Baudelaire Without Benjamin
Baudelaire Without Benjamin
Baudelaire Without Benjamin
Sonam Singh
Baudelaire without
Benjamin: Contingency,
History, Modernity
Comparative Literature
Comparative Literature
for sentences and concepts (212). Still, Jennings calls Benjamins first essay on
Baudelaire one of our most authoritative social readings of modern lyric
poetry, an effort in which Baudelaire is seen for the first time as the quintessential modern alienated, spatially displaced, saturnine (21). Likewise, while
he acknowledges some of the essays weaker juxtapositions, Jennings nevertheless argues that it is constructed according to a rigorous structural principle (32,
26). I dispute this assessment below; here, I wish simply to note the marginalization of Baudelaires literary texts throughout Dialectical Images. Jennings quotes
only one line from Baudelaires lyrics in the book, and that line is quoted and
translated incorrectly.2
This lack of corroboration takes it for granted that, in all important respects,
Benjamin got Baudelaire right. I will turn to The Swan in the third part of my
essay to suggest the many ways that Baudelaires vision would challenge Benjamins, but for now I want to emphasize how commonly appreciations of Benjamins
literary criticism disregard the literature being criticized. Baudelaire, at least, is a
significant cultural presence in the Anglophone literary world, frequently translated and always in print, often in dual-language editions. However, the seventeenth-century German playwrights who are the chief subject of Benjamins earlier Origin of the German Mourning Play are not so readily available. Of the major
baroque tragedies, a determined search reveals only abridged translations of
Andreas Gryphiuss Leo Armenius (1646, published 1650) and Daniel Casper von
Lohensteins Sophonisbe (1669, published 1680) in the Continuum Publishing
Companys The German Library series. Additionally, Gryphiuss short comedy Die
geliebte Dornrose (1660), itself half of a larger dramatic unit, was translated as The
Beloved Hedgerose in a 1928 issue of the journal Poet Lore. I have located no English
translations of plays by Martin Opitz or Johann Christian Hallmann. This dearth
of translations is evident in the troubling but common incidence of literary scholars extolling and expanding upon Benjamins literary-critical insights in Origin
without adducing any apparent independent familiarity with or concern for the
actual plays. Jennings neither quotes nor cites any of them. In a similar fashion,
Samuel Webers two remarkable essays on the mourning play book contravene the
ethos of deconstruction by confidently forwarding Benjamins insights without a
single textual reference to a German mourning play, thus implicitly placing Benjamins philosophical commentary on a higher epistemological plane than the
literary texts that occasion it.3 Jennings and Weber are hardly alone in this deferential attitude towards Benjamins readings. In an analysis of the frequency of
2
Baudelaire did not write Tout autour de moi devient allgorie (Everything around me
becomes allegory) (174). The apostrophizer of The Swan actually exclaims: tout pour moi devient allgorie (everything for me becomes allegory). The point here is not that Jennings does not
know his Baudelaire; it is that he does not seem to worry about what the poet might say in response
to the critic.
3
In perhaps the most famous attempted rapprochement between Benjamin and deconstruction,
Paul de Man (after announcing that in the profession you are nobody unless you have said something about [The Task of the Translator]) insists than any messianic themes readers encounter in
that text (and that he admits he himself constantly re-encounters) must be explained away by a very
difficult attentive reading (it takes really a long practice) predicated upon a belief in Benjamins
extraordinarily refined and deliberate strategy, a strategy of echoing but then somehow displacing these themes (Conclusions 73, 103). A deconstructive regard for, and deference to, the deliberateness of a writers intended strategy is incongruous, to say the least.
Comparative Literature
author citations in Critical Inquiry from 1974 to 2004, Anne H. Stevens and Jay
Williams reveal that Benjamin was the fourth most cited author (trailing only Derrida, Freud, and Foucault) and note that, among major authors cited in that journal, it is our guess that perhaps only Benjamins works are cited nonargumentatively (223). Indeed, considering the often productive and always lively theoretical
debates that swirl around the genealogies, texts, and legacies of Derrida, Freud,
and Foucault, the tendentiousness with which Benjamin has been engaged is
remarkable.
Even though cogent critiques of Benjamin are available, often from European
scholars, these have not been systematically elaborated upon. Indeed, literary
critics who do not concern themselves with exploring the consonance between
Benjamins criticism and the literary objects of that criticism regularly denounce
anyone who addresses problematic aspects of Benjamins approach. An extraordinary example is Franoise Meltzers excoriation of Hannah Arendt. I take
Arendts characteristically dispassionate, sincere, and precise summary of Benjamins imperfect biographical and intellectual struggle with and against humanly
induced dark times as an unexhausted model for genuine critique. For example,
Arendts observation that the only world view that ever had a decisive influence
on Benjamin was Goethes conviction of the factual existence of an Urphnomen provides great purchase on Benjamins construal of Baudelaire as a minor
tragic hero in an era without access to such transcendence (12).4 Meltzer, for her
part, denounces Arendt for suggesting that Benjamin was (in Meltzers breathless paraphrase) politically nave and at times unreliable and eccentric and
inconsistent (if brilliant) (161, 151). In her view, Benjamin simply cannot be subjected to the kind of skepticism to which she subjects Arendt: she insults Arendts
critique as bizarre, irritat[ed], shrill, and misogynist, but never meets the
basic obligation of offering evidence that Arendt is wrong (142, 143, 144, 151).
Benjamins profundity is for Meltzer axiomatic; he offers not a text to be read,
but a life-work to be decoded.
Meltzer is also critical of Fredric Jamesons thoughtfully ambivalent take on
Benjamin, citing Jennings for support (151). Such critiques of Jameson are usually
predicated upon an entrenched polemic against Adornos objections to Benjamins cultural analyses. Indeed, defenders of Benjamin are rarely more exercised
than when evaluating Benjamins relations with Adorno and the other members
of the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt. The Institutes editorial hand is
typically taken as a desecration of Benjamins purer vision, and the epistolary
intellectual exchange between Adorno and Benjamin is regularly reduced to the
level of a good soap opera or a bad tragic drama. Jennings is, again, exemplary.
Rather than engaging with the substance or possible validity of Adornos critique
of Benjamin, Jennings instead casts Adorno as Eve Harrington to Benjamins
Margo Channing: By the late 1930s, however, Adornos own intellectual accomplishments led to a change in tone and a perhaps necessary denial of Benjamins
4
Arendts insight helps explain why Benjamins translation Der Schwan (part of his famous
1923 task of translating Baudelaires Parisian Scenes) incorrectly renders Baudelaires formal
opening invocation (Andromaque, je pense vous!) as the intimate Ich denke dein, Andromache! (Gesammelte Schriften 4.1: 17, my emphases). Benjamin is likely paying homage to Goethes
lyric Nhe des Geliebten.
Comparative Literature
Comparative Literature
becomes entangled with her defense of the evanescence, if not the ineffability, of
Benjamins life (214). Like the vast majority of those who censure Adorno, Butler
proceeds here on the basis of little more than decontextualized readings of a
small, popular selection of his correspondence with Benjamin. In fact, Butlers
approbation of Benjamins method as one in which the concept appears to
become articulated only through its disarticulation as a figure is based not on a
reading of his criticism but on his own self-appraisal in these letters (21314).
