Text, Context and
Sex:
Gender Construction and Religious Identity in Robert Musil’s Unions
A perfect woman perpetrates literature
as she perpetrates a small sin:
as an experiment, in passing, looking around
to see if anybody notices it—and to make sure
that somebody does.
Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols
as she perpetrates a small sin:
as an experiment, in passing, looking around
to see if anybody notices it—and to make sure
that somebody does.
Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols
Claudine and Veronica were perfect women. Claudine
was sexually promiscuous. Perfecting her second marriage consumed
her energy as she struggled between the deep mystical union and love
she shared with her husband and the physical desire she felt for
other nameless men who preyed on her in transient environments. Veiled
Veronica the Virgin was tempted to give up her self-imposed hermitage
for the love of a real man, yet quietly, determinedly she chose to
remain in the confines of her cold, dark, and damp habitat and to
give her love to the illusory man. These women are main characters
in Unions, a collection of two
novellas (The Perfecting of a Love and The
Temptation of Quiet Veronica) by the Austrian writer Robert
Musil (1880-1942) published in 1911. Musil, best known for his unfinished
magnum opus, The Man Without Qualities,
is considered a central figure in the modernist and early postmodernist
movements in the development of twentieth-century literature (see
Poupard, 223ff). Literary critics have likened Musil’s style
of writing, in Unions in particular,
to impressionism, with a stream of consciousness style whose closest
comparison is James Joyce or Gertrude Stein (see Peacock 255). In
twentieth-century literary criticism, Musil is noted for his contribution
to the history of modern identity (see Johnson). I will explore the
function of Unions as it represents
spaces of religious identity tied to gendered erotic and mystical
experiences.
I begin with the assumption that moral philosophies
within culture are often transmitted at the popular level via such
vehicles as literature. I also begin with the assumption that discourse
within a culture can often be identified via these forms of popular
culture. And finally, I begin with the knowledge that Musil is seen
as one of the most observant writers of the twentieth century, continuously
praised for his perceptions of society and his particular focus upon
identity (both internal and external).[1] His
diaries as well as his literary works are valued for their ability
to express vividly “the things that preoccupied men and women” during
his lifetime: love, sex, morals, philosophy, psychology, politics,
society, art, culture, science, human relationships, and religion
(Payne xxii). The cast of characters one finds in Musil’s writings
represent a plethora of “attitudes within society at large” (Payne
xxxi). It is for this reason that Musil is an excellent choice in
exploring literary representations of gender construction and religious
identity in early twentieth-century Central Europe. Hence, the question
I have in this examination is: what do these early twentieth-century
novellas tell us about gender construction and religious identity
in the waning days of Central European Imperial culture? In answering
this question I will limit my examination to the literary function
of these novellas.
I enter the material with three primary categories
in mind: text, context, and sex – what do the texts themselves
tell us of religion and gender? What does the context in which the
novella was written tell us about religion and gender? How does the
text and context display sex and what do these displays tell us about
gendered relationships and religious identity in early twentieth-century
Central Europe? I will show that Unions tells
us a great deal about the religious economy of early twentieth-century
Central Europe.
Religious economy has been defined as, and is understood
here as, “a subsystem of all social systems within a society” and
it “encompasses all of the religious activity going on in any
society” (Stark and Fink 35).[2] These
novellas illustrate one activity making up the early twentieth-century
Central European religious economic landscape, that is, a gendered
religious identity that included erotic and sensual experiences with
a divine presence.
In The Perfecting of
a Love (henceforth Perfecting), Claudine,
the central character, after spending yet another blissful night
in the arms of her husband, travels alone to see her daughter
in a boarding school. During the trip, she reflects on the love
of her husband, her past sexual life and entertains the possibility
of having an affair with a man with whom she is travelling. After
much internal and demanding dialogue, being stranded by a snowstorm,
and in the process forgetting to see her daughter, Claudine has
sexual intercourse with the man and considers this an act that
affirms her great love and intimate bond with her husband. At
the end of the novella she reflects on how the feeling that she
is left with after consummating the affair is perhaps similar
to the feeling that children have when they claim to see God.
In The Temptation of
Quiet Veronica (henceforth Veronica), Veronica,
a virgin, remains in the confines of her home, caring for an
elderly aunt and reflects on the relationships with two men,
Johannes and Demeter, both of whom have left. Demeter left first
when the two men had fought over Veronica and Johannes left after
Veronica had rejected his confession of love and refused to go
away with him. Johannes indicated that he was leaving to commit
suicide. While alone, Veronica remembers the arousal of erotic
feelings she felt as a young child when with her dog, acknowledges
that she has denied her own sexual desire for Johannes and then,
after a night of intense spiritual and mystical dreams and experiences,
finds an inner joy with the prospect of Johannes’ death.
In the end she learns that Johannes is still alive and is coming
back, and Veronica is happy at this prospect.
First, let me say, to summarize these two novellas
does an injustice. These novellas, considered some of Musil’s
most abstract and dense work, are particularly written not to simply
be read, but rather to be experienced. Musil was interested not in
intellectual response but in emotional response (Peacock 255). The
external action as briefly described in the plot line above is of
secondary import in both of these novellas. Of primary import is
the space of internal experiential processes in which these women
embrace their identity, culminating in their actions. Literary critics
have described these novellas in a variety of ways – from being “two
exquisitely written stories” (Wilkens and Kaiser 232) to “two
of the world’s most unreadable stories” (Cohn 154). As
author of these novellas, Musil has been negatively described as
a “pervert and educational Philistine” (Isitt 244) and
as putting “queer ideas into women’s heads” (Bayley
265). If anything, Musil has been successful in his goal of eliciting
affect in anyone who completely reads these novellas. In fact, these
novellas are meant for what one literary critic calls the “implacable
re-reader” (Cohn 154). This is undeniably so.
Upon my first reading of Unions, I
was struck, as most readers are, by the language that Musil uses
to describe these two women’s internal struggles and erotic
experiences with a divine presence. For instance, one scholar counted
337 similes – most often comparatives involving animals, bodies,
and landscapes – in the brief 38 pages of Perfecting (Cohn
157). The many similes in the novellas focus upon the main female
character’s ethical dilemma between external and internal codes
of behavior, between intellect and erotic feeling. Musil’s
language evokes the experience of the deep dichotomy that each main
character feels between their body and the outside world. For instance,
Claudine, after consummating her affair and beginning to feel pangs
of guilt comes to the following revelation: “Yet at the back
of her mind, there was a shadow memory of something she had once
experienced on a day in spring: a state that was like giving herself
to everyone and yet belonging only to the one beloved....” (177,
italics in original). In like manner, although coming from the opposite
direction, Veronica also speaks of this deep dichotomy at the end
of her mystical experience: “Consumed by fever, fine-drawn
and thin as a withered rose-petal, she felt herself to have become
transparent; and she felt as though her body were everywhere at once
and at the same time contracted to such minuteness that it was as
if she were holding it in her own tightly shut hand” (216).
Many critics of Musil turn to Freud in examining
Musil’s literary works and the deep dichotomy expressed above.
In particular, Andrew Webber’s study, Sexuality
and the Sense of Self in the works of Georg Trakl and Robert Musil,[3] reduces
Musil’s oeuvre, particularly Unions,
to Freudian principals of phallic obsession, hysteria and general
self-projection. Yvonne Isitt critiques this type of misguided Freudian
focus. She states that rather than attributing it to Freud, Musil’s
concern reflected “the prevailing attitude to life presented
by Austrian literature; the interplay of the magical and the real
world in the Zauberstück,
the interaction of magic and morality in the Geisterstück” so
common in drama (Isitt 244-45). What was unique to Musil is that
he transposed this interplay and interaction into the novel. I would
agree with Isitt that Musil is indeed drawing on the history of Austrian
dramatic literature; however, there is something else that is also
occurring in Unions.
In my second reading of the text I began to see
that this something else has everything to do with religious identity.
In his introduction to the English translation of Musil’s diaries,
Mark Mirsky states that Musil’s The
Man Without Qualities (henceforth MoE) is
a “deeply religious work” a kind of “religious
drama” along the lines of Homer’s Odyssey,
the Epic of Gilgamesh, and the Book
of Job (xliii, xlvi). Mirsky
continues that it is this religious quality that distinguished Musil
from other early postmodern writers of the day who claimed no truth
or no transcendence, only relativity and flux. Musil found the idea
of an eternal presence, the divine, the supernatural, if you will,
not only positive, but of much use in a world in which the social
and political centers were slowly fading. Musil is described as one
of those “few writers whose work seems to hold wisdom, the
secrets of one’s own questions about Eros, political direction,
and religion; what the pious of all religions would call ‘the
Unknown’ or ‘other reality’....” (xxxvii).
Hence I intend to explore the possibility that Musil, in writing Unions,
was consciously in dialogue with various religious economies present
in the early twentieth-century European landscape. On the one hand,
in reaction to the growing feminist movement sweeping across Europe
in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries – particularly
Feminist Socialism as led by such women as Adelheid Popp-Dworak in
Austria and Clara Zetkin in Germany – the Roman Catholic Church
was tightening its traditional stand on approved female roles for
women, such as wife, mother, and nun.[4] On
the other hand, scientific inquiry into human experience was being
hailed as making religion obsolete, particularly in the new psychoanalytic
community represented most notably in the works of Sigmund Freud.
In Freud’s 1899 publication, Interpretation
of Dreams, the focus was upon the unconscious mind and
the difference between reality and illusion. The tenants of this
religious cartel included his 1895 Studies
in Hysteria, his subsequent [mis]diagnosis
of Dora, one of the most well-known case studies in the history of
psychoanalysis, which led many others to [mis]diagnose the illness
of hysteria in other women and thus discount, denigrate, if not pervert,
women’s experiences of their bodies, their sexuality and their
erotic fantasies, and culminated with Freud’s The
Future of an Illusion in 1927, which contended that any
concept of the divine is just that, an illusion, and, more often
than not, tied to sexual neuroses.
Given the various religious economies circulating
in Musil’s intellectual environment, we can understand the
function of Unions in terms
of what Mieke Bal calls an “efficient ideological weapon,” that
is, a text supporting one’s views and triggering a reaction
in the reader (132). Bal concludes that there is no “one” truth
to any reading of a text, and for this very reason, “women
can creep” into a text and “rewrite themselves back into
the history of ideology” (132). Or, as Nietzsche stated above,
these perfect women can perpetrate a text. Musil represents in Unions,
I believe, another option to the religious economies above. Musil’s
religious economy included spaces of mystical embodied experiences
of the divine that were sexual, sensual, beyond scientific, empirical
certainty and that often transgressed accepted moral and ethical
codes of behavior. Can adultery lead to a perfecting of a marriage?
Musil emphatically stated yes. Can fantasizing about bestiality,
denying physical sexual contact, and rejoicing at the thought of
a loved one’s death cause that love to grow? Musil emphatically
stated yes. Are these women sick or delusional? Musil, I think, emphatically
stated no.
In this light, we can, for example, explore the
function of Veronica’s fantasizing about bestiality to illustrate
my point. Veronica declares at one point to Johannes:
I understand her so well.... The peasant woman...
She never had a lover again, only those two big dogs of hers. ...
but just try to imagine it: those two huge beasts, sometimes standing
up on their hind-legs, their teeth bared, insistent, masterful, as
though you were just the same as they are – and somehow you
are.... It’s not an animal’s desire, but a desire coming
from something else that I can’t find any name for. And I don’t
know how it is that I can understand it so well. (186)
Johannes responds, “But all this is sin!
Such talk is filthy!” And perhaps most readers of this text
find Johannes’s response rational and appropriate. However,
when we examine this text in the context of another text by Musil,
Veronica’s musings become more than simply filth, sin or “queer
ideas in women’s heads.”
In a diary entry dated 24 April 1907, Musil relates
a story about a woman in Carinthia, Austria, the province of Musil’s
birthplace. This woman was rumored to have an intimate relationship
with her mastiff. Musil’s diary entry reads, “In the
angry arousal of such an animal there is something that may well
stimulate a woman. It is also possible that one feels loathing for
men and prefers dogs – such a feeling is possible, precisely
with women who love their integrity” (113).[5] This
is Veronica, our literary heroine created by Musil two years later.
Disturbing as it may be for those reading Veronica’s musings
on bestiality in 1911 or for those of us reading about it almost
a hundred years later, Musil, I believe, includes a story in actual
oral circulation in Austria in order to illustrate an important point
in his religious economy – the unsettling possibility that
the preference a woman might have for a dog over a man is not a sign
of diseased sexual fantasy or unholy perversion, but rather an erotic
experience which not only maintains a woman’s integrity, but
in the end, provides access to the divine. For Musil, women were
operating out of this unconventional morality, if you will, and leading
the way in an alternative economy to the dogmatic institutional religions
or the popular psychoanalytic professions. Women’s bodies,
their internal yearnings, their outward expressions and their ultimate
union with Geist, spirit, god,
what have you, is the vehicle through which Musil’s religious
economy is had. To Musil, women were not lethal – as the Roman
Catholic Church would contend and as Bal illustrates so clearly in
her examination of biblical readings of women’s roles as temptresses
and whores, and of women’s sexuality a thing to be avoided,
save for procreation – nor were women ill and their sexuality
(or their fantasies about sex) a symptom of deep and disturbing neuroses.
As represented in Unions, women
were sensuously powerful, saw beyond the surfaces to an often unsettling
depth, expressed unabashedly their sexuality, and understood that
transgressions and denials must sometimes be made in order to perfect
a divine, transcendent union, even if only temporarily. In short,
corporal and spiritual dimensions are entwined in Musil’s moral
and ethical landscape, which embraced a deep skepticism “toward
the conventional in all its aspects” (Mirsky xliii)
and required that women and their bodies transgress or deny certain
moral certainties. However, I am not advocating that Musil was an
early feminist writer. While he rejects the gendered traditions of
both poles of the religious economy to which he is reacting, Musil’s
alternative also includes nonetheless gendered constructions of power.
Musil’s gendered notion of access to the
divine illustrates what Pierre Bourdieu calls the official and unofficial
gendered practices of power and spaces (Bourdieu 41). While men officiate
their spiritual power in public within the realm of an institutional
organization, women must unofficially practice their clandestine “magic” in
private. In short, women’s power comes from their private experiences
of erotic intercourse with the divine. And, this intercourse often
entails transgressing or denying conventional codes of behavior.
This establishes a social and symbolic order according to gender
(Bourdieu 93ff). In short, Musil’s literary women transgress
boundaries or deny conventional codes of behavior in order to access
the divine. In accessing these women (be it via sexual intercourse
or via the reading of a text in which these women have crept in),
men are able to access the divine by proxy. The gender constructed
from this dynamic relationship establishes, then, “social relationships
based on these perceived differences between the sexes,” and
thus signifies “relationships of power” (Scott 42). Musil’s
gendered religious economy integrated psychological states in which
an individual would merge with the entire universe, not simply at
a mental level, but at an emotional, physical as well as spiritual
level. Musil used the expression “der
andere Zustand” (the “other” condition)
to refer to “mental states in which the selfhood of the individual
merges with the universe as a whole”; it represented “something
of a mystical quality” and is considered central to Musil’s
thinking (Diaries 524, fn 1;
525, fn 13). Some attribute Musil’s interest in this “other” condition
to the fact that his chosen professions – soldier, engineer,
academic psychologist – prior to committing himself to a life
as a writer were all consumed with demands of “manhood” as
constructed in Europe (and of course elsewhere) at the time, namely
the demands of “objectivity, self-discipline, asceticism of
the body and mind” (Payne xxviii).
And here is where we can see clearly the construction of gender and
religious identity in Musil, and in Unions in
particular. Women’s sexuality and their transgressive nature
are the way to transcendent union with god. Men need these
women in order to break off, or rather balance, the “demands
of manhood” as described above. In Musil the relationship of
power is this symbiotic relationship of male and female becoming
one – whether it be a hermaphrodite or androgynous is irrelevant.
Musil’s literary characters in general “will
toward another existence, a life in which there are no boundaries
of gender but an ecstatic wholeness, a submersion of two partners
in a boundless Unknown” (Mirsky xli).
This same “will toward another existence” is operative
and one of the guiding motivations of action for both Claudine and
Veronica. Both women want to experience this ecstatic union. Claudine
does it by committing adultery, Veronica via bestial fantasies and
mystical communion with a man she believes to be dead. These women
represent two poles of ecstatic union – transgression and asceticism.
In this way both Claudine and Veronica are on the margins of moral
and ethical society. As one commentator states:
If you are curious about the forbidden, the
taboos of society, and regard fiction as a way of exploring the boundaries
of consciousness, Musil becomes irresistible. What constitutes evil?
The reality of nationalism, the meaning in erotic and mystical awareness — these
are the questions of his essays, shorter fiction, and novels. (Mirsky xxxvi)
Via his narrative, Musil explores the taboos of
his society and brings them from margin to center and demands that
the reader not only read this experience but also “feel, smell
and live through” (Mirsky xxxviii)
these transgressive experiences.
In particular, Musil was interested in transgressions
which would create another moral system. Often, when examining MoE, commentators
and critics will point to the irony in characters whose actions permit
that which is forbidden: namely, a transgression or denial that is
transformed into deep mystical love (Mirsky xlii).
It is obvious, however, that these elements of irony are central
to the novellas of Unions and
that the notion of transgression, with elements of a Buddhist or
Kabbalist sensibility, is present throughout. Bernard Faure points
out in his study of Buddhist approaches to sexuality, particularly
Tantric Buddhism, that within this religious system, “apparent
transgressions may end well” (282). Cleaving to Bataille’s
notions of taboo and transgression, Faure continues, “Transgression
is the very movement of spirituality: to exceed all limits, to abide
nowhere.... It is a constant violence to or violation of the homeostatic
tendency of human nature, an ex-stasis, excess, hubris” (282).
Transgressions produce an ex-stasis that places one beyond human
experience in the realm of religious, otherworldly experience.
Faure also points out that female transgression
has, more often than not, been kept silent historically. Acknowledging
female transgression would permit “women to break through the
boundaries of male discourse ... female transgression has to remain
invisible or unthought, it has to be made irrelevant, if women are
to be kept in a subaltern position” (138-39). In both novellas,
Musil breaks this conspiracy of silence by allowing these women to
perpetrate a text and speak publicly about transgressive behavior
that leads to religious ecstasy. Instead of keeping the women and
their experience in a subaltern position, on the margins, Musil moves
women and their transgressions (whether it be the sexual transgression,
as with Claudine, or the structural opposite, ascetic denial, as
with Veronica) front and center. Musil does not use these texts of
female transgressions as cautionary tales to extract proper behavior
(as a sort of interdiction), as the Roman Catholic Church might have,
nor does he employ them as psychoanalytic studies in order to expose
deep neurotic neuroses, as Freud might have. Musil acknowledges that
women’s transgressions illustrate an alternative moral and
ethical space in which one could live.
It is at this point that I must pause to ask about
Musil’s world and possible influences on these two unique and
exhaustingly abstract novellas about women’s deepest erotic
and spiritual experiences. What influenced Musil’s ethical,
moral, in short, religious perspectives? This leads, then, to the
context in which Musil was writing.
Born to an Austrian father and Bohemian mother,
Musil spent his early years in both Austria and Bohemia. After attending
military boarding school, Musil embraced the many aspects of fin
de siècle narcissism early in his life while studying
engineering in Brünn/Brno. Musil himself wrote later in life, “my
generation was anti-moral or amoral because our fathers talked of
morality and behaved in a philistine and immoral fashion” (cited
in Payne, xxiii). The hypocrisy and
stated moral rigidity of the bourgeois attitude is what Musil was
reacting to in his literary works, something which also found its
way into his diary: “I accept and enjoy every kind of sensual
experience without any form of restraint” (Diaries 16).[6] As
one scholar surmises in his reflection on Musil’s literary
subjects, “Is it possible to create another morality in a secular
age that will bring us into an experience beyond this particular
time and age?” (Mirsky xxxvi).
This interest in creating an alternative ethical and moral world
prompted Musil, after graduating with an engineering degree and working
for one year as an academic engineer in Stuttgart to begin studies
in psychology and philosophy at the University of Berlin (1903-1908).
Under the direction of one of the leading scholars in experimental
psychology, Dr. Carl Stumpf, Musil not only began to learn to scientifically
observe other human beings, but also turned the microscope upon himself
and those he knew best. Musil used empirical observations and scientific
precision in his creative writing as well and published his first
novel, Die Verwirrungen des Zöglings
Törleß (The Confusions of Young Törless)
in 1906, two years before he would complete his doctorate in philosophy.[7] Young
Törless gained critical acclaim, and after graduating,
Musil turned down a prestigious academic position in Graz to focus
upon his writing. It was during this time that Musil began to write Unions.[8] He
was commissioned in 1909 to write a piece after an editor had read
an early version of Veronica in
a 1908 periodical and asked Musil to compose a companion piece for
the edited article. (Hickman 57).[9] Musil
readily agreed and Unions was
published two years later, in 1911.
As noted above, Musil developed his literary craft
by using the skills of dissection and observation in his own life. Young
Törless is an autobiographical sketch of Musil’s
early life in military boarding school, and it is common knowledge
among those familiar with Musil that he dissected his own life for
this first novel.[10] For
his second novel, Unions, he
dissected a woman’s life.
Musil met Martha Marcovaldi in 1907. Martha was
six years older than Robert and was married to her second husband
when they met. Martha and her children left her husband, and Robert
and Martha became quickly inseparable. Although they were living
together, Martha was not able to secure a divorce and marry Robert
until 1911. They remained together for the rest of their lives, sharing “intellectually
and spiritually as one organism” (Payne xii).
While there are many relevant details of both Martha’s individual
life and their life together for the purposes of this examination,
I will focus only upon her direct influence on the writing of Unions.
Unions is
not only very intense for the reader but was very straining for Musil.[11] It
is also one of his most concentrated works, and “from the point
of view of taxing his abilities as a writer ... was probably the
most difficult Musil ever undertook” (Isitt 245). Musil himself
described it as “despairing work” (cited in Isitt, 244).
Musil and Martha had been together only a year
when he published the first version of Veronica. Hickman
reveals that Martha, like Veronica, lived in a home with an elderly
aunt and four male cousins, one of whom became her first husband
(59). This is the framework from which Musil created the first of
the novellas. While they shared a deep and mutual intimacy from the
beginning, early in their relationship, Martha went to visit a former
fiancé and ended up having a brief affair with him. Again,
most scholars agree that this episode is the foundation for Perfecting.[12]One
scholar, however, sees the motivation for the composition of this
second novella as Musil’s “revenge” for this affair
and to “interrogate Martha on her feelings before, during,
and after her infidelity,” making this interrogation itself
the subject of the novella.[13] I
am not convinced that it was revenge Musil was seeking in composing
this second novella. Unconventional, transgressive sexual behavior
was not foreign to Musil. For one thing, Martha assisted in the composition
of these two novellas. There are diary entries which Musil made beginning
in August of 1910 that indicate Martha’s assistance in both
the editing and compositions of Veronica and Perfecting (Diaries 116ff). In
addition, Musil’s autobiographical first novel includes both
homosexual and heterosexual experiences, at least one with a prostitute
(Payne x). Musil also had a love affair
prior to meeting Martha with a “working class girl” (from
whom he became infected with syphilis) that would be the basis of
another later novel (Tonka),
in which one can also see, as in Unions, that
the “borders between sexuality and love are fluid” (Payne xxv).
And finally, Musil’s own mother had a forty-year male liaison,
who lived in the home (Musil’s father apparently accepting
the situation) and whom Musil was told to call “Uncle” (Peacock
254). Hence, I do not see these two novellas, and Perfecting in
particular, as a type of revenge
for unconventional sexual behavior. I view them as a type of interrogation
that one might find in a confession; I see Musil as an interlocutor
extracting a confession of Martha’s experiences – her
feelings, inner struggles and subsequent revelations concerning her
affair, which are then put to paper. What is the function of this
confession?
In The History of Sexuality,
vol. I, Michel Foucault provides
the historical context in which we can move beyond revenge and
better display the function of confession in Musil’s Unions.
Foucault’s classic analysis of modern European sexual history
pinpoints several social and mental mechanisms that caused the
public discourse of sex to be of import. In particular, Foucault
points to the confession as a pivotal moment in which power relations
are established and disseminated within European sexual discourse.
Foucault illustrates that the infinite task of telling one another
about our sex lives, via confession, while having a long history
in ascetic and monastic life, had become a standard “rule
for everyone” (20) by the seventeenth century. This required
discourse, Foucault continues, was particularly important in
the Christian pastoral economy, which expanded into the public
realm in the eighteenth century. By the nineteenth century sexuality
had become a standard part of the discourse of the medical establishment. Hence,
whether in religious, political, social or medical settings,
by the time Robert Musil was writing, “one had to speak
of sex” publicly (Foucault 24). We can view other writings,
such as Freud’s publications and case studies, in this
light as well. One can posit that psychoanalytic case studies
are also a secular form of confession. Foucault contends that
the obligation, if not requirement of confession had everything
to do with the exercise of power. Foucault illustrates that in
western European sexual discourse there have been “two
great procedures for producing the truth of sex” – ars
erotica and scientia sexualis. Societies
such as China, Japan, India, Rome, and the Arab world embraced
an “ars erotica that
experienced pleasure as the space in which truth can be found
and that its particular intensity would be in its reverberations
in the body and the soul” (57), while “our civilization,” as
Foucault refers to the European continent, practices what he
calls scientia sexualis. It
is a civilization, which has developed the “procedures
for telling the truth of sex which are geared to a form of knowledge-power
strictly opposed to the art of initiations and the masterful
secret as expressed in ars erotica” (58). This
tradition, Foucault continues, relies on a “production
of truth,” the most valued techniques of which became the
confession, in which “one admits to oneself, in pleasure
and in pain, things it would be impossible to tell to anyone
else, the things people write books about” (58-59). The
efficacy of this production of truth via scientia
sexualis comes not from the confessor but from the
one who listens – the priest in religious settings, the
psychologist in psychoanalytic settings, the judge in legal settings
and, for the purposes of our examination, the scribe in a literary
setting, and finally the reader.
I believe Musil was using both of these productions
of truth in his literary representation of his wife’s confessions.
In one sense, he embraces the ars erotica;
as one scholar puts it “the eroticism of marriage is terra
incognita for Western literature. Perhaps Musil has unwittingly approached
it closer than anyone else.”[14] Yet
Musil presents it via the process of scientia
sexualis, whereby those who listen to (or rather read)
the confession provide its efficacy. While of course Musil did not
have Foucault’s writing from which to draw inspiration (lest
you think for a moment I am anachronistic), there is another contemporary
text from which Musil does draw, I believe, his notions of confessions
of ecstatic experiences.
Musil was influenced by the great panoply of nineteenth-
and early twentieth-century intellectual life, many of whom he knew
personally: Nietzsche, Emerson, Wittgenstein, Thoreau, Stendhal,
Marx, Jung, Maeterlinck, Lévy-Bruhl, Hegel, Mann (both Heinrich
and Thomas), Schiller, Wundt, Dilthey, Dostoevsky, Rilke, Kafka,
Lukács, Tolstoy.[15] Much
could and has been written on how these various thinkers influenced
Musil’s life, literary craft and his interest in mystical eroticism,
particularly Nietzsche and Emerson; however, I would like to examine
the work most biographers of Musil point out was Musil’s “bible” and
which I believe had a particular influence upon the composition of Unions:
Martin Buber’s 1909 collection Ekstatische
Konfessionen (Ecstatic Confessions).[16]
Musil’s obsession with Ecstatic
Confessions was acknowledged in a 1985 English translation
of Buber’s collection:
No one perhaps read Ecstatic
Confessions as carefully as the Austrian novelist
Robert Musil, who kept a special copybook in which he transcribed
numerous excerpts from Buber’s collection. These excerpts
later served Musil in the composition of the many excursuses
on mysticism in his novel The Man Without
Qualities. (xix)
I would argue that Buber’s collection was
one of the primary frames in which Musil worked in crafting Unions.
In addition, most literary critiques constantly evoke MoE when
discussing any influence of Ecstatic Confessions on
Musil’s literary works, as Paul Mendes-Flohr did above, and,
perhaps, rightly so, in that around 300 citations of excerpts from
Buber’s book are said to be within MoE (Mirsky xlix).
There is also speculation that Musil’s seeking the unknown
via the erotic could also have been influenced by the thirteenth-century
neo-Platonic Jewish Kabbala document, The
Zohar, and Dante’s Commedia (Mirsky xlix). A
1988 review in the New York Review of Books of
a new English translation of Musil’s works states, “The
most graphic passages in all his books deal with sexual musings and
intimations as a part of the other condition, the state that medieval
mystics, in whom Musil was much interested, frequently likened to
certain kinds of erotic experience” (Bayley 263). I would argue
that one can see the direct influence of Buber’s collection,
if not the Kabbala and Dante as well, in Unions. When
examining Unions with this in
mind, one can see that Musil’s novellas have everything to
do with religious identity and gender construction based on mystical,
ecstatic confessions along the lines of Foucault’s ars
erotica and scientia sexualis.
Buber’s collection includes voices of mystical
encounters from a wide variety of cultures and historical periods—from
the great Indian epic Mahabharata (c.
400 BCE-300 BCE) and Lao-Tse (c.
300 BCE) to eighteenth- and nineteenth-century European mystics.
Buber states his book represents the vox
humana and that orderly explanations are not of import:
The ecstatic individual may be explained in
terms of psychology, physiology, pathology; what is important to
us is that which remains beyond explanation: the individual’s
experience. We pay no heed here to those notions which are bent on
establishing ‘order’ even in the darkest corners; we
are listening to a human being speak of the soul and of the soul’s
ineffable mystery. (xxxi)
I would argue that in this passage Buber expresses
exactly what Musil intended to be the function of Unions. Musil
was also not interested in orderly explanations of the psychology,
physiology or pathology of his characters.
Unions is, above all, a literary work in which the reader
listens to women speak of the soul and of the soul’s ineffable,
inexplicable, mystery. It is of import in illustrating the influence
of Buber’s work on the novellas, in that the overwhelming majority
of confessions in Buber’s collection, particularly from Central
Europe, are those of women.
There are two hauntingly familiar confessions in
Buber’s collection in particular that, on the surface at least,
evidence similar concerns with both Claudine’s and Veronica’s.
These two medieval confessions are part of a larger corpus entitled, “From
the German sister-books (thirteenth and fourteenth centuries).” These
two sisters, Sofia von Klingnaur and Jützi Schultheiss, are
uncannily similar to the other “sisters,” Claudine and
Veronica. Buber states in his forward that Sofia “could experience
only herself (but not something particular about herself, rather
her entire I in everything)” while Jützi “could
experience only the world (but not this, that, or the other thing
in it, rather the whole world in everything). They experienced the
same thing, and yet how differently!” (xxxiv–xxxv). Buber’s
declaration here is, I believe, also a description of Claudine (read
Sofia) and Veronica (read Jützi), who both have come to the
same conclusion, via different routes, particularly in the passages
of the novella cited above regarding the deep dichotomy each woman
feels. This intertextuality between Unions and Ecstatic
Confessions takes on even more weight when reading the
confessions themselves. For instance, the confession of Sofia, who
is about to die, begins with a reflection on her former life and
how much time she “had spent in the world in frivolous pursuits” (81).
This is indeed what Claudine reflected upon during her entire trip
prior to her affair and subsequent ecstatic union with the divine.
The confession of Jützi begins with the simple statement, “Then
God decreed a great temptation for her, that she thought and it became
her opinion that she should never see God” (85). The Temptation
of Quiet Veronica echoes this decree. There are also uses
of similes comparing their bodies to landscapes and other elements
that are utilized within Unions, as
discussed above. While I realize these constructions within confessional
narratives are not unique, the pairing that Buber expresses in the
forward and the subsequent similarities of these two confessions
to the two novellas of Unions may
very well be related.
One can also see the influence of Jewish mysticism
in Unions by pointing to one
of the verses excerpted from the Hasidim in Ecstatic
Confessions:
Whoever greatly desires a woman and contemplates
her brightly colored garments has his mind not on the gorgeous cloth
or colors, but on the splendor of the desired woman who is enveloped
in them. But the others see only the garments and nothing more. So
whoever desires and receives God in truth beholds in all the things
of the world only the power and the pride of him who shaped them
at the primal beginning, and who lives in things. But whoever is
not on this level sees things as separate from God. (149)
This verse indicates a gendered and embodied notion
of the divine that is sexual in its nature. One desires God in the
same way that one desires the splendid unclothed body of a woman.
And of course it is of more than passing interest to note that both
Claudine and Veronica, in the midst of their most transformative
mystical unions, take their garments off and stand naked – or
rather are on all fours on the floor – allowing that divine
presence to “behold” them in their primal beginnings.
While I have yet to find any scholarship on Buber’s influence
on the writing of Unions, his
influence on MoE has been noted
(see Goltschnigg), which serves to support my basic premise that
Buber’s collection is a frame in which Musil is working.
In short Ecstatic Confessions is
a study of comparative religious experience that counters the scientific
and psychoanalytical, if not pathological, writings gaining currency
in the Central European religious economy of the nineteenth century,
which, more often than not, tagged women as ill and their sexuality
as somehow dangerous. Musil was never persuaded to accept the psychological
theories of Freud, Schnitzler, and Wedekind “as a fundamental
means of analyzing the human psyche” (Islitt 247). Unions represents
Musil’s reaction against these sterile and scientific interpretations
of women’s inner religious experience. As an ideological weapon,
Musil’s novellas offer an alternative space of religious identity
within the early twentieth-century Central European religious economy.
In his examination of MoE and
the construction of modern identity, Stefan Jonsson contends that
Musil’s magnum opus should
be “situated among a series of other projects of the same period
that sought to explain the political role of affections and the suggestive
power of nationalism and fascism.”[17] I
agree with Jonsson’s assessment of MoE, and
I similarly situate Unions, as
an ideological weapon, in order to explain the gendered role of affections
within the religious economic landscape of the early twentieth century.
In situating the analytical frame of Foucault’s
confessions and the influence of Buber’s collection, we can
now see the function of Unions as
expressing power relations not only between Robert and Martha Musil,
but also relations of power between the characters within the novellas.
We can also understand the relations of power that Musil was reacting
against within his intellectual heritage of science and psychology,
that of “radical empirical skepticism” which considered
highly suspect any notions of harmony and union.[18] Musil
is embracing a space of identity that insists on acknowledging a
transcendent world that is beyond scientific empirical proof or psychological
stereotypes. He would deny that religion was an illusion, as Freud
later contended. In short, Musil is arguing against the view that
sexuality, of women in particular, is nothing but repressed neuroses
often manifesting itself in various illnesses such as hysteria. Rather
Musil is representing in his work a sexuality that is inextricably
tied to a gendered religious identity that embraces a mysterious other. In
short, Musil’s religious economy is one in which women’s
bodies and their experiences, particularly their erotic experiences,
as told, as confessed, as perpetrating texts, are access to the divine.
The artistry of Unions emerges,
as I have shown here, when one situates Martin Buber’s Ecstatic
Confessions next to Musil’s text and reads it within
the context of Foucault’s historical analysis of the confession.
When properly framed and adequately displayed, Unions provides
an important portrait of one space of gender construction and religious
identity in the early twentieth-century religious economic marketplace.
Musil himself felt that Unions was
inadequately understood and inappropriately displayed. In a diary
entry made late in his life, he pointed out that what was wrong with Unions was “that
it is a book. That it has a binding, spine, pagination. One ought
to lay out a few of its pages between sheets of glass, then change
them from time to time. Then one would see what it is” (Diaries 205).
Like so many relics of a saint displayed at a pilgrimage site, Musil
wanted the ecstatic confessions of his wife to be adequately displayed
or noticed in the way that he intended. And it is here that we must
return to Nietzsche, as Musil did so often in his life:
A perfect woman perpetrates literature
as she perpetrates a small sin:
as an experiment, in passing, looking around
to see if anybody notices it — and to make sure
that somebody does.
as she perpetrates a small sin:
as an experiment, in passing, looking around
to see if anybody notices it — and to make sure
that somebody does.
Robert Musil wrote these two novellas about perfect
women, perpetrating literature, perpetrating small sins, creeping
into a text as an experiment. For Musil, the experiment was in giving
positive voice to a woman’s confession of a mystical, ecstatic,
sexual identity in the early twentieth century. He and Martha did
this, almost in passing, wondering if anyone noticed. And in the
waning days of his life, Musil acknowledged that Unions was
the only one of his literary works that he enjoyed re-reading occasionally
(Hickman 66), he himself being that implacable re-reader. Musil was
making sure that at the very least somebody noticed a perfect woman
perpetrating a text. I noticed it.
