《露丝·克莱格的遗产和奥斯维辛世纪的结束》,马克·h·盖尔伯主编

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Austrian Studies Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1353/oas.2023.0039
Adam J. Toth
{"title":"《露丝·克莱格的遗产和奥斯维辛世纪的结束》,马克·h·盖尔伯主编","authors":"Adam J. Toth","doi":"10.1353/oas.2023.0039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century ed. by Mark H. Gelber Adam J. Toth Mark H. Gelber, ed., The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century. Perspectives on Jewish Texts and Contexts 20. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 2022. 190 pp. Ruth Klüger's death in 2020 dealt an enormous blow to the fields of German, Jewish, and Austrian Studies. Her passing was not only a tremendous loss for these scholarly communities but represents a larger, inevitable conundrum for scholarship on the Holocaust: the dying out of survivors with living memory of the travesty. The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century aims to serve both as a tribute to Klüger and her memory as well as a springboard for meditation on how to discuss the Holocaust once the remaining survivors are gone. The volume's contributors—Mark H. Gelber (who edited the volume), Sander L. Gilman, Heinrich Detering, Stephan Braese, Irène Heidelberger-Leonard, Ulrike Offenberg, Monica Tempian, Daniel P. Reynolds, and Vera Schwarcz—offer a mix of hits and misses in achieving these goals. I will look at each contribution based on how well they (1) memorialize Klüger and (2) make a compelling argument, starting from the weakest. Reynold's chapter, which should be the most important for grappling with the question of Holocaust memory, disappoints in its argumentation. Propping up cultural critic Theodor Adorno as a straw man because of his famous declaration of poetry as barbaric after Auschwitz, Reynolds wants to argue for Holocaust memorial tourism and seems to know of Adorno for his critique of mass culture. I am unsure, as Reynolds never cites Adorno and refers to Adorno's position out of context, with a quote from Klüger on what [End Page 133] she viewed as an authoritarian perspective from Adorno as Reynolds's closest engagement with Adorno. Reynolds conflates Adorno's well-known critique of mass culture with his metacritique of cultural criticism itself and the malleability of total ideology to include criticism of total ideology within that ideology. This conflation glibly undermines his reading of Klüger to support Holocaust tourism. Gelber's contribution, built on a long-standing professional friendship with Klüger and an almost unrivaled knowledge of her writings, argues that she is a Zionist. For all the circumstantial evidence Gelber compiles, none of it is a direct statement from Klüger affirming this argument. Gelber openly admits to a degree of speculation and, when one considers Gelber's role as editor and that Klüger is no longer around to dispute his claim, the lack of a direct statement stands out like a sore thumb, weakening his position. Gliman's contribution does not so much advance an argument beyond \"Names matter\" (10) as provide us with a historical sketch of two Jewish Germanists in America. The chapter moves us through the significance of names and the magic behind them throughout various texts in a style expected from Gilman, as he also traces his professional friendship with Klüger. However, Gilman also rebukes Adorno out of context and, in the absence of a more specific argument to be made, the personal insights into Gilman and Klüger's professional friendship are the only silver lining. Comparative analyses by Tempian and Schwarcz offer readers fresh perspectives on Klüger and Holocaust writing. Tempian's chapter gives readers a comparative look at Holocaust children's poetry and, with Klüger's scholarly and personal perspectives in the background, shows readers that the children of the Holocaust processed and appreciated trauma of the Holocaust no differently than their adult counterparts. Schwarcz holds Klüger's poetry up against poems on ghosts and mourning in a way that shows some important transcendental qualities to Klüger's poetry, while still respecting historical specificities. Braese and Detering focus on closer readings of Klüger's language. Braese claims that the German weiter leben serves as a \"Miteinandersprechen\" (47), a settling of accounts. This is to say that writing weiter leben in German was not only to keep her mother from reading her...","PeriodicalId":40350,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Austrian Studies","volume":"301 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century ed. by Mark H. Gelber\",\"authors\":\"Adam J. Toth\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/oas.2023.0039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reviewed by: The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century ed. by Mark H. Gelber Adam J. Toth Mark H. Gelber, ed., The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century. Perspectives on Jewish Texts and Contexts 20. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 2022. 190 pp. Ruth Klüger's death in 2020 dealt an enormous blow to the fields of German, Jewish, and Austrian Studies. Her passing was not only a tremendous loss for these scholarly communities but represents a larger, inevitable conundrum for scholarship on the Holocaust: the dying out of survivors with living memory of the travesty. The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century aims to serve both as a tribute to Klüger and her memory as well as a springboard for meditation on how to discuss the Holocaust once the remaining survivors are gone. The volume's contributors—Mark H. Gelber (who edited the volume), Sander L. Gilman, Heinrich Detering, Stephan Braese, Irène Heidelberger-Leonard, Ulrike Offenberg, Monica Tempian, Daniel P. Reynolds, and Vera Schwarcz—offer a mix of hits and misses in achieving these goals. I will look at each contribution based on how well they (1) memorialize Klüger and (2) make a compelling argument, starting from the weakest. Reynold's chapter, which should be the most important for grappling with the question of Holocaust memory, disappoints in its argumentation. Propping up cultural critic Theodor Adorno as a straw man because of his famous declaration of poetry as barbaric after Auschwitz, Reynolds wants to argue for Holocaust memorial tourism and seems to know of Adorno for his critique of mass culture. I am unsure, as Reynolds never cites Adorno and refers to Adorno's position out of context, with a quote from Klüger on what [End Page 133] she viewed as an authoritarian perspective from Adorno as Reynolds's closest engagement with Adorno. Reynolds conflates Adorno's well-known critique of mass culture with his metacritique of cultural criticism itself and the malleability of total ideology to include criticism of total ideology within that ideology. This conflation glibly undermines his reading of Klüger to support Holocaust tourism. Gelber's contribution, built on a long-standing professional friendship with Klüger and an almost unrivaled knowledge of her writings, argues that she is a Zionist. For all the circumstantial evidence Gelber compiles, none of it is a direct statement from Klüger affirming this argument. Gelber openly admits to a degree of speculation and, when one considers Gelber's role as editor and that Klüger is no longer around to dispute his claim, the lack of a direct statement stands out like a sore thumb, weakening his position. Gliman's contribution does not so much advance an argument beyond \\\"Names matter\\\" (10) as provide us with a historical sketch of two Jewish Germanists in America. The chapter moves us through the significance of names and the magic behind them throughout various texts in a style expected from Gilman, as he also traces his professional friendship with Klüger. However, Gilman also rebukes Adorno out of context and, in the absence of a more specific argument to be made, the personal insights into Gilman and Klüger's professional friendship are the only silver lining. Comparative analyses by Tempian and Schwarcz offer readers fresh perspectives on Klüger and Holocaust writing. Tempian's chapter gives readers a comparative look at Holocaust children's poetry and, with Klüger's