|
Franz Kafka's Letter to his father. |
|
DEAREST FATHER,
You asked me recently why I maintain that I am afraid of you. As usual,
I was unable to think of any answer to your question, partly for the very
reason that I am afraid of you, and partly because an explanation of the
grounds for this fear would mean going into far more details than I could
even approximately keep in mind while talking. And if I now try to give
you an answer in writing, it will still be very incomplete, because, even
in writing, this fear and its consequences hamper me in relation to you
and because the magnitude of the subject goes far beyond the scope of my
memory and power of reasoning.
To you the matter always seemed very simple, at least in so far as you
talked about it in front of me, and indiscriminately in front of many
other people. It looked to you more or less as follows: you have worked
hard all your life, have sacrificed everything for your children, above
all for me, consequently I have lived high and handsome, have been
completely at liberty to learn whatever I wanted, and have had no cause
for material worries, which means worries of any kind at all. You have not
expected any gratitude for this, knowing what "children's
gratitude" is like, but have expected at least some sort of
obligingness, some sign of sympathy. Instead I have always hidden from
you, in my room, among my books, with crazy friends, or with crackpot
ideas. I have never talked to you frankly; I have never come to you when
you were in the synagogue, never visited you at Franzensbad, nor indeed
ever shown any family feeling; I have never taken any interest in the
business or your other concerns; I saddled you with the factory and walked
off; I encouraged Ottla in her obstinacy, and never lifted a finger for
you (never even got you a theater ticket), while I do everything for my
friends. If you sum up your judgment of me, the result you get is that,
although you don't charge me with anything downright improper or wicked
(with the exception perhaps of my latest marriage plan), you do charge me
with coldness, estrangements and ingratitude. And, what is more, you
charge me with it in such a way as to make it seem my fault, as though I
might have been able, with something like a touch on the steering wheel,
to make everything quite different, while you aren't in the slightest to
blame, unless it be for having been too good to me.
This, your usual way of representing it, I regard as accurate only in
so far as I too believe you are entirely blameless in the matter of our
estrangement. But I am equally entirely blameless. If I could get you to
acknowledge this, then what would be possible is—not, I think, a new
life, we are both much too old for that—but still, a kind of peace; no
cessation, but still, a diminution of your unceasing reproaches.
Oddly enough you have some sort of notion of what I mean. For instance,
a short time ago you said to me: "I have always been fond of you,
even though outwardly I didn't act toward you as other fathers generally
do, and this precisely because I can't pretend as other people can."
Now, Father, on the whole I have never doubted your goodness toward me,
but this remark I consider wrong. You can't pretend, that is true, but
merely for that reason to maintain that other fathers pretend is either
mere opinionated nests, and as such beyond discussion, or on the other
hand—and this in my view is what it really is—a veiled expression of
the fact that something is wrong in our relationship and that you have
played your part in causing it to be so, but without its being your fault.
If you really mean that, then we are in agreement.
|
 |
|
I'm not going to say, of course, that I have become what I am only as a
result of your influence. That would be very much exaggerated (and I am
indeed inclined to this exaggeration). It is indeed quite possible that
even if I had grown up entirely free from your influence I still could not
have become a person after your own heart. I should probably have still
become a weakly, timid, hesitant, restless person, neither Robert Kafka
nor Karl Hermann, but yet quite different from what I really am, and we
might have got on with each other excellently. I should have been happy to
have you as a friend, as a boss, an uncle, a grandfather, even (though
rather more hesitantly) as a father-in-law. Only as a father you have been
too strong for me, particularly since my brothers died when they were
small and my sisters came along only much later, so that I alone had to
bear the brunt of it—and for that I was much too weak. Compare the Twoof us: I, to put it in a very much abbreviated form, a
Löwy with a certain Kafka component, which, however, is not set in motion
by the Kafka will to life, business, and conquest, but by a Löwyish spur
that impels more secretly, more diffidently, and in another direction, and
which often fails to work entirely. You, on the other hand, a true Kafka
in strength, health, appetite, loudness of voice, eloquence,
self-satisfaction, worldly dominance, endurance, presence of mind,
knowledge of human nature, a certain way of doing things on a grand scale,
of course also with all the defects and weaknesses that go with these
advantages and into which your temperament and sometimes your hot temper
drive you. You are perhaps not wholly a Kafka in your general outlook, in
so far as I can compare you with Uncle Philipp, Ludwig, and Heinrich. That
is odd, and here I don't see quite clear either. After all, they were all
more cheerful, fresher, more informal, more easygoing, less severe than
you. (In this, by the way, I have inherited a great deal from you and
taken much too good care of my inheritance, without, admittedly, having
the necessary counterweights in my own nature, as you have.) Yet you too,
on the other hand, have in this respect gone through various phases. You
were perhaps more cheerful before you were disappointed by your children,
especially by me, and were depressed at home (when other people came in,
you were quite different); perhaps you have become more cheerful again
since then, now that your grandchildren and your son-in-law again give you
something of that warmth which your children, except perhaps Valli, could
not give you. In any case, we were so different and in our difference so
dangerous to each other that if anyone had tried to calculate in advance
how I, the slowly developing child, and you, the full-grown man, would
behave toward one another, he could have assumed that you would simply
trample me underfoot so that nothing was left of me. Well, that did not
happen. Nothing alive can be calculated. But perhaps something worse
happened. And in saying this I would all the time beg of you not to forget
that I never, and not even for a single moment believe any guilt to be on
your side. The effect you had on me was the effect you could not help
having. But you should stop considering it some particular malice on my
part that I succumbed to that effect.
|
|
|
I was a timid child. For all that, I am sure I was also obstinate, as
children are. I am sure that Mother spoiled me too, but I cannot believe I
was particularly difficult to manage; I cannot believe that a kindly word,
a quiet taking by the hand, a friendly look, could not have got me to do
anything that was wanted of me. Now you are, after all, basically a
charitable and kindhearted person (what follows will not be in
contradiction to this, I am speaking only of the impression you made on
the child), but not every child has the endurance and fearlessness to go
on searching until it comes to the kindliness that lies beneath the
surface. You can treat a child only in the way you yourself are
constituted, with vigor, noise, and hot temper, and in this case such
behavior seemed to you to be also most appropriate because you wanted to
bring me up to be a strong, brave boy.
Your educational methods in the very early years I can't, of course,
directly describe today, but I can more or less imagine them by drawing
conclusions from the later years and from your treatment of Felix. What
must be considered as heightening the effect is that you were then younger
and hence more energetic, wilder, more primitive, and still more reckless
than you are today and that you were, besides, completely tied to the
business, scarcely able to be with me even once a day, and therefore made
all the more profound impression on me, one that never really leveled out
to the flatness of habit.
There is only one episode in the early years of which I have a direct
memory. You may remember it, too. One night I kept on whimpering for
water, not, I am certain, because I was thirsty, but probably partly to be
annoying, partly to amuse myself. After several vigorous threats had
failed to have any effect, you took me out of bed, carried me out onto the
pavlatche,* and left me there alone for a while in my nightshirt,
outside the shut door. I am not going to say that this was wrong—perhaps
there was really no other way of getting peace and quiet that night—but
I mention it as typical of your methods of bringing up a child and their
effect on me. I dare say I was quite obedient afterward at that period,
but it did me inner harm. What was for me a matter of course, that
senseless asking for water, and then the extraordinary terror of being
carried outside were Twothings that I, my nature being what it was, could
never properly connect with each other. Even years afterward I suffered
from the tormenting fancy that the huge man, my father, the ultimate
authority, would come almost for no reason at all and take me out of bed
in the night and carry me out onto the pavlatche, and that
consequently I meant absolutely nothing as far as he was concerned.
*Pavlatche is the Czech word for the long balcony in the inner
courtyard of old houses in Prague. (Ed.)
That was only a small beginning, but this feeling of being nothing that
often dominates me (a feeling that is in another respect, admittedly, also
a noble and fruitful one) comes largely from your influence. What I would
have needed was a little encouragement, a little friendliness, a little
keeping open of my road, instead of which you blocked it for me, though of
course with the good intention of making me take another road. But I was
not fit for that. You encouraged me, for instance, when I saluted and
marched smartly, but I was no future soldier, or you encouraged me when I
was able to eat heartily or even drink beer with my meals, or when I was
able to repeat songs, singing what I had not understood, or prattle to you
using your own favorite expressions, imitating you, but nothing of this
had anything to do with my future. And it is characteristic that even
today you really only encourage me in anything when you yourself are
involved in it, when what is at stake is your own sense of
self-importance, which I damage (for instance by my intended marriage) or
which is damaged in me (for instance when Pepa is abusive to me). Then I
receive encouragement, I am reminded of my worth, the matches I would be
entitled to make are pointed out to me, and Pepa is condemned utterly. But
apart from the fact that at my age I am already nearly unsusceptible to
encouragement, what help could it be to me anyway, if it only comes when
it isn't primarily a matter of myself at all?
At that time, and at that time in every way, I would have needed
encouragement. I was, after all, weighed down by your mere physical
presence. I remember, for instance, how we often undressed in the same
bathing hut. There was I, skinny, weakly, slight; you strong, tall, broad.
Even inside the hut I felt a miserable specimen, and what's more, not only
in your eyes but in the eyes of the whole world, for you were for me the
measure of all things. But then when we stepped out of the bathing hut
before the people, you holding me by my hand, a little skeleton, unsteady,
barefoot on the boards, frightened of the water, incapable of copying your
swimming strokes, which you, with the best of intentions, but actually to
my profound humiliation, kept on demonstrating, then I was frantic with
desperation and at such moments all my bad experiences in all areas,
fitted magnificently together. I felt best when you sometimes undressed
first and I was able to stay behind in the hut alone and put off the
disgrace of showing myself in public until at last you came to see what I
was doing and drove me out of the hut. I was grateful to you for not
seeming to notice my anguish, and besides, I was proud of my father's
body. By the way, this difference between us remains much the same to this
very day.
