Auferstanden Über Alles

Ich war beim Zeitungslesen zufällig auf Hans Magnus weniger bekannten Bruder Ulrich Enzensberger gestoßen. Dieser war in terroristische linke Gruppen in den 60er-70er Jahren verwickelt und lebt und arbeitet seit Jahren als Autor und Journalist in (West-)Berlin. Sein Buch Auferstanden Über Alles, welches ich mir daraufhin kaufte, sammelt einige seiner Reportagen aus den 80er Jahren. Diese sind unterschiedlich interessant und vor allem (aus heutiger Perspektive) unterschiedlich interessant. Am Besten war wohl seine Aufarbeitung des Deutschlandliedes und warum Theodor Heuß, dieses von den Nazis viel gesungene Lied wieder als Nationalhymne. Direkt danach sein (für mich) interessanter Artikel über die allierten Sonderrechte im besetzten West-Berlin. Eine schnelle, kurze Lektüre, als Zeitportrait interessant ohne unbedingt (und für alle) empfehlenswert zu sein.

Union Atlantic

Adam Haslett might be the best modern, young American writer that I know of. His short story collection You Are Not a Stranger Here was amazing, his first novel Union Atlantic convinced me little based on its cover or the description on its back. Yet, I bought it anyway, based on how much I had enjoyed him before and he truly rewarded me. Haslett includes a slight bit of magical realism in his novel, which tends to irritate me a bit, but notwithstanding this small default Union Atlantic is probably the novel of the US financial (note: not the real economy) crisis that I have read so far. Haslett's book reflects the US constantly at war in the Middle East, the greed of its banks and some of the people working for them, it even includes parts about the difficulty of being a - gay but not limited to that - adolescent. His characters have made good or bad career choices, but most of them are unsatisfied one way or another. His book shows life, period. And it does so without embellishments but poignantly. Highly recommendable.

The German Europe

Prompted by the reset in thinking brought about by the euro crisis, there has been a flurry of publications dealing with a possible future of Europe recently. To begin with Daniel Cohn-Bendit and Guy Verhofstadt – both of the rarest of species: Well known Members of the European Parliament (EP) – published their federalist manifesto Debout l'Europe! Martin Schulz, President of the EP weighed in with his entry tellingly entitled The Tied Up Giant – Europe's Last Chance. Jürgen Habermas has also made his voice heard with an essay Zur Verfassung Europas. Even that weathercock of the subject du jour, Bernard-Henri Levy, has co-signed a manifesto on Europe ou le chaos? together with a number of other European writers.

Ulrich Beck with his short essay on The German Europe fits right into this – important – fad. In his book, he provides a criticism of the current state of Europe, while at the same time putting forward a new Rousseauian social contract for a better future Europe. His is an integrationist vision that he proclaims a necessity for Europe if it is to be “capable of finding answers for [today's] fundamental transformation and great challenges without falling into the trap of xenophobia and violence.”

For Beck, Europe has become German in a process that is determined by economic might on the one hand and “Merkiavelli's” (in)action on the other hand. Said inaction is what in particular reinforces German power. It is not the fear to be dominated by German money – or tanks – that prompts the submission to German policy preferences, it is the all-dominating fear – inherently part of modernity's risk society – of a forced exit from the Euro prompted by the absence of German money that results in the political might of the country.

This German inaction has been described and criticized (Beck: “Germany has become too powerful to allow itself not to take a decision”) elsewhere of course, Beck's analysis is nothing new in this regard then. It also comes up surprisingly short when he claims that Merkel had seized her chance and changed the balance of power in Europe. Even while admits himself, that the current situation is untenable with the crisis still very much – and once again – raging.

Germany's hesitant action at every recurring point of deep crisis might be sufficient to contain the problem of the day; an end to the crisis per se cannot come without deep structural and institutional solutions. Current German might in that regard is merely a temporary phenomenon based on a specific politico-economic problem-set that allows the country to position itself as a normative model whose policy solutions others are expected to apply.

This temporary and sectoral – because economic – hegemony might of course be translated into a more enduring institutional and structural format once a sort of new European Union (2.0) has emerged. Yet, Germany has so far produced little but a cacophony of voices advocating changes with little tangible proposals emanating from the supposed leader of the pack. It is is difficult to argue then that Merkel has – at least so far – managed to implement a lasting shift of powers within the EU's complex governance system.