scholarly and personal perspectives in the background, shows readers that the children of the Holocaust processed and appreciated trauma of the Holocaust no differently than their adult counterparts. Schwarcz holds Klüger's poetry up against poems on ghosts and mourning in a way that shows some important transcendental qualities to Klüger's poetry, while still respecting historical specificities. Braese and Detering focus on closer readings of Klüger's language. Braese claims that the German weiter leben serves as a \\\"Miteinandersprechen\\\" (47), a settling of accounts. This is to say that writing weiter leben in German was not only to keep her mother from reading her...\",\"PeriodicalId\":40350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Austrian Studies\",\"volume\":\"301 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Austrian Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/oas.2023.0039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Austrian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/oas.2023.0039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

书评:《露丝·克莱格的遗产与奥斯维辛世纪的终结》,作者:马克·h·盖尔伯,主编:亚当·j·托斯·马克·h·盖尔伯,主编:《露丝·克莱格的遗产与奥斯维辛世纪的终结》。犹太文本与语境透视柏林/波士顿:De Gruyter, 2022。Ruth kl格尔于2020年去世,对德国、犹太和奥地利研究领域造成了巨大的打击。她的离世不仅是这些学术团体的巨大损失,也代表了大屠杀学术研究中一个更大的、不可避免的难题:对这一嘲弄有着鲜活记忆的幸存者越来越少。《露丝·克莱格的遗产》和《奥斯维辛世纪的终结》旨在向克莱格尔和她的记忆致敬,同时也为思考在幸存的幸存者离开后如何讨论大屠杀提供了一个跳板。这本书的撰稿人——马克·h·盖尔伯(他编辑了这本书)、桑德·l·吉尔曼、海因里希·德特林、斯蒂芬·布雷斯、伊伦内·海德堡-伦纳德、乌尔里克·奥芬伯格、莫妮卡·坦皮安、丹尼尔·p·雷诺兹和维拉·施瓦茨——在实现这些目标的过程中,既有成功,也有失败。我将根据他们(1)对kl格尔的纪念程度和(2)从最弱的开始,提出一个令人信服的论点来看待每个贡献。雷诺的这一章应该是解决大屠杀记忆问题最重要的一章,但它的论点令人失望。雷诺兹把文化评论家西奥多·阿多诺(Theodor Adorno)当作稻草人,因为他在奥斯维辛集中营之后发表了著名的诗歌是野蛮的宣言。雷诺兹想为大屠杀纪念旅游辩护,似乎因为阿多诺对大众文化的批评而认识阿多诺。我不确定,因为雷诺兹从来没有引用阿多诺,也没有断文断义地引用阿多诺的立场,她引用了kl格的话,她认为阿多诺的专制观点是雷诺兹与阿多诺最亲密的接触。雷诺兹将阿多诺对大众文化的著名批判与他对文化批评本身的元批评性以及整体意识形态的可塑性结合起来,将对整体意识形态的批评包括在意识形态中。这种混淆轻易地破坏了他对kl格尔的理解,以支持大屠杀旅游。Gelber的贡献,建立在与kl格尔长期的职业友谊和对她的作品几乎无与伦比的了解之上,认为她是一个犹太复国主义者。尽管Gelber汇编了所有的间接证据,但没有一个是kl格尔证实这一论点的直接陈述。盖尔伯公开承认有一定程度的猜测,当人们考虑到盖尔伯作为编辑的角色,以及kl格尔不再对他的说法提出异议时,缺乏直接声明就像拇指疼痛一样突出,削弱了他的地位。格里曼的贡献并没有在“名字很重要”(10)之外提出一个论点,而是为我们提供了两个在美国的犹太德国人的历史概况。这一章以吉尔曼所期望的风格带领我们通过各种文本了解名字的重要性和它们背后的魔力,因为他也追溯了他与kl格尔的职业友谊。然而,吉尔曼也断文断义地指责阿多诺,在缺乏更具体的论据的情况下,对吉尔曼和kl格尔职业友谊的个人见解是唯一的一线希望。坦皮安和施瓦茨的比较分析为读者提供了关于kl格尔和大屠杀写作的新视角。Tempian的章节让读者对大屠杀儿童的诗歌进行了比较,并以kl格尔的学术和个人观点为背景,向读者展示了大屠杀儿童对大屠杀创伤的处理和理解与他们的成人同龄人没有什么不同。施瓦茨将克莱格尔的诗歌与关于鬼魂和哀悼的诗歌进行比较,在尊重历史特殊性的同时显示出克莱格尔诗歌的一些重要的超越性。Braese和Detering专注于对kl格尔语的深入解读。Braese声称德国的weiter leben起到了“Miteinandersprechen”(47)的作用,即结算账目。这就是说,用德语写weiter leben不仅是为了不让她的母亲读她的书……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century ed. by Mark H. Gelber
Reviewed by: The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century ed. by Mark H. Gelber Adam J. Toth Mark H. Gelber, ed., The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century. Perspectives on Jewish Texts and Contexts 20. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 2022. 190 pp. Ruth Klüger's death in 2020 dealt an enormous blow to the fields of German, Jewish, and Austrian Studies. Her passing was not only a tremendous loss for these scholarly communities but represents a larger, inevitable conundrum for scholarship on the Holocaust: the dying out of survivors with living memory of the travesty. The Legacy of Ruth Klüger and the End of the Auschwitz Century aims to serve both as a tribute to Klüger and her memory as well as a springboard for meditation on how to discuss the Holocaust once the remaining survivors are gone. The volume's contributors—Mark H. Gelber (who edited the volume), Sander L. Gilman, Heinrich Detering, Stephan Braese, Irène Heidelberger-Leonard, Ulrike Offenberg, Monica Tempian, Daniel P. Reynolds, and Vera Schwarcz—offer a mix of hits and misses in achieving these goals. I will look at each contribution based on how well they (1) memorialize Klüger and (2) make a compelling argument, starting from the weakest. Reynold's chapter, which should be the most important for grappling with the question of Holocaust memory, disappoints in its argumentation. Propping up cultural critic Theodor Adorno as a straw man because of his famous declaration of poetry as barbaric after Auschwitz, Reynolds wants to argue for Holocaust memorial tourism and seems to know of Adorno for his critique of mass culture. I am unsure, as Reynolds never cites Adorno and refers to Adorno's position out of context, with a quote from Klüger on what [End Page 133] she viewed as an authoritarian perspective from Adorno as Reynolds's closest engagement with Adorno. Reynolds conflates Adorno's well-known critique of mass culture with his metacritique of cultural criticism itself and the malleability of total ideology to include criticism of total ideology within that ideology. This conflation glibly undermines his reading of Klüger to support Holocaust tourism. Gelber's contribution, built on a long-standing professional friendship with Klüger and an almost unrivaled knowledge of her writings, argues that she is a Zionist. For all the circumstantial evidence Gelber compiles, none of it is a direct statement from Klüger affirming this argument. Gelber openly admits to a degree of speculation and, when one considers Gelber's role as editor and that Klüger is no longer around to dispute his claim, the lack of a direct statement stands out like a sore thumb, weakening his position. Gliman's contribution does not so much advance an argument beyond "Names matter" (10) as provide us with a historical sketch of two Jewish Germanists in America. The chapter moves us through the significance of names and the magic behind them throughout various texts in a style expected from Gilman, as he also traces his professional friendship with Klüger. However, Gilman also rebukes Adorno out of context and, in the absence of a more specific argument to be made, the personal insights into Gilman and Klüger's professional friendship are the only silver lining. Comparative analyses by Tempian and Schwarcz offer readers fresh perspectives on Klüger and Holocaust writing. Tempian's chapter gives readers a comparative look at Holocaust children's poetry and, with Klüger's scholarly and personal perspectives in the background, shows readers that the children of the Holocaust processed and appreciated trauma of the Holocaust no differently than their adult counterparts. Schwarcz holds Klüger's poetry up against poems on ghosts and mourning in a way that shows some important transcendental qualities to Klüger's poetry, while still respecting historical specificities. Braese and Detering focus on closer readings of Klüger's language. Braese claims that the German weiter leben serves as a "Miteinandersprechen" (47), a settling of accounts. This is to say that writing weiter leben in German was not only to keep her mother from reading her...
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Austrian Studies
Journal of Austrian Studies HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: The Journal of Austrian Studies is an interdisciplinary quarterly that publishes scholarly articles and book reviews on all aspects of the history and culture of Austria, Austro-Hungary, and the Habsburg territory. It is the flagship publication of the Austrian Studies Association and contains contributions in German and English from the world''s premiere scholars in the field of Austrian studies. The journal highlights scholarly work that draws on innovative methodologies and new ways of viewing Austrian history and culture. Although the journal was renamed in 2012 to reflect the increasing scope and diversity of its scholarship, it has a long lineage dating back over a half century as Modern Austrian Literature and, prior to that, The Journal of the International Arthur Schnitzler Research Association.
期刊最新文献
Paul Celan—"sah daß ein Blatt fiel und wußte, daß es eine Botschaft war": Neue Einsichten und Lektüren Hrsg. Martin A. Hainz (review) Oskar Kokoschka und Österreich: Facetten einer politischen Biografie by Bernadette Reinhold (review) WSD*: Die Bibliothek Wendelin Schmidt-Dengler und ihre Lesespuren ed. by Roland Innerhofer and Thomas Kohlwein (review) Rose Ausländers Leben im Wort by Olena Staranchuk, Oleg Gryshchenko und Oxana Matiychuk (review) Evolution of Servant Laws in the Habsburg Empire
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1