Such uncritical and imprecise deployments of Benjamin have become routine in contemporary literary-critical discourse. Elissa Marders Flat Death:
Snapshots of History will serve as a final example. At one point, addressing Benjamins mistaken reference to the titular character of To a Woman Passerby as
a widow, Marder concedes that there is nothing in the poem to indicate that
the mourning woman is a widow (75). Although this imposition should be troubling, Marder insists nonetheless that Benjamins fabrication leads us to see
how the poem presents a vision of modernity that is permeated by the decay of
history (76). This is not in any way a reading of the Baudelaire sonnet, but
merely a recapitulation of Benjamins theory of history and his longstanding
account of modernity. That is, Benjamins explicit misreading is rationalized
because it validates Benjamins theory, with all of this based upon the faith that
Benjamin got Baudelaire right. The entire Baudelaire section of Marders book
is vexed by this kind of circularity. For example, in disagreeing with Hans Robert
Jausss objection that, when discussing Baudelaires theory of modern art, Benjamin ... turns the functional relationship of modernity and antiquity back into an
opposition of content (Reflections 179; see, also, Tradition 385), Marder
declines entering into the specifics of Jausss rigorous exposition, in order to
stress the fact that Benjamins argument is anything but self-evident (71). That is,
Jausss critique of Benjamins theory must be wrong because it fails to validate the
complexity of Benjamins theory. History especially the historicity of Baudelaires literary text does not perturb the closed circuitry of Marders criticism
machine.
As a result, we now inhabit a situation in which cultural critics regularly take
Benjamin to be beyond critical reproach. A return to Benjamins and Baudelaires
actual words is long overdue, as is a serious engagement with sympathetic critiques
of Benjamin. Adorno, Arendt, Jauss, and Jameson represent critics who honor the
resoluteness with which Benjamin refuses his cultures phantasmagorias, but who
do not allow themselves to ignore the chimeras he offers in their place. Adorno is
uncompromising on this point: Between myth and reconciliation, the poles of his
philosophy, the subject evaporates. Before his Medusan glance, man turns into
the stage on which an objective process unfolds. For this reason Benjamins philosophy is no less a source of terror than a promise of happiness (Portrait 235).
In this recognition of Benjamins catastrophism, of his disregard for the human
subject, the human condition, and human cultural objects, Adorno anticipates
the shudder of a reader no less scrupulous than Jacques Derrida. At the far end
of a careful deconstruction of Benjamins notion of divine violence, a terrified
Derrida finds himself forced to condemn Benjamins thought as too messianicomarxist or archeo-eschatological for me, as resembl[ing] too closely ... the very
thing against which one must act and think, do and speak (1045).
Comparative Literature
Comparative Literature
the decrepitude with which Benjamins philosophy had always arraigned the modern world, whereas Baudelaires critical insights are denigrated for attempting to
transmogrify that sense of decrepitude into something productive.
On Some Motifs in Baudelaire retains the basic argument of the first essay
with two substantive alterations. First, it states early and axiomatically what was
only implied late in the first essay: shock-ridden modern experience (now categorized as Erlebnis) is a degraded fall from premodern experience (categorized as
Erfahrung). Second, Benjamin aligns two of Baudelaires key concepts spleen
and ideal w ith these two historical conditions, respectively. In support of his
axiom, Benjamin marshals contemporaneous representations (in Bergson, Proust,
and Freud) of memory and the discontinuous structure of consciousness. But
Benjamin also criticizes all three for failing to recognize that what they consider
universal features of human consciousness are actually cognitive limitations specific to a modern world in which man is increasingly unable to assimilate the
data of the world around him by way of experience (158). A search for something
irretrievably lost for a once-possible experience ... in crisis-proof form
becomes for Benjamin the true secret architecture of The Flowers of Evil and the
subterranean key to modern literature and philosophy (181, 182). Correspondingly, the experience of modernitys fallen temporality, the collapse of experience, is made to be the secret to Baudelaires spleen (184).
A systematic survey of Benjamins intellectual development would reveal his
uninterrupted belief in the inexorability of historical decline, a belief displayed
most prominently in Origin of the German Mourning Play. Baudelaire merely provides a ready nineteenth-century hook on which to extend a storyline that begins
in the seventeenth century and is now grounded in an overly literal conception of
industrializations shocks and an overly paranoid conception of urbanizations
crowds. It is undeniable that modern life is bound to appear barren, and its aesthetic glorification a desperate rationalization, if one sustains a metaphysical fantasy of a once and future socially and linguistically unmediated Erfahrung.6 This is
something Baudelaire already knew. In The Painter of Modern Life, he famously
notes almost as if in anticipation of Benjamin that it is much easier to decide
outright that everything about the garb of an age is absolutely ugly than to devote
oneself to the task of distilling from it the mysterious element of beauty that it may
contain (13).7 But Benjamins unwillingness to engage Baudelaires (or Bergsons
or Prousts or Freuds) counter-theories, or indeed to recognize any imaginative
artifice in The Flowers of Evil, renders the textual specificity of Baudelaires oeuvre
essentially inconsequential to Benjamins theoretical claims.
Almost all of the roughly forty-six poems and three prose poems cited across
the two essays are treated as self-evident support for the historical or theoretical
claim at hand. Benjamin is not in the business of close reading. Only three
6
On this point Jameson cogently notes: Benjamins work seems to me to be marked by a painful
straining toward a psychic wholeness or unity of experience which the historical situation threatens
to shatter at every turn (Marxism 61).
7
Photographer Diane Arbus movingly echoes Baudelaires quintessentially modern outlook when
she proposes to photograph the considerable ceremonies of our present because we tend while living here and now to perceive only what is random and barren and formless about it, while we regret
that the present is not like the past and despair of its ever becoming the future, its innumerable
inscrutable habits lie in wait for their meaning.
Comparative Literature
poems, The Ragpickers Wine, The Swan, and To a Woman Passerby (the
former two cited only in the first essay) are analyzed in a non-cursory manner. A
few are not quoted at all, a few are not even identified by title, and almost all are
considered as interchangeably sincere confessions directly attributable to the
historical poet. A typical engagement treats a given poem as a realist account of
mid-century Parisian life, according it a sociological and biographical literality
parried from the outset by the histrionic title Baudelaire gave the collection.8 In
this reductively historicist vein, Benjamin proffers, for example, that the lyric
Abel and Cain is actually about the proletariat, that Satan in The Litanies of
Satan is actually Louis Auguste Blanqui, that The Denial of Saint Peter actually mourns the culpably precipitous dream of a dictatorship of the proletariat
in June 1848, and that the acquiescence to a bruised heart in The Love of Lies
actually marks, quite astonishingly, the petty bourgeoisies declining purchasing
power (Paris 22, 23, 101, 59).
Much of this is arguable and appealing, offering surprisingly canny juxtapositions of text and context in a kind of cultural studies avant la lettre. Indeed, Benjamins charisma and endurance are in large part accounted for by his partial consonance with a modern critical practice that likewise gives significant weight to
historical context, traverses freely the demarcations of cultural canons and genealogies, borrows theoretical support idiosyncratically from across the humanities,
interrogates cultural objects more for their fissures than seams, and is animated
by a commitment to worldly justice. By posing the mourning plays and, later, Parisian consumer culture and Baudelaires writings as distinctive social-historical
phenomena, Benjamin helps inaugurate a criticism that exits the barren terrain
of arbitrary aesthetic valuations and instead appreciates the relation between economic, social, intellectual, and aesthetic production. Yet, given the widespread
appreciation for the questions Benjamin poses, it is surprising how incompletely
acknowledged, or even understood, the limitations of his answers are and particularly his inability to see Baudelaires poetry as something more than Les Fleurs
des Hochkapitalismus or a private journal of impressions on society and politics.
Svend Erik Larsen has argued that Benjamins essentially Platonic conception of representation leads him to treat literary texts, despite his keen eye for
surprising parallels or associative links, as mere epiphenomena: for Benjamin
literature comes to assume the role of an illustrative text, or of a cultural-historical source for an analytical thesis on the fragmented character of the city ... .
Thus, we can pass back and forth between the literary structure and the world of
actual experience without noticing any decisive boundary (149, 13637). This
conception of literature has two major implications. First, literatures textual
specificity is erased because the transformation from individual work into a
prototypical social object is grasped without consideration of all the textual
8
This problematic historicism is also evident in Benjamins proclivity for historical hyperbole,
particularly in the Arcades expos: the first establishments to; the first gas lighting; For the
first time in the history of architecture; the first prefabricated iron component; the first appearance of the panoramas; For the last time, the worker appears; for the first time, the lens was
deemed; for the first time a special display: the first of which takes place; the first physiognomist of the domestic interior (Arcades 313). Such hyperbole is particularly vulnerable to historical error and empirical correction. So, for example, to the claim that iron was the first artificial
building material, Adorno deftly rejoins, what about bricks! (Complete Correspondence 109).