Beck finally lays out his vision for a social contract for Europe. He regards this kind of contract as the overcoming of an out-dated national state of existence – Nationalzustand. Europe of course is not a society though, which means that a “post-national society of national societies” has to be constructed instead. The fact that there is no European people hardly matters in this regard since our societies are increasingly individualized in the first place.

The Erasmus generation were to live this kind of individualized European life horizontally already, even while the vertical, institution-oriented process of integration, prompts their criticism of Brussels. For Beck, this new social contract needs to be accompanied by more social security at the European level especially to address youth unemployment in Southern Europe. Increased integration furthermore were to go along with an increased bottom-up democratization process, leading to aforementioned individuals emerging as the sovereign of European democracy.

The German sociologist lays out an interesting vision of a German Europe, dominated by Merkiavelli's government. Yet, his analysis is a disappointingly temporal nature, not taking into account demographic, economic, nor even institutional changes, that will seriously impact the intra-EU balance of power as he presents it. His proposed social contract, finally, is an interesting idea that Beck seems to have no idea how it could be implemented though.

Dantons Tod

Georg Büchner ist einer der vielen Klassiker der deutschen Literatur, die mir vom Name her ein Begriff sind zu denen ich aber wenig detailliertes Wissen habe. Nun las ich also Büchners Dantons Tod vor einigen Wochen. Büchner war natürlich Teil des aufsässigen bürgerlichen Vormärzes in Deutschland in der ersten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhundert. Er beschreibt in seinem Theaterstück das tragische Ende eines der frühen großen Gestalten der französischen Revolution, der unter Robespierres Guillotine verendet. Büchner bezieht hierbei einerseits Position für Danton, auch wenn er dessen Lebensstil zu kritisieren scheint, andererseits weist er auf die Gefahren einer überbordenden - jakobinischen - Revolution hin.

Böse Schafe

Eine schweizer Freundin hatte mir Böse Schafe empfohlen, ich lese ja kaum neuere Literatur sonst. Gerade jetzt, nach einem Jahr dominiert von viel Lektüre im wissenschaftlichen und vor allem wirtschaftlichen Bereich, wo ich kaum in den Genuss reiner - was auch immer das genau heißen soll - Fiktion kam, gefiel mir Katja Lange-Müllers Buch ungemein. Die (Ost-)Berlinerin erzählt hier die Geschichte einer aus dem Osten gekommenden West-Berlinerin, die sich in einen, sagen wir charakterlich schwierigen, Mann verliebt. Eine schöne Geschichte über die rauen Unschönheiten des Lebens, welche sich leicht am Stück liest.

Les Mots

Je lis beaucoup trop vite en ce moment malheureusement - mon emploi du temps m'y aide trop - alors je suis tellement en arrière que mes critiques me paraissent superficielles voire superflues parfois. Mais tant pis, je fais ceci autant pour avoir un compte rendu de mes lectures que tout autre chose. Sartre alors, dont j'ai aimé la trilogie Les Chemins de la liberté que j'avais lu quand je parlais à peine le français (ou au moins je le ressens comme tel aujourd'hui). 

Les Mots est bien différent de cette trilogie sublime ainsi que peu comparable aux drames magnifiques Les Mouches et surtout Huis Clos. Ce petit bouquin est un sort de A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man en plus jeune et moins catholique. L'auteur y raconte son enfance, sa mère veuve, son grand-père dominant. Il regarde sa famille - qui lui a clairement fournie et plus tard permis une éducation importante - d'un point de vue arrogant qui est impressionnant parfois. Cela en gardant une fausse modestie voire perception ironique de ce qui concerne ses capacités intellectuels de l'époque.

En somme de tout un livre qui pâlit en comparaison avec ce que j'avais lu de Sartre avant, en terme de beauté autant que d'importance.

Chronicles - Volume 1

Arguably one of the most important (Western) artists of the 20th century, Bob Dylan came out with Volume 1 of his Chronicles a few years ago. I had been wanting to read them for a while but life had always intervened, so here almost ten years after they came I finally got around to reading the - German - version. I had never read anything by Dylan before, heard virtually all of his songs at least once, know most of the early ones by heart, but I didn't read any of his earlier attempts at straight out (biographical/literature) writing.

What is Chronicles then? It is not of course a faithful recounting of his (early) life, in fact it sets in for the most part with his arrival in New York with some flashbacks to his time in Minnesota, and thus fits the Dylan legend quite well. Just like in his Theme Time Radio Hour - filled with amazing music for the most part - he constantly name drops great artists and songs most of which I was not only familiar with but whom I for the most part adore myself (Hank Williams, Robert Johnson, Woody Guthrie of course). The most interesting aspect of all these names and songs (and books) might be the ones one wouldn't expect, Dylan seems to be much more read and globally informed than one might have thought. He thus name checks Bertolt Brecht's Dreigroschenoper, Rimbaud, Lord Byron...while also giving voice to the doubt as to what kind of music he recorded in the late 1980s concomitant with Kurtis Blow, NWA and the like.

Dylan hardly tells us anything about his personal life, there is virtually no gossip about his wives, about his many kids, instead much about his cultural origins, the singers he met and worked with before he became Dylan. He also goes on about his musical self-doubts as to the timeliness of his music as seen above already, but also as to his capacity to still produce something he may himself be satisfied with. Thus he mentions at one point that the producer of Oh Mercy was looking for songs such as the ones he had done in the past and yet he (Dylan) simply knew he couldn't deliver anymore.

Finally, and most noticeably maybe is his almost frontal attack of the protest or counter-culture movement he felt he was made the mouthpiece of. I see his point to some extent, he clearly wanted to be seen as an artist not as the exponent of a generation. Yet, at the same time, his early albums especially and this can be heard reflected in many of his early live recordings also, feature songs that were radical in their positioning of the time (and what concerns war and peace still are in the USA even today). It was little surprising then that he was expected to live up to his image as the spokesperson of his generation. 

Even in the German translation I read, Dylan seemingly managed to preserve the staccato of many of his songs as well as the name dropping of his later radio show. Chronciles is not great literature in the sense that Dylan's songs are amazing poetry, but they provide an interesting insight in the self-perception of someone who has to at least be considered among the greatest artists of the 20th century.

The Rum Diary

One of the first solely literature novels I had read in a while, I thoroughly enjoyed Hunter S. Thompson's The Rum Diary. The author tells the story of a group of American journalists living hedonistically in Puerto Rico. Reminiscent of Hemingway or Graham Greene without most of the political or historical interest, it is a journalist's novel. Telling the tale of hard-drinking journalists living it up without knowing where to go, what really to look for what to do. Arguably, the end tries to criticize this kind of lifestyle to some extent - interestingly enough, or sexist enough, it is a woman who pays the ultimate price for it who is incapable of living this life without paying a price. Yet, at the end of the day the novel simply provides a glimpse into this life, nothing more, nothing less.

Die Inflationslüge

Mark Schieritz ist als Wirtschafskorrespondent bei der Zeit tätig und schreibt unter anderem am Blog Herdentrieb mit. Er ist einer der wenigen (relativ) prominenten öffentlichen Stimmen in Deutschland, der sich gegen die anti-Keynesianistische Mehrheitsmeinung richtet. Sein - kurzes - Buch, Die Inflationslüge - Wie uns die Angst ums Geld ruiniert und wer daran verdient, ist denn auch ein Pladöyer gegen die vollkommen überzogene Inflationsangst von den Springermedien und der FAZ (und einigen anderen) kontinuierlich hervorgeholt. Für mich, der ich mich an der Eurokrise schon viel abgearbeitet hatte, war leider relativ wenig neues in seinem Büchlein enthalten, aber es bleibt eine gute Übersicht über das Thema und die missgeleitete deutsche Politik in Bezug auf den Euro.

Postwar

Tony Judt is one of the most renowned, relatively (2010) recently deceased public intellectuals, historians around. His book Postwar - A History of Europe since 1945 is a massive - in physical size and scope - undertaking to tell the history of the divided - and then re-united - continent following the two wars that shaped its destiny. He devotes 900 pages to this endeavor, which yet is obviously impossible, he is obliged to concentrate on a number of major states while putting forward major trends and faultlines.

For me it was a fascinating introduction into regional and temporal parts of history I had been little familiar with previously. Necessarily slightly superficial where I already had a good understanding, essentially Germany and to some extent France, but ever there Judt contributed new elements or analysis to my understanding. Most valuable though, was the book for me where I knew hardly anything about such as Eastern Europe but also, say, Italian or UK history of the 1960s-1970s. The end with it heavy concentration on the very recent past seemed a bit redundant for anybody well versed with the news of the day (say, the last ten-fifteen years), yet a great overview for anybody interested in European history.

Kleine Geschichte der Ukraine

Andreas Kappelers Kleine Geschichte der Ukraine, 1994 geschrieben, soll angeblich eine der ersten - deutschsprachigen - Werke über die Ukraine überhaupt sein. Der Autor gibt hier die Geschichte der Region (denn ein Land war es den größten Teil dieser Zeit eigentlich nicht) vom 11. Jahrhundert wieder. Zeigt auf die frühe Hochperiode mit dem Kiever Rus, gefolgt von der Dominierung aus dem heutigen Russland (dem Moskauer Rus), die frühe Aufteilung zwischen Habsburg-Österreich und dem russischen Zarenreich. Die vielen Versuche Unabhängigkeit oder zumindest Eigenständigkeit zu behalten. Und schließĺich die furchtbare Geschichte des Landes im 20. Jahrhundert mit Bürgerkriegen nach beiden Weltkriegen, Kriegen mit Polen und Russland bzw der Sowjetunion, der Besetzung durch deutsche Truppen, dem Massenmord der ukrainischen Juden durch die Deutschen, schon vorher Pogrome von Russen und Ukraine verübt an denselben. Eine gut geschriebene Begleitlektüre meiner Reise im Land.

Dead Souls

One more novel from my trip to Ukraine, this was one from the Ukraine-born Russian writer Nikolai Gogol, Dead Souls - similarly to the The Daughter of the Commandant but much more so - pokes holes into the Russian self-satisfied noble middle class who - to varying degrees - rely on their serfs and petty business deals (and corruption) for their well-being. 

I have to admit that I found this novel difficult to read though. It seemed too drawn out in its story-telling, too repetitive in a way. Still interesting during my quest to find out more about the Slavic world I was traveling in recently.

The Daughter of the Commandant

Recently gone on a trip to Ukraine - Kiev and Odessa - I had a rather hard time finding translated Ukrainian literature even within the country itself and thus restricted myself to - amongst others - Alexander Pushkin for my reading material. Pushkin of course is not Ukrainian - but really to clearly differentiate between Ukrainian and Russian history is quite difficult and he furthermore spent some time living in - exile in - Odessa where he promptly seduced the local governor's wife and thus had to leave more quickly than anticipated.

The Daughter of the Commandant then, where Pushkin tells the story of a Simplicissismus-like young noble posted on the Russian frontier where he and his new-found love interest are exposed to and suffer from Pugachev's Rebellion. Pushkin constant problems with the Tsarist government due to his socially critical writings and this also comes across in this - short - novel some. The young noble here comes across as naive - if later on heroic and lucky - at best, most of the higher-up officers in the army are described as incompetent or a bit corrupt, while finally the government's justice is erroneous - note: not the Tsar herself though.

In read this in one sitting - lying really - on the train from Odessa to Kiev and thought it a very enjoyable even if Pushkin's status as one of the greatest writers of Russian history was not clearly established to me with it. Curious to try and read something else of his though.

Marie-Antoinette

Le prix Goncourt est évidemment extrêmement connu dans le monde francophone, beaucoup moins de gens savent quoi que soit sur les frères Goncourt, Jules et Edmond, dont ce dernier a été le fondateur dudit prix. Du fait Edmond et son frère écrivaient des romans naturalistes ainsi que des œuvres historiques. Moi, dans ma recherche de connaitre plus l'histoire voire de la littérature française, je suis tombé sur leur Histoire de Marie-Antoinette de 1858.

Ce serait aller loin de réclamer que ce livre constitue un œuvre indispensable. Les Goncourts prennent une position enhardie pour Marie-Antoinette qui parait presque absurde pour le lecteur d'aujourd'hui. Marie-Antoinette évidemment, fille de Marie-Thérèse l’Impératrice de l'empire Austro-hongrois, est entré dans l'histoire comme la reine aveuglée par sa richesse personnelle de voir la souffrance du peuple et finalement guillotinée sur la Place de révolution (aujourd'hui: Concorde) à Paris. 

La vraie histoire parait beaucoup plus intéressante et j'aimerais bien en savoir plus. Malheureusement les Goncourts sont incapables de la fournir. Pour eux la reine n'a jamais faillie en rien, a été une victime des circonstances voire de la méchanceté des autres, des révolutionnaires autant que des nobles. Il est donc difficile de se former une vraie image de la personnage historique basée sur le récit des frères, de savoir à quel point elle prenait le dessus sur son mari Louis XVI, à quel point elle soutenait la contre-révolution contre la monarchie constitutionnelle, à quel point elle soutenait une invasion étrangère afin de se rétablir sur le trône.

Pour les Goncourts, elle, qui arrive en France, déjà mariée à Louis XVI à peine son ainé, n'est rien qu'une jeune femme jolie qui aime les plaisir, les fêtes, les amis, le théâtre et qui n'arrivent pas à s'accorder à la vie trop contrôlée du cours à Versailles. Finalement elle n'est rien qu'une mère et femme à qui on arrache son mari, ses enfants pour la, in finis, guillotiner en faces de preuves de inexistantes, voire une défense juridique mal-préparé et incluant des assertions d’inceste écrit de son fils de même pas 10 ans (et alors très peu crédible vu les circonstances).

Ce qui reste avec le lecteur après une lecture éclairée en essayant de retenir ce qui les Goncourts n'ont pas pu détournés dans la faveur de Marie-Antoinette, est que la reine a été sans doute une victime tragique de ses circonstances (son arrivée en France très jeune, l'affaire du collier, les reformes échoués de la monarchie absolu engendré par Louis XVI) mais qui y jouaient une rôle aussi. Elle essayât d'influencer la politique, en choisissant des ministres, en communiquant avec des autres acteurs politiques (Mirabeau entre autre!) ainsi que des gouvernements étrangers (notamment ses frères, empereurs d'Autriche  l'un après l'autre). Il parait logique du fait qu'elle soit engagé dans la contre-révolution! Même si je n'en sais pas grande chose sur son importance là-dedans.

Une période très intéressante en toute évidence. Comme toujours il faut lire plus dessus. Un livre trop tendancieux par contre et trop répétitive dans son admiration de la reine. 

For Europe!

Daniel Cohn-Bendit and Guy Verhofstadt, the most prominent Green and liberal politicians on the European scene respectively, put forward a Manifesto for a postnational revolution in Europe. They see this call for a federal European Union as a natural response to the euro debt crisis brought about by an imbalanced integration concentrating almost exclusively on monetary policy and the single market. Their text entitled For Europe! is a short one, lining out in broad strokes the reasons they see for this step towards a postnational revolution. I very much agree and as most of their arguments are hardly new, they were (in my case) preaching to the choir some.

Still, they bring to the forefront once more an argument that European national sovereignists tend to ignore, namely that with "the so-called G8" consisting of 8 non-European countries within twenty years, individual European states' voices will simply not matter in international negotiations on virtually anything. And yes this includes France, Germany, and the UK, economic and military might notwithstanding. From a Realist perspective then, "the interests of European citizens can only be guaranteed by a strong EU." I do wonder how the nationalists square up this circle, they probably simply deny it away.

Verhofstadt and Cohn-Bendit also remind us that it was only "thanks to the nationalists and populists [that] Europe has in just a single century been transformed from an ethnic and cultural melting pot into a monotonous collection of mono-cultural and mono-ethnic islands." Normatively speaking and from a cultural perspective, I am looking forward to the re-emergence "in the belly of Europe of that mishmash of languages, cultures and [non-]religions."

Finally, "the global financial crisis has proved to us to what extent the nation state is no longer suited to the modern world. While the markets have become globalized, political organization has hardly changed since the end of the 19th century and remains based on the nation."

In total, a short, but interesting read...

The Breaking of Nations

Robert Cooper is the elder statesman of European (EU) diplomacy. He is one of the very few - relatively - widely known EU administrators around. His book The Breaking of Nations - Order and Chaos in the Twenty-First Century is a essentially a recapitulation of his previous argument of a world separated into modern, post-modern and pre-moder countries. It as such provides the reader with nothing much additional new aside from well-known problems that even pre-modern states may post to modern/post-modern states. 

