Focus Spring 1998.tif G errnan-J ewish Crea tive Identity in d1e Age of Lessing and Beyond: Berd10ld Auerbach 's Dichter 111ld Ka1lfmann H elen Ferstenberg 1711 erhaps the central dilemma fo r the nineteenth -century German­ ___ Jewish community was the question of how [0 gaUl acceptance in German culture while still maintairung some form of Jewish iden­ tity. \Vh.ile this dilemma was played out in coumless variations in all a reas of Jewis h life, the iss ue of how German Jews in the literary realm were to balance the demands of their dual identity was particu­ larly problematic and in n acrable. 111e literary debates carried on in the Allgtflltine ZtiJlmg de; jlldmlumJ. onc of the leading Jewish jour­ nals of the ni nc[cemh and early twentieth centuries, bear \1,ritness La rhe struggle within the German-Jewish community to define a Ger­ man-Jewish creative identity.1 Although the Allgtnwnt Zei/ung des jNdtn/llmJ was always strongly assimiiationist, it also contained an ongoing debate about the need and potential for an authentically Jew­ ish litera[\lre mat would £lourish 10 German culture and yet give ex­ preSSion in literary form to an identifiably Jewish identity. Berthold Auerbach's successful career and prominence as a man of lette rs made him the darling of the AIlgtmtine Zei/ung du ]uden/unli, and he was often celebr:ated as proof mat a J ewish and German identity could exist hand in hand (llorch 126). Nonethdess, beneath the praise 10 this journal of Auerbach as a classic German wriler of enduring standlOlt runs an undercurrent of doubt over the nature of Auerbach's success. Auerbach's Jewish novds Sp;noza (1837) and D;tbltr Ifnd Kaufmann (1840) are consistently seen as inferior in guality,l and his real contribution to literature is seen as his village tales, the genre with which he also achieved popular success. \'{' riting on the occasion of the hundredlh anniversary of Auerbach's birth, Ludwig Geiger reflects that Auerbach did much for r.he Jewish cause «durch scin Beispiel und durch seine Taten" but remains conspicu­ ously silent on r.he legacy ofrus writing for J ewish issues (101-102). As FMU .. Ultrat"r Vol 5, No.1 (1998) 2 - ----.;---, ~oan on Literal~ one critic lamenlS, Jews pl.ay only a pcriph~ cole in the village wes which made Auerbach famous and his plans to write a Jewish village tale came to nothing ( 'Litcrarischcc" 240). Despite the consistent cel­ ebration of Auerbach's life and success throughout the history of the Allgtmtint Zeitlin!. du jutienbuJIJ. a doubt about his status as a model Gcrman.jewish creative writer persists based on me sense tb:u his success was bought at me price of a denial of his Jewishness (Horch 126-27). In fact, an ex2.1ninacion of Auerbach's eady career suggests that rhe issue of a Gennan:lewish creative identity so central to the Allgtmtint Ztilung tits JlidtnlzuhI was one which preoccupied him deeply. After devoting himse:lf to Jewish issues in his firSt two novds, Auerbach turned decisively away from Jewish themes for the rest of his literary career. Auerbach's second novel, Dichter lind Kaufmann: Ein Lebms!,emQ/de aus tier leu Atose! Mmdeluohns, suggests some of the Wld«lying reasons for his decision to avoid Jewish themes in the future. This novel is a fictionalized biography of the obscure eigh­ teemh-cenrury poet Ephraim Kuh (1731-1 790), one of the firSt writ­ ers of Jewish origin to wnte 10 Gennan, and as such is an extremely interesting meditation on the issue of Jewish creative identity in the German cu1rura1 sphere. Indeed, the title Auerbach originally intended for the novel, "Der jiidische Dichter: Ein Tableau aus der Zeit Friedrichs des GraBen," suggests that one of his prunary InterestS here was the starns of the Jewish wnler in Germany. The shift of emphasis in the oue from "Dtt jiidische Dichter" to «Dichter Wld Kaufmann" hims at Auerbach's eagerness to avoid any paradigmatic: significance being attached to the example of Kuh as a Jewish writet. Instead, it suggeslS a desire to PUt the focus on the more universal conflicLing demands of spirituality and materialism. Yet the poet-merchant con­ flict is not well-developed in the noveL Auerbach's underlying con­ cern with the status of the Jewish writer in Germany not only re­ mams apparent but also constitutes one of the most interesting as­ peClS of the book. In this novd, Auerbach explores the external and