Reviews chapter, on science fiction from the s into the twenty-first century, Esselborn continues to hold on to his artificial distinction. His selection, based on winners of the Kurd Lasswitz Prize, is limited to serious mind experiments written by serious men. e analysis of the works of Herbert Franke is thorough and sympathetic, while the discussion of recent novels by Dietmar Dath offers little more than short vignettes. German science fiction texts written by women (e.g. Juli Zeh, Karen Duve, or eresa Hannig) are conspicuous by their absence. Esselborn leaves us with tantalizing but underexplored observations about the nature of German science fiction: the Faustian myth of overreaching oneself in the pursuit of knowledge, and the repeated messages of warning against a belief in our ability to solve human problems through technology. Instead, and somewhat despondently, Esselborn concludes: ‘das spannende und phantasievolle Erzählen [hat] den Sieg über den technischen, wissenschalichen und utopischen Diskurs davongetragen’ (p. ). Esselborn has needlessly limited the scope of his enquiry. For where is it written that the German ‘novel of the future’ has to focus exclusively on technology and the ‘hard’ sciences? Just because Germans are known for their scientific and technological prowess, an internalized ‘Vorsprung durch Technik’ marketing slogan that is as dubious as the Romantic image of ‘das Land der Dichter und Denker’? Why can we not include texts that are less concerned about technology yet still imagine possible futures, be they explorations of the ‘inner spaces’ of human psychology or the ‘so’ social fictions that envision alternative timelines and different ways of organizing society? Such caveats should not detract from what has been achieved here: a catalogue of German literature of oen outstanding quality that is routinely omitted in standard literary histories, and a valiant attempt to break down the still existent divide between the ‘two cultures’. U L I C Der Faustische Pakt: Goethe und die Goethe-Gesellscha im Dritten Reich. By W. D W. Munich: dtv. . pp. €. ISBN ––––. is book documents the career of the Goethe-Gesellscha, the scholarly society founded aer the death of Goethe’s last direct descendant in , during the period of National Socialist rule. Its broad aim is to challenge existing research, which, even where it has not been actively ‘apologetic’, has not, Daniel Wilson contends, been sufficiently comprehensive or robust to dispatch the myth, introduced by Hans Wahl in , that the Goethe-Gesellscha received no support from the NSDAP and was not subject to Gleichschaltung. Drawing on extensive archival research, Wilson debunks this myth with energy and determination. e study repeatedly refuses to understand the decision by senior figures in the Goethe-Gesellscha to conform with National Socialist policies as inevitable or necessary compromises. By this account, the line between capitulation in the face of pressure on the one MLR, ., hand, and the active pursuit of favour on the other, was hazy, to say the least. Indeed, the former soon tipped into the latter, as the recurring motif of ‘over-hasty obedience’, used to describe the attitude of senior figures in the Society, makes plain. With the assertion that, by the mid-s, the Goethe-Gesellscha was moving ‘immer mehr und freiwillig auf das Regime zu’ (p. ), the central notion of the ‘Faustian pact’ comes into its own. e image of a collaboration which, though initially ambivalent, becomes increasingly tight, is very apt. Wilson exposes the role of the Goethe-Gesellscha in helping, for example, to create the ‘Trugbild eines weltoffenen Deutschlands’ on the occasion of the Berlin Olympics, so that foreign observers might be reassured that ‘normality’ still prevailed (p. ). Particularly egregious was the telephone conversation in November between Anton Kippenberg and a representative at the National Socialist headquarters, during which strategies were discussed for covering up (above all from foreign members) the fact that Jewish members of the Society were to be actively excluded from then on (p. ). At the end of the study, Wilson acknowledges that those at the helm of the Goethe-Gesellscha were in a difficult position; but he is also clear in his judgement that the morally preferable course of action would have been for the Society...
Read full abstract