Comparative Literature
details that distinguish the work both as literature, as an individual work, and as
a commodity, and which gives the various literary forms (genres, imagery, motif,
and so forth) a relatively independent historicity (139). Second, works or literary forms that take as their theme anything other than the gestural instant on
which Benjamin focuses, or that dont directly treat the city at all, although this
hardly prevents them from appearing and circulating in the urban culture
these works are marginalized in Benjamins oeuvre (140).
For example, Evening Twilight, the most cited poem in both versions of the
essay (four and three times, respectively), is adduced by Benjamin to prove the
incontrovertible: that Baudelaire was aware of the masses, registered the practice of prostitution, and expressed ambivalence about crowds (Paris 43, 57;
Motifs 172). Yet, he surprisingly neglects the fact that the practice of prostitution is registered as a personification (La Prostitution), a figure whose undertakings are elaborated via a jarring sequence of similes.9 Initially, the nightly commencement of Prostitutions trade is compared to an ant armys egress from its hill
(Comme une fourmilire). The army is then humanly re-figured as Prostitutions efforts are compared to an enemy combatant preparing a surprise attack
(Ainsi que lennemi). Finally, Prostitution is analogized to a worm that steals
Mans food (Comme un ver). An accounting for these three similes doesnt begin
to exhaust the figurative grammar of the seven lines devoted to La Prostitution.
Furthermore, Benjamin also leaves unnoted the fact that Prostitutions nightly
advent is figured as an illumination facilitated, seemingly, by gaslight ( travers les
lueurs); that its journey, far from corresponding to the street map, clears away new
occult paths (elle se fraye un occulte chemin); that all these movements and
transformations, far from effecting urban degradation, transpire at the heart of a
city that is already a mire (au sein de la cit de fange) (uvres compltes 1: 9495).
Instead, Benjamin simply comments that only the mass of inhabitants permits
prostitution to spread over large parts of the city. And only the mass makes it possible for the sexual object to become intoxicated with the hundred stimuli which it
produces (Paris 57). How this relates to Baudelaires lyric is never explained.
Compare this commentary with Jonathan Cullers, which does home in on the
occurrence of allegory. For Benjamin (when considering The Swan, for example) simply noting Baudelaires resort to allegory is prima facie evidence for his
thesis, the specific content being immaterial. Cullers attunement to rhetoric leads
him to consider allegorys possible functions less narrowly. He notes how the ideology of a culture may be most powerfully instantiated in its production of allegorical agents, and thus takes the unlikely personification the movement of
eerie abstraction o
f La Prostitution as a Baudelairean provocation, not merely
a Baudelairean report (Feminism 188). Culler seeks to understand the force of
this provocation, which is also present in other poems in L
es Fleurs du mal, not in
terms of a meta-history or meta-theory, but rather within the historically specific
discursive processes in which these poems, with their unusual thematic nexus of
eroticism, virginity, and barrenness, participate (192). In Evening Twilight,
9
But then, as Hansen makes clear, in Benjamins usage allegory is a trivial catch-all for the
language of fallen man: allegorys failure actively underscores the gulf between matter and transcendence by foregrounding the conflict between artistic form and transcendent or theological
intention (671).
Comparative Literature
Culler argues, Baudelaire counters both the religion of the virginal mother and
the reglementarian practices devoted to making the prostitute a public health
functionary, but in keeping the two most implausible qualities of the central figures in these discourses the virginity of the mother and the barrenness of the
prostitute he retains a transformative reference to them, redirecting them
toward a different result (193). For my purposes, what is most important about
this reading is that it grants Baudelaire an aesthetic competence that Benjamin
denies the poet at every turn: Culler emphasizes that in Baudelaires transformative use of allegory lies a good part of his modernity (191) and that, unlike
Benjamin, he does not prejudge this modernity pejoratively.