internal barriers to Jewish involvement in German literary culture and weighs the possibility of developing a d.istinctively Jewish voice against the desire for assimilation into the mainStream German liler­ ary environment. At this early stage of his career, Auerbach engages in an intense mediation on the identity of the Gaman-J ewish wmer. Germlm-Jewish Creative Identity 3 Finding no workable definition, however, he comes to behcve that the highest aspiration of the Jewish-born man of letters must lie in being indistinguishable in all regards from non-Jewish German writ­ m. One of Auerbach's ostensible purposes in wnting this Jewish novel at the start of his career is to challenge the prevaillOg stereo­ types abou( Jews, 10 Di(hllr lind KOlljnlollll, Auerbach tackles preju­ dices which he.ld that Jews were uncreative and unworthy to appear as serious figures 10 literatu.re by frequently emphasizing the cultural and artistic sense of German Jews. The parenthetical explanations of Jewish words and customs in the novel reveal that Auerbach's in­ tended audience consists of non-Jewish Germans. By depicting ordi­ nary J ews who enjoy music and engage in spirited literary discussions on Lessing and Goerhe, Auerbach makes an Implicit plea to his Gen­ tile readers to recognize the right of Jews to full partidparion in Gtt­ man culrural life. Auerbach's optimism aboUi the potential for Jews to be accepted and thrive in the Gennan cultural sphere is embodied in the rdationshtp of Lessing and Moses Mendelssohn, who appear m Dichler und Kaufmann, and take a benevole nt Interest in Kuh's asptnll­ ~ons. The twO men are described in the novel as " Eingangspfoslen der neuen Zeit" (12: 219),· and their friendship srands as a symbol of bope that the Enlightenment has ushered 10 an e~ where the accep­ tance of J ews In mainstream German life is possible. Indeed, Auerbach's optimism is so insistent here that he deviates rather sig­ nificantly from the known facts of Kuh's Interactions WIth Lessing and l\'lendelssohn. In fact, Kuh formed a closer friendship with l\'lendelssohn than with Lessing. contrary to Auerbach's depiction. Kuh's biographer, Kayserling, states that Lessing had "weder Zeit noch Lust" to read Kuh's poems (27). Equ211y imcresting is Auerbach's omission of Kuh's falling out with 1>. lendelssohn over a poem which ~&ndelssohn reworked and published under his own name (Kayserling 30). Such changes suggeSt that Auerbach was anxious no t only to pay tribute to the gre2tness of Lessing and r.lenddssohn by avou:lmg lilly hint of ungenerosity of spi rit on their pan, but also to further the Jewish cause by showing that such an icon of German licer21ure as Lessing can take Jewish creative aspirations seriously. On another level, however, the portrayal of Kuh's active at­ tempts at artistic production reveals a deep anxiety on Auerbach's 4 FOQil on Literatltr pan about the status of the Jewish writer in German culture. 10 par­ ticular, the novel reveals his conviction that the creative person must be rooted within a community and his fear that the inadequately as­ similated Jew will be unable 10 find such a community. Diehur JlnJ Kaufman" charts the struggle and failure of Kuh to find a place in society for himself at this time of tremendous change. The literary­ philosophical circle of Berlin is one of the cemral loci of the novel, and other writers who appear suggest models for the German-Jewish writer. Finally, however, none offer a viable communi!:}' within which he can rhcive. Most strikingly, ussing appears as the revered philoso­ pher of HUfhaniliil. In a vivid and strong portrayal, Auerbach shows Lessing to be noble in his thought and harmonious in his personality and existence. Yet Auerbach makes him more than just a symbol of me Enlightenment: he is also light-heaned, dashing, somewhat flirta­ tious, and filled with youthful idealism. His activity as a writer is scarcely touched upon in the novel, although the power of his works is demonstrated through Kuh's sister, Veilchen, who falls in love with him on the basis of reading his play Die ludell. Kuh's disharmonious personality, eccentricities, and social clumsiness prevent him from being at home in the Lessing-l\Iendelssohn circle, and the LichlfJu!lJchm who inhabit thi s circle are ultimardy impossibly unat­ tainable models for the troubled Jewish writer. The inadequately educated and assimilated Kuh stands as an observer of the highest promises of the Enlightenment, but these promises remain beyond his grasp. \'<'hile Lessing seems co inhabit a different creative sphere than Kuh, the struggles and evenrual success of Anna Luise Karschin offer a closer parallel to Kuh's aspirations. Like Kuh, Karschin drifts around on the periphery of successful literary circles for much of the novel. Yet despite initial poverty and a deeply ll'oubled personal life, she evemuaUy achieves popuJarity with her poeLry honoring Frederick the Great. This interesting kinship between the woman-outsider and the Jew-outSider in their creative endeavors also proves unfruitful for Kuh in the end, since he cannot tap into the patriotic fervor for Frederick which motivates Karschin.5 Unable to fit into German literary circles and encountering f.requent anti-Jewish prejudices in broader German society, Kuh fails to find a viable community be­ yond the ghetto in which he can pursue his poetic aspirations. German-Jewish Creative TdenLity 5 Simultaneously, the Jewish community is shown to be an in­ hospitable environment for the aspiring writer. The expectations of Kuh's family are that he will become a rabbi or a merchant; no sup­ port for his creative ambitions exists. The restrictiveness of aJewish upbringing means that imaginative endeavors are associated In Kuh's mind with guilt and division. The first mention of his poetic indina­ tion in the novel is the pleasure he cakes in retelling the stOry of hls half-hearted youthful attempt at suicide with ample embellishments. Realizing that his imagination has caused him to teU "cine geOissenwchc Luge," we are tOld that "ein unversohnlicher Zwiespah" enters his soul (12: 72). Later, Kub's friend Maimon reminds him of a Jewish legend "die da verbieter, Phamasiegebilde zu schaffen; denn in cler Todesstunde kommen die P hantasiegebilde als Damone" (13: 185). The hosrility of the Jewish community to creative aspirations is evi­ dent even al Kuh's burial. Kuh's sisler-in-law, Rosa, places a laurel wreath on his head, bU[ this is tom off by the Jewish grave-diggers, "denn das jiidischc: Ceremonicl duldet keine solche Zierde" (13; 225). Tn this nove!, Auerbach confronts the nighunare of a Ger­ man-Jewish poet whose life and career end in utter dissonance. At home neither in the Jewish community, nor in wider German cul­ ture, Kuh's poetic achievement remains negligible and inauthentlc. Yet, paradoxically, Out of the failure and confusion of Kuh's life and career, Auerbach sees a clear path emerge fo r his own. At several poims in the novel, Auerbach speculates on the conditions necessary for creative success, and posits mat the successful write!:: must be able to draw from one of four streams of inspiratio n, identified as "Gott., Freiheit, Vaterland und liehe" (12: 154). In addition, he emphasizes the necessity of a stable and harmonious self if the aspiring writer is to achieve creative success (12: 167 and 13: 212). WIllie all of these well­ springs of creativity remain closed to [he deeply troubled Kuh, Auerbach senses that through assimilation and self-cultivation, a Jew­ ish-born writer of his own genenation can be assured access to one or more of these sources of creativity. He fears that parcial assimilation is tanmmount to trying to operate in a void, and comes to believe that the way to literary success in his own career is 10 be found in his genuine pall'iotism for Germany. The fact that Auerbach putS the onus firmly on the Jewish writer to assimilate to German ways has displeased some modern critics,' yet Auerbach's belief that creative 6 F(t{JIs on Literatur success depends upon assimilation is a pragmatic decision born Out of the fear that beyond the German mainstream, no alternative commu~ oiry exists witltin which the Jewish writer may thrive. The fact that this decis.ion was not an easy one for Auerbach is shown by the evident desire in Diehltr und Koufmann to rctain a Jewish identity in some measure even after me religious communil}' has loosened. Addressing the problem of religious identi£y, Auerbach shows that the Jewish community is threatened both by adherence to orthodoxy and by conversions to Christianity. The exa mpl e of Ephraim's boyhood tutor, Rabbi Chananel, demonstrates the dan­ gers Auerbach perceives in octhodoxy. Reacting against the stifling restrictions placed on him by Jewish law, Chananel is driven to ever greater infractions of the Sabbath, sabotages Ephraim's education in Judaism, and finally self-destructs by starving himself to death. Auerbach's intended career as a rabbi was made impossible after he received a prison sentence for his involvement with the student fra­ ternity Ge.rmarua. Had he been able to fulfill his original intenrion of becoming a rabbi, he cenainly would have been at the forefront of the Jewish reform movement in Germany (Sammons 63). Auerbach is equally clear that conversion is a m .... jor blow to the unity of the family and is beyond the limitS of acceptable assimilation. Kuh's fam­ ily drifts apart when twO brothers convert after their father's death. As far as religion is concerned, Auerbach is clear in his belief iliac at least nominal ties to Judaism are essenual for maintaining a Jewish identity. The question of how Jewish identity may find expression within the literary activity of the German-Jewish wriler proves much more problematic for Auerbach. fn his portrayal of Kuh's attempts to forge a career as a poet, Auerbach makes tentative moves towards claiming wit as a specifically Jewish aesthetic. Kuh achieves his greac­ est literary success with his epigrams, and he dreams of becoming a new Martial. Tn the novd, Kuh is encouraged to dedicate himself to the literary fonn of epigrams by no less a mentor than Lessing, since the epigram's brevity and snappiness is the ideal vehicle for what Lessing sees as the Jewish characteristic of wiL Indeed, throughout the oovd, Auerbach associates the genre of the epigram with wit rather th.an regarding it as a classical fonn, as would be more usual. Lessing explains to Kuh "daB die Juden schon durch ihre SteUung einen Bernf German-Jewish Creative Identity 7 zorn Wiu, zur Saryre Wld zum Epigramm haben" (12: 130). He elabo­ rates that wit is a natural reaction on the pan of Jews to the difficult position which they occupy in society: . der Witz ist 1m Geistesleben was der B1.itz im au!3ern Naturleben, er reinigt die Armosphare, er entsteht wie der Blitz durch den Conflict zweier Elektrizitaten. Gerade dte Contraste des L ebens, die sich dem Juden von selbst aufdringen, sind ergiebig fur den Witz. (12: 130) TIu-ough Lessing, Auerbach suggests that Jews have a disunctive voice, and tentatively posits that the Jewish gift for wit may represent a unique and positive aesthetic comribution to German hterarure. Almost as soon as this suggestion is made, however, Auerbach retreats from it. Lessing's praise of Jewish wit turns out to be a double­ edged sword, since he adds that wit is rather insubstantial: "Der \'(liLZ ist, wic das Salz, oieht sattigc:ode Speise, aber es wurZI die Nahrung und bewahn vor FaulniB" (12: 131). Even more damningly, Auerbach returns to the issue of wit in a later context in the novel, and in an explicit narrative aside he explains that " die klein en Witzspiele in Sinngedichteo und Epigrammen" are OOt equal to the task of express· ing the complexiues of imponant nationaJ issues (13: 2). He equates indulgence in wit with self·abandonmem, succumblOg to superficial pleasures, and allowing oneself to be exposed to a contagious disease. Despite the modest fame and popularity Kuh achieves tn Ber:lin as a wit, Auerbach condemns his activities as "gcistigen Sc1bsunord, der die tieffsren Erregungen gern fUr ein momentanes Aufsehen in ih( Gegentheil verkeh rt und preisgiebt" (13: 4). Such strong language suggests that Auerbach is doing more than merely illuminating the mistakes his protagonist makes in his literary career. Rather, in his meditations on wit, Auerbach is weigh­ ing the thorny issue of whether the Jewish writer tn Germany may have a disunctive voice without sacrificing the substantiality of his work and jeopardizing his claim to acceptance in Germany. 10 this novel, the answer he arrives at is that he may nOlo Auerbach's medi­ tations on this issue take place at least in parl under the shadow of Heine, easily the most prominem and controversial German writer of Jewish origin in the nineteeOlh century, and a writer who, what- 8 Focus on Literatur ever dse he may have been accused of, was never described as lacking in wit. In 1836, four years be fore Dichter lind KaMjmQnll, Auerbach had published an essay entitled "D as Judenthum und di e neueste Literarur," a refutation of Wolfgang Menzel's attack on the Young Germans as Jewish in spirit. Ye l , as Jeffrey L. Sammons notes, Auerbach's motive in this essay "is not to defend Young Germany against association with Jewjshness, but rather to defend Jewishness from association with Young Germany" (66). Auerbach argues mat the Jewish spirit, like the Christian one, is fundamentaUy opposed co the shallowness and sensualism characteristic of Young Gennany. He is particularly scathing ab out what he calls Heine's "platter Sensualismus," arrogance and reckless disrespect for all institutions, so that eve.rything becomes th.~ "ZIe!sche.ibe seines Witus" Ulldtnfhllfn 322). He criticizes Heine for being lost in a subjectivity so incense that it ends in " Witz- und Schmerzbankerott" (jllden/hllff' 32 1). Tn Auerbach's view, Heine's controversial pe.rson and writi ngs lack any fixed base and are essentially empty exercises in wit. He is anxious to show that H eine is an anachronism, not a representative German­ Jewish writer of the nineteenth. century, and indeed he disputes Heine's right to speak as a Jew at all (jUdUlfhlllll 322).1 Acknowledging that wir is frequently considered a specifi cally Jewish characteristic, in Dichter lind Kmifmoflll, Auerbach locates the origins of J ewish wit in the unconventional education Jews receive, the hybtid nature of Jews' language ("der eigenthiimlich e, mit H ehraismen versetzte Jargon''), and the effecrs of training in "Talmudischtt Dialektik" together with the infiltration of Voltaire into Jewish circles (13: 3). fnterestingly, all of these reasons for the existence of Jewish wit are ones which may be remedied in the nineteenth century by a healthy dose of Bildllng and assimilation to German ways. Auerbacl1'S clear sense is that any dif­ feu:nce on the parr of the Jewish writer is damaging to the J ewish cause, and that the proper aspiration of the Jewish writer should be confOrmity in literary style and theme. Seen together, the novd DichJer und }G:mfmann and the essay "Das Judenthum und die neueste Lileratur" cons titu te documenta­ tion of Auerbach's decision to forge his own career squarely in the mainstream of German literature. By nature, Auerbach was intensely anti-experimental in his literary style, but in this novel his rootedness in a realist aesthetic is justified and sealed. 8 Iv{oreover, Dichttr und German-J ewish Creative Identity 9 Kallfmann mar ks the end of Auerbach's experimem with Jewish themes in his writing. In the early years o f his career, he confronts both the nightmare o f the un successfully assimUatcd J ewish writer, Kuh, and the nightmare of the controversial J ew, Heine, and dissoci­ ates himself fltmly from both. \Xfhile remaining a hfclong believer in the need to retain a separate Jewish religious identity, Auerbach comes to the decision in the early years of his career that a separate Jewish creative identity is unacceptable. It is a distOrtion to see Auerbach's deci sion to avoid being labeled as a Jewish writer as an example of Jewish self-hatred, as Sander Gilman argues. ' Auerbach does not [urn away from J ewish themes Out of a fear that he, as a Je\\,;sh writer, has a tainted discourse, bOl rather Out of a genuine conviction that the best way to further the Jewish cause is to show that the Jewish writer is an equal parmer in German culture. 1o In fact , Auerbach's private identity r emained vcry much that of a Jewish-German wri ter, as evidenced by a letter written [0 Ferdinand Freiligrath in the wake of the tremendous success of his fust village tales. Tn it he wntes: '1 ch muB Dir auch nocb sagen, daB es mir besondere Freudc mach£, daB es mir, cineOl Juden, gelungen ist, etwas aus clem innersten des deutschen Volksgeistes zu offe nbaren" (Bettelheim 161). \l As David Sorkin argues, the role of J ewish artiStS is central to the debate over the position of Jews in Germany, since the idea of culrure plays such a crucial role in the emancIpation bar­ gain (100). As a highly public figure, the Jewish writer is among the most visib le manifestations of the involvement of J ews 10 German culture, and Auerbach form ed the opinion that as such, the wises t contribution of the Jewish writer is to make himself indistinguishable from hi s non-Jewish colleagues in his creative activities. Auerbach's own successful career seemed to bear Out his decision until near the end of his life, when the l ise of political