It still provides an interesting read with regard to the Eurocris and accompanying debates about sovereignty and the such. Most interestingly in this regard might be his (unintended) response to simplifying public debate figures such as Emmanuel Todd in France or Bernd Lucke in Germany but even national governments in general:

"Interests mean something different for the modern state and for its postmodern successor. The interests ... were essentially security interests ... with the EU [they] are essentially matters of policy preference and burden-sharing. There is no fundamental reason why in trade negotiations France should be ready to sacrifice the interests of its sofware companies in favour of its farmers; France’s ‘interests’ are defined by the political process."

Go here for a short version of effectively the same argument he lays out in his book.

Kein schönes Land in dieser Zeit

Mehmet Gürcan Daimagülar ist eine Art deutsch-türkischer Modell Hans in allen Gassen. Arbeitete als einer, wenn nicht der erste, Deutsch-Türke im Bundestag, war im Bundesvorstand der FDP, war als Berater bei Boston Consulting tätig, studierte in Harvard und an Yale und arbeitet heute als Partner einer Kanzlei in Berlin. Er vertritt im Rahmen dieser Tätigkeit (oder freiberuflich, ich weiß es nicht) mindestens drei der Opfer der NSU. Außerdem hat er ein Buch geschrieben: Kein schönes Land in dieser Zeit - Das Märchen von der gescheiterten Integration.

Der Autor betreibt in diesem Buch eine Art Amalgam zwischen seiner Kindheit und Jugend im Rheinland, seiner darauffolgenden Karriere und den gesellschaftlichen Problemen mit der Integration der Deutsch-Türken. Die Einwanderung seiner Eltern findet Erwähnung und auch seine persönlichen Erfolge bzw Rückschläge werden wiedergegeben.

Das Buch hat eine seltsam zweigeteilte Nachricht, die der Autor rüberzubringen versuchen zu scheint. Erstens (fangen wir mit der negativen an) positioniert er sich gerne als Erfolgsbeispiel, als einer der besser Deutsche spricht als viele Deutsche, der auf einen breiten Fundus von deutscher (zT westlicher) Hochkultur zurückgreifen kann. Das stimmt zwar einerseits einfach, andererseits ist es aber ein wenig zu sehr gesucht, zu selbstdarstellerisch und noch karikariert durch eine kaum überzeugende Bescheidenheit (à la: Was habe ich denn? Wer bin ich denn?).

Dies ist nur um so mehr unnötig als daß Daimagülars Parcours ja für sich selbst spricht. Wem sollte er denn noch etwas beweisen wollen? Ich hoffe doch, daß wenigstens ein Mann in seiner Position auch als Deutsch-Türke, dies nicht mehr nötig hat.

Viel wichtiger jedoch ist die zweite Nachricht, die der Autor rüberbringen will: Das Märchen von der gescheiterten Integration. Sein Buch ist in vielerlei Hinsicht als Antwort auf Sarrazin zu verstehen. Er beschreibt ja nicht nur sich selbst als Beispiel erfolgreicher Integration und vor allem auf beruflichen Aufstiegs, sondern versucht auch etwas Realität in die deutsche Debatte zu diesem Integrationsthema einzubringen. Eine Realität, welche Integrationsprobleme beinhaltet, aber eben vor allem auch einen Staat und seine Mehrheitsgesellschaft darstellt, welche bis vor sehr kurzer Zeit ihren Status als Einwanderungsland einfach nicht wahrnehmen wollte. Eine Realität, welche existierende Integration ins Extreme verzerrt ohne sich des im Vergleich zu vielen anderen Ländern ruhig ablaufenden Integrationsprozesses bewußt zu werden.

Gelingt ihm das? Bei mir rennt er mit seinen Argumenten zu Kopftüchern, Religion im Allgemeinen und der Notwendigkeit der deutschen Mehrheitsgesellschaft auch integrieren zu wollen und nicht nur zu verlangen natürlich offene Türen ein. Und ich befürchte, daß abgesehen von einem sehr amüsanten provozierenden Eingangstext, der Rest des Buches zwar absolut zutreffend ist in seiner differenzierten Einschätzung des Integrationsprozesses in Deutschland, aber eben auch nur von jenen gelesen wird, die sowieso schon damit einverstanden sind.

Für mich war es nichtsdestotrotz interessant diese Integrationsgeschichte aus Sichtweise eines Deutsch-Türken erzählt zu bekommen. Auch wenn mir vieles nicht neu war, so ist der Blickwinkel doch ein anderer. Und auch wenn Daimagülar kein herausragender Autor im Sinne seines literarischen Stiles ist, so liest sich sein Buch doch leicht und fesselt den Leser, ob seiner Sichtweise eines beruflich erfolgreichen Deutsch-Türken, welche im Rahmen der deutschen Mehrheitsgesellschaftsmedien immer noch viel zu kurz kommt.

Solaris

Ich lese zugegebenermaßen - leider? - kaum noch fantastische Romane. Solaris von Stanisław Lem war in der Hinsicht eine absolute Ausnahme. Das kleine Büchlein, welches ich fast in einem durch las, war aber nicht richtig packend, sondern sogar angst einflößend! Lem beschreibt den - gegenseitigen? - Versuch der Kontaktaufnahme einer zukünftigen Menschheit und einem intelligenten außerirdischen Wesen. Er greift hierbei nicht nur direkt die simplistischen sonstigen außerirdischen Fantasiegestalten, welche in dem meisten Fällen zwar vielleicht grün sind, sonst aber Menschen ähneln. Obendrein gelingt es ihm seine Charaktere mit ihrer tiefsten Furcht zu konfrontieren und hierdurch selbst dem abgehärteten Leser Angst einzujagen. Eindrucksvoll.

Bei uns in Auschwitz

Bei uns in Auschwitz von Tadeusz Borowski ist vielleicht das eindrucksvollste Beispiel von Lagerliteratur, das ich je gelesen habe. Der Autor als polnischer Widerständler inhaftiert beschreibt in seiner unglaublichen lakonischen, kalten Art die täglichen Lebensumstände in Auschwitz aber auch in einem Displaced Persons' Camp nach dem Krieg. Die absolute Grausamkeit, das menschenunwürdige dieses Lebens wird durch seine Erzählweise extrem untermalt. Der Leser hat wirklich den Eindruck zu verstehen wie es sich dort lebte oder zumindest nachvollziehen zu können warum - so gut wie - jedwede normale zwischenmenschliche Regung unterdrückt werden musste und wurde. Borowski gibt keinen Überblick, bietet keine Analyse oder viele dem Leser unbekannten Fakten, aber er erlaubt es sich in eine Situation einzufühlen in der das Opfer auch sich - notgedrungen - grausam verhielt.

Rising '44

Norman Davies' Rising '44 - The Battle for Warsaw fits right into the - positive - stereotype of massive and incredibly detailed written history books dealing with the Second World War and written by UK authors. Davies, most known maybe for his monumental, all-encompassing Europe - A History, had previously written a history of Poland and in his take on the Warsaw insurrection he tackles most of the issues related to the Soviet-German invasion of Poland, the ensuing exclusively German occupation period, and finally the (re-)invasion by the Red Army.

The tragic fate of Poland during the Second World War, where it went, to use Davies' expression, from the First Ally of the United Kingdom to an afterthought barely remarked when its capital was razed and its sovereign government usurped, still is ignored in Western Europe to an astonishing extent. The country's horrifying experience may be seen epitomized in Warsaw's triple (!) destruction. Having been bombed in 1939, its formerly Jewish part or rather the one used for the Ghetto was burnt down house by house following the always doomed to fail Ghetto Uprising in 1943. In 1944, the Home Army, which was one of the best organized in German-occupied Europe, finally, decided to rise up against the German troops in anticipation of the Soviet troops stationed just on the under side of the Vistula just as the French had successfully done in Paris.

Yet, the Red Army stopped cold in its track and let the Germans handle the insurrection with astonishing cruelty and disgustingly pointless destruction. Davies discusses this Rising in great detail and much - a bit too much at times I felt - compassion. He talks about the lead-up to the decision for the Rising, the sinking fortunes of the Polish government-in-exile in London, the aftermath for the veterans of the Home Army many of whom were hunted down by Soviet forces.

The Warsaw Rising was inadequately prepared and faultily directed; it was a political gamble of the highest order. Psychologically, however, it could hardly have been avoided.

His is a book of mind-blowing detail, minutiae that serves to provide the reader with an overall understanding of the Rising and yet still leaving him (or her, or in this case: me) at a loss of words of a period and place where the - moral - laws of men had no meaning anymore.

How to understand that which is impossible to wrap your mind around? The only solution to this question has always been the stupefying collection of facts, which rarely offers a solution to anything, but never fails to serve as a welcome distraction.