Focus 2001.tif


64 FOCl/S m Germa1l SllIdies 

Revis iting Social and Racist Prejudice in 
Imperial Germany after the Goldhagen 

Controversy: Anti-Emancipatory 
Tendencies in Heinrich Mann's D er Untertan 

Teague Mims 

I. 

D n light of ongoing discussion as to Ihe validity of Daniel Jonah 
Goldhagen's assenion of the "long-incubdling, pervasive [ ... J 

elimmationis l antisemitisOl of German culture" (419), it may be useful to 

retlsst:n aicernalive models of ami-Semitism's character ,lIld its pun:h.lse 
in Gennan society. Such models which have been marginalized by til£: .led­

demic and popular attention has been lavished on GoldbJgen's best-seIl­
i.n g Sllld)~ Nitler's IVillmg Exec1Itiorx..'ys: Odimry Germm; mr! (be HdQ.:m(Sl.' 
For Gold h,lgen, by the lime of the Third Reich anti-Semitism resided with 
·'hurricane-force potent ial [ ... ) in the hean of German political culture, in 
German society itself" (428), thus making available a pliJble and even 
"willing" population of executors of Hitler's murderolls scheme for Eu­
ropean Jewry. One ,!\temative to Goldhagen's model is proposed in 
Shulamit Volkov's anicle "Antisemitism as a G.lltural Code: Reflections on 
the liistory,md HistoriogrJphy of Antisemitism i.n Impelil! Germ.Ul)( <l 

discussion of "anti-errl.lncipJLOry" (34) tendencies wh ich locates .llui­
Semitism ,,~thin a complex, or "cultural code" (34), composed of Illutu­
aUy reinforcing social and racist p rejudice.! 

To be clear, Goldhagen does set fonh a "cultural cognitive model" 
(91; d. J4-48) for explaining the mentality and actions o f Ge rmans. 
However, for aU that he insists 011 the suffusion of the constitutive ele­
ments o f litis common German cognitive model with anti·Semitism, for 
him tills is a unidirectional process. \'(filat is lacking is an allowJllce forthe 
reciprocal influence and mUUlal reinfo rcement of sociJI and racist preju­
dice, and here Volkov's contribution is a useful remedy. At an early stage 
in his project, Goldhagen describes JUSt such a d}11..lmic, but he immedi-

Fool5 al Germall Studies Volume S (2001) 



66 FootS on German Studies 

areiysets aboUllimiting its scope and implications. He does this firstly and 
most generally by foregoing investigation of many areas and themes that 
would add to this dimension and more fully illustrate the complexities. In 
"The Goldhagen G:mtroversy. One Nation, One People, Ooe Theory?" 
historian Fritz Stern points to just some of these areas, noting ''Lhe still 
sharp antagonisms between Protestants and Catholics, orthe intense class 
conflict that Germans called the 'social question' and that weighed on 
them far more than the 'Jewish question' did" (131) .3 In a corollary to this, 
Goldhagen insists from the outset thallhe "social and psychological func­
tions that Jew-hatred, once ensconced, comes to play in people's mental 
economies" can really only offer an amciliary and clearly subordinate ex­
planation for the fundamenta l and baSIcally sufficient role pla)ed by "the 
definition of the morJ.l o rder as a Ouistian one, with Jev..-s as its sworn 
enemies" (43). 

In my conclusion I e:: .. :plore this critical enterprise funher. For the 
present, it is more fitting to emphasize thJ.t the Impulse to broaden and 
enlivemhe context of German anti-Semitism is fed bysome of Goldhagen's 
own theoretical assertions, which I intend to follow:' 

Because antisemitism springs from the bosom of the culture 
of the antisemites and not from the character of Jews' actions, 
it is nOt surprising thJ.t the nature of antisemitism in a given 
society tends to be in harmony with the cultural models that 
guide contempomrytU1derstanding of the social world 
(JHO) 

O:)Osequentl}~ 

it becomes difficult for non-Jews to alter the conception of Jews 
",,"ithout altering a wide- ranging and integrated symbol structure, 
including importam cognitive models, upOn which people's un­
derstanding of society and morJ.lity rest. (38) 

In light of these cues from Goldhagen's own "recasting" of the "frame­
work for analys is" (Ch. 1), it appears that he initially trots om but then 
sends back to pasUire perspectives that would bear us away from the !'ather 
rest rictive tendencies of his explanatory model. G:Jfilniryto Goldhagen's 
view, I propose that at least for t he decades of the Empire, and very pos-

Anti- E mancipatory Tendencies in Mann's Der Unlert£l71 67 

sibly into the subsequent years, anti-Semitism should be viewed not so 
much as the "donimnt ro;yIiti1.E thread' (47, emphasis in original), but rather 
as an indispensable one among Illimy such threads that are related in a 

dynamic fashion. 
In setting up such a contrJ.st, it is helphJ to build on Volkov's 

earlier contribution. In that article she presents a b!"ief survey of ap' 
proaches to lhe historiography of anti·Semitism in Imperial Germany, 
and she identifies in1portant changes in emphasis and interpretation _ \"'hile 
accepting the conclusion that the "decline of the parliamenta!yantisemitic 
political panies" appeared to be an established fact by the early 1890s, she 
maintains that anti·Semitism per se had not changed, merely the fo rm it 
took had changed: "Antisemitism had spread from the 'since re' groups to 
Olher organizations and it WJ.S no less significant or potent for th<l \ change 
o f face" ("Antisemitism" 28). Although divested of that immediate insti­
(Ulional environment, anti-Semitism persisted and caIne to pervade Ger­
man society on a more generJ.1 symbolic level, feedi.ng upon and reinforc­
ino- the related elements within an ami-erruncipatorycomplex. Tn the course o 
of th is development, Volkov suggests that Gerrrun "societyundelwem a 
process of cultural polarization," .;vith a broadly construed anti-Semitism 
clur.lCterizing the culture of the majority of Germans, and i\ web of v<ll· 
ues and norms tied to "enuncipalion" setting its imprint on lhe other 

("Antisemitism" 34). 
This stands in stark contrast to Goldhagen's oudook, ;1S Volkov 

spells out the implication: "antisemitism was neither identical with the 
overall 'Genrumic cullUre' of the Reich, nor was it merely an element within 
it" ("Antisemitism" 34). Rather, by the late 1890s, it had become an inte­
gral p,m of a "cultural code" that communicated and was embedded in 
espousal of certai.n conservative, "anti· egalitarian" social, political, and 
mor.u values ("Amisemitism" 33-35). The broadlyanti-emancipatorynorms 
and values identified by Volkov did not necessarily rest upon a conscious 
or rigorous framework Indeed, her suggestion that they were aJlthe more 
pernicious when operating at a casual or submerged level is perhaps illus­
trJ.ted by rhe rule of thumb of N1ann's protagonist, "nicht U1 <luffalliger 
Weise hinter del' Mehrheit zuruckzubleiben" (298) . 

A compelling illustration of much that Volkov's alternative theo­
retical and historical treatment entails is to be found tn Heim"ich 1vlaIUl'S 
novel, DcI' Untf!ltan, conceived and wrinen in the gathering shadow cast by 
the conflicts within and between the European nations that wOlJd issue in 



68 FoolS on Gennall Swdies 

the First World War. Conversely, indicators of the fruitfulness of viewing 
DO' Untertan through the lens of Volkov's article are, for one, the absence 
of any mention of thal novel in Rohenson's recent survey, 71x Jeuish 
Qrestion' in GemunLiterautre[ . . .]. For another, the fact that in a suggestive 
recem schematic survey of the German novel, which includes a chapter 
on Der UnJertan, Alfred D. White does not ackno'Wiedge the specific, cen­
tral rele\~Jnce of anti-Semitism forrhat work, as racism and anti-Semitism 
are marginal to the analysis.' Finally, Reinhold Alter's insightful anicle, 
"Heinrich:Manns Untertan- Priifstem fiirdie 'Kaiserreich-Debane'?" does 
not address the question of anti-Semitism except byciting it and "virulenter 
Amimarxismus" as examples of "aggressiver Feindbilder" (374). 

II. 

He inrich MaIm's DIY Unlertan ponra)'S a 'world skewed by salirical distor­
tions. But it is also a 'world ill which the various social, cultural, and politi­
cal anitudes and practices that ;Ire rendered to such biting effect can be 
undersLOod as interconnected pans of a larger web. The historiography 
on Imperial Germany has undergone major revisions in recem years.6 The 
socio-political order of the Wtlhelmine period after 1890- presided over 
by tbe monarchy, officialdom, and their conservative allies~ is now seen 
as less efficacious at sening its own in1print on events and memalities or at 
least limiting the scope and impact of unsanctioned ways of thinking and 
aCling. These interpretations have achieved wide academic acceptance, 
with the result that one may feel lillcertain how to treat a work such as Der 
Unterfan h is hard to deny that the liberal-democratic political sympath.ies 
of the author generate a vindictive portrayal of bourgeois hypocrisy in 
late-nineteemh-century Germany. H o\vever, one may still ask, does the 
book shed light on a set o f interconnected attitudes and practices that, 
although not often treated as a complex, nuy yl:t be relevant to continuing 
efforts of histOrical interpretation? Drawing on Volkov's suggestive con­
cept of "antisemitism as a cultural cooe," this paper argues that Mann's 
provocative novel remains a useful and illuminating document of that t ime. 
Indeed, as Helmut Peitsch explains in his introouclion to the authOI~tJ.tive 
English ediuon, 'fiJe Lapl Subjoct, in his earlier journalistic writings Mann 
also espoused anti-Semitic vie'.VS, and Mann later "stated it a requirement 
for the satirist to have once been involved in what he is later CJ~ticizing" 

(ix) . Perhaps the self-critical a'Wareness thus engendered tempers rhe por-

Anti-EnuncipatoryTendencies in Mann's Der U1/1e1tan 69 

trait of his protagonist, who exhibits instances of ambivalence and, most 
infrequendyand fleetingly, even hunun decency. Nevertheless, as the fol­
lowing will demonstrate, hard-nosed and hypocritical self-interest lead the 
list of characteristics that predominate in the Wilhelmine milieu that Mann 

depicts. . 
T he main targets of Mann's unrelenting anack are the bourgeOi­

sie, the institutions of the state, and the chauvinist ideology of the Ger­
man Empire. It comes as no surprise, then, that serial publication WaS 
curtailed in late August 1914, delaying the appearance of the complete 
book until the breakdown of WIlhelmine regimentation in 1918 (Benl 
131-32; d. Rumold 170-71). The narrative follows the ruthless rise of the 
protagonist, Diederich Hessling, from his childhooo presumably in the 
1870s to the centenary commemoration of Emperor WJ.helm I in 1897. 
These were ~ars of dynamic social and economic change. The estab­
lished conservative forces of which the bourgeois Hessli.ng is a willing, 
upward-striving instrument have pleserved a fragile hegemony by the book's 

close. As lhe 1890s appear lO be the crucial years of dug consolidation, 
that period is the chronological focus in what follows, whereAS the the­
Imtic focus will be rhe social and racist prejudices exlubited by Mann's 

prOlagolllst. 
If one were to attempt to sum up the mind-set of Dr. Hessling, it 

would be difficult to find a better term than "anti-emancipatOry." The 
mulliple, interCollllected meanings of this term are stressed by Volkov, 
and drawing upon her categories ("Antisemitism" 31, 33-34) we C<1I1 cie.I!-ly 
identify an anti-elmncipatory att itude in Hessling's dealings with variOlls 
social groups: ill his defiance and vilification of working-class o rganiza­
tion in parry, associations and clubs, that is, his anti-socialism; 1I1 his pr~­
granumtic rejection of and personal efforts to suppress women's seli­
determination, thal is, his anti-feminism; and in his distress with regard to 

lhe prospect of Jewish assi.milation into Gcrnun society, that lS, hi:; aOli­

Semitism.' 
In examining the main aspects of Hessling's anti-enuncipatory 

bent, we begin with the question of socialism. It should be noted dut 
I-feimich Mann was byno means uncritical of social de mocrac)\ which he 
considered to be guilty of parliamentary and political opportunism, and 
his portrayal of the party reflects that view. As a key to I-Iessling's percep­
tions, however, the name of the mQst prominent and thre;ltelung 'Nurk­

ing-class character in the novel is very revealing. For a factory milner like 



70 FootS 00 German Studies 

Hessling, a worker by me name of Napoleon Fischer surely conjures up 
visions of a populous class pervened by foreign ideas and swelling in 
revolutionary intent unlillhe mo ment should arrive to topple the existing 
order. lllls panicu1ar Napoleon, moreover, is a skilled worker qU<lhfied to 

openl.le and maintain the key machinery of the Hessling paper m.J.oufac­
tory. and in an industrializing, increasingly competitive economy he is thus 
an mdispensable aClor who can command higher wages and perhaps insist 
on Other accollunod,nions. In this respect he is a t}picai member of the 
SPD, a panythat consisted mainlyof skilled faCtory workers and journey­
men (Nolan )52), and he is a union man. Hessling's obvious anxiety with 
regard to Napoleon is at times strangely ambivalent, and one might won· 
der whether Mann is diso poking flln.It the personage standing behind Ihe 
aUlocrJtic Hessling, Emperor Wilhelm II, who was notoriouslyinconsis­
lent and volatile, alternately excoriating as unpatriotic those Gernuns, es­
pecially among the \"\'Orking classes, who would not demonstr.ne obei­
sance, and then appealing in loftier tones for lo)'alty to fatherland .md 
throne_ The insecurity and tension of Hessling's relationship to N.l.po­
leon is evident in his first encounter \\~th the black-bearded nuchirilst, 
during which "Diederich zuckte 2us:urunen, fast bane er dem Arbeiter 
Plan gemacht. Daflir rannte er ihn mit der Schulter beiseite, bevor der 
Mann ausweichen konnte" (110). 

Although Hessling feels forced to make acconunodations \"\~th 
Napoleon based on his self-interest and his sense of anxiety; this does not 
supplmt Hessling's underl)1.ng convict ion that he is dealing with an infe­
rior breed. Indeed, in that rUSt encowner his latem fe.us 311d preJudICes, 
including an irrational hatred towards non-Gerrru.nic peoples, come to 

the fore: 

Ein ani.m.tlischer !-LIB stieg in Diederich herauf, der i-I.J B senes 
blonden Fleisches gegen den nugeren Schv.':J.rLen, den Menschen 
von einer anderen Rasse, die er gern fi.ir niedriger gehalten h:itte 
und die ihm unheimlich schien. (111) 

Hessling's racism has its wlderpinning in popular social Darwinism. One 
result of this is a renurkable mmifestauan- for which there is a parallel 
in the passages that deal with lhe convened Jew Jadassohn- n.unel)~ the 
pe.rceived phl'.:iical transformation that accompanies Hessling's moments 
of uncen.tintyand related aggression, in the course of which NJPoleon 
takes on.l subhunun pose with dragging arms and hunched back. A litany 