In keeping, furthermore, was your intellectual domination. You had
worked your way so far up by your own energies alone, and as a result you
had unbounded confidence in your opinion. That was not yet so dazzling for
me, a child as later for the boy growing up. From your armchair you ruled
the world. Your opinion was correct, every other was mad, wild, meshugge,
not normal. Your self-confidence indeed was so great that you had no need
to be consistent at all and yet never ceased to be in the right. It did
sometimes happen that you had no opinions whatsoever about a matter and as
a result every conceivable opinion with respect to the matter was
necessarily wrong, without exception. You were capable, for instance, of
running down the Czechs, and then the Germans, and then the Jews, and what
is more, not only selectively but in every respect, and finally nobody was
left except yourself. For me you took on the enigmatic quality that all
tyrants have whose rights are based on their person and not on reason. At
least so it seemed to me.
|
| Now, when I was the subject you were
actually astonishingly often right; which in conversation was not
surprising, for there was hardly ever any conversation between us, but
also in reality. Yet this was nothing particularly incomprehensible,
either; in all my thinking I was, after all, under the heavy pressure of
your personality, even in that part of it—and particularly in
that—which was not in accord with yours. All these thoughts, seemingly
independent of you, were from the beginning burdened with your belittling
judgments; it was almost impossible to endure this and still work out a
thought with any measure of completeness and permanence. I am not here
speaking of any sublime thoughts, but of every little childhood
enterprise. It was only necessary to be happy about something or other, to
be filled with the thought of it, to come home and speak of it, and the
answer was an ironic sigh, a shaking of the head, a tapping on the table
with a finger: "Is that all you're so worked up about?" or
"Such worries I'd like to have!" or "The things some people
have time to think about!" or "Where is that going to get
you?" or "What a song and dance about nothing!" Of course,
you couldn't be expected to be enthusiastic about every childish
triviality when you were in a state of vexation and worry. But that was
not the point. Rather, by virtue of your antagonistic nature, you could
not help but always and inevitably cause the child such disappointments;
and further, this antagonism, accumulating material, was constantly
intensified; eventually the pattern expressed itself even if, for once,
you were of the same opinion as I; finally, these disappointments of the
child were not the ordinary disappointments of life but, since they
involved you, the all-important personage, they struck to the very core.
Courage, resolution, confidence, delight in this and that, could not last
when you were against it or even if your opposition was merely to be
assumed; and it was to be assumed in almost everything I did.
This applied to people as well as to thoughts. It was enough that I
should take a little interest in a person—which in any case did not
happen often, as a result of my nature—for you, without any
consideration for my feelings or respect for my judgment, to move in with
abuse, defamation, and denigration. Innocent, childlike people, such as,
for instance, the Yiddish actor Löwy, had to pay for that. Without
knowing him you compared him, in some dreadful way that I have now
forgotten, to vermin and, as was so often the case with people I was fond
of, you were automatically ready with the proverb of the dog and its
fleas. Here I particularly recall the actor because at that time I made a
note of your pronouncements about him, with the comment: "This is how
my father speaks of my friend (whom he does not even know), simply because
he is my friend. I shall always be able to bring this up against him
whenever he reproaches me with the lack of a child's affection and
gratitude." What was always incomprehensible to me was your total
lack of feeling for the suffering and shame you could inflict on me with
your words and judgments. It was as though you had no notion of your
power. I too, I am sure, often hurt you with what I said, but then I
always knew, and it pained me, but I could not control myself, could not
keep the words back, I was sorry even while I was saying them. But you
struck out with your words without much ado, you weren't sorry for anyone,
either during or afterward, one was utterly defenseless against you.
But your whole method of upbringing was like that. You have, I think, a
gift for bringing up children; you could, I am sure, have been of help to
a human being of your own kind with your methods; such a person would have
seen the reasonableness of what you told him, would not have troubled
about anything else, and would quietly have done things the way he was
told. But for me as a child everything you called out to me was positively
a heavenly commandment, I never forgot it, it remained for me the most
important means of forming a judgment of the world, above all of forming a
judgment of you yourself, and there you failed entirely. Since as a child
I was with you chiefly during meals, your teaching was to a large extent
the teaching of proper behavior at table. What was brought to the table
had to be eaten, the quality of the food was not to be discussed—but you
yourself often found the food inedible, called it "this swill,"
said "that cow" (the cook) had ruined it. Because in accordance
with your strong appetite and your particular predilection you ate
everything fast, hot, and in big mouthfuls, the child had to hurry; there
was a somber silence at table, interrupted by admonitions: "Eat
first, talk afterward," or "faster, faster, faster," or
"There you are, you see, I finished ages ago." Bones mustn't be
cracked with the teeth, but you could. Vinegar must not be sipped noisily,
but you could. The main thing was that the bread should be cut straight.
But it didn't matter that you did it with a knife dripping with gravy.
Care had to be taken that no scraps fell on the floor. In the end it was
under your chair that there were the most scraps. At table one wasn't
allowed to do anything but eat, but you cleaned and cut your fingernails,
sharpened pencils, cleaned your ears with a toothpick. Please, Father,
understand me correctly: in themselves these would have been utterly
insignificant details, they only became depressing for me because you, so
tremendously the authoritative man, did not keep the commandments you
imposed on me. Hence the world was for me divided into three parts: one in
which I, the slave, lived under laws that had been invented only for me
and which I could, I did not know why, never completely comply with; then
a second world, which was infinitely remote from mine, in which you lived,
concerned with government, with the issuing of orders and with the
annoyance about their not being obeyed; and finally a third world where
everybody else lived happily and free from orders and from having to obey.
I was continually in disgrace; either I obeyed your orders, and that was a
disgrace, for they applied, after all, only to me; or I was defiant, and
that was a disgrace too, for how could I presume to defy you; or I could
not obey because I did not, for instance, have your strength, your
appetite, your skill, although you expected it of me as a matter of
course; this was the greatest disgrace of all. This was not the course of
the child's reflections, but of his feelings.
My situation at that time becomes clearer, perhaps, if I compare it
with that of Felix. You do, of course, treat him in a similar way, even
indeed employing a particularly terrible method against him in his
upbringing: whenever at meals he does anything that is in your opinion
unclean, you are not content to say to him, as you used to say to me:
"You are a pig," but add: "a real Hermann" or
"just like your father." Now this may perhaps—one can't say
more than "perhaps"—not really harm Felix in any essential
way, because you are only a grandfather to him, an especially important
one, of course, but still not everything as you were for me; and besides,
Felix is of a quiet, even at this stage to a certain extent manly
character, one who may perhaps be disconcerted by a great voice thundering
at him, but not permanently conditioned by it. But above all he is, of
course, only comparatively seldom with you, and besides, he is also under
other influences; you are for him a rather endearing curiosity from which
he can pick and choose whatever he likes. For me you were nothing in the
least like a curiosity, I couldn't pick and choose, I had to take
everything.
And this without being able to produce any arguments against any of it,
for it is fundamentally impossible for you to talk calmly about a subject
you don't approve of or even one that was not suggested by you; your
imperious temperament does not permit it. In recent years you have been
explaining this as due to your nervous heart condition. I don't know that
you were ever essentially different. Rather, the nervous heart condition
is a means by which you exert your domination more strongly, since the
thought of it necessarily chokes off the least opposition from others.
This is, of course, not a reproach, only a statement of fact. As in
Ottla's case, when you say: "You simply can't talk to her at all, she
flies straight in your face," but in reality she does not begin by
flying out at all. You mistake the person for the thing. The thing under
discussion is what flies in your face and you immediately made up your
mind about it without listening to the person; whatever is brought forward
afterward merely serves to irritate you further, never to convince you.
Then all one gets from you is: "Do whatever you like. So far as I'm
concerned you have a free hand. You're of age, I've no advice to give
you," and all this with that frightful, hoarse undertone of anger and
utter condemnation that makes me tremble less today than in my childhood
only because the child's exclusive sense of guilt has been partly replaced
by insight into our helplessness, yours and mine.
The impossibility of getting on calmly together had one more result,
actually a very natural one: I lost the capacity to talk. I daresay I
would not have become a very eloquent person in any case, but I would,
after all, have acquired the usual fluency of human language. But at a
very early stage you forbade me to speak. Your threat, "Not a word of
contradiction!" and the raised hand that accompanied it have been
with me ever since. What I got from you—and you are, whenever it is a
matter of your own affairs, an excellent talker—was a hesitant,
stammering mode of speech, and even that was still too much for you, and
finally I kept silent, at first perhaps out of defiance, and then because
I could neither think nor speak in your presence. And because you were the
person who really brought me up, this has had its repercussions throughout
my life. It is altogether a remarkable mistake for you to believe I never
complied with your wishes. "Always contrary" was really not my
basic principle where you were concerned, as you believe and as you
reproach me. On the contrary: if I had obeyed you less, I am sure you
would have been much better pleased with me. As it is, all your
educational measures hit the mark exactly. There was no hold I tried to
escape. As I now am, I am (apart, of course, from the fundamentals and the
influence of life itself) the result of your upbringing and of my
obedience. That this result is nevertheless distressing to you, indeed
that you unconsciously refuse to acknowledge it as the result of your
methods of upbringing, is due to the fact that your hand and the material
I offered were so alien to each other. You would say: "Not a word of
contradiction!" thinking that that was a way of silencing the
oppositional forces in me that were disagreeable to you, but the effect of
it was too strong for me, I was too docile, I became completely dumb,
cringed away from you, hid from you, and only dared to stir when I was so
far away from you that your power could no longer reach me—at least not
directly. But you were faced with all that, and it all seemed to you to be
"contrary," whereas it was only the inevitable consequence of
your strength and my weakness.
Your extremely effective rhetorical methods in bringing me up, which
never failed to work with me, were: abuse, threats, irony, spiteful
laughter, and—oddly enough—self-pity. I cannot recall your ever having
abused me directly and in downright abusive terms. Nor was that necessary;
you had so many other methods, and besides, in talk at home and
particularly at the shop the words of abuse went flying around me in such
swarms, as they were flung at other people's heads, that as a little boy I
was sometimes almost stunned and had no reason not to apply them to myself
too, for the people you were abusing were certainly no worse than I was
and you were certainly not more displeased with them than with me. And
here again was your enigmatic innocence and inviolability; you cursed and
swore without the slightest scruple; yet you condemned cursing and
swearing in other people and would not have it.
