Growing up, one of my favorite books that my parents used to read me was Eric Carle's Brown Bear, Brown Bear What do You See? I remember taking note of things in the surrounding environment and continually observing all that is around me. Since then, I have always been fascinated by my surroundings and taking note of things, both big and small. Whether a changing political climate or watching the sunrise greet you in the morning, there are things that are meant to be noticed. And at the risk of sounding too elementary, I believe that the "Brown Bear, Brown Bear" mentality is exactly what Roth seeks to do in his account of What I Saw. His account details his portrait of Berlin in the interwar period and how the aftermath of World War I in addition to the changing political structure truly left an imprint on him.
To use the words of the New Yorker, contributing writer Willing Davidson says "Roth was a predictor of doom, both of civilizations and his own". Following World War I, Germany is left in a standstill and knee deep in the devastation due to the outcomes. It is interesting that Roth's portrait of life in Berlin (which is detailed in this video above) during this interwar period truly is one that focuses on what I believe to be the "unseen". The state that Germany finds itself is one of despair due to the repercussions following the war; however, the changing political climate seems to place a veil over the city of Berlin, which, at the time was the current capital of the Weimar Republic and reveal the true nature of people and certain people groups.
Roth's attention to different people groups seeks to give a voice to all those inhabiting the city. Coming from a Jewish background himself, his portrait of the "Solomon's temple" or even of his journey to Grenadierstrasse of which life is detailed in the photograph above. In reading this particular portion of his account, it was very interesting that he mentions, "the weakest and far from loveliest of peoples was given the most dreadful curse and most dreadful blessing, the hardest law and the most difficult mission: to sow love on the earth and to reap hatred" (47). And to recount Davidson's point earlier, Roth indeed seemed to be one that was a "predictor of doom", which in fact he appears to be doing here. It seems to only be an objective blanket statement of the Jewish people themselves but almost as if it too is a charge that he himself notices solely by being a Jew, which begs the question, how much does his Jewish heritage influence his perceptions, especially in the interwar period?
And it wasn't just the people groups that were being rebuilt during this interwar period, it was also a change to the physical structure of the city. Whether the simple look of a housing complex, a train station or even a department store in 1930 Berlin, Roth takes notice of how the structures that support the people for all sorts of purposes, truly take on different shapes of their own. The phrase "a city to meet the people's needs" slowly starts to come to mind in reading his account of the changes to the architecture. Even Roth's use of the term "industrialized merriment" as he details Berlin's pleasure industry, suggests that a certain degree of frivolity exists in the city. From Roth's perspective, "the entire mechanism by which fun is produced and communicated these days seems ever more simplistic and transparent the more human nature is forced to import entertainment from the outside" (171). According to his observations, it no longer seems that Berlin is stripped to basics due to the state of the country itself but in turn seeks to find a way to escape from the present through losing itself in the sometimes frivolous nature of entertainment.
And then, as the year 1933 approaches and the ever changing political climate gives rise to Hitler and the Third Reich, Roth's Jewish heritage seems to leap from the pages. Here, his perspective is not only that of a Jewish man, but also a writer as he attempts to discern the Third Reich's purpose in targeting the Jews (207). And as we know today, Roth passed away in Paris in 1939 just as Hitler was "destroying Europe".
This video (until 3:30) paints a portrait of this charismatic leader that Roth, "a predictor of doom" saw to an extent the power that Hitler portrayed in becoming chancellor of Germany.
And to Mr. Joseph Roth, I thank you for the raw and yet bold account that you provided. With sincere thanks to see truly through your eyes, how the changing landscape, whether physical, political or even emotional drove you to stand up and not leave it "unnoticed", I thank you. In reading some of your last thoughts, I was struck by your words: "now, as the smoke of our burned books rises into the sky, we German writers of Jewish descent must acknowledge above all that we have been defeated. Let us, who are fighting on the front line, under the banner of the European mind, let us fulfill the noblest duty of the defeated warrior: Let us concede our defeat" (207). Mr. Roth, may you know that while I understand your writing and purpose for concession, may you know how this account seeks to provide perspective, not only from your Jewish heritage but also from your understanding of this political dictatorship is to be a revered account from history. So, simply, thank you for gifting us with your raw and honest written words.
Discussion Questions
1) Discuss any of the specific people groups or even "characters" that Roth takes note to mention. What seems to be the significance of including them? How did their story influence this interwar period in Berlin?
2) Discuss Joseph Roth and his writings. He seems to be an observer who can explore his surroundings through a written account. Is this the way that he approaches all of his writings? If so, why? And if not, why does Just What I Saw receive a different approach?
3) The NY times article coins the phrase and states that Roth is a "predictor of doom". How does the understanding of that phrase influence the perception of his writing?
Link to NY article: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2012/01/book-excerpt-the-letters-of-joseph-roth.html
4) The religious implications of the Third Reich's rise to power that Roth alludes to in the end of his novel; it seems that it is the beginning of a statement made directly to the Third Reich on behalf of the Jewish people. Is this the case? And was it the attack to the Jews specifically or the way that Roth appeared to take offense to how the Third Reich destroyed the written word that influenced his last chapter?
5) On pg. 217, Roth states, "Many of us served in the war, many died. We have written for Germany, we have died for Germany. We have spilled our blodd for Germany in two ways: the blood that runs in our veins, and the blood with which we write. We have sung Germany, the real Germany! And that is why today we are being burned by Germany!" (217). Discuss the implications of this quote and the role that "hindsight" plays in our understanding of Roth's account.
Resources Fulbrook,
Mary. A History of Germany: 1918-2008 The
Divided Nation. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2009. Print. Roth, Joseph. What I Saw: Reports from Berlin 1920- 1933. London: W.W. Norton & Company., 1996. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment