What remains? The afterlife of GDR literature in the research

The title of the story What Remains by Christa Wolf denotes one of the main topics of the present discussion about German literature after 1989. The article presents the new questions (e.g. one or two German literature(s)? What does ‘GDR literature‘ mean? Is it a ‘special case’?) and changing conditions of the study of East German literature. A few new historical works discussing German literature since 1945, mainly since the reunification, and a few theoretical approaches (e.g. GDR literature as a chronotope and as regional literature) are presented.The title of the story What Remains by Christa Wolf denotes one of the main topics of the present discussion about German literature after 1989. The article presents the new questions (e.g. one or two German literature(s)? What does ‘GDR literature‘ mean? Is it a ‘special case’?) and changing conditions of the study of East German literature. A few new historical works discussing German literature since 1945, mainly since the reunification, and a few theoretical approaches (e.g. GDR literature as a chronotope and as regional literature) are presented

DDR-Literatur und Literaturwissenschaft in der DDR : zwei kritische Bilanzen

In einem allerorten spürbaren Zustand schwieriger, oft scheiternder Kommunikation zwischen den Intellektuellen Ost und West richten Klaus Städtke (der bis 1986 am Zentralinstitut für Literaturgeschichte bei der Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR gearbeitet hat und seit 1989 in Bremen Kulturgeschichte Osteuropas lehrt) und Wolfgang Emmerich (der seit 15 Jahren zur Kultur und Literatur der DDR publiziert) den Blick zurück - zum einen auf die Geisteswissenschaften der DDR im allgemeinen, zum andern auf die Geschichtsschreibung der DDR-Literatur im besonderen. Im einen wie im andern Fall: Erkennbar wird, daß Umdenken auf der Tagesordnung steht. Und es hat schon begonnen

Vom Zürcher Straußenhandel zu Nietzsches Basler Straußiade: David Friedrich Strauß als Märtyrer

After his “Leben Jesu” (1835) and his unsuccessful vocation in Zurich Strauß developed, according to the social analysis of cultural reproduction theory by Pierre Bourdieu, the habitus of a victim of his own belief, a martyr. This habitus is shown in the works he wrote after the end of his academic theological career. In “Leben und Schriften des Dichters Nicodemus Frischlin” (1856) and in “Ulrich von Hutten” (1858) he portrays two authors who were both unsuccessful in their work and their lives and became victims of their beliefs. Not only these biographies but also the translation of Huttens Latin oeuvres modified Strauß’ habitus: in giving popularity to forgotten authors and works he felt that the time had come to rehabilitate his “Leben Jesu”, especially because he considered it to be a milestone of theological development. He thus modified the habitus of a martyr into the habitus of a risen hero. Instead of creating a new edition of his “Leben Jesu” he wrote the popular version “Leben Jesu, für das deutsche Volk bearbeitet” (1864), followed by “Der alte und der neue Glaube” (1872). Nietzsche’s very polemic critique of this last work in “Unzeitgemässe Betrachtung” (1873) deals closely with the modified habitus of Strauß and shows the latter to have become yet again a martyr of his own beliefs