You reinforced abusiveness with threats and this applied to me too. How
terrible for me was, for instance, that "I'll tear you apart like a
fish," although I knew, of course, that nothing worse was to follow
(admittedly, as a little child I didn't know that), but it was almost
exactly in accord with my notions of your power, and I saw you as being
capable of doing this too. It was also terrible when you ran around the
table, shouting, grabbing at one, obviously not really trying to grab, yet
pretending to, and Mother (finally) had to rescue one, as it seemed. Once
again one had, so it seemed to the child, remained alive through your
mercy and bore one's life henceforth as an undeserved gift from you. This
is also the place to mention the threats about the consequences of
disobedience. When I began to do something you did not like and you
threatened me with the prospect of failure, my veneration for your opinion
was so great that the failure became inevitable, even though perhaps it
happened only at some later time. I lost confidence in my own actions. I
was wavering, doubtful. The older I became, the more material there was
for you to bring up against me as evidence of my worthlessness; gradually
you began really to be right in a certain respect. Once again, I am
careful not to assert that I became like this solely through you; you only
intensified what was already there, but you intensified it greatly, simply
because where I was concerned you were very powerful and you employed all
your power to that end.
You put special trust in bringing up children by means of irony, and
this was most in keeping with your superiority over me. An admonition from
you generally took this form: "Can't you do it in such-and-such a
way? That's too hard for you, I suppose. You haven't the time, of
course?" and so on. And each such question would be accompanied by
malicious laughter and a malicious face. One was, so to speak, already
punished before one even knew that one had done something bad. Maddening
were also those rebukes in which one was treated as a third person, in
other words, considered not worthy even to be spoken to angrily; that is
to say, when you would speak ostensibly to Mother but actually to me, who
was sitting right there. For instance: "Of course, that's too much to
expect of our worthy son," and the like. (This produced a corollary
in that, for instance, I did not dare to ask you, and later from habit did
not even really much think of asking, anything directly when Mother was
there. It was much less dangerous for the child to put questions to
Mother, sitting there beside you, and to ask Mother: "How is
Father?"—so guarding oneself against surprises.) There were, of
course, also cases when one was entirely in agreement with even the worst
irony, namely, when it referred to someone else, such as Elli, with whom I
was on bad terms for years. There was an orgy of malice and spiteful
delight for me when such things were said of her, as they were at almost
every meal: "She has to sit ten feet back from the table, the big fat
lump," and when you, morosely sitting on your chair without the
slightest trace of pleasantness or good humor, a bitter enemy, would
exaggeratedly imitate the way she sat, which you found utterly loathsome.
How often such things happened, over and over again, and how little you
really achieved as a result of them! I think the reason was that the
expenditure of anger and malice seemed to be in no proper relation to the
subject itself, one did not have the feeling that the anger was caused by
this trifle of sitting some way back from the table, but that the whole
bulk of it had already been present to begin with, then, only by chance,
happened to settle on this matter as a pretext for breaking out. Since one
was convinced that a pretext would be found anyway, one did not try very
hard, and one's feelings became dulled by these continued threats. One had
gradually become pretty sure of not getting a beating, anyway. One became
a glum, inattentive, disobedient child, always intent on escape, mainly
within one's own self. So you suffered, and so we suffered. From your own
point of view you were quite right when, clenching your teeth and with
that gurgling laughter that gave the child its first notions of hell, you
used to say bitterly (as you did only just recently in connection with a
letter from Constantinople): "A nice crowd that is!"
What seemed to be quite incompatible with this attitude toward your
children was, and it happened very often, that you openly lamented your
situation. I confess that as a child (though probably somewhat later) I
was completely callous about this and could not understand how you could
possibly expect to get any sympathy from anyone. You were such a giant in
every respect. What could you care for our pity or even our help? Our
help, indeed, you could not but despise, as you so often despised us
ourselves. Hence, I did not take these laments at their face value and
looked for some hidden motive behind them. Only later did I come to
understand that you really suffered a great deal because of your children;
but at that time, when these laments might under different circumstances
still have met with a childish, candid sympathy, unhesitatingly ready to
offer any help it could, to me they had to seem like overemphatic means of
disciplining me and humiliating me, as such not in themselves very
intense, but with the harmful side effect that the child became
conditioned not to take very seriously the very things it should have
taken seriously.
Fortunately, there were exceptions to all this, mostly when you
suffered in silence, and affection and kindliness by their own strength
overcame all obstacles, and moved me immediately. Rare as this was, it was
wonderful. For instance, in earlier years, in hot summers, when you were
tired after lunch, I saw you having a nap at the office, your elbow on the
desk; or you joined us in the country, in the summer holidays, on Sundays,
worn out from work; or the time Mother was gravely ill and you stood
holding on to the bookcase, shaking with sobs; or when, during my last
illness, you came tiptoeing to Ottla's room to see me, stopping in the
doorway, craning your neck to see me, and out of consideration only waved
to me with your hand. At such times one would lie back and weep for
happiness, and one weeps again now, writing it down.
You have a particularly beautiful, very rare way of quietly,
contentedly, approvingly smiling, a way of smiling that can make the
person for whom it is meant entirely happy. I can't recall its ever having
expressly been my lot in my childhood, but I dare say it may have
happened, for why should you have refused it to me at a time when I still
seemed blameless to you and was your great hope? Yet in the long run even
such friendly impressions brought about nothing but an increased sense of
guilt, making the world still more incomprehensible to me.
I would rather keep to the practical and permanent. In order to assert
myself even a little in relation to you, and partly too from a kind of
vengefulness, I soon began to observe little ridiculous things about you,
to collect them and to exaggerate them. For instance, how easily you let
yourself be dazzled by people who were only seemingly above you, how you
would keep on talking about them, as of some Imperial Councilor or some
such (on the other hand, such things also pained me, to see you, my
father, believing you had any need of such trifling confirmations of your
own value, and boasting about them), or I would note your taste for
indecent expressions, which you would produce in the loudest possible
voice, laughing about them as though you had said something particularly
good, while in point of fact it was only a banal little obscenity (at the
same time this again was for me a humiliating manifestation of your
vitality). There were, of course, plenty of such observations. I was happy
about them; they gave me occasion for whispering and joking; you sometimes
noticed it and were angry about it, took it for malice and lack of
respect, but believe me, it was for me nothing other than a
means—moreover, a useless one—of attempted self-preservation; they
were jokes of the kind that are made about gods and kings, jokes that are
not only compatible with the profoundest respect but are indeed part and
parcel of it.
Incidentally, you too, in keeping with your similar position where I
was concerned, tried a similar form of self-defense. You were in the habit
of pointing out how exaggeratedly well off I was and how well I had in
fact been treated. That is correct but I don't believe it was of any real
use to me under the prevailing circumstances. It is true that Mother was
endlessly good to me, but for me all that was in relation to you, that is
to say, in no good relation. Mother unconsciously played the part of
a beater during a hunt. Even if your method of upbringing might in some
unlikely case have set me on my own feet by means of producing defiance,
dislike, or even hate in me, Mother canceled that out again by kindness,
by talking sensibly (in the confusion of my childhood she was the very
prototype of good sense and reasonableness), by pleading for me; and I was
again driven back into your orbit, which I might perhaps otherwise have
broken out of, to your advantage and to my own. Or it happened that no
real reconciliation came about, that Mother merely shielded me from you in
secret, secretly gave me something, or allowed me to do something, and
then where you were concerned I was again the furtive creature, the cheat,
the guilty one, who in his worthlessness could only pursue sneaky methods
even to get the things he regarded as his right. Of course, I became used
to taking such a course also in quest of things to which, even in my own
view, I had no right. This again meant an increase in the sense of guilt.
It is also true that you hardly ever really gave me a beating. But the
shouting, the way your face got red, the hasty undoing of the suspenders
and laying them ready over the back of the chair, all that was almost
worse for me. It is as if someone is going to be hanged. If he really is
hanged, then he is dead and it is all over. But if he has to go through
all the preliminaries to being hanged and he learns of his reprieve only
when the noose is dangling before his face, he may suffer from it all his
life. Besides, from the many occasions on which I had, according to your
clearly expressed opinion, deserved a beating but was let off at the last
moment by your grace, I again accumulated only a huge sense of guilt. On
every side I was to blame, I was in your debt.
|
| You have always reproached me (either
alone or in front of others, since you have no feeling for the humiliation
of the latter, and your children's affairs were always public) for living
in peace and quiet, warmth and abundance, lacking nothing, thanks to your
hard work. I think of remarks that must positively have worn grooves in my
brain, such as: "When I was only seven I had to push a handcart from
village to village." "We all had to sleep in one room."
"We were glad when we got potatoes." "For years I had
open sores on my legs because I did not have enough warm clothes."
"I was only a little boy when I was sent to Pisek to work in a
store." "I got nothing from home, not even when I was in the
army, but still I managed to send money home." "But for all
that, for all that—Father was always Father to me. Ah, nobody knows what
that means these days! What do these children know? Nobody's been through
that! Does any child understand such things today?" Under other
conditions such stories might have been very educational, they might have
been a way in encouraging one and strengthening one to endure torments and
deprivations similar to those one's father had undergone. But that wasn't
what you wanted at all; the situation had, after all, become quite
different as a result of all your efforts, and there was no opportunity to
distinguish oneself as you had done. Such an opportunity would first of
all have had to be created by violence and revolutions, it would have
meant breaking away from home (assuming one had had the resolution and
strength to do so and that Mother wouldn't have worked against it, for her
part, with other means) But that was not what you wanted at all, that you
termed ingratitude, extravagance, disobedience, treachery, madness. And
so, while on the one hand you tempted me to it by means of example, story,
and humiliation, on the other hand you forbade it with the utmost
severity. Otherwise, for instance you ought to have been delighted with
Ottla's Zürau escapade*—apart from the accompanying circumstances. She
wanted to get back to the country from which you had come, she wanted work
and hardship such as you had had, she did not want to depend on the fruits
of your labor, just as you yourself were independent of your father. Were
those such dreadful intentions? Was that so remote from your example and
your precept? Well, Ottla's intentions finally came to nothing in
practice, were indeed perhaps carried out in a somewhat ridiculous way,
with too much fuss, and she did not have enough consideration for her
parents. But was that exclusively her fault and not also the fault of the
circumstances and, above all, of the fact that you were so estranged from
her? Was she any less estranged from you (as you later tried to convince
yourself) in the business than afterward at Zürau? And would you not
quite certainly have had the power (assuming you could have brought
yourself to do so) to turn that escapade into something very good by means
of encouragement, advice, and supervision, perhaps even merely by means of
toleration?
*Refers to his sister Ottla's taking over the management of a farm
in the German-Bohemian town of Zürau. Kafka spent time with her there
during his illness in 1917-18. (Ed.)
In connection with such experiences you used to say, in bitter jest,
that we were too well off. But that joke is, in a sense, no joke at all.
What you had to fight for we received from your hand, but the fight for
external life, a fight that was instantly open to you and which we are, of
course, not spared either, we now have to fight for only late in life, in
our maturity but with only childish strength. I do not say that our
situation is therefore inevitably less favorable than yours was, on the
contrary, it is probably no better and no worse (although this is said
without reference to our different natures), only we have the disadvantage
of not being able to boast of our wretchedness and not being able to
humiliate anyone with it as you have done with your wretchedness. Nor do I
deny that it might have been possible for me to really enjoy the fruits of
your great and successful work; that I could have turned them to good
account and, to your joy, continued to work with them; but here again, our
estrangement stood in the way. I could enjoy what you gave, but only in
humiliation, weariness, weakness, and with a sense of guilt. That was why
I could be grateful to you for everything only as a beggar is, and could
never show it by doing the right things.
The next external result of this whole method of upbringing was that I
fled everything that even remotely reminded me of you. First, the
business. In itself, especially in my childhood, so long as it was still a
simple shop, I ought to have liked it very much, it was so full of life,
lit up in the evening, there was so much to see and hear; one was able to
help now and then, to distinguish oneself, and, above all, to admire you
for your magnificent commercial talents, for the way you sold things,
managed people, made jokes, were untiring, in case of doubt knew how to
make the right decision immediately, and so forth; even the way you
wrapped a parcel or opened a crate was a spectacle worth watching; all
this was certainly not the worst school for a child. But since you
gradually began to terrify me on all sides and the business and you became
one thing for me, the business too made me feel uneasy. Things that had at
first been a matter of course for me there now began to torment and shame
me, particularly the way you treated the staff. I don't know, perhaps it
was the same in most businesses (in the Assicurazioni Generali, for
instance, in my time it was really similar, and the explanation I gave the
director for my resignation was, though not strictly in accordance with
the truth, still not entirely a lie: my not being able to bear the cursing
and swearing, which incidentally had not actually been directed at me; it
was something to which I had become too painfully sensitive from home),
but in my childhood other businesses did not concern me. But you I heard
and saw shouting, cursing, and raging in the shop, in a way that in my
opinion at that time had no equal anywhere in the world. And not only
cursing, but other sorts of tyrannizing. For instance, the way you pushed
goods you did not want to have mixed up with others off the counter—only
the thoughtlessness of your rage was some slight excuse—and how the
clerk had to pick them up. Or your constant comment about a clerk who had
TB: "The sooner that sick dog croaks the better." You called the
employees "paid enemies," and that was what they were, but even
before they became that, you seemed to me to be their "paying
enemy." There, too, I learned the great lesson that you could be
unjust; in my own case I would not have noticed it so soon, for there was
too much accumulated sense of guilt in me ready to admit that you were
right; but in the shop, in my childish view—which later, of course,
became somewhat modified, although not too much so—were strangers, who
were after all, working for us and for that reason had to live in constant
dread of you. Of course I exaggerated, because I simply assumed you had as
terrible an effect on these people as on me. If it had been so, they could
not have lived at all; since, however they were grown-up people, most of
them with excellent nerves, they shook off this abuse without any trouble
and in the end it did you much more harm than it did them. But it made the
business insufferable to me, reminding me far too much of my relations
with you; quite apart from your proprietary interest and apart from your
mania for domination even as a businessman, you were so greatly superior
to all those who ever came to learn the business from you that nothing
they ever did could satisfy you, and you must, as I assumed, in the same
way be forever dissatisfied with me too. That was why I could not help
siding with the staff; I did it also, by the way, because from sheer
nervousness I could not understand how anyone could be so abusive to a
stranger, and therefore—from sheer nervousness and for no other reason
than my own security—I tried to reconcile the staff, which must, I
thought, be in a terrible state of indignation, with you and with our
family. To this end it was not enough for me to behave in an ordinary
decent way toward the staff, or even modestly; more than that, I had to be
humble, not only be first to say "good morning" or "good
evening," but if at all possible I had to forestall any return of the
greeting. And even if I, insignificant creature that I was, down below,
had licked their feet it would still have been no compensation for the way
that you, the master, were lashing out at them up above. This relationship
that I came to have toward my fellow man extended beyond the limits of the
business and on into the future (something similar, but not so dangerous
and deep—going as in my case, is for instance Ottla's taste for
associating with poor people, sitting together with the maids, which
annoys you so much, and the like). In the end I was almost afraid of the
business and, in any case, it had long ceased to be any concern of mine
even before I went to the Gymnasium and hence was taken even further away
from it. Besides, it seemed to be entirely beyond my resources and
capacities since, as you said, it exhausted even yours. You then tried
(today this seems to me both touching and shaming) to extract,
nevertheless, some little sweetness for yourself from my dislike of the
business, of your world—a dislike that was after all very distressing to
you—by asserting that I had no business sense, that I had loftier ideas
in my head, and the like. Mother was, of course, delighted with this
explanation that you wrung from yourself, and I too, in my vanity and
wretchedness, let myself be influenced by it. But if it had really been
only or mainly "loftier ideas" that turned me against the
business (which I now, but only now, have come really and honestly to
hate), they would have had to express themselves differently, instead of
letting me float quickly and timidly through my schooling and my law
studies until I finally landed at a clerk's desk.
If I was to escape from you, I had to escape from the family as well,
even from Mother. True, one could always get protection from her, but only
in relation to you. She loved you too much and was too devoted and loyal
to you to have been for long an independent spiritual force in the child's
struggle. This was, incidentally, a correct instinct of the child, for
with the passing of the years Mother became ever more closely allied to
you; while, where she herself was concerned, she always kept her
independence, within the narrowest limits, delicately and beautifully, and
without ever essentially hurting you, still, with the passing of the years
she more and more completely, emotionally rather than intellectually,
blindly adopted your judgments and your condemnations with regard to the
children, particularly in the case—certainly a grave one—of Ottla. Of
course, it must always be borne in mind how tormenting and utterly wearing
Mother's position in the family was. She toiled in the business and in the
house, and doubly suffered all the family illnesses, but the culmination
of all this was what she suffered in her position between us and you. You
were always affectionate and considerate toward her, but in this respect,
you spared her just as little as we spared her. We all hammered ruthlessly
away at her, you from your side, we from ours. It was a diversion, nobody
meant any harm, thinking of the battle that you were waging with us and
that we were waging with you, and it was Mother who got the brunt of all
our wild feelings. Nor was it at all a good contribution to the children's
upbringing the way you—of course, without being in the slightest to
blame for it yourself—tormented her on our account. It even seemed to
justify our otherwise unjustifiable behavior toward her. How she suffered
from us on your accounts and from you on our account, even without
counting those cases in which you were in the right because she was
spoiling us, even though this "spoiling" may sometimes have been
only a quiet, unconscious counterdemonstration against your system. Of
course, Mother could not have borne all this if she had not drawn the
strength to bear it from her love for us all and her happiness in that
love.
My sisters were only partly on my side. The one who was happiest in her
relation to you was Valli. Being closest to Mother, she fell in with your
wishes in a similar way, without much effort and without suffering much
harm. And because she reminded you of Mother, you did accept her in a more
friendly spirit, although there was little Kafka material in her. But
perhaps that was precisely what you wanted; where there was nothing of the
Kafka's, even you could not demand anything of the sort, nor did you feel,
as with the rest of us, that something was getting lost which had to be
saved by force. Besides, it may be that you were never particularly fond
of the Kafka element as it manifested itself in women. Valli's
relationship to you would perhaps have become even friendlier if the rest
of us had not disturbed it somewhat.
Elli is the only example of the almost complete success of a breaking
away from your orbit. When she was a child she was the last person I
should have expected it of. For she was such a clumsy, tired, timid,
bad-tempered, guilt-ridden, overmeek, malicious, lazy, greedy, miserly
child, I could hardly bring myself to look at her, certainly not to speak
to her, so much did she remind me of myself, in so very much the same way
was she under the same spell of our upbringing. Her miserliness was
especially abhorrent to me, since I had it to an, if possible, even
greater extent. Miserliness is, after all, one of the most reliable signs
of profound unhappiness; I was so unsure of everything that, in fact, I
possessed only what I actually had in my hands or in my mouth or what was
at least on the way there, and this was precisely what she, being in a
similar situation, most enjoyed taking away from me. But all this changed
when, at an early age—this is the most important thing—she left home,
married, had children, and became cheerful, carefree, brave, generous,
unselfish, and hopeful. It is almost incredible how you did not really
notice this change at all, or at any rate did not give it its due, blinded
as you were by the grudge you have always borne Elli and fundamentally
still bear her to this day; only this grudge matters much less now, since
Elli no longer lives with us and, besides, your love for Felix and your
affection for Karl have made it less important. Only Gerti sometimes has
to suffer for it still.
I scarcely dare write of Ottla; I know that by doing so I jeopardize
the whole effect I hope for from this letter. In ordinary circumstances,
that is, so long as she is not in particular need or danger, all you feel
is only hatred for her; you yourself have confessed to me that in your
opinion she is always intentionally causing you suffering and annoyance
and that while you are suffering on her account she is satisfied and
pleased. In other words, a sort of fiend. What an immense estrangement,
greater still than that between you and me, must have come about between
you and her, for such an immense misunderstanding to be possible. She is
so remote from you that you scarcely see her any more, instead, you put a
specter in the place where you suppose her to be. I grant you that you
have had a particularly difficult time with her. I don't, of course, quite
see to the bottom of this very complicated case, but at any rate here was
something like a kind of Löwy, equipped with the best Kafka weapons.
Between us there was no real struggle; I was soon finished off; what
remained was flight, embitterment, melancholy, and inner struggle. But you
Twowere always in a fighting position, always fresh, always energetic. A
sight as magnificent as it was desperate. At the very beginning you were,
I am sure, very close to each other, because of the four of us Ottla is
even today perhaps the purest representation of the marriage between you
and Mother and of the forces it combined. I don't know what it was that
deprived you both of the happiness of the harmony between father and
child, but I can't help believing that the development in this case was
similar to that in mine. On your side there was the tyranny of your own
nature, on her side the Löwy defiance, touchiness, sense of justice,
restlessness, and all that backed by the consciousness of the Kafka vigor.
Doubtless I too influenced her, but scarcely of my own doing, simply
through the fact of my existence. Besides, as the last to arrive, she
found herself in a situation in which the balance of power was already
established, and was able to form her own judgment from the large amount
of material at her disposal. I can even imagine that she may, in her
inmost being, have wavered for some time as to whether she should fling
herself into your arms or into those of the adversaries; and it is obvious
that at that time there was something you failed to do and that you
rebuffed her, but if it had been possible, the Twoof you would have
become a magnificently harmonious pair. That way I should have lost an
ally, but the sight of you Twowould have richly compensated me; besides,
the incredible happiness of finding complete contentment at least in one
child would have changed you much to my advantage. All this, however, is
today only a dream. Ottla has no contact with her father and has to seek
her way alone, like me, and the degree of confidence, self-confidence,
health, and ruthlessness by which she surpasses me makes her in your eyes
more wicked and treacherous than I seem to you. I understand that. From
your point of view she can't be different. Indeed, she herself is capable
of regarding herself with your eyes, of feeling what you suffer and of
being—not desperate (despair is my business) but very sad. You do
see us together often enough, in apparent contradiction to this,
whispering and laughing, and now and then you hear us mentioning you. The
impression you get is that of impudent conspirators. Strange conspirators.
You are, admittedly, a chief subject of our conversations, as of our
thoughts ever since we can remember, but truly, not in order to plot
against you do we sit together, but in order to discuss—with all our
might and main, jokingly and seriously, in affection, defiance, anger,
revulsion, submission, consciousness of guilt, with all the resources of
our heads and hearts—this terrible trial that is pending between us and
you, to examine it in all its details, from all sides, on all occasions,
from far and near—a trial in which you keep on claiming to be the judge,
whereas, at least in the main (here I leave a margin for all the mistakes
I may naturally make) you are a party too, just as weak and deluded as we
are. An example of the effect of your methods of upbringing, one that is
very instructive in the context of the whole situation, is the case of
Irma. On the one hand, she was, after all, a stranger, already grown up
when she entered your business, and had to deal with you mainly as her
employer, so that she was only partially exposed to your influence, and
this at an age when she had already developed powers of resistance; yet,
on the other hand, she was also a blood relation, venerating you as her
father's brother, and the power you had over her was far greater than that
of a mere employer. And despite all this she, who, with her frail body,
was so efficient, intelligent, hard-working, modest, trustworthy,
unselfish, and loyal, who loved you as her uncle and admired you as her
employer, she who proved herself in previous and in subsequent positions,
was not a very good clerk to you. Her relationship with you was, in fact,
nearly that of one of your children—pushed into that role, naturally, by
us, too—and the power of your personality to bend others was, even in
her case, so great that (admittedly only in relation to you and, it is to
be hoped, without the deeper suffering of a child) she developed
forgetfulness, carelessness, a sort of gallows humor, and perhaps even a
shade of defiance, in so far as she was capable of that at all. And I do
not even take into account that she was ailing, and not very happy in
other respects either, and that she was burdened by a bleak home life.
What was so illuminating to me in your relation to her, you yourself
summed up in a remark that became classical for us, one that was almost
blasphemous, but at the same time extraordinary evidence of the naïveté
of your way of treating people: "The late lamented has left me quite
a mess."
I might go on to describe further orbits of your influence and of the
struggle against it, but there I would be entering uncertain ground and
would have to construct things and, apart from that, the farther you are
away from your business and your family, the pleasanter you have always
become, easier to get on with, better mannered, more considerate, and more
sympathetic (I mean outwardly, too), in exactly the same way as for
instance an autocrat, when he happens to be outside the frontiers of his
own country, has no reason to go on being tyrannical and is able to
associate good-humoredly even with the lowest of the low. In fact, in the
group photographs taken at Franzensbad, for instance, you always looked as
big and jolly, among those sulky little people, as a king on his travels.
This was something, I grant you, from which your children might have
benefited too, if they had been capable of recognizing this even as little
children, which was impossible; and if I, for one, had not had to live
constantly within the inmost, strictest, binding ring of your influence,
as, in fact, I did.
Not only did I lose my family feeling, as you say; on the contrary, I
did indeed have a feeling about the family, mostly in a negative sense,
concerned with the breaking away from you (which, of course could never be
done completely). Relations with people outside the family, however,
suffered possibly still more under your influence. You are entirely
mistaken if you believe I do everything for other people out of affection
and loyalty, and for you and the family nothing, out of coldness and
betrayal. I repeat for the tenth time: Even in other circumstances I
should probably have become a shy and nervous person, but it is a long
dark road from there to where I have really come. (Up to now I have
intentionally passed over in silence relatively little in this letter, but
now and later I shall have to keep silent about some things that are still
too hard for me to confess—to you and to myself. I say this in order
that if the picture as a whole should be somewhat blurred here and there,
you should not believe that this is due to lack of evidence; on the
contrary, there is evidence that might well make the picture unbearably
stark. It is not easy to find a middle way.) Here, it is enough to remind
you of early days. I had lost my self-confidence where you were concerned,
and in its place had developed a boundless sense of guilt. (In
recollection of this boundlessness I once wrote of someone, accurately:
"He is afraid the shame will outlive him.") I could not suddenly
change when I was with other people; rather, I came to feel an even deeper
sense of guilt with them, for, as I have already said, I had to make up to
them for the wrongs you had done them in your business, wrongs in which I
too had my share of responsibility. Besides, you always had some objection
to make, frankly or covertly, about everyone I associated with, and for
this too I had to atone. The mistrust that you tried to instill into me
toward most people, at business and at home (name a single person who was
of importance to me in my childhood whom you didn't at least once tear to
shreds with your criticism), was, oddly enough, of no particular burden to
you (you were strong enough to bear it; besides, it was perhaps really
only a token of the autocrat). This mistrust (which was nowhere confirmed
in the eyes of the little boy, since everywhere I saw only people
excellent beyond any hope of emulation) turned in me to mistrust of myself
and perpetual anxiety about everything else. There, then, I was in general
certain of not being able to escape from you. That you were mistaken on
this point was perhaps due to your actually never learning anything about
my association with other people; and mistrustfully and jealously (I don't
deny, do I, that you are fond of me?) you assumed that I had to compensate
elsewhere for the lack of a family life, since it must be impossible that
away from home I should live in the same way. Incidentally, in this
respect, it was precisely in my childhood that I did find a certain
comfort in my very mistrust of my own judgment. I would say to myself:
"Oh, you're exaggerating, you tend too much to feel trivialities as
great exceptions, the way young people always do." But this comfort I
later lost almost entirely, when I gained a clearer perspective of the
world.
I found just as little escape from you in Judaism. Here some measure of
escape would have been thinkable in principle, moreover, it would have
been thinkable that we might both have found each other in Judaism or that
we even might have begun from there in harmony. But what sort of Judaism
was it that I got from you? In the course of the years, I have taken
roughly three different attitudes to it. As a child I reproached
myself, in accord with you, for not going to the synagogue often enough,
for not fasting, and so on. I thought that in this way I was doing a wrong
not to myself but to you, and I was penetrated by a sense of guilt, which
was, of course, always near at hand.
Later, as a young man, I could not understand how, with the
insignificant scrap of Judaism you yourself possessed, you could reproach
me for not making an effort (for the sake of piety at least, as you put
it) to cling to a similar, insignificant scrap. It was indeed, so far as I
could see, a mere nothing, a joke—not even a joke. Four days a year you
went to the synagogue, where you were, to say the least, closer to the
indifferent than to those who took it seriously, patiently went through
the prayers as a formality, sometimes amazed me by being able to show me
in the prayer book the passage that was being said at the moment, and for
the rest, so long as I was present in the synagogue (and this was the main
thing) I was allowed to hang around wherever I liked. And so I yawned and
dozed through the many hours (I don't think I was ever again so bored,
except later at dancing lessons) and did my best to enjoy the few little
bits of variety there were, as for instance when the Ark of the Covenant
was opened, which always reminded me of the shooting galleries where a
cupboard door would open in the same way whenever one hit a bull's-eye;
except that there something interesting always came out and here it was
always just the same old dolls without heads. Incidentally, it was also
very frightening for me there, not only, as goes without saying, because
of all the people one came into close contact with, but also because you
once mentioned in passing that I too might be called to the Torah. That
was something I dreaded for years. But otherwise I was not fundamentally
disturbed in my boredom, unless it was by the bar mitzvah, but that
demanded no more than some ridiculous memorizing, in other words, it led
to nothing but some ridiculous passing of an examination; and, so far as
you were concerned, by little, not very significant incidents, as when you
were called to the Torah and passed, in what to my way of feeling was a
purely social event, or when you stayed on in the synagogue for the
prayers for the dead, and I was sent away, which for a long
time—obviously because of the being sent away and the lack of any deeper
interest—aroused in me the more or less unconscious feeling that
something indecent was about to take place.—That's how it was in the
synagogue; at home it was, if possible, even poorer, being confined to the
first Seder, which more and more developed into a farce, with fits of
hysterical laughter, admittedly under the influence of the growing
children. (Why did you have to give way to that influence? Because you had
brought it about.) This was the religious material that was handed on to
me, to which may be added at most the outstretched hand pointing to
"the sons of the millionaire Fuchs," who attended the synagogue
with their father on the High Holy Days. How one could do anything better
with that material than get rid of it as fast as possible, I could not
understand; precisely the getting rid of it seemed to me to be the devotes
action.
Still later, I did see it again differently and realized why it was
possible for you to think that in this respect too I was malevolently
betraying you. You really had brought some traces of Judaism with you from
the ghetto-like village community; it was not much and it dwindled a
little more in the city and during your military service; but still, the
impressions and memories of your youth did just about suffice for some
sort of Jewish life, especially since you did not need much help of that
kind, but came of robust stock and could personally scarcely be shaken by
religious scruples unless they were strongly mixed with social scruples.
Basically the faith that ruled your life consisted in your believing in
the unconditional rightness of the opinions of a certain class of Jewish
society, and hence actually, since these opinions were part and parcel of
your own nature, in believing in yourself. Even in this there was still
Judaism enough, but it was too little to be handed on to the child; it all
dribbled away while you were passing it on. In part, it was youthful
memories that could not be passed on to others; in part, it was your
dreaded personality. It was also impossible to make a child, overacutely
observant from sheer nervousness, understand that the few flimsy gestures
you performed in the name of Judaism, and with an indifference in keeping
with their flimsiness, could have any higher meaning. For you they had
meaning as little souvenirs of earlier times, and that was why you wanted
to pass them on to me, but since they no longer had any intrinsic value
even for you could do this only through persuasion or threat; on the
one hand, this could not be successful, and on the other, it had to make
you very angry with me on account of my apparent obstinacy, since you did
not recognize the weakness of your position in this.
The whole thing is, of course, no isolated phenomenon. It was much the
same with a large section of this transitional generation of Jews, which
had migrated from the still comparatively devout countryside to the
cities. It happened automatically; only, it added to our relationship,
which certainly did not lack in acrimony, one more sufficiently painful
source for it. Although you ought to believe, as I do, in your
guiltlessness in this matter too, you ought to explain this guiltlessness
by your nature and by the conditions of the times, not merely by external
circumstances; that is, not by saying, for instance, that you had too much
work and too many other worries to be able to bother with such things as
well. In this manner you tend to twist your undoubted guiltlessness into
an unjust reproach to others. That can be very easily refuted everywhere
and here too. It was not a matter of any sort of instruction you ought to
have given your children, but of an exemplary life. Had your Judaism been
stronger, your example would have been more compelling too; this goes
without saying and is, again, by no means a reproach, but only a
refutation of your reproaches. You have recently been reading Franklin's
memoirs of his youth. I really did purposely give you this book to read,
though not, as you ironically commented, because of a little passage on
vegetarianism, but because of the relationship between the author and his
father, as it is there described, and of the relationship between the
author and his son, as it is spontaneously revealed in these memoirs
written for that son. I do not wish to dwell here on matters of detail.
I have received a certain retrospective confirmation of this view of
your Judaism from your attitude in recent years, when it seemed to you
that I was taking more interest in Jewish matters. As you have in advance
an aversion to every one of my activities and especially to the nature of
my interest, so you have had it here too. But in spite of this, one could
have expected that in this case you would make a little exception. It was,
after all, Judaism of your Judaism that was coming to life here, and with
it also the possibility of entering into a new relationship between us. I
do not deny that, had you shown interest in them, these things might, for
that very reason, have become suspect in my eyes. I do not even dream of
asserting that I am in this respect any better than you are. But it never
came to the test. Through my intervention Judaism became abhorrent to you,
Jewish writings unreadable; they "nauseated" you.—This may
have meant you insisted that only that Judaism which you had shown me in
my childhood was the right one, and beyond it there was nothing. Yet that
you should insist on it was really hardly thinkable. But then the
"nausea" (apart from the fact that it was directed primarily not
against Judaism but against me personally) could only mean that
unconsciously you did acknowledge the weakness of your Judaism and of my
Jewish upbringing, did not wish to be reminded of it in any way, and
reacted to any reminder with frank hatred. Incidentally, your negative
high esteem of my new Judaism was much exaggerated; first of all, it bore
your curse within it, and secondly in its development the fundamental
relationship to one's fellow men was decisive, in my case that is to say
fatal.
You struck closer to home with your aversion to my writing and to
everything that, unknown to you, was connected with it. Here I had, in
fact, got some distance away from you by my own efforts, even if it was
slightly reminiscent of the worm that, when a foot treads on its tail end,
breaks loose with its front part and drags itself aside. To a certain
extent I was in safety; there was a chance to breathe freely. The aversion
you naturally and immediately took to my writing was, for once, welcome to
me. My vanity, my ambition did suffer under your soon proverbial way of
hailing the arrival of my books: "Put it on my bedside table!"
(usually you were playing cards when a book came), but I was really quite
glad of it, not only out of rebellious malice, not only out of delight at
a new confirmation of my view of our relationship, but quite
spontaneously, because to me that formula sounded something like:
"Now you are free!" Of course it was a delusion; I was not, or,
to put it most optimistically, was not yet, free. My writing was all about
you; all I did there, after all, was to bemoan what I could not bemoan
upon your breast. It was an intentionally long and drawn-out leave-taking
from you, yet, although it was enforced by you, it did take its course in
the direction determined by me. But how little all this amounted to! It is
only worth talking about because it happened in my life, otherwise it
would not even be noted; and also because in my childhood it ruled my life
as a premonition, later as a hope, and still later often as despair, and
it dictated—yet again in your shape, it may be said—my few small
decisions.
For instance, the choice of a career. True, here you gave me complete
freedom, in your magnanimous and, in this regard, even indulgent manner.
Although here again you were conforming to the general method of treating
sons in the Jewish middle class, which was the standard for you, or at
least to the values of that class. Finally, one of your misunderstandings
concerning my person played a part in this too. In fact, out of paternal
pride, ignorance of my real life, and conclusions drawn from my
feebleness, you have always regarded me as particularly diligent. As a
child I was, in your view, always studying, and later always writing. This
does not even remotely correspond to the facts. It would be more correct,
and much less exaggerated, to say that I studied little and learned
nothing; that something did stick in my mind after those many years is,
after all, not very remarkable, since I did have a moderately good memory
and a not too inferior capacity for learning; but the sum total of
knowledge and especially of a solid grounding of knowledge is extremely
pitiable in comparison with the expenditure of time and money in the
course of an outwardly untroubled, calm life, particularly also in
comparison with almost all the people I know. It is pitiable, but to me
understandable. Ever since I could think, I have had such profound
anxieties about asserting my spiritual and intellectual existence that I
was indifferent to everything else. Jewish schoolboys in our country often
tend to be odd; among them one finds the most unlikely things; but
something like my cold indifference, scarcely disguised, indestructible,
childishly helpless, approaching the ridiculous, and brutishly complacent,
the indifference of a self-sufficient but coldly imaginative child, I have
never found anywhere else; to be sure, it was the sole defense against
destruction of the nerves by fear and by a sense of guilt. All that
occupied my mind was worry about myself, and this in various ways. There
was, for instance, the worry about my health; it began imperceptibly
enough, with now and then a little anxiety about digestion, hair falling
out, a spinal curvature, and so on; intensifying in innumerable
gradations, it finally ended with a real illness. But since there was
nothing at all I was certain of, since I needed to be provided at every
instant with a new confirmation of my existence, since nothing was in my
very own, undoubted, sole possession, determined unequivocally only by
me—in sober truth a disinherited son—naturally I became unsure even to
the thing nearest to me, my own body. I shot up, tall and lanky, without
knowing what to do with my lankiness, the burden was too heavy, the back
became bent; I scarcely dared to move, certainly not to exercise, I
remained weakly; I was amazed by everything I could still command as by a
miracle, for instance, my good digestion; that sufficed to lose it, and
now the way was open to every sort of hypochondria; until finally under
the strain of the superhuman effort of wanting to marry (of this I shall
speak later), blood came from the lung, something in which the apartment
in the Schönbornpalais—which, however, I needed only because I believed
I needed it for my writing, so that even this belongs here under the same
heading—may have had a fair share. So all this did not come from
excessive work, as you always imagine. There were years in which, in
perfectly good health, I lazed away more time on the sofa than you in all
your life, including all your illnesses. When I rushed away from you,
frightfully busy, it was generally in order to lie down in my room. My
total achievement in work done, both at the office (where laziness is, of
course, not particularly striking, and besides, mine was kept in bounds by
my anxiety) and at home, is minute; if you had any real idea of it, you
would be aghast. Probably I am constitutionally not lazy at all, but there
was nothing for me to do. In the place where I lived I was spurned,
condemned, fought to a standstill; and to escape to some other place was
an enormous exertion, but that was not work, for it was something
impossible, something that was, with small exceptions, unattainable for
me.
This was the state in which I was given the freedom of choice of a
career. But was I still capable of making any use of such freedom? Had I
still any confidence in my own capacity to achieve a real career? My
valuation of myself was much more dependent on you than on anything else,
such as some external success. That was strengthening for a moment,
nothing more, but on the other side your weight always dragged me down
much more strongly. Never shall I pass the first grade in grammar school,
I thought, but I succeeded, I even got a prize; but I shall certainly not
pass the entrance exam for the Gymnasium, but I succeeded; but now I shall
certainly fail in the first year at the Gymnasium; no, I did not fail, and
I went on and on succeeding. This did not produce any confidence, however;
on the contrary, I was always convinced—and I had positive proof of it
in your forbidding expression—that the more I achieved, the worse the
final outcome would inevitably be. Often in my mind's eye I saw the
terrible assembly of the teachers (the Gymnasium is only the most obvious
example, but it was the same all around me), as they would meet, when I
had passed the first class, and then in the second class, when I had
passed that, and then in the third, and so on, meeting in order to examine
this unique, outrageous case, to discover how I, the most incapable, or at
least the most ignorant of all, had succeeded in creeping up so far as
this class, which now, when everybody's attention had at last been focused
on me, would of course instantly spew me out, to the jubilation of all the
righteous liberated from this nightmare. To live with such fantasies is
not easy for a child. In these circumstances, what could I care about my
lessons? Who was able to strike a spark of real interest in me? Lessons,
and not only lessons but everything around me, interested me as much, at
that decisive age, as an embezzling bank clerk, still holding his job and
trembling at the thought of discovery, is interested in the petty ongoing
business of the bank, which he still has to deal with as a clerk. That was
how small and faraway everything was in comparison to the main thing. So
it went on up to the qualifying exams which I really passed partly only
through cheating, and then everything came to a standstill, for now I was
free. If I had been concerned only with myself up to now, despite the
discipline of the Gymnasium, how much more so now that I was free. So
there was actually no such thing for me as freedom to choose my career,
for I knew: compared to the main thing everything would be exactly as much
a matter of indifference to me as all the subjects taught at school, and
so it was a matter of finding a profession that would let me indulge this
indifference without injuring my vanity too much. Law was the obvious
choice. Little contrary attempts on the part of vanity, of senseless hope,
such as a fortnight's study of chemistry, or six months' German studies,
only reinforced that fundamental conviction. So I studied law. This meant
that in the few months before the exams, and in a way that told severely
on my nerves, I was positively living in an intellectual sense, on
sawdust, which had moreover already been chewed for me in thousands of
other people's mouths. But in a certain sense this was exactly to my
taste, as in a certain sense the Gymnasium had been earlier, and later my
job as a clerk, for it all suited my situation. At any rate, I did show
astonishing foresight; even as a small child I had had fairly clear
premonitions about my studies and my career. From this side I did not
expect rescue; here I had given up long ago.