Ami-Emancipatory Tendencies in M,mn 's Ot.-r U"le11an 71 

of features of supposed racial inferiority-- "die krununen, magercn Beine 
des Menschen, seine knochigen Schulter [ ... J seine starke Kiefer, [ ... J 
[die] Ausdlinstung [des schwanen Kerls]" (114)- culmmates in l-lessling's 
remark: "Gleich wird er auf allen vieren lauren und Ni.isse fressen. Oem 
AHen werden wir ein Bein steUen, verl~sen Sie sich daraun" (114). De­
spite signs of ambivalence, then, there are moments of uncompromising 
hatred, and the fierce potential of such an oriemalion is clear enough when 
Hessling cro\\lS over the gmtuitous gunning dotvn of a disgruntled )Qung 
worker whom Hessling has only JUSt dismissed on the grOlUlds of pruri­
elll indiscipline, a fa.r cry from the liberal Lauer's profit-sharing schemes 
(138-45)_ 

JUcism informed by the widespread purcllJ.se of soci.ll D,\lwinist 
modes of thinking links Hessling's anti-socialism and ami-Semilisln So­
cial Danvinist ideas are especially compelling 10 ty!;UlIl'S rendering for the 
WJy in which they facilitate a cross- fenilizatian of often-vague sociJ.l and 
cultural an.xieues ~~th the hard realities of bourgeois economic competi­
tion as v.'Cll as cuss antagonisms. Indeed, Hessling's liberal, pan-Jewish, 
and at moments effeminate generationa l counterpart, Wolfg.mg Buck, son 
of a preeminent notable, is impelled in his dealings with Hess ling and the 
socio-political order Hessling represents to dlScern a new l}pe o i nun, as 
White suggests (74), citing Wolfgang'S oration at the tri,ll of an uncle ac­
cused by Hessling of defaming the Emperor: 

Dann kann es geschehen, daB liber das Land sich ein neue r 
T )'pus verbreitet, der in !-tine und Unterdriickung nichl J en 
traurigen Durchgang ZtI menschlichercn Zust:inden sieht, 
sondern den Sinn des Lebens selbsl. (240) 

When Hessling broods over his h,nred of Buck, "der Feind, der Anti­
pode" (237), he is reacting to a range of grievances, among them Buck's 
liberalism, his Jev.~shness, and his impugning of t-lesslillg's character and 
social standing. In an earlier episode, in addition to Hess ling'S perception 
of traces of effeminacy and disturb ing racial difference, it is Buck's 
"sogenmnte feine Bildung" and his upstdn social mobilit}\ the warin whidl 
this" J udenbengel [ . .. J sich aufspielt ," that incite Hessling's wralh (82-83). 

Hessling acquires his anti-Semitism indirectly. JUSt as he acquires 
his nationalism and militArism. That is, it is a means to self-adv-J ncemem 
in a sOCietYlhat esteems and rewards such racisland chauvinistic behavior. 



72 FoolS al German SWdies 

A formative experience as a schoolboy involves an unusually humiliating 
variation on the customary mistreatment of Je\VS in school, "'wie es ublich 
lUld geboten war" (IS), in which Hessling subjects the single Jew in his 
class to a painful mock crucifixion: «[es1 geschah, daB Diederich jede 
Rucksicht vergaB. sich bli.lldlings bet:itigte und zum siegestrunkenen 
Unterdriicker ward" (15). That aCt earns him the open approval of his 
cbssmates and even his !"lUSters, and thus it also gives a taste of the social 
and even material benefits that could result, since «er bekam es leichter 
seitdem" (15), and his professors were "voU verlegenen Wohlv.ullens" (15). 
I ndeed, it is implied dun his matriculation to the highest class, which as­
sures him of access to university, can hardly be accounted for by Ius aca­
demic achievement (17). MaJUl'S portrayal of Hessling's acquisition of 
anti-Semitism, and the other COnte>..LS of ami-Semitic sentiment that are 
pursued below, offer an interesting literary corroboration of Volkov's slIg­
genion that anti-Semitism in this period was merely one rrunifestation­
though by no means innocuous- of a 'wider set of ITIUcually reinforcing 
re.lctionary or ami-emancipatory vie\>lS, "a fining element in a complex 
,IUd many-sided culture" ("Antisemitism" 32). and it is wonh considering 
the wars in which such views may h,we been reinforced by the dictates of 
seU-advancemelll. For inslance. il is surely no coincidence thaI the early 
1890s were ITIuked by a cyclical downturn in the economy.' 

During his first encounter v.ith l-Ierr Assessor Jad.lSsohn of the 
Public Prosecutor's Office, Hessling is 10.llh to show respect to a gentle­
nun whose appearance is concei,·ed as conforming to a common Jewish 
stereotn>e· As with the socialist machinist, Hessling's anxiety and animas­
ilytowards JdddSSOhn crystallize around a set of alleged racidl char.lcteris­
tics, which Ie .Ids to the following episode: "Ddbei betraclllete er 
schreckerfiilh die ungcheuren, roten und 'Weit abstehenden Ohren" (123). 
The ears become a grotesque gauge of Hesslings state of .Inti-Semit ic 
perplexity, for Iheyare taken synecdochically to betray the person's entire 
character: "seine ganze Miene, sagar die Ohren sahen perfid aus" (170).' 
When conflict and distmst undermine Hessling and Jadassohn's collabo­
rations, Hessling concludes, "Wtrklich national empfinden ban man eben 
Joch nicht mit solchen Ohren" (171-72). \'(/jth but a lillie imaginat ion 
even the name Jadassohn can be seen as an indictment of that person's 
traitorous and immol-al character, for the sintil.uity to 'Judassohn' or son 
of Judas is surely not coincidental The e.x'tremes of this animosity based 
011 racist, social, religious, and even se.uu1 anxieties are apparent at the 

Ami-Emancipatory Tendencies in f..bnn's Der Ul1l ... '1UlI 73 

moment during coun proceedings whenJad'lSSohn. U drohend aufgerichtet," 
is illuminated from behind like some vengeful faUen angel, whereupon his 
prominent ears "blutig leuchteten, und seine Mene heischte von Diederich 
eine so leichenhafte Gefugigkeit [ ... J" (21<4). 

[n order to advance his personal fonunes, hov.e\'er, Hessling is 
able 10 suppress some of these outbreaks. Indeed, this an.xious ambivd­
lence is an imponam characteristic of I Iessling's anti-Semitism A super· 
ficia! camardderie arises Out of his conunon social contacts withJ.ld.lssohn 
among the Neo-Temons, a conserv.nive student fr.llernit}) but this en· 
dures only as long as the self-serving Ollln.icip,ll political co'!litions in which 
both are engaged. Funhermore, despite J.ldassohn's impressive re,lction­
ary credent ials- !us inquisitorial stance on rooting out the liber,lls ,md 
socialists, his not atypical refutation of his own religious and ethluc b,lck­
ground in condemnation of the ·'Philister. Nargler und Juden" (130) who 
dJre to criticize the Emperor, and his unselfconscious cclcbrJlion of lhe 
true-born German- he remains for Hessling Jnd others .I focJ.! poUlt of 
suspicion, anxiety J.nd animosity. Hessling and his compAtriOts prefer to 
overlook the role pla)t!d bytheiro'Wll scramble for materiJI, poliuc.ll JnJ 
social advam.lge in giving rise 10 divisiveness lmd conflict within Germ.1Il 
society; r,nher,Jews such as ]adassohn and their "ji.idischer Radikali:.mus" 
.Ire blamed: ··\'\Iie untersteht sich so ein Jude, uns z.u verhetzcn?" (180-81; 
d. 169). In a related \"ein, it is wonh noting the inlpacl on liessling 01 
anti-Semitic vle'loVS expressed by the }Qllng feud,.l anslocrat von Bamun at 
a gathering of Nco-Teutons during his Berlin da)s: 

"'[\'(I]Jren sie doch d.ls Prinz.ip der Unordnung und AufioS1Ulg, 
des Durcheinanderwerfens, der Respekdosigkeit; dJS Prinz.ip des 
Bosen selbst." Sein frommcs Gesiclll zog sich zusammen \·om 
1-1.:.i~, lUld Diederich flihlle mit il1ll1. (57) 

HO'Wever, a more down·to-eanh re.son for tlus aninlOsity is provided ll1 
von B.lrnim's subsequent scornful reference to.l Cen.tlll Herr Frankfuner. 
who had purchased his anslOcnllic famllyestJte. 