When context does enter the picture for Benjamin, it is generally in the way
that Adorno diagnoses: Benjamin gives conspicuous individual features from
the realm of the superstructure a materialist turn by relating them immediately, and perhaps even causally, to certain corresponding features of the substructure (Complete Correspondence 283). For example, Benjamins discussion of
The Ragpickers Wine proceeds via a brief social history of the mid-century,
since at that time motifs which appear in this poem were being publicly discussed (Paris 17). Benjamin covers the tax on wine, using as sources Karl
Marxs The Class Struggle in France 18481850, a police section head, and another
contemporary observer (1718). He appends eight lines of the poem to this
lesson with the perfunctory transition, Thus in The Ragpickers Wine (my
emphasis). The text of these eight lines is left unexamined. Instead, he provides
further citations regarding the sociology of the ragpicker (who fascinated his
epoch), bolstered in turn by additional contemporary accounts, including one
that gives the budget of a Paris ragpicker and his family for the period between
1849 and 1850, presumably the time when Baudelaires poem was written (1920).
This presumably fails to distinguish the historical stereotype from the literary
figure, making a cultures discursive agon an unwarranted unity and Baudelaires idiosyncratic deployment of discursive orthodoxies a mere symptomology.10 Marx, et al., explain a Baudelaire who exemplifies their observations in
turn. Again, compare this with the analysis of Baudelaire scholars who carefully
chart political and cultural contexts for The Ragpickers Wine, especially given
its multiple drafts, which were composed during the two decades spanning the
rise and fall of the Second Republic (see Pichois in Baudelaires OC 1: 1047).
Building on work by W.T. Bandy and Luc Badesco, Richard D.E. Burton provides
a detailed overview of contexts for Baudelaires revisions.11 In general terms,
10
Jennings is unperturbed: Benjamin resolutely refuses to attribute a single productive social or
political insight to Baudelaire himself; the achievement of Benjamins essays is their ability to
expose Les Fleurs du mal as uniquely, scathingly, terrifyingly symptomatic of Baudelaires era a nd
ours (Introduction 2).
11
Bandy distinguishes Baudelaires ragpicker from the protagonist of a popular 1847 play, The Ragpicker of Paris, noting that despite numerous descriptive similarities, dans le Vin des Chiffonniers, ce
nest pas le dcor qui importe, cest la vision hallucinatoire du vieillard, cest lantithse entre la
misre de son tat et la noblesse de ses rves (583; in The Ragpickers Wine, it is not the setting that
matters, but rather the hallucinations of the old man, the antithesis between the misery of his condition and the nobility of his dreams). Badesco draws attention to the imaginative transformations that
Baudelaires ragpicker undergoes in successive drafts, suggesting that the ralisme de Baudelaire, si
ralisme il y a, a ce souci dlevation, de transcendance et de mystre (83; realism of Baudelaire, if
realism it be, has this concern for elevation, for transcendence and for mystery). See also Avni.
Comparative Literature
Burton argues that readers alert to the political codes and contexts of midnineteenth-century France will not fail to notice how almost all the changes
Baudelaire made ... make of this definitive version of Le Vin des chiffonniers
one of the richest, most complex and most ambiguous political poems in Baudelaires entire work (Baudelaire and the Second Empire 242). What emerges in Burtons reading is a poem that deploys the convoluted representational history of
the ragpicker (the socialists mascot, the bourgeoiss bogeyman, the Marxists
scapegoat) to offer a cogent commentary on the failure of the Second Republic:
Baudelaires point seems to be that the (cynical) authoritarianism of Bonapart
ism is already contained in nuce in the (idealistic and Utopian) authoritarianism
of republican-socialist attempts to legislate for instant human happiness and to
shape human beings in accordance with some pre-existing ideological blueprint
(257). Building on Burton, Ross Chambers recognizes under the poems historically specific terms a compelling philosophy of history:
The vacillations and torment of those who, in reality, undergo the effects of history t hey are tourments par lge (ge in the sense, not only of old age, but also of the era, the epoch) like