But I showed no foresight at all concerning the significance and
possibility of a marriage for me; this up to now greatest terror of my
life has come upon me almost completely unexpectedly. The child had
developed so slowly, these things were outwardly all too remote; now and
then the necessity of thinking of them did arise; but the fact that here a
permanent, decisive and indeed the most grimly bitter ordeal loomed was
impossible to recognize. In reality, however, the marriage plans turned
out to be the most grandiose and hopeful attempts at escape, and,
consequently their failure was correspondingly grandiose.
I am afraid that because in this sphere everything I try is a failure,
I shall also fail to make these attempts to marry comprehensible to you.
And yet the success of this whole letter depends on it, for in these
attempts there was, on the one hand, concentrated everything I had at my
disposal in the way of positive forces, and, on the other hand, there also
accumulated, and with downright fury, all the negative forces that I have
described as being the result in part of your method of upbringing, that
is to say, the weakness, the lack of self-confidence, the sense of guilt,
and they positively drew a cordon between myself and marriage. The
explanation will be hard for me also because I have spent so many days and
nights thinking and burrowing through the whole thing over and over again
that now even I myself am bewildered by the mere sight of it. The only
thing that makes the explanation easier for me is your—in my
opinion—complete misunderstanding of the matter; to correct slightly so
complete a misunderstanding does not seem excessively difficult.
First of all you rank the failure of the marriages with the rest of my
failures; I should have nothing against this provided you accepted my
previous explanation of my failure as a whole. It does, in fact, form part
of the same series, only you underrate the importance of the matter,
underrating it to such an extent that whenever we talk of it we are
actually talking about quite different things. I venture to say that
nothing has happened to you in your whole life that had such importance
for you as the attempts at marriage have had for me. By this I do not mean
that you have not experienced anything in itself as important; on the
contrary, your life was much richer and more care-laden and more
concentrated than mine, but for that very reason nothing of this sort has
happened to you. It is as if one person had to climb five low steps and
another person only one step, but one that is, at least for him, as high
as all the other five put together; the first person will not only manage
the five, but hundreds and thousands more as well, he will have led a
great and very strenuous life, but none of the steps he has climbed will
have been of such importance to him as for the second person that one,
firstly high step, that step which it is impossible for him to climb even
by exerting all his strength, that step which he cannot get up on and
which he naturally cannot get past either.
Marrying, founding a family, accepting all the children that come,
supporting them in this insecure world and perhaps even guiding them a
little, is, I am convinced, the utmost a human being can succeed in doing
at all. That so many seem to succeed in this is no evidence to the
contrary; first of all, there are not many who do succeed, and second,
these not-many usually don't "do" it, it merely
"happens" to them; although this is not that utmost, it is still
very great and very honorable (particularly since "doing" and
"happening" cannot be kept clearly distinct). And finally, it is
not a matter of this utmost at all, anyway, but only of some distant but
decent approximation; it is, after all, not necessary to fly right into
the middle of the sun, but it is necessary to crawl to a clean little spot
on Earth where the sun sometimes shines and one can warm oneself a little.
How was I prepared for this? As badly as possible. This is apparent
from what has been said up to now. In so far as any direct preparation of
the individual and any direct creation of the general basic conditions
exist, you did not intervene much outwardly. And it could not be
otherwise; what is decisive here are the general sexual customs of class,
nation, and time. Yet you did intervene here too—not much, for such
intervention must presuppose great mutual trust, and both of us had been
lacking in this even long before the decisive time came—and not very
happily, because our needs were quite different; what grips me need hardly
touch you at all, and vice versa; what is innocence in you may be guilt in
me, and vice versa; what has no consequences for you may be the last nail
in my coffin.
I remember going for a walk one evening with you and Mother; it was on
Josephsplatz near where the Lander bank is today; and I began talking about
these interesting things, in a stupidly boastful, superior, proud,
detached (that was spurious), cold (that was genuine), and stammering
manner, as indeed I usually talked to you, reproaching the Twoof you with
having left me uninstructed; with the fact that my schoolmates first had
to take me in hand, that I had been close to great dangers (here I was
brazenly lying, as was my way, in order to show myself brave, for as a
consequence of my timidity I had, except for the usual sexual misdemeanors
of city children, no very exact notion of these "great
dangers"); but finally I hinted that now, fortunately, I knew
everything, no longer needed any advice, and that everything was all
right. I had begun talking about all this mainly because it gave me
pleasure at least to talk about it, and also out of curiosity, and finally
to avenge myself somehow on the Twoof you for something or other. In
keeping with your nature you took it quite simply, only saying something
to the effect that you could give me advice about how I could go in for
these things without danger. Perhaps I did want to lure just such an
answer out of you; it was in keeping with the prurience of a child overfed
with meat and all good things, physically inactive, everlastingly occupied
with himself; but still, my outward sense of shame was so hurt by
this—or I believed it ought to be so hurt—that against my will I could
not go on talking to you about it and, with arrogant impudence, cut the
conversation short.
It is not easy to judge the answer you gave me then; on the one hand,
it had something staggeringly frank, sort of primeval, about it; on the
other hand, as far as the lesson itself is concerned, it was uninhibited
in a very modern way. I don't know how old I was at the time, certainly
not much over sixteen. It was, nevertheless, a very remarkable answer for
such a boy, and the distance between the Twoof us is also shown in the
fact that it was actually the first direct instruction bearing on real
life I ever received from you. Its real meaning, however, which sank into
my mind even then, but which came partly to the surface of my
consciousness only much later, was this: what you advised me to do was in
your opinion and even more in my opinion at that time, the filthiest thing
possible. That you wanted to see to it that I should not bring any of the
physical filth home with me was unimportant, for you were only protecting
yourself, your house. The important thing was rather that you yourself
remained outside your own advice, a married man, a pure man, above such
things; this was probably intensified for me at the time by the fact that
even marriage seemed to me shameless; and hence it was impossible for me
to apply to my parents the general information I had picked up about
marriage. Thus you became still purer, rose still higher. The thought that
you might have given yourself similar advice before your marriage was to
me utterly unthinkable. So there was hardly any smudge of earthly filth on
you at all. And it was you who pushed me down into this filth—just as
though I were predestined to it with a few frank words. And so, if the
world consisted only of me and you (a notion I was much inclined to have),
then this purity of the world came to an end with you and, by virtue of
your advice, thc filth began with me. In itself it was, of course,
incomprehensible that you should thus condemn me; only old guilt, and
profoundest contempt on your side, could explain it to me. And so again I
was seized in my innermost being—and very hard indeed.
Here perhaps both our guiltlessness becomes most evident. A gives B a
piece of advice that is frank, in keeping with his attitude to life, not
very lovely but still, even today perfectly usual in the city, a piece of
advice that might prevent damage to health. This piece of advice is for B
morally not very invigorating—but why should he not be able to work his
way out of it, and repair the damage in the course of the years? Besides,
he does not even have to take the advice; and there is no reason why the
advice itself should cause B's whole future world to come tumbling down.
And yet something of this kind does happen, but only for the very reason
that A is you and B is myself. This guiltlessness on both sides I can
judge especially well because a similar clash between us occurred some
twenty years later, in quite different circumstances—horrible in itself
but much less damaging—for what was there in me, the
thirty-six-year-old, that could still be damaged? I am referring to a
brief discussion on one of those few tumultuous days that followed the
announcement of my latest marriage plans. You said to me something like
this: "She probably put on a fancy blouse, something these Prague
Jewesses are good at, and right away, of course, you decided to marry her.
And that as fast as possible, in a week, tomorrow, today. I can’t
understand you: after all, you're a grown man, you live in the city, and
you don't know what to do but marry the first girl who comes along. Isn't
there anything else you can do? If you're frightened, I'll go with
you." You put it in more detail and more plainly, but I can no longer
recall the details, perhaps too things became a little vague before my
eyes, I paid almost more attention to Mother who, though in complete
agreement with you, took something from the table and left the room with
it.
You have hardly ever humiliated me more deeply with words and shown me
your contempt more clearly. When you spoke to me in a similar way twenty
years earlier, one might, looking at it through your eyes, have seen in it
some respect for the precocious city boy, who in your opinion could
already be initiated into life without more ado. Today this consideration
could only intensify the contempt, for the boy who was about to make his
first start got stuck halfway and today does not seem richer by any
experience, only more pitiable by twenty years. My choice of a girl meant
nothing at all to you. You had (unconsciously) always suppressed my power
of decision and now believed (unconsciously) that you knew what it was
worth. Of my attempts at escape in other directions you knew nothing, thus
you could not know anything either of the thought processes that had led
me to this attempt to marry, and had to try to guess at them, and in
keeping with your general opinion of me, you interpreted them in the most
abominable, crude, and ridiculous light. And you did not for a moment
hesitate to tell me this in just such a manner. The shame you inflicted on
me with this was nothing to you in comparison to the shame that I would,
in your opinion, inflict on your name by this marriage.
Now, regarding my attempts at marriage there is much you can say in reply,
and you have indeed done so: you could not have much respect for my
decision since I had twice broken the engagement with F. and had twice
renewed it, since I had needlessly dragged you and Mother to Berlin to
celebrate the engagement, and the like. All this is true—but how did it
come about?
The fundamental thought behind both attempts at marriage was quite
sound: to set up house, to become independent.
An idea that does appeal to you, only in reality it always turns out like
the children's game in which one holds and even grips the other's hand,
calling out: "Oh, go away, go away, why don't you go away?"
Which in our case happens to be complicated by the fact that you have
always honestly meant this "go away!" and have always
unknowingly held me, or rather held me down, only by the strength of your
personality.
Although both girls were chosen by chance, they were extraordinarily well
chosen. Again a sign of your complete misunderstanding, that you can
believe that I—timid, hesitant, suspicious—can decide to marry in a
flash, out of delight over a blouse. Both marriages would rather have been
commonsense marriages, in so far as that means that day and night—the
first time for years, the second time for months—all my power of thought
was concentrated on the plan. Neither of the girls disappointed me, only I
disappointed both of them. My opinion of them is today exactly the same as
when I wanted to marry them.
It is not true either that in my second marriage attempt I disregarded the
experience gained from the first attempt, that I was rash and careless.
The cases were quite different; precisely the earlier experience held out
a hope for the second case, which was altogether much more promising. I do
not want to go into details here.
Why then did I not marry? There were certainly obstacles, as there
always are, but then, life consists in confronting such obstacles. The
essential obstacle, however, which is, unfortunately, independent of the
individual case, is that obviously I am mentally incapable of marrying.
This manifests itself in the fact that from the moment I make up my mind
to marry I can no longer sleep, my head burns day and night, life can no
longer be called life, I stagger about in despair. It is not actually
worries that bring this about; true, in keeping with my sluggishness and
pedantry countless worries are involved in all this, but they are not
decisive; they do, like worms, complete the work on the corpse, but the
decisive blow has come from elsewhere. It is the general pressure of
anxiety, of weakness, of self-contempt.
I will try to explain it in more detail. Here, in the attempt to marry,
Twoseemingly antagonistic elements in my relations with you unite more
intensely than anywhere else. Marriage certainly is the pledge of the most
acute form of self-liberation and independence. I would have a family, in
my opinion the highest one can achieve, and so too the highest you have
achieved; I would be your equal; all old and even new shame and tyranny
would be mere history. It would be like a fairy tale, but precisely there
lies the questionable element. It is too much; so much cannot be achieved.
It is as if a person were a prisoner, and he had not only the intention to
escape, which would perhaps be attainable, but also, and indeed
simultaneously, the intention to rebuild the prison as a pleasure dome for
himself. But if he escapes, he cannot rebuild, and if he rebuilds, he
cannot escape. If I, in the particular unhappy relationship in which I
stand to you, want to become independent, I must do something that will
have, if possible, no connection with you at all; though marrying is the
greatest thing of all and provides the most honorable independence, it
also stands at the same time in the closest relation to you. To try to get
out of this quandary has therefore a touch of madness about it, and every
attempt is punished by being driven almost mad.
It is precisely this close relation that partly lures me toward
marrying. I picture the equality which would then arise between us—and
which you would be able to understand better than any other form of
equality—as so beautiful because then I could be a free, grateful,
guiltless, upright son, and you could be an untroubled untyrannical,
sympathetic, contented father. But to this end everything that ever
happened would have to be undone, that is, we ourselves should have to be
canceled out.
But we being what we are, marrying is barred to me because it is your
very own domain. Sometimes I imagine the map of the world spread out and
you stretched diagonally across it. And I feel as if I could consider
living in only those regions that either are not covered by you or are not
within your reach. And, in keeping with the conception I have of your
magnitude, these are not many and not very comforting regions—and
marriage is not among them.
This very comparison proves that I certainly do not mean to say that
you drove me away from marriage by your example, as you had driven me away
from your business. Quite the contrary, despite the remote similarity. In
your marriage I had before me what was, in many ways, a model marriage, a
model in constancy, mutual help, number of children; and even when the
children grew up and increasingly disturbed the peace, the marriage as
such remained undisturbed. Perhaps I formed my high idea of marriage on
this model; the desire for marriage was powerless for other reasons. Those
lay in your relation to your children, which is, after all, what this
whole letter is about.
There is a view according to which fear of marriage sometimes has its
source in a fear that one's children would some day pay one back for the
sins one has committed against one's own parents. This, I believe, has no
very great significance in my case, for my sense of guilt actually
originates in you, and is filled with such conviction of its
uniqueness—indeed, this feeling of uniqueness is an essential part of
its tormenting nature—that any repetition is unthinkable. All the same,
I must say that I would find such a mute, glum, dry, doomed son
unbearable; I daresay that, if there were no other possibility, I would
flee from him, emigrate, as you had planned to do if I had married. And
this may also have had some influence on my incapacity to marry.
What is much more important in all this, however, is the anxiety about
myself. This has to be understood as follows: I have already indicated
that in my writing, and in everything connected with it, I have made some
attempts at independence, attempts at escape, with the very smallest of
success; they will scarcely lead any farther; much confirms this for me.
Nevertheless it is my duty or, rather, the essence of my life, to watch
over them, to let no danger that I can avert, indeed no possibility of
such a danger, approach them. Marriage bears the possibility of such a
danger, though also the possibility of the greatest help; for me, however,
it is enough that there is the possibility of a danger. What should I do
if it did turn out to be a danger! How could I continue living in
matrimony with the perhaps unprovable, but nevertheless irrefutable
feeling that this danger existed? Faced with this I may waver, but the
final outcome is certain: I must renounce. The simile of the bird in the
hand and the Twoin the bush has only a fiery remote application here. In
my hand I have nothing, in the bush is everything, and yet—so it is
decided by the conditions of battle and the exigency of life—I must
choose the nothing. I had to make a similar choice when I chose my
profession.
The most important obstacle to marriage, however, is the no longer
eradicable conviction that what is essential to the support of a family
and especially to its guidance, is what I have recognized in you; and
indeed everything rolled into one, good and bad, as it is organically
combined in you—strength, and scorn of others, health, and a certain
immoderation, eloquence and inadequacy, self-confidence and
dissatisfaction with everyone else, a worldly wisdom and tyranny,
knowledge of human nature and mistrust of most people; then also good
qualities without any drawback, such as industry, endurance, presence of
mind, and fearlessness. By comparison I had almost nothing or very little
of all this; and was it on this basis that I wanted to risk marrying, when
I could see for myself that even you had to fight hard in marriage and,
where the children were concerned, had even failed? Of course, I did not
put this question to myself in so many words and I did not answer it in so
many words; otherwise everyday thinking would have taken over and shown me
other men who are different from you (to name one, near at hand, who is
very different from you: Uncle Richard) and yet have married and have at
least not collapsed under the strain, which is in itself a great deal and
would have been quite enough for me. But I did not ask this question, I
lived it from childhood on. I tested myself not only when faced with
marriage, but in the face of every trifle; in the face of every trifle you
by your example and your method of upbringing convinced me, as I have
tried to describe, of my incapacity; and what turned out to be true of
every trifle and proved you right, had to be fearfully true of the
greatest thing of all: of marriage. Up to the time of my marriage attempts
I grew up more or less like a businessman who lives from day to day, with
worries and forebodings, but without keeping proper accounts. He makes a
few small profits—which he constantly pampers and exaggerates in his
imagination because of their rarity—but otherwise he has daily losses.
Everything is entered, but never balanced. Now comes the necessity of
drawing a balance, that is, the attempt at marriage. And with the large
sums that have to be taken into account here it is as though there had
never been even the smallest profit, everything one single great
liability. And now marry without going mad!
That is what my life with you has been like up to now, and these are
the prospects inherent in it for the future.
If you look at the reasons I offer for the fear I have of you, you
might answer: "You maintain I make things easy for myself by
explaining my relation to you simply as being your fault, but I believe
that despite your outward effort, you do not make things more difficult
for yourself, but much more profitable. At first you too repudiate all
guilt and responsibility; in this our methods are the same. But whereas I
then attribute the sole guilt to you as frankly as I mean it, you want to
be 'overly clever' and 'overly affectionate' at the same time and acquit
me also of all guilt. Of course, in the latter you only seem to succeed
(and more you do not even want), and what appears between the lines, in
spite of all the 'turns of phrase' about character and nature and
antagonism and helplessness, is that actually I have been the aggressor,
while everything you were up to was self-defense. By now you would have
achieved enough by your very insincerity, for you have proved three
things: first, that you are not guilty; second, that I am the guilty one;
and third, that out of sheer magnanimity you are ready not only to forgive
me but (what is both more and less) also to prove and be willing to
believe yourself that—contrary to the truth—I also am not guilty. That
ought to be enough for you now, but it is still not enough. You have put
it into your head to live entirely off me. I admit that we fight with each
other, but there are Two kinds of combat. The chivalrous combat, in which
independent opponents pit their strength against each other, each on his
own, each losing on his own, each winning on his own. And there is the
combat of vermin, which not only sting but, on top of it, suck your blood
in order to sustain their own life. That's what the real professional
soldier is, and that's what you are. You are unfit for life; to make life
comfortable for yourself, without worries and without self-reproaches, you
prove that I have taken your fitness for life away from you and put it in
my own pocket. Why should it bother you that you are unfit for life, since
I have the responsibility for it, while you calmly stretch out and let
yourself be hauled through life, physically and mentally, by me. For
example: when you recently wanted to marry, you wanted—and this you do,
after all, admit in this letter—at the same time not to marry, but in
order not to have to exert yourself you wanted me to help you with this
not-marrying, by forbidding this marriage because of the 'disgrace' this
union would bring upon my name. I did not dream of it. First, in this as
in everything else I never wanted to be 'an obstacle to your happiness,'
and second, I never want to have to hear such a reproach from my child.
But did the self-restraint with which I left the marriage up to you do me
any good? Not in the least. My aversion to your marriage would not have
prevented it; on the contrary, it would have been an added incentive for
you to marry the girl, for it would have made the 'attempt at escape,' as
you put it, complete. And my consent to your marriage did not prevent your
reproaches, for you prove that I am in any case to blame for your not
marrying. Basically, however, in this as in everything else you have only
proved to me that all my reproaches were justified, and that one
especially justified charge was still missing: namely, the charge of
insincerity, obsequiousness and parasitism. If I am not very much
mistaken, you are preying on me even with this letter itself."
My answer to this is that, after all, this whole rejoinder— which can
partly also be turned against you—does not come from you, but from me.
Not even your mistrust of others is as great as my self-mistrust, which
you have bred in me. I do not deny a certain justification for this
rejoinder, which in itself contributes new material to the
characterization of our relationship. Naturally things cannot in reality
fit together the way the evidence does in my letter; life is more than a
Chinese puzzle. But with the correction made by this rejoinder—a
correction I neither can nor will elaborate in detail—in my opinion
something has been achieved which so closely approximates the truth that
it might reassure us both a little and make our living and our dying
easier
Translated by Ernst Kaiser and Eithne Wilkins; revised by
Arthur S. Wensinger
Copyright Schocken Books Inc |