“Almost Poetic”: Alfred Döblin’s Subversive Theater Geraldine Poppke Suter Manrode, Germany B.A., Bridgewater College, 2006 M.A., James Madison University, 2008 M.A., University of Virginia, 2013 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures University of Virginia May, 2018 Benjamin K. Bennett Jeffrey A. Grossman Volker Kaiser John L. Parker © 2018 Geraldine Poppke Suter Dedicated to the memory of Hans-Jürgen Wrede “Am Bahnhof stand ein Sauerampfer, sah immer nur Züge und nie einen Dampfer. Armer Sauerampfer.” — Hans-Jürgen Wrede, frei nach Joachim Ringelnatz Abstract This dissertation explores elements of objectification, artistic control, and power in three of Döblin’s plays: Lydia und Mäxchen, Comteß Mizzi, and Die Ehe. In the first chapter I address the nature of, and relationships between, characters and things that people these plays, and outline Döblin’s animation of props, and their elevation to the status of characters in his initial play Lydia und Mäxchen, the objectification of characters in his second play Comteß Mizzi, and a combination thereof in his final play Die Ehe. In the second chapter I treat issues of artistic control. While his debut play contains multiple and unconventional loci of control, the focus of his second play lies on artistic restrictions and its consequences. In his final play Döblin addresses social forces which rule different classes. In the third chapter I connect the elements of objectification and uprising with matters of control by arguing that Döblin employs Marxist themes throughout his plays. In Lydia und Mäxchen I compare the uprising of the props against the poet (and all things human) to the uprising of the working class against the bourgeoisie. In Comteß Mizzi I discuss matters of human mechanization and the alienation of labor. In Die Ehe I address the lack of control that members of all classes experience since capitalism establishes itself as reigning force. Acknowledgements I thank my committee at the University of Virginia: Benjamin Bennett, Jeffrey Grossman, Volker Kaiser, and John Parker. Benjamin Bennett agreed to serve as my “Doktorvater,” and the idea for my dissertation stems from one of his courses, in which I discovered Döblin’s plays. Jeffrey Grossman offered clarification and advice throughout. Volker Kaiser enthusiastically supported my efforts. John Parker read my manuscript and provided detailed comments and feedback. Thank you to Stefan Keppler-Tasaki, Erich Kleinschmidt, and other Döblin scholars who have inspired me. The participants of the International Alfred-Döblin-Colloquium, in Zurich 2015, provided stimulating theories on many of Döblin’s texts. Thank you to my friends—those unexpected and those longterm—who never failed to encourage me, especially Beatrice and Chuck Taggart, Lucy Bednar and Richard Gaughran, Sybil Scholz and Samantha Hume, Janette Hudson, Philipp and Silke von Detten, Stefanie Arend, Emily Hanger, and Ted Butchart, and to my former professor Philip O’Mara whose belief in my scholarly work first encouraged me to become a professor. I’d also like to thank Anna and Ian who confirm that no challenge is insurmountable. Most of all, thank you to my loving husband Scott Suter for accompanying me throughout the entire process with never wavering moral support and advice. Thank you also especially to my parents Karin Wrede-Poppke and Dieter Poppke and my siblings Janine, Jacqueline, and Felix Poppke who have always supported my endeavors and never doubted my decisions. Thank you to all for believing in me during this marathon. Table of Contents Introduction 1 Play Summaries 13 Dramatic Theory I: People and Things 34 “He treats objects like women”: People, Props, and Prostitution 38 Chair, Locker, and Candelabra 38 Demeter’s Dagger 48 Screens and Silence 60 “Schuhauszieher, Taschentuch, Corsettstange”: Marriage as “Universalmöbel” 74 “Ein Schwert bittet heißer als zehn Münder” 75 “Bett, Waschtisch und Ofenschirm” 79 “Adalin, Bromural, Veronal” 84 “Konsument des Wahren und Schönen”: The Spectator as Co-Author 93 Theatersalat 96 Prostitutes and Substitutes 97 “Die kompletteste Romansituation” 105 Dramatic Theory II: The Idea of Artistic Control 113 “Talkin’ ‘bout A Revolution”: Rebellion in Lydia und Mäxchen 118 Dichter 118 Requisiten 121 Klabautermann 126 “Statues Made of Matchsticks”: Assertion and Control in Comteß Mizzi 130 The Actress 133 The Poet 137 The Sculptor 142 “Requisiten sind nicht erlaubt”: Artistic Limitations and Constraints in Die Ehe 146 Restrictions and Prescriptions 146 Prelude 149 Real World Reactions 153 Dramatic Theory III: The Marxist Allegory 159 “Ein Gespenst geht um in Europa”: Lydia and “Marxchen” 162 Grave Diggers 162 Prop Rebels 165 Specter Actors 169 “Lebend, gemalt, Holz oder Stein?”: Aufgabe and Adaptation in Comteß Mizzi 176 Artists as Commodities 176 Pimps in Power 182 “Women as Production Instruments” 186 “Champagne and Reefer”: Excess and Dearth in Die Ehe 197 Kaltgestellte Kunstwerke 197 Interlude 215 “And It’s All Vanity” 226 Conclusion 233 Bibliography 239 !1 Introduction “Ihr wißt, auf unsern deutschen Bühnen Probiert ein jeder, was er mag.”1 Before delving into my dissertation’s subject matter, I will provide a brief biographical and literary overview, including synopses of the plays that I discuss. Alfred Döblin, born on 10 August 1878, in Stettin as one of six siblings became fatherless when he was almost ten years old when his father left the family, and, with his young lover, embarked to the United States. The loss of the father led to his family’s financial hardship, leaving his mother without the means to provide for the family. Shortly thereafter, also in 1888, the family moved to Berlin. Among others, Döblin’s biographer Wilfried F. Schoeller argues that this event shaped some of Döblin’s own life decisions. For instance, Döblin felt a strong sense of responsibility towards the important women in his life—his mother and his wife. His loyalty to his mother prevented a continuation of an early relationship with the young nurse Frieda Kunke since his mother did not 1 Goethe, Faust I. !2 approve of her as a viable option for her son: “Der Familienrat sprach, Döblin lässt es durchblicken, ein eindeutiges Urteil: Er durfte Frieda Kunke nicht heiraten, denn er sollte vermutlich nicht mit einem armen Mädchen in die Welt schreiten, er sollte nach oben heiraten” (Schoeller 89).2 In 1911, Frieda Kunke gave birth to their son Bodo. After completing his medical studies and while working as doctor at the Urban Hospital in Berlin, Döblin met Erna Reiss, a medical assistant on his ward. Considering her a more agreeable match Döblin married her, and thus, embarked on a complicated marriage. Döblin describes their engagement as follows: “Da Erna an der Verlobung festhielt, wurde diese gegen meinen Willen vollzogen: Man bat mich, Klavier zu spielen und zu singen; ich schlug Brahms vor: ‘O Tod, wie süß bist du.’ Alles verlief friedlich. Ich zog begossen ab ins Krankenhaus, sagte mir: Ich habe mir den Hals abgeschnitten” (Schoeller 97).3 The two married in 1912, and had their first son, Peter, in the same year. Sons Wolfgang and Klaus followed in 1915 and 1917 respectively. The couple had four children together. Their youngest son Stefan was born in 1926. Starting in 1921, Döblin engaged in an off and on relationship with photographer Yolla Niklas, and biographers 2 Trans.: “The family counsel spoke, Döblin implies, an irrefutable verdict: He was not allowed to marry Frieda Kunke because he was not supposed to walk into the world with a poor girl; he was supposed to marry up” (Schoeller 89). 3 Trans.: “Since Erna insisted on the engagement, it was being executed against my will: I was being asked to play the piano and to sing; I proposed Brahms: ‘Oh death, how sweet art thou.’ Everything was peaceful. I left crestfallen for the hospital, told myself: I have cut my throat” (Schoeller 97). !3 speculate that the traumatic childhood experience of his father’s abandoning the family prevented Döblin from leaving his wife Erna to establish an official relationship with Yolla. Döblin (similarly to some of his dramatic characters), trapped within social structures with certain expectations, followed his mother’s advice for finding a partner instead of allowing his heart to guide him. He remained in the marriage with Erna instead of fully committing to Yolla. The rising Nazi party presented a threat to Döblin as a secular Jew which he, however, did not realize at first. Döblin’s friends advised him to leave the country in the early 1930s. Not too concerned initially, he laughed about the advances of the Nazi party, but, after the burning of the Reichstag he realized the seriousness of the national socialist threat. Initially he emigrated to Zurich, Switzerland, first alone, then his family followed. Later that year, in September 1933, they moved to Paris, France. In 1940, after fleeing through France, and via Marseille, Barcelona, Madrid to Lisbon, Döblin, his wife, and their youngest son Stefan eventually departed Europe for the United States, and arrived in New York, on 9 September of that year. Earlier in the year their son Wolfgang committed suicide during his flight from German troops—a tragedy of which his parents only learn at the end of the war. Initially employed by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Döblin had trouble continuing his literary work during his US exile. In 1941, Döblin, his wife, and !4 Stefan converted to Catholicism, a move his friends and foes widely criticized. Eager to return home after the war ended, Döblin returned to Germany on 9 November 1945, and lived in Baden-Baden. Only two years later, Döblin revisited Berlin for the first time. Although his exile in the United States was not easy for Döblin he left with mixed feelings: “Viel ist uns in diesem Land zuteil geworden.