Scribd Logo
Unggah

Selamat datang di Scribd!

  • Auerbach and His Mimesis (Bremmer)

    Diunggah oleh

    William Robayo
    8 tayangan9 halaman
    Auerbach and his mimesis

    Hak Cipta

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Format Tersedia

    PDF atau baca online dari Scribd

    Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

    Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

    Laporkan Dokumen Ini
    Auerbach and his mimesis

    Hak Cipta:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Unduh sebagai PDF atau baca online dari Scribd
    Tandai sebagai konten tidak pantas
    8 tayangan9 halaman

    Auerbach and His Mimesis (Bremmer)

    Diunggah oleh

    William Robayo
    Auerbach and his mimesis

    Hak Cipta:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Unduh sebagai PDF atau baca online dari Scribd
    Tandai sebagai konten tidak pantas
    dari 9
    Erich Auerbach and His Mimesis Jan N. Bremmer Theology, Groningen Erich Auerbach’s Mimesis: Dergestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlindischen Liter- atur was first published in 1946 by A. Francke Verlag, Bern, Switzerland. An American edition entitled Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, tanalated by Willard R. Trask and published by Princeton Uni- versity Press, appeared in 1953. Translations into other languages soon fol- through numerous printings; both are still on the stock lists of their re- spective publishers. Auerbach’s Afimesis is, withour a doubt, one of the few genuine classics of literary scholarship from the second half of this century. But who was the author of Mimesis? It is striking that only in recent years have there appeared good biographical essays about Auerbach and his works, in general, and about the circumstances in which Mimesis was com- posed, in particular.’ Immediately after his death in 1957, the journal Roma- nische Forschungen published a short in memoriam by Fritz Schalk (1902-80), which provides a concise sketch of Auerbach’s work and ends with, “Von 1929-36 lehrte er an der Universitit Marburg, 1936-1946 an der Universi- tat Istanbul” (Schalk 1957). Not a word is said about this remarkable career ‘This is the slightly revised opening address of the Groningen conference “MIMESIS” men- tioned Later im the text of my contribution, I would like to thank Bernard Scholz, the confer- cove rg fr eral mggeone, Ths MeCreigh fr a copy af the Spr iurview (952), and Henry Remak for an illuminating conversation on May 15, 1998. 1. Bor my biographical sketch 1 arm much indebted to I. Auerbach 1971: 462-63 (with useful mornion of Auerbach's alain the Stasnsarchiv Marburg): Peyre 1977, Christman 1989; Ziolkowahi tgs; Ourbrecht 1996; and Maas 1996: 1725. Nelson go and Coser 198, 262-64 are ioe inelul than thei ties would sage. Poetics Today 20:1 (Spring 1999}. Copyright © sggg by the Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics. 4 Poetics Today 20:7 move to the University of Istanbul, not a word about the difficult circum- stances under which Mimesis was written. Similarly, Schalk only hints at the circumstances of .Mimesis's composition in the preface to Auerbach's collected studies on Romance philology (Auerbach 1967). which he co- edited? The entry in the Encyclopedia Britannica is even less helpful: “From 1929-1946 Auerbach taught in Marburg and Istanbul.” It is therefore not surprising that the most detailed biographical lemmata can be found in dictionaries specifically concerned with Jewish authors and scholars." Except for these specific studies, virtually none of the shorter biographi- cal notices | consulted bothers to mention that Auerbach was of Jewish origin and thar he would never have written Mimesis without this buck- ground. They might also have mentioned that Auerbach’s scholarly life had not really been that easy. He was born in Berlin on November g, 1892 into a well-to-do family of merchants. After graduating from the presti- gious Franzésisches Gymnasium he went on to study law at the universities of Berlin, Freiburg, Munich, and Heidelberg (1g10-13): in Berlin he was strongly affected by the best student ever of classical prose style, Eduard Norden (Ziolkowski 1993: xiv).* Afier earning his doctorate in law at Hei- delberg, in 1913 with a dissertation entitled “Die Teilnahme in den Vorar- beiten zu einem neuen Stralgesetzbuch.~ he joined the German army in December 1914 for the duration of the Great War. He spent four years on the western front where, in April 1918, he suffered a leg wound that would trouble him for the rest of his life. Having decided before the war not to pursue a legal career, he obtained a Greifswald doctorate in Romance philology in 1921 with the dissertation “Zur ‘Technik der Frihrenaissance- novelle in Italien und Frankreich.” In 1g24 he became Bihliothekrrat at the Prussian State Library in Ber- lin, where he first published on three figures who would interest him for the rest of his life: Dante, Vico, and Croce (Candela 1996). In 1929 he was transferred to the University Library at Marburg, then recommended for Habilitation on the basis of his Dante als Dichter der irdischen Welt (1929). In 1930 he was appointed chairman of the Department of Romance Phi- lology at Marburg, where he succeeded another great Jewish scholar, Leo Spitzer (1887-1960). who had taken a chairmanship in Cologne. Here he 42. Schalk was a declared opponent of the Nazis, but it reflects his lack of interest in Auer- bach’s fate that, as Hausmann (ighg: 4ti1 notes, his prewar currespondence with Hugo Friedrich contains “kaum ein Worn des Mitleids oder Ineresse fir die Vertriehenen.” 3 See the lemma “Auerbach” in Caplan and Rosenblarr ‘¢This is not mentioned by the studies on Norden (1868-1 ’ 5. Auerbach probably owed his interest in Vico to Ernsi Troelisch (Della Tera G. Fora comparison of Auerbach and Spitzer, see Cromau 1 reviewed in Knoke 181. Bremmer - Erich Auerbach and His Mimesis 5 could work undisturbed for a relatively short time. Although not immedi- ately affected after 1933, he was dismissed in 1995 after the abolition of the Jaw that protected the veterans of the Great War. Fortunately, Kemal Ara- tiirk, having decided to modernize the Turkish educational system, was inviting German professors to Istanbul, including many Jews. Auerbach made use of this happy circumstance and in 1936 once again succeeded SE EN mane, Biiltosy (Spiizer having emigrated to the United States);’ the title notwithstanding, however, bark was faced wih earkng laf Wenern Europa Besenmr ce Bek 1988). The Jewish professors were left in relative peace by the German consulate general in Tstanbul until 1938, when they received question- naires requiring information about their racial origin; a few years later the German citizenship of all these emigrants was revoked (Neumark 1980: 182-83; Eckert 1985: 228-29). Auerbach had managed to take along the notes and references of his work in progres, and during the first years in Istanbul he could still work from what he had brought with him. Having completed the work begun in Germany, including his famous essay “Figura,” he subsequently wrote the brief Introduction to Romance Languages and Literature® But he was no longer able to do what he thought he could do best, highly detailed philological work, as Istanbul lacked most Western books and journals—this despite (who would become Pope John XXII) to use the library of the Dominican monastery, San Pietro di Galata. When Spitzer had complained about this situation to the dean he had received the severe answer that books were not significant since they were so easily combustible (see Spitzer 1959: 19- 21, 26-27). Tt. was these circumstances, and the need to remember and iascribe them, that led Auerbach to record the dates of composition—May 1942-April 1945—on the verso of Mimesis’s title page. This context is also clear from the contents, which indirectly reflect his experience of the Nazis: from the first chapter with its glorification of the Old Testament over Homer, through the depictions of barbarian rulers in Gregory of Tours and of a revolt of the lower classes in Ammianus Marcellinus, to the last chapters where the pessimistic views of modern novelists are criticized because they would weaken our resolve in standing up to negative ideologies” 7. Widmann 1979: 107-9. 255; Neumark 1980: g2-93 (on Auerbach's succession of Spitzer. otherwise not informative on Auerbach). 8. The first edition was in French (1943). For subsequent translations and reviews see Ste- fenelli 1989: 95 1. 1. 9g. The relevance of these chapters to Auerhach’s own experiences was noted at a conference 6 Poetics Today 20:1 Auerbach's book, then, is a typical product of a specific moment in time.” Drawing on concepts developed from his philological research, he presented a study of reality as represented in literature from antiquity to the present. His presentation would show the variety of these depic- tions but be infused with the general human quality, “and thar human quality would transcend and encompass the historically particular.” His task would be “to provide humanity with an alternative conception to the one that was threatening the world . . . , an ideal powerful enough to grapple with its enemies and emerge supreme” (Green 1982: 37, 68). For this depiction Auerbach chose the Greek term mimusis. In retrospect one may question whether this was a truly fortunate choice. In a way it fixes the depiction in a certain, historically determined, manner, whereas Auerbach’s critics had not failed to notice that he nowhere clearly defines “reality.” For the Greeks, mimesis is not only imitation, as one might be lined to think, In various cases it can indeed be an attempt at ts most trivial form, pure copying; but it is also often more than that. In fact, in many passages mimesis is best translated as “representa- tion”: even Plato realized that artists sometimes represent things that have No counterpar in real life." Auerbach’s book was an immediate success. Reviewers hailed its “truly monumental greatness” (Theophil Spoerri) and praised Auerbach for his “umfassende[s] und vielseitige|s] Wissen” (Ouo Regenbogen). At the same time, specialists also complained about his definition of realism, the omis- sion of texts dear to their hearts, or errors in their fields. Auerbach ad- dressed at least one of these complaints in 1949 by adding a chapter on ‘Virginia Woolf and in 1953. by supplementing the American edition with a chapter on Dor Quixale. However, in “Epilegomena zu Afimesis” he vig- orously defended his views, in particular against the complains of Ernst Robert Curtius (1886-1956) about his separarion of styles, declaring his unwavering adherence to German historicism (Aucrbach 1953). The success of Afimesis enabled Auerbach to move to America in 1947. where he became visiting professor at Pennsylvania State University but failed to get tenure due to medical reasons (a serious cardiovascular ail- ment): in any case, shy and refined as he was, he did not enjoy the campus’s on Auerbach in Marburg. Cf. the report in the Franéfsrter

    Anda mungkin juga menyukai