’. puppet sew to was ‘My greatest joy 9 it. a long time until I destroyed me for show; with / It attracted as a boy a puppet in love ‘I fell 53). 1

53). White opens her eyes again? And the raising of the dead in miracle stories – those of the of the And the dead in miracle New again? raising White opens her eyes (Freud, do with to the nothing uncanny’ that have feelings – arouses example for Testament, are all-powerful, but I cannot cite one genuine fairy story in which anything uncanny occurs. occurs. fairy uncanny cite one genuine story anything in which but I cannot all-powerful, are life, or dolls – come to when inanimate objects – pictures uncanny that told it is highly are We Christian stories the Andersen’s but in Hans household utensils, the furniture and the tin sol- when Pygma- Even the uncanny. from is further nothing and perhaps removed alive, are diers (Freud, be uncanny’ to felt this is hardly life, comes to lion’s beautiful statue first Primafirst Donna and the dog had bitten off the head.’ to they wished so dearly for eyes, with their glass and stared large so pitifully ones that sighed so that the could move.’ they queen, too be anointed a little, like just Daniel Amadeus Atterbom. The biblical story and Asheverus is of Ester ways. but in important slightly, has been altered a fairy to tale of a princess, example. changed for full-heartedly. I can freely make my own plays. I take the best from the comedies, and no one the from best I take plays. own my make I can freely full-heartedly. some thirty years a draw but were on the despised stages large that now are about it. Plays frets them I present to hold of and now taken and then now made theago, audience chortle, I have the little ones, and the little ones chortle their chortled; mother and father like ‘Jo- I present the appreciate little for ones do not versions, but abbreviated and ‘Dyveke’, hanna Montfaucon’ inside and Denmark travelled I have Now sad, but quickly. they want love-nonsense: lengthy in return’. known and I’m all people out, I know 1 fabricated. the in their seemed calculated. I addressed Every one thatthey clothes fold were with away turned on me and went his back one word, answer me, but he did not to came closest than polite no more but he was another, I addressed stridehis regular and an arrogant manner. turn patience and the also about to – When presently on me, I lost the was third his back first. movement amount of to hold and made an extraordinary difficult his arm.grabbed was He I sensed last at me. At with peculiarly the all his limbs, while at rather same time he sneered men, filled with a kind of artifi- steam; wooden of completely consisted that the company entire the antechamber’. decorate that to thecial automaton century had invented who one day face, catlike a little remember man with I still a strange As if in a dream of day. dry hung to I was innocence, on a string. My in all my where, the into living room stepped us – told existence my manuscript whom I owe call the to – as I dare mother aforementioned alderman without whom she during Hoffmann, children that the our father, he was night listened We of day. seen the light have never would paper and we unwritten be pure still would Snow instance, for when, call it uncanny as to so far go in fairy tales. Who would ‘commonplace 1 8 it had been his for moaned so horridly, and the poor puppeteer she broke, How ‘Knick, knack! 9 the in a heap. The king and all the they scattered were henchmen, dolls were the wooden ‘All 6 the name ‘Bloodless’ Romantic Per the borrowed Swedish from have to appears Andersen 7 the marionette scene Companion], In its later incarnation [The Travelling as ‘Rejsekammeraten’ 3 marionettes and then only they killed me!’ they were ‘in reality 4 reason, and neither does does not the audience’ staff ‘my 5 reason, and neither does itself does not it enjoys the audience, staff my director, ‘I am a happy 2 1 1 20 that the and wishes view thoughts ‘Indeed, the committed to animistic openly fairy tale is quite 1 1 1 1 1 22 like looked They the floor. up and down of adorned mechanically host Gentlemen moved ‘A 23 the the to printers’ light memories back saw ‘My first – reaches – it began I first shop, where

6 ROMANTIK ·

01 4 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ROMANTICISMS 47 , Bloodless who drank who drank Bloodless stretches one of his stretches Bloodless . . spins the glowing bar. See how the cut scissors See how bar. spins the glowing Scandinavian Studies Scandinavian Bloodless The Lives of Things The Lives [The Improvisatore], the entire metaphysical apparatus is rolled out in an is rolled apparatus the metaphysical entire [The Improvisatore], sits and, through the great halls and rooms, he stretches his hard limbs, each joint is limbs, each his hard the he stretches great sits and, through halls and rooms, Improvisatoren engagement with concepts of mimesis. For Andersen, statues, unlike puppets, absorb eternity absorb puppets, unlike statues, Andersen, of mimesis. For with concepts engagement This means that the ‘tragic and immortality powers. with and resonate Promethean/Pygmalion See Sanders. marble. of neoclassical the into connotations doll’ is absorbed novel novel Morbid Imagination’, forthcoming in Imagination’, Morbid it is and of wood; of stone grew limbs of metal, and thereby human thought from life possess. In Motala, physically that strength humans do not gained human thought who by Bloodless iron the glowing and see how inside threads. –Step and thick iron wheels on wheels, chains rods. long iron into presses pieces are in detail in more investigated with curiosity to what she told us about him, how the specters that moved inside of us showed inside of us showed with the that curiosity specters moved us about him, how told what she to during the long winter’s worked when he sat and And how him as if alive to nights. themselves sit with out of bed so she could him withhe often and call his wife her knitting sock had to power.’ much too the claiming to whose imagination was peculiar man nod genially the he hammers; how Listen paper. as if into and softly, plates, so quietly metal theinto hard them fitted pieces; it breaks to the rods, he breaks thick iron See how the anvil. fly from sparks in front shreds planed into pieces are The long iron looks as if a piece of the broken. seal was head run the threads, your great turning iron of you, wheels are In front and over feet. of your amongst the into open yard, venture buzzes, and if you and It hammers and large. heavy then too here and railways, steamboats for boilers scattered large still and is silenced and stands and hauls off. Everything man alone fingers fathom-long is alive, springs The water one’s from stops. looking at it. One turns, bows fingertips just still, stands of the limbs.’ that human thought has iron here in awe say, what to know and does not 27 and also in his Psyche], [The on the as ‘Psychen’ statue-stories, hand, such In Andersen’s other 25 It is the of hammer. strokes ‘What beats with in the here ticks strong clock, 24 and Bifocality Ingemann’s B. S. Eye: article ‘Left on this, Eye-Right see my an elaboration For 26 and humans will be nature to with with relationship machines regards complex Andersen’s