Jewish Philosophical Politics in Germany, 1789-1848

(Amelia) #1

334 } Notes to Chapter 5



  1. Paul Rose, Revolutionary Antisemitism in Germany from Kant to Wagner (hereafter
    RA), chapter 11 in general and 198 in particular.

  2. See Helen Ferstenberg, Meditations on Jewish Creative Identity, 77 – 78.

  3. Heinrich Heine, Historisch-kritische Gesamtausgabe der Werke (hereafter DHA),
    7 (part 2 ): 1337. In summer 1828 Eos changed editorship and became more conservatively
    Catholic and adamantly antiliberal. The journal adopted as its new motto, “Judeis quidem
    scandalum, gentibus autem stultitiam,” from Corinthians 1 : 23. See the editorial note in Hein-
    rich Heines Werk im Urteil seiner Zeitgenossen, edited by Eberhard Galley and Alfred Ester-
    mann, 1 , “Kommentar,” 64.

  4. See George Peters, The Poet as Provocateur, 23 – 24.

  5. See the editorial note in Heinrich Heines Werk im Urteil seiner Zeitgenossen, edited
    by Galley and Estermann, 1 , “Kommentar,” 64 – 65. The campaign culminated in the feud be-
    tween Heine and August von Platen, who was close to members of the Eos circle, including
    Döllinger. Platen had taken antisemitic swipes at Heine in his 1828 play, Der romantische Oe-
    dipus. In The Baths of Lucca ( 1829 ) Heine struck back at Platen by cruelly ridiculing his ho-
    mosexuality. Widely seen as beyond the pale, Heine’s act was nearly universally condemned
    and seriously damaged his reputation. See Peters, The Poet as Provocateur, 26 – 28.

  6. In an 1829 review of Heine’s third volume of Reisebilder, for example, in which Heine
    mocks the ignorance and servility of Tyroleans, Döllinger contrasts the Tyroleans’ loyalty
    to Religion and Vaterland with the “individuality of our ingenious traveler.” Whereas this
    small Volk clings to collective traditions, Heine possesses an “excess of self-assurance” (Über-
    maß von Selbstgefühl) and is guided by a liberal overvaluation of “Persönlichkeit” (Ignaz von
    Döllinger, “Notiz zu Reisebilder Bd 3 ,” 1 : 354.

  7. Döllinger, “Notizen zu Heines Werke,” 1 : 548.

  8. Ibid., 1 : 549.

  9. Ibid., 1 : 548.

  10. Eduard Meyer, “Notizen zu Reisebilder,” 1 : 576 – 77.

  11. Ibid., 1 : 577.

  12. Gabriel Riesser, “Börne und die Juden,” 2 : 77.

  13. Auerbach quotes the conclusion of Menzel’s “Immoralische Literatur” in Das Juden-
    thum und die neueste Literatur, 54.

  14. Jeffrey Sammons, “Observations on Berthold Auerbach’s Jewish Novels,” 66.

  15. Auerbach, Das Judenthum und die neueste Literatur, 47 , 48.

  16. Lothar Kahn and Donald Hook locate Auerbach within a group of Jewish writers
    who, struggling to establish themselves as truly German, sought to dissociate themselves
    from Heine, whom they saw as “a dire threat to their continued well-being in Germany”
    (“The Impact of Heine on Nineteenth-Century German-Jewish Writers,” 53). Auerbach’s
    Dichter und Kaufmann provides further evidence of how Auerbach had to confront wit and
    ironic subjectivity as specifically Jewish phenomena. Auerbach’s Lessing encourages Kuh
    to dedicate himself to the epigram, which he sees as the ideal genre for the expression of
    Jewish wit (Berthold Auerbachs Romane, 2 : 86 ). For Lessing the Jewish propensity for wit
    derives from the “contrast” or “conflictual” relation in which Jews stand to the wider society
    (ibid.). As Ferstenberg (Meditations on Jewish Creative Identity, 77 ) points out, however,
    even as Auerbach’s Lessing encourages Kuh to pursue his Jewish talent for wit, he disparages
    it as ultimately insubstantial (Auerbach, Berthold Auerbachs Romane, 2 : 86 ). Indeed, Less-

Free download pdf