Volkov's discussion of anti-Senlltism can also be broughllo bear 
on the factthatjddassohn, willie proscribed from n-.embenhip in the Vet­
erans' Associ,nion, is nevertheless in a position to imroduce I less ling to 

its leading members (130). If the exclusion, motivated by racism, of the 
Jewish Public ProsecUlor from the Veterans' Association can be seen by 



74 Focus en German Studies 

these influential German citizens as reconcilable with his inclusion in so­
cial and administrative dealings in other senings, then their anti-Semitism 
is arbitrary and unprincipled, or, in a word, opponunislic (d. Valkov, 
"Antisemitism" 28, 31). Finally, given the lingering suspicions regarding 
Jadassohn despite his national zea1olr)~ religious conversion, fraternity 
swagger, and so on, there remains a fundamental doubt as to whether 
Jewish assimilation will ever be possible in such a society. Although the 
surgical alteration of his "perfidious" ears, undertaken in the imputably 
decadent French capital. secures him a promotion and confers upon him a 
!leW reputation for "Mailigung" (-141), even the "opfervoUe[r] EI1LSch1u{!" 
(423) of that radical step apparently fails to erase some kind of inde~ble 
nurker from his identity.1e 1n this and Olher ways, Mann points to the 
painful and distoning repercussions of "'acculturation without integra­
tion" (Robenson 285).11 

Hessling's attitude towards the role of women is another 
aspect of an ami-emancipatorycomplex. Names have a speciJ.I function 
in this novel, and it is significant th.u the first woman "\\ollh tvhom l lessling 
comes intO contact as an adult, the )Oung Fraulein G6ppel, is given the 
name Agnes. Her wtf"onwld.te namesake Wd.S allegedlynun)'I"ed in founh­
cenrury Rome after she had emerged miraculouslyunsc.nhed from forced 
prostitution (Thumon 133-34). Hessling also subjectS Agnes G6ppelto 
e}':ploitalion and ma1rre.llment, and d plausible consequence for d WOI1UIl 

of her time would have been the reson (Q prostitution, a fate wruch she is 
able 10 escape. Funhermore> it is significant that she does nOl, as Hessling 
romantically fears, succumb to despair or resort to suicide either, J.ldlOugh 
his disappointment indicates that this outcome \"\.'Ould have pleased his 
masculine vanity (402). Rather, she goes on to overcome severe uibula­
tions and, in the end, she achieves her modest don-.estic goals. Her trJ.jec­
tory can be taken positively as an indication of changing sociJI roles and 
relations between the sexes, and thus as a ha rbinger of the decl.ine of 
traditional patnarchal order, the HerrimHtU6estandpoilll in which felT1J.le 
dependantS and workers are similarly subordinated. At least, the fate of 
Agnes is a far cry from that which Theodor Fomane saw fining for his 
doomed heroine in Effi Bnest, a novel begun in 1888, in which Effi's early 
demise symbolizes the stiffer resistance to such forms of emancipation in 
the Prussid-Gernunyof even the recent pasl. Perhaps Fontane also sees 
Effi as a (eilingly fragae symbol of a Germany less fixated on power Jnd 
domination than the Germany of the er.!. of Lriumphalist n,niOlldlism in 

Anti-EmancipatolY Tendencies in Mann's Der UllJert.:l1l 75 

which Fomme wrote. Nevenheless, in Der U,tertaJl. where.ls Agnes evades 
a trdgic fall, Katchen Zillich, the pdStOr's daughter, does ~O~"le a .~ery 
sought-after, Berlin-trained courtesan in Hessling's provll1clal milieu. 
However, her lot should properly be understood as relating to Mann's 
cnticism of the double mor.1 standards of male-dominated imperial soci­
et)~ and of the lI1effectudlityof the church. Hessling perpeluates these 
double standards in his oWO immedllte family. He is quick to forgel his 
emotional avowal, "daB ich meinem Gott fi:ir euch Rechenschaft schulde" 
(105), to care for his legally dependent mother and sisters as soon as his 
own self-advancement reguixes the mobiliz.ation of the family's resources, 
and presently he even seizes upon flattering anstocrdtic precedent to jus­
tify further his dishonest reversal (295-96). 

The PJges of Del" UllJ(!/Um,lre full of nation~t slog.llls ~lI1d avow­
.lis of conservative unity in the face of the "Red Penl" and otherthrcats to 
the I mperi.ll order. Despite this, there is a surprising lack of patnotic 
cohesion and steadfastness when matters of individual m.nenai interest 
and self-advancement becOl1lC involved. In his economic history of mod­
ern Germal1}~ \X'ernerSomban diagnosed ~ disappe.r.mce of polilicdl ide­
dis in the last )ears of the nineteenth century (gtd. in Golo Mann 546-47). 
In nuking this diagnosis, he effeclivelydlsregmls the prodigious number 
of nauon.ilist phrdSes. which he sees as contnved to camouO.lge a prcvdil­
ing inner void. rn the absence of Ideah, the struggle for nuten.11 advan­
taOe dominates social action, and the role of polilics becomes i.nslrumen+ 

o . 
tal or perfunctorr Hessling is c.!.ughl 111 such empl)' poslUnng when chJI-
lcnged by Governor von Wulckow to ei.lborate on his pl,lOS if he ",,-ere to 
achieve political office: "Was dann?' fr-agte \Xlu.lckow. Diedench wu&.e es 

nichl" (291). 
TIle emblematic instance of such compliciues is the GausenIeid 

affair, in which the dovet.liling of politicdl and pecuniary interests on the 
Pdns of Hessling, von Wulckow, and others is gla ringly cvidem: as one 
commentator hAS observed, "palliotic phrdses are a front for self-enoch­
mem" (White 76). A third pJrty to these dealings, Napoleon Fischer, breaks 
lhat mould somewhat by effectively disavowing the malenal interests of a 
worker injured on lhe job in order to achieve a political aml (a seat in the 
Reichstag as well as "Agitationssloff" with which to discredit "die ersten 
Kreisel"') (166-69). The principal elements of the multifdCeted, convo­
luted affai.r are as foUows. From Hessling's first glimme:rof VOIl \'(/ulckow's 
crucial role in achieving his ambitions (2404), he seeks political influence.ls 



76 FoolS at German Studies 

a platform from which to bluster abom Emperor and Fa(herl.md, but po­
marilyas a wayef expanding his business and sidelining competitors. CUef 
among these is the Gausenfeld \\'000, and since the trial Hessling's posi­
lion has been eroded, in pan because the Jewish department store owner 
Cohn has been driven by his s}mpalhies for Hessling's opponent at th,lt 
time to give galling preference for the Ouistmas catalogs to Gausenfeld 
(182). The delails of the ensuing trading of politiccl.! influence for eco­
nomic gain are worked OUt dlrough innuendo and at limes a more fonh­
right :miculation of quid pro quo (e.g. 282·94). At any early stage of tills 
aligning of interests, tiessling is assured of election 1O the Municip,l! CoWl­

cil, whereas von Wulckow gains allies in defeating the Liberals' recently 
created labor exchange service, which has drawn the Junker's ire by bleed­
ing his estate of agricultural workers and also providing a dangerous im­
pettIS fora "Koalition der Landarbeiter" (288-89). As the affair .lpproaches 
its climax, in fr.mk dialog von \'(/ulckow informs Hessling of the av.-,m\ of 
a p,ltriotic medal from the [mperial government, and he offe rs l--Iessling 
government comraas and preferences of which lhe mere memion will 
drive the rivAl in Gausenfeld into his arms. In addition, von \X'ulckow 
accedes to Hessling's complicity in the political goals of the Social Demo­
crat NApoleon, gaining in return gUdfalltees to carry out plans forthe con­
struction of a patriouc monument to Emperor \'(rtlhelm I (331-39), sup­
pon in the municipal council to secure ACCeptance of financi.11 burdens 
associated with construct ion of a railwAyspur to the town (403- 15), and a 
tidy pecuniary windfall drising from construction of the patriotic monu­
ment (-158-60). Murkystock-tnJ,rket ltl.lchirutions generate adrutional spoils 
for those involved in the affair (425-26). 

In a si.milarveill, Hessling's plans after taking over the fJmilybusi­
ness reflect the degradation and distOnion of national principles, prob­
lematic enough by their own lightS, to biting satirical effect: "Man mu&e 
konkurrenzf:ilug tverden. Der Platz an der Sonne!" (107). 11tis is a clear, 
!( wtobtrusive, I'e(erence to Oancellorvon Billow's speech in the Reichstag 
m December 1897, in which he celebrnted the Empire's recent colonial 
acquisition in Otina as the maugur.uion of a far-flung \'(/eJepc/ll1k .Uld an­
nounced the desire of the German nation lO take its rightful"plJCe in the 
Slill." The many instances in Der U,7tertdn of the Ill}stlcal alionmem of 

. 0 
Hessling, the senti-official denizen, with imperial powee are exemplified 
by his amicipation of Bi.ilow's historic rhetoric. h is worth noting thal 
Hessling represents an ambiguous relationship to power, as he IS at tunes 

Anti_EmancipatoryTendenclcs in Mann's DerUrmt..m 77 

lillie more than an impressionable appendage of that power, whereas in 
the case relating to \YleJtpdmk and elsewhere Hessling appears in the van­
guard of policy and agenda-setting. TIlls suggests that l\~ann does n~t 
offer the untenable caricature that political culture in Impen'll Germany IS 

shaped only by manipulation from above, but mher that politics ~d ~ 
titic.1 culture are also susceptible to impulses ansing from .1 mobilizauon 
at the grass-roots level. ll BUl mostly, by permitting Hessling to' Appropri­
:ate the grand allusion lO "a place in the sun" within the v\llgdl' come:ll.1. of 
bourgeois economic competition, Mann revea ls the hollowness of 
Hessling's nationalist rhetoric and discredits his nlOlivations as opponu­
rustic and basically dishonest. 

Pe rhaps Mann also seeks UI tltis way to' link the l.lunching of Ger­
m.m world politics in the }ears 1895 to' 1897-98 with the ultul1ate demise 
of the Imperial order.ll -nlat demise is clearly foreshadowed by the violent 
SlOrm that ntins the commcmorntive celebr.uions surrounding the unveil­
ing of the monument to Emperor WIlhelm I, in which Hessling plays a 
central role. The monument has a fun.her significance as a s}mbol of the 
viC10ryof the conservative nAtion.llislldeologyover the liberAl ahemati"e, 
which here assumes the guise of a children's as)~unl,ll for the allocation of 
government funds rendered all the more scarce by the anticipated appro­
priations for naval construction. 11lls victory is highlighted by the dedth 
of Old Buck, one of the laSt surviving re\'olutionary fighters of '48, sym­
bolizing the eclipse of nOtables' comrol of municipal and provincial poli­
tics (Havr.lluTf!npauzk). 11lllS, writing in a s.lliric.1 mode, Mann offers a 
kind of anti-Btkbo'1fj;mlm~s and shows thalthe rise of I lesslmg's fommes, 
,md ltis farcical advances in the sphere of municipal politics, are in fact 
indicators of German decline. In his h}pocrilicai pursuit of nuterial and 
social advantage, as in his espousal of anti-elll.mcipatOlyvic\\"S, Diederich 
l lessling deserves recoglulion as a fitting exponent of his \,(lilhelmine nu· 
lieu. II> 

ilL 

TIus revis itUIO of Volkov's anide and Mann's novel goes against the grain o . 
of twO recent historiographical revisions. On the one lund, tillS paper 
points to feawfeS of \Xftlhelmine society thAt tend to efface the image of a 
society in step, in terms of sociJI and politicdl modemu..llion, ,,~th its 
neighbors west of the Rhine and, Ul paniculJr, across the Ol.llll1el. In the 



78 FootS 00 Germa 1l Studies 

absence of a comparative perspective, however, I would propose this as a 
col.utious corrective relative to Goldhagen's embrace of a German Sarlerueg 
and his thesis of a "Slll~" German culrure (419), although even Valkov 
ill her decidedly less monolithic explanatory model discerns a "unique Ger­
man culture emerging in the 18905" ("Antisemitism" 31). AspecLS of thJt 
cullure- Of to follow Valkov, the antagonistic cultural fronts- have been 
e)..-piored here, bm (hey would admittedly merit a more comprehensive 
analysis as v.reU as exploration of the wider European comparative dimen­
sIOn. 

On the other hand (and more to the poim), there is the 
seismic impact of Goldbagen's enterprise. If the challenge presented by 
Goldhagen is nO( to languish either in avid {popular} acceptance or in 
unrecepuve admonishment, alternative models or explanations of anti­
Semitism need to be taken in hand which are better able to widlStand at 
least three areas of criticism: first , diachronic scrutiny, which I hope to 
have demonstrated with regard to the years of the German Empire, and 
which Stern has suggested als o penains to Goldhagen's treatment of the 
watershed )'ea~ of the First World War (13 1, cf. Goldhagen 81-82), and at 
all events there is the implicit question of the character and du.ability of 
specific historical formations of anti-Semitism; second, with regard to the 
early 19405 (including the aftemL1th of war), the need to consider in a 
more forthright matUler the evidence of murderous ami-Semitism else­
where in Europe; and third, the need to set fonh in a less selective and 
predetermined v,'ay the manner and the con{o"\ in which the Nazi regime 
manufactured widely varying degrees of consem throughout the years of 
power.17 Redressing this last imbalance would require, among other things, 
exploring factors thal do not necessarily allow for the definitive imerpreta. 
lion to which Goldhagen is inclined. Here I am referring, for example, to 
studies on euthanasia and "medicine against the useless" (Friedlander, 
Burleigh, Aiy); and also to Wolfgang Sofsky's account of the genesis and 
"'order" of the concentration camp, with its emphasis on the incompre­
hensibly viCIOUS and murderous behavior IQwJ.rds German Social Demo­
cratS and Communists , the firSt vi ctims of the Nazi 
regime in 1933 and 1934.19 In a sinlllar vein, it v.'CuId be necessary to ac­
commodate research which suggests, according to Quist! \Xlickert, that 
many denunciatio ns o n lhe part of ordinary citizens to Naz i 
autho rities regarding ami- State and " racial" infractions involved 
"accusers and accused [ . . ] from the same pers onal and profess ional cir-

Anti-EmancipatOryTendencies in Mann's Der UnlltrtLm 79 

cumstances," thar they arguabl y "stemmed from personal conflicts," and 
that as such they "v,.-ere not evidence thalthe populauon really adhered to 
Nazi anti-Semitism, [but rather that] accusers used anti-Semitism 10 their 
own advantage" (283- 84):~ 

In different ways, these three areas of concern arc ones upon 
which the combined perspectives of Volkov and Mann may have an i.ndi­
rect bearing. The embeddedness of ami-Semitism in a complex of anll­
emancipatory attirudes, and the diffuse manner in which dlese anitudes 
were acquired and became socially and politicallyefficaciolls, arguablys hifts 
the emphasis of explanation away from anti-Semitism as construed by 
Goldhagen. I have aireadypolnted to the explanatory tension lhat follo'WS 
from GoldhJ.gell's assertions along the lines that "to abandon ,1I1li-Semitism 
would necessitate a discomfoning reconceplUalizalion of the social or­
der" (43). \'\!hat is more, the dynamism il1p1uxl in that wayo( understand­
ing anti-Semitism compons beuer with Goldhagen's forceful insistence 
that anti-Semitism does not actually disappear when it is not in nag.Jnt 
evidence, but rather that it remains present and is only less manifest ,It 

such times (-13-4 4).21 
Despite the apparent tenacity of anti-Semitism misl.'(\ to a "clll­

ttlral axiom" (4 19), forthe period after 1945 Goldhagen regislers its dis!)i­
p,nion, although lhe immedi.ne postwar years saw a linge ling widespre,ld 
"profotmd" anti-Semitism (-1 19).!l Thus, if the Nazi interregnum did not 
provide for the e}.:purgation of the "hallucinalOf)( "demonizing" world 
view that according to Goldhagen dominated and defined German cul­
(Ure, post-war reeducation and the cessation of the ami-Semitic tenor in 
the German "public conve~ation" (606) helped establish a basis for a new 
po litical culture:. HOt .... ever, offering a funher inadvenent indic.llion of the 
fnlilfulness of Volkov's appro.-lch, Goldhagen also muses that "the l\,lazified 
view of JeW'S, because it was so at odds with realil); W.lS .llso fragile; its 
hallucinatory components \VCrc difficult to Ill_\lintain without institution,'ll 
reinforcement" (606). Indeed, preciselydtis kind of reasoning points back 
to the murual reinforcen-.em that Volkov discerns, although her analysis 
admittedly focuses on an earlie r period. Therefore, as intriguing as 
Goldhagen's explanations may be, questions remain regJrdi..Ilg cOlltinuil}\ 
radicalization, and finally the dissipation of anti-Semitisnl, and such in­
congruities sugges t that Goldhagen may ultin1ately insist o n too stalic a 
model. Indeed, although he takes to task unspecified schobrs in the thrall 
of "tr'anshisLOrical and inval;am pSYLhologica l propensities," such as the 



80 FOO(5 (II German Studies 

"slavish foUowing of narrow 'self-interest'" (13), Goldhagen's maneuver­
ing panicularly on the question of continuity, but also on the question of 
what acruallyconsri(Utes a monocausal explanation (416-20), does not al­
wa}s preserve him from a similar charge (cf. Stem 129). 

Allowing fanhe constructive impulses that undoubtedly arise from 
Goldhagen's project, if his tendentiallymonocausal "eliminationist" model 
is roUed back, a heinous bm at least in some sense "'positive" explanation 
of ordinary Germans' perpetration of the Holocaust is forfeited. How­
ever, this may have the partiaUy benefi cial effect of redlrecling historical 
scholarship, and even the anention of an engaged public, back to the bit­
ler and perplexing fnlits of earlier explanatory effons, and La the con­
comitant reappraisal of earlier phases of anti-Semitism in German cul­

ture. In effect, by reassening perspectives such as Volkov's, O f that o f 
others who, like Stern, point to the significance for the rel.ltionship o f 

ordinary Germans to Jewry of an att icude of "e},.1:rusion" (132) r,nher 
thJ.n "elimination," we are left with what seems a more plJ.usibly "incon­

testable" (d. Stern 129) web ofanti-emancipatory tendencies, a kind of 
lowest common denominator for which definitive status perhaps cannot 

be cldlmed, but which accounts more fully for historical complexitr 
Heinrich ~,r.llm's depiction of German society, as this pdper demonslr.nes, 

highlights this web and points not only lO mutually reinforcing social and 

rJ.cist prejudice but also [0 [he significance of opporrunism and (submis­
sive) accommodation, both in the acquisition and espousdJ o f al1(i­

emancipalOryanimdes. These are areas that warrant renewed .memion as 
we seek to understand the character and purchase of anti-Semitis m in 

German society and the durabiliryof its specific historical format ions. 

Comdl Uniu!15icy 

Anti-Emancipatory Tendencies in Mann's Der U~derta}/ 81 

NOles 

. I \\uuld like 10 thank lhe journal's anonymous refe~ee (?r subslantive com­
ments and suggestions that greatly helped to 1mprove thIS article. 

I For references to the onsomg discussion of Goldhagen's thesis, and for,In 
anal}'~is of the public rectpl10n and impact of Goldhagen's work, see Ele)' 
"GddJXlg:II EJJea.~ 

1 See also Volkov,}iJis~ LdxJluni A nl/SeJlU/Sl/ltS, an essay compilation now 
available as the timely recent reissue, A It:iseJlliismtS als kullureller Oxk. It is striking 
that, in the wake of Goldhagen, Volkov's essays have not only been reissued in 
Germany, but in a way that highlights her (altcrnative and contrasting) approadl 
as one dealing, like Goldhagen, With anti-Scmitism as a "cultur,ll" modeL 

J Stern 131 . See also Gold1ugen's rather shtiU and diffuse response: Goldhagen, 
"Germans vs. the G-itics." A significant portion of this appears in the" AIterv.ord 
to lhe Vintage Edilion,~ in Goldhagen, Exocutu:.n:''15 463·66. 

1 However, in terms of his research into and depiction of thc concretc reality 
of Germans' appalling actions during the Third H.eich, Goldhagcn cenaillly nun· 
ages to ~ enliven" the historical rccord. 

S The author sums up in the fol1owins words: "[Diederich] refuses his \tl.le 
natme in favor of a brew of capiu.lism, Imperialism, miSlllldersLOod Idealism, 
sado-masochistic sex and patriarchalism." (\'Vhite 73). 

(, For an e.\.1.ensive bibliogr-J.phy as well as examples of lhis scholarship, see 
Ele)~ Saitty. Alter's article provides many imeresting insights into the relevance of 
De,- UlterTdll for these historiographical debates. 

1 The categories that I emphasize here in regard LO a specific f r.ullework for 
anJ.lysis are, of course, not exhaustive. For instance, th~ prevJlcnt militarism, 
authoritarianism, and deeply ambivalent rel:llionship to liberalism (thus not ex· 
actly"anti-hberalism-) v.Quld also merit separate attention, but for present pur· 
poses they are treated in connection with my principal categones. However, I 
\\uuld Iikt! 10 point 10 Volkov's emphasis regarding the connection benveen anti­
feminism and anti-Semitism, although this cannot be addressed spccific.Jlywithin 
lhe frame of the prcsent contribUtion. See "Antisemitism~ 3·L 

I Thc impact of earlier economic crisis periods on am i· Semitic discourse and 
on perceptions of JeWli in German socicty is widely documemed. For some inter­
esting observations regarding the Jewish presence in GermAn lilerJlure, see Krobb, 
esp. 5-6, 9. 

? I am grateful for the suggestion th~t the satirical exaggeration of the ears, 
rather man the vulgar stereofype of a dIStinctive proboscis, is an ancmpt on Mann's 
part to avoid a cliche; there is also the implication lhat, in the absence of the olle 
absurd racist fixation, another call and probably would be fa stened upon. 

In addition, I am gratcfulto David Prickett fo r the suggestion that Mann's 
emphasis on Jadassohn's ears can be interpreted in connection to a cnminological 
discourse on "types." This discourse had its rOOlS in the late eighteenth century, 
was prominent in the late nineteenth century, and was later appropriated by the 
Nazis. For a detailed discussion of these ideas, including the international scope 
of their application, see Sekula. 

10 Indeed, it is almost as if the brunt of anxiety and suspicion relative to 

ladassohn that Hessling formerly cxhibiLS [In his 3clions, speech and thoughts) 
'becomes subsumed in ihe narratOr's perspective. For insu.nce, it is no longer the 
oblivious Hessling but rather the narratOr who implies that Jad.lSsolm is trading 



82 Focus on German Stlldies 

pillow talk with Guste, Hessling's wife. acarly, this dra .... 'S on a stereotype of the 
Jew as devious sexual predator that Hessling himself has often appropriated; 
«Jadassohn ladue mit noch mchr G rund, als Diederich meinte; denn er hanc_ cs 
schon hi.ngst fur scmc sinliche PiEcht gehalten, Frau Generaldirekror Hesshng 
aufzuklaren tiber diese Zusammenhange.H (tv\ann 451). 

11 David Prickett has kindly called auention to the relevance of the concept 
of Jewish "self-hamd H in connection with Jadassohn_Jadassohn's desperate re­
solve to seek surgical Intervention cao perhaps be paired with hi.s effons, de­
scribed above, "to become morc German than the Germans" (RobertSon 286; d. 
285-345). See also Gilman,je-..w-h Se1fHatred. 

11 See Ele}~ "The Wilhelmine Right," on this question. I mention Eley be· 
cause, in that light, one might choose w reexamine White's claim that "the murual 
quotations, misquotations and pseudo-quotations of master and man, the small­
W"Wll. parallels ro state and court sensations, shape the 5Wry and underline the 
theme of the loyalist's psychology, but do nothing for sober social history" (W'hite 
72). Thus, even in such <:ari<:atures Mann's depIction has nuan<:e. 

II d. Alter 384, where the author suggests that "the contrast benveen the 
Second French Republic of Napoleon III and the German Empire, which Mann 
sneaks into the speech of his protagonist at lhe unveiling of the monument to 
Emperor William I, implies that po,,-'Cr politics contains within it the seed of its 
own demise.~ 

14 As Rurnold points Ollt, ho\\'Cver, even this symbol of a liberal social order is 
sullied by the self-mterest of its maUl sponsor (174). 

t; d. Peitsch, who suggests that " the narrator's comment at the end of 
Diederj<:h's 'apprenticeship' recalls GoeLhe's IVzfbeimMeislerand 50 brings out that 
[Der UHler/an] begms as an inverted version of the Badungsroman" (x.1lI). 

16 For a more critical view regardmg the valIdity of Ma!Ul'S portrayal o f char­
acteristic mentalities in the German Empire, see Nipperde}; cited in Alter 371-73. 

11 For indi<:a(ions of the complex ramifications when Jealing, for example, 
with denunciation and both the ma.terial and non-material considerations on Ihe 
part of those ",no participated in the oppressive and finally genocidal apparatUSes 
of Nazi Germany, see the recent synthesis by Robert Gellate!y: 

Ii An example of GolJhagen's proclivity for definitive explanation and the 
impact this has on his presentation of the lllstirutional and developmental con­
teA1:S of anti-Semitism IS his treatment of the Nazis' euthanasia program: "It is 
highly implausible to maintalll thal !-fider and those who implemented the so­
called Euthanasia program set OUt to kill, by the tens of thousands, non-Jewish 
Gertn:lllS with mental illness but did not consider, let alone believe with rcli~ious­
like cenirude, that the Jews- conceived of as being far more malignant and dan­
gerOllS- ought ro share this fale." This seems a preemptory form of argumenta­
tion (Goldhagen 143. d . 162-63). 

19 Stern 133·34 refers to So(sh.-y These groups included, o f course, non-Jew­
ish and Jewish victims. 

20 However, d. the summarizing assenion: ~Denunciations with antisemitic 
content often veiled the real motives stemming from pure self-interest. 
Amisemitism was a means to other ends." (WIckert 295). I would suggest that 
Wickert's findings corroborate myimerpretive effort by highlighting the pOlential 
connections of racist and SOCial prejudice. To pur a finer point on this, raCist and 
social prejudice, alloj"l~d with self- interest, were often mutually reinforcing, and 
therefore Wickert 's (perhaps rhetorical) reference 1O "pure self- interest" may be 
misleading. 

Anti-Emancipatory Tendencies in Marm's Del" Ur"llert:m 83 

11 This uwencJ perspective is one aspect of his treatment for ",+tich Goldhagen 
claims originality. But it would seem [hat the significance of the new perspective is 
muted if one agrees to some extent with the criticisms either raised or referred to 
ill this paper. fn addition, Volkov's analy.;is points to the alternately latent and 
manifest nature of ami-Semitism, but the omy reference [ am able to find III 

Goldhagen's book is 10 her slUdy on German artisans, Volkov, 77le Rise if PcplJar 
A nfmrx1erniJ1Il 

!! (Goldhagen, EX(,(II!ial?lS 419). For Goldhagen's ambiguous appraisal of 
anti-Semitism alter 1945 and in the Federal Republic, see 442, and eSp. 605-06, fl1. 
53. 

Works Gted 

Alter, Reinhold "Heinrich Manns UruerW!}- PrufSlein fUr die ' Kaiscrreich­
Debatte'?" GtsdJidJleIllriGeellsd){ifi 17 (1991): 370-89. 

AI); Gotz. "Medicine against the Useless." AlyGOtz, Peter ellfOllSt, and 01!"iSlian 
Pross, Oml1.iing tile FatiJer!ani: Nazi Mrx:lmream Raaa! Hygim:. Trans. B. 
Oxlper. Bal(imore:Johns Hopkins UP, 1994. 22-98 

Benl, K laus D. and Ulnch Mi.iller. VanNallm:t!151111S ZllJlJExpressloni;;lIllS. Lilem{J{r 
de; &iseneir:hs. Sruttgart: K lett, 1984. 

Burleigh, Mlchael. D&lIharrl Deiiwall:e: "EUl.hamskl" in Gemurry 1900· 1945. Cam­
bridge: Cambridge UP, 1994. 

Ele)~ Geoff. "The Wilhelmine Right: How It Changed" In SOOt!:}' tlnl Pditia m 
Wi/heilli/X! Gemmry, ed. Richard J. E vans. New York B,lrnes and Noble, 
1978.112-35. 

-, ed. Societ); OJlirre, am tile State in G('rmTl~ 1870·1930. Ann Arbor: U of 
IvGchigan P, 1997. 

- - -. 77JC "GddhdJPIE/fea." Hiswry. MenIYr)l Ntaism- Facing dJC Gen1ll1l Past. Ann 
Arbor: U of Michigan P, 2000. 

Friedlander, Henry. 77x Oigin) if Nazi Geruide. FromEIIV"Xlm5b:110 tlx Flm! Sdll· 
rim Chapel Hill and London: U of Nonh Carolina P, 1995. 

Gellately, Robert. Backilf;Hirler. Cbrsell1 am o.x:nioninNazi Germmy. Oxford: Ox­
fo rd UP, 200 l. 

G ilman, Sander L. /euish SelfHatrei. A nci·Senl!ism mu the Hiddt:''11 Lmfilli/iF if !IX' 
Jew. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1986. 

Goldhagen, Daniel Jonah. Hil!er~ lVilfirf, Ex(Uaioll .. 'w Otbmry CemHI/5 mri dx 
Hdroms!. 1996. New York Vi.nt~e, 1997. 

- - -. "Germans vs. the Gitics." FmeigllAJJair5 76.1 (1997): 163-66. 
Krobb, Florian. ~Scheidewege. ZumJudenb!ld in deutschen Romanen def 1890er 

Jahre." f= in Germm Lilemtltre 5ilU' 1945: Germm}eW.sh Litera/we? Ed. 
Pol O'Dochanaigh. GermlllMoniwr 53. Amsterdam, GA- Rodapl, 2000. 
1-20. 

Mann, Golo. DelltsdJe Gtsd)@tede; 19. Iflu20. faJ7I/;wrie>rs. 1958. F rankfun am 
Main: Fischer, 1992. 

Mann, Heinrich. Der Unterf£J.n 1918. Frankfurt a.M .. Fischer, 2000. 
Nipperdey, Thomas. uWar die wilhelminische Gesellschaft eine Untenanen­

Gesellschaft?" In NadxJenken im die deutsdx G:sdJuhte. 1986. Munich: 
dtv, 1990. 208- 24. 

Nolan, Mary. "Economic 0isi5, State Policy, and \Xbrking-Oass Form:uion in 



84 Frots al Germ an Swdies 

Gernuny. 1870-1900." If-&*ug-a1SS Familiar NuJ:"!lit'Ith-o,tllryPaUet1lS 
UJ \l7estmf £1~arJ t1x UruaiSIa1eS. Ed. IIOl KOIttndson and Ans-tide R. 
Zolberg. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1986.351-93. 

Peitsch, l-klmut. wlmroduction." In I-Icinrich Mann, 7beLf¥l Sllhp:t. Ed. Helmut 
PCllSCh. New York: Conunuum, 1998. vii-xvii. 

Robenson, Ritchie. 71x jewsh ~etJal' tI'I GemunL/lemJl~ 1749·1939. £tlWripa­
tOlald UJ DiJarum. New York: Oxford UP, 1999. 

Rumold, lUint:r. "~rt .. ding Hcinrich MuUl's Ow UrteTtan; The Seeds of Fascism, 
orS.tire as Anuclp<ltion." 'npm..llGmmny EsW)!. Ed. Volker Diirr, Kathy 
I-Urms, and Peter i-b.yes, McnttJbtfieOmsianl VdlOlB 3. ~bdison: U of 
\XflSCOnsin P, 1985. 168·81. 

Sekula, Allan. "The Body and the Archive." D.tchr 39 (WlCllcr 1986): )·64. 
Sofslq; \'fulfgang. Oil OW.Dfj'des Terrr:H: [)as Kcmf!1Cl/1.Ualilaff7. Ftdnkfurt a.M.: 

Fischu, 1993. 
Stern, Frirz. "The Go!dh;;lgen Controversy. One Nation, One People, One Theory?" 

Fon:J.1§lAjfom 75.6 (1996): 128-38. 
Thurston, l-ierbcrt, and Donald AtlW<lter, eels. BUllen Liw r:f riJeSamts. New York: 

P. J. Kenned)~ 1956. 
Valkov, Shulamit. • Antisemitism as a 01lrural Code. Reflections on the History 

and rfistoriography of Antisemitism in r mpcri.u Germany." Leo B...,eck 
Irrsl;lJ(le YtutOO:* 13 (1978): 25-46. 

- - -. TIJe RlSec/ ~J.zr Ammnemismm Genmny nil! UrwnMnster A rtisrms. 1873-
1896. Pnnceton: Pnnceton UP, 1978. 

- - -.Jiwsk Leben IOri A1tIsenu/SmlS il7lJ9. 1M! 10. jahrmuriut. Munich, 1990. 13· 
26. 

•• '. A ,rise11lllSmtS als kJJtlorJkr O:t-k. Munich: CH. Beck, 2OCX). 
\X'hite, Alfred D. TIJe OJ!-E)ld Man Soo.J Rwtly in the. Gennm NuulI848·J968. 

Gernun LingUIstic and GJ1tural Studies S. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2CXXl 
WICkt:n, Otrisd. ~Pap'ubr Attitudes to Nauonal Socialist Antisemitism: Denun· 

ci.anons far insidious Offenses' and 'Racial Ignommy.- Pn:iAJ~tbeDl!pthf 
c{ Germm A 1flSl!11lUJm Genmn S/XJI:rjani the. Pe1srotllal c{ rbe Jew. [933· 
1941. Ed. David Bankier. Ne:w York: Leo B~ck institute, 2000. 282·95. 

"hier komrnr sowas nichr vor"?: 
Fremdbilder in Theodor Fontanes 

Effi BJlest 

Bine Schulz 

~ an bon heim Lesen von Thcodor Fontanes £jji Bnesr nicln lImhin 
!ll!I feslzuslellen, wie priisent fremde Uinder und Kulluren in diesem 
Roman sind. Dcr (angeblich) in Effis lIa\\s spukende Chinese, der 
multih-ullUrelle Olar.:lh1.er del' Kessiner Bcvolkerung und die Reisen der 
Innstettens mach halien und Danenurk sind nur einige offensichtliche 
Beispiele dafUr, wie Auslander und Aus\;indisches in Effi Bnest eingeserl.l 
werden. 

Einc der neueslen Sludien zu diesem '111enu ist die von Juli.:lll 
Preece mil clem lile! F&lrq tlx f~t?r: Omrle, Pdes an:{ aher Nat-PntSSl.:.l115 
111 71xa1u Fa1l.11£1 E/fi Briest. Ausgehend von der FeslSleUung, dJ.B aUe 
Figuren in Fomanes Romandurch ihre Volks- bzw. R.e.ligions-zugehorigkeit 
idemifrz.ien werden, was "race" ZlI einem sub-te:!\1.uellen Thenu m.Jche, 
imeressien sich Preece hauplSachlich ftir die Problem.nik von lldtionaien 
Vonllteilen und die subtile Art iluer Verwcndung in E/fi Bnesl. Zunachsl 
geht Preece daran, die wichtigs ten de r zu Fonunes Zeit herrschenden 
Vomneile Zll idemifiz-ieren. So 5lellt er z. B. fiir Golchowski, den Otinesen 
lUld Crampas fest: "In lhe eyes o[ the PruSSi.UlS they are.lll generally Wl­
lrust worthy lnd se).'Ually dangerous to Gernun women" (l73). Preece 
argllmemien weiter, FOntdne em\ ... e rfe eine An moralische LlI1dkane, die 
ddS Beurteilungss),slem der Prell&n v.~ederspiegele. Auf diese l' Landkarte 
gebe es so\\'Ohl moralisch ,sichere' Gebiete ("lhe cemre," Preu&n, aber 
a\lch Skandinavien und Schon].l.Ild) als auch ,unsichere' ("the periphery," 
Osteuropa, Siideuropa, Ouna und Afrib) (190). Der Name emer Person 
(als l odiz fijrdie Volkszugehorigkeit) oderillraJ...·l'ueller AlIfemhahsol1 helfen 
b ut Preece, sie inoerhalb dieses S)SlemS zu lokalisieren und damit moralisch 
einzuordnen. 1 Fonune stelle jedoch durch seill subliles Spiel mil 
dlthergcbr.lcluen Voruneilen eben dieses Klassifizierungsprinzip in Frdge,! 

FOO6 '" GemulII Srlfdies Volume 8 (2001)