References
Anderson, Bonnie S. and Judith P. Zinsser. A
History of their Own: Women in Europe. New York: Harper & Roe,
1988.
Bal, Mieke. Lethal
Love: Feminist Literary Readings of Biblical Love Stories. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1987.
Bayley, John. “Death and the Dichter.” In
Peacock.
Bourdieu, Pierre. Outline
of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University of Press, 1977.
Buber, Martin. Ecstatic
Confessions. Trans. Paul Mendes-Flohr. San Francisco:
Harper & Row, 1985 [1909].
Cohn, Dorrit. “Psyche and Space in
Musil’s Die Vollendung der Liebe.” The
Germanic Review LXIX.2 (March 1974)
Faure, Bernard. The
Red Thread: Buddhist Approaches to Sexuality. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998.
Foucault, Michel. The
History of Sexuality, An Introduction, vol. I. Trans.
Robert Hurley. New York:
Vintage Books, 1990.
Goltschnigg, Dietmar. Mystische
Tradition im Roman Robert Musils: Martin Bubers “Ekstatische
Konfessionen” im “Mann ohne Eigenschaften.” Heidelberg:
Lothar Stiehm, 1974. Robert Musil & the
Culture of Vienna. London & Sydney: Croom Helm,
1984.
Isitt, Yvonne. “Robert Musil.” In
Poupard.
Jonsson, Stefan. Subject
Without Nation: Robert Musil and the History of Modern Identity. Durham & London:
Duke University Press, 2000.
Mirsky, Mark. “Introduction.” Diaries
1899-1941. Robert Musil. New York: Basic Books, 1998.
Musil, Robert. Diaries,
1899-1941. Selected, translated, and annotated by
Philip Payne, edited by Mark Mirsky. New York: Basic Books, 1998.
—. Unions. Trans.
Eithne Wilkins and Ernst Kaiser. Preface by Frank Kermode. Boston:
Verba Mundi, 1966.
Payne, Philip. “Preface,” Diaries
1899-1941, Robert Musil. New York: Basic Books, 1998.
Peacock, Scott, ed. Twentieth-Century
Literary Criticism, vol. 68,. Detroit, London: Gale
Research, 1984.
Poupard, Dennis, ed. Twentieth-Century
Literary Criticism, vol. 12. Detroit, London: Gale
Research, 1984.
Rogowski, Christian. Distinguished
Outsider: Robert Musil and his Critics. Columbia,
SC: Camden House, Inc., 1994.
Scott, Joan Wallach. Gender
and the Politics of History. New York: Columbia University
Press, 1988.
Stark, Rodney and Roger Finke. Acts
of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2000.
Webber, Andrew. Sexuality
and the Sense of Self in the Works of Georg Trakl and Robert
Musil. London, England: Modern Humanities Research
Association for the Institute of Germanic Studies, 1990.
Wilkins, Eithene and Ernst Kaiser. Essay,
1952 In Poupard.
Notes
[1] See
Rogowski, Hickman, and Jonsson.
[2] This
concept was borrowed and developed from Talcot Parsons’s 1951 The
Social System.
[3] While
Webber does reveal certain crucial aspects of Musil’s literary
craft, Webber ignores the point of what I will show was Musil’s
primary inspiration for the novellas – women’s confessions
of a deep religious, sexual, and mystical union with god.
[4] See
Anderson and Zinsser, 354, 372, 383.
[5] It
is important to note that the English translation of Musil’s
diaries are only two-fifths of the German original. I am obviously
hindered from not having these originals available to me.
[6] The
editor admits that these early entries can be anywhere from 1899-1904
or later.
[7] See
Hickman 190. Musil’s dissertation was on the epistemology of
the physicist and philosopher Ernst Mach, who deeply influenced Musil’s
interest in, among other things, mysticism. This section also owes
a great deal to Payne.
[8] Unfortunately,
the reception of Unions falls
outside the parameters of this study formed, as they are, by the
context in which Musil produced literary work and the way Musil’s
literary work sheds light on early twentieth-century religious economies.
A fascinating line of inquiry would be to explore whether there were
significant differences in reception according to gender or whether
there was any reaction from the institutional church or the psychoanalytic
community.
[9] The
earlier article which included elements of Veronica was
entitled “The Enchanted House.”
[10] See
Hickman, Jonsson, and Rogowski.
[11] See
Payne xii, and Hickmann 57 ff.
[12] See
Hickmann, Jonsson, and Rogowski.
[13] See
Payne’s preface, xxvii. I disagree with Payne’s assessment
of this “eye for an eye” attitude of Musil, who later
had an affair while in Italy, and put this experience down in the
narrative of “Girgia.”
[14] Denis
De Rougement as quoted in Mirsky, xli.
[15] It
should also be noted that another possible influence on Musil was
his second cousin Alois Musil (1868–1938), Old Testament professor
and Arabic scholar at the University of
Vienna who was a spy in the Middle East during WWI for the Austrian
intelligence. I found one very brief reference to him; however, more
research on their relationship, which includes written correspondence
would, I think, be an interesting inquiry. See Mirsky liii.
[16] See
Jonsson 23, Rogowski 158 ff, and Hickmann 160.
[17] Jonsson
261. He also contends that MoE should
not be compared to, among other things, Buber’s theology. I
am arguing, of course, precisely the opposite, that Buber’s
theology assisted Musil in formulating explanations.
[18] Genese
Grill, as quoted in Mirsky l.