anti-Semllism proved a de­ moralizing blow (Kaiser 417-18). A petition with a quarter of a mil­ lion signatures demanding restrictions on the rights of J ews and a two-day long debate in parliament on the subject Jed Auerbach to make his well-known despairing comment in a lener: "Vergebens ge\ebt und gearbeited" (Berrelheim 376).12 Although hindsight shows us that Auerbach was naive in his faith in assimilation and education as the keys to J ewish acceptance in Germany, his underrated novel Di(httr Imd KBlt/mann shows that this faith was nor unthinking, but was rather 10 FOCliJ on Literatllr the hard-won product of a difficult confrontation with the problems of the Jewish writer in Germany. Yale Universil.J Notes ISee Horch. zSee, for aample, L Levi's repon of Auerbach's funeral in Allgeomitt leitllng dtJ jlldentlllJlJ 46 (1882): 136-139. JSee, for example, E . Grunebaum's assessment of Dichur IIlld Kallfmallll ~s QJa.llgtl~ajt. in A!/gtmtint Zeitllllg du Iudentuml 19 (1855): 125 and LudWig Geiger s diSCUSSion of Auerbach's Jewish novcls in AllgtllJtine Zei/lll1g du jlldtlltumJ 76 (1912): 101 .102. 'AII references to Dichter lind Kalljmallll are from Berthold Auerbach's GualJlmellt S{hnfltln. ~lndeed, there are several critical remarks about Frederick in the course of the novel See Di :Maio 272. These views are Auerbach's own' in reality, Kuh was a great admirer of Frederick (Kaysaling 11). ' 6See, for example, Gilman 224. ' As Lothar Kahn and Donald Hook show, Auerbach was one of a group of writers concerned with showing that Jewish writers "are indeed de~ng ~f the Gennan label" and "to dissociate themselves from [Hcine), while looking upon him as a d ire threat to their continued well-being in Germany" (53). ~n addition to distancing himself from wit, Auerbach condemns ~mpfilldsomkeit (13: 107), the Gmit cult (12: 164), and ballalltiJlht Obmnuth tinged with cynicism (13: 70) as false approaches to literary production in the coursc of this novel. ~ A~erbach's novd does not simply establish a "paradigm of the 'good' and 'bad' discourse of the Jew" as Gilman stateS (224), but rarner addresses the. co~plex issue o~ how ~e Je~ish writer can build a career in a society which IS largely hostile to his aspIrations. lQAs Jeffrey L. Sammons writes: "Auerbach was an assimilationisl, nm out of opportunism or convenience but out of conviction" (72). "Letter from 24th November, 1843, (Bettdheim 161). 12Lener to Jakob Auerbach, November 23, 1880, (Beuelheim 376). German-Jewish Creative Tdentity 11 Works C ite d Auerbach, Berthold. GuammeiJe Jthrifttll. 20 vols. Augsburg: Cottll, 1858. -, "Das Judenthum und die ncucstc Litcratur." 1836. Po/itiuhe At-an/tarde 18JO-1840. Eim Do/r.llll1mtatiOIl Zlim 'Jllligm Delltuhland", Ed. ALfred Estcrmann. Vol. 1. Frankfun 2. t-.L Athcnau, 1972 . .305-329. Benelheim, Anton. Btrthold ANerbach. Der Malin - Still IPerk - Jem NtJthlaJf. Stungart: Cotta, 1907. Oi Maio, and Irene $IQcksieker. "Berthold Auerbach's Dithltr /llId KON/malln: Enlightenment T hought and Jewish Identity," LUIing Yearbook 19 (1987): 267-85. Geiger, Ludwig. AIIgumi1lt Zeilllllg de! jlldmlllm! 76 (1912): 101 -102. Gilman, Sander L. JewiIh StlJ-Hatrd: Anti-Semililm o/ld the Hiddell Lan­ guage oj the Jewl. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1986. Horch, Hans Otto. AIIj dtr Sucht nath der judischen Erzahlliteratlir: Die Lilua'"rkrilik du "Allgtfluintll ltl/llng du iudtlllllmJ" (1837-1922). Frankfurt a. M.: Lang,. 1985. Kahn, Lothar and Donald D. Hook. "The Impact of I·kine on Nineteenth-Century German-Jewish Writers." The Jeu'ilh Ruep/ion of Heinrich Heillt. Ed. Mark H. Gelber. Tubingen: Niemeyer, 1992. 53-65_ Kaiser, Nancy A. ' 'Berthold Auerbach: The Dilemma of the JeWish Human­ ist from Vormarz to Empire." German Studiu Review 6 (1983): 399-419. Kayserling,1-.t Dtr Dkhter Ephraim Kllh. Berlin: Springer, 1864. "Literarischer Wochenbedcht." Allgellldllt ldlllllg du Judtllillml 28 (1864): 240. Sammons, Jeffrey L. "Observations on Berthold Auerbach's Jewish Nov­ els." Orim: A jewish jOllmal at Yale 1.2 (Spring 1986): 61-74. Sorkin, David. "The Invisible Community: Emancipation, Secular Culture and Jewish Identity in the Writings of Berthold Auerbach." The Jtu'ilh RupolIJt to German Culture jrom the Enlightmlllelil to the Su­ ond IPorld IPar. Eds. J ehuda Reinharz and Walter Schatzbe rg. Hanover: UP of New England, 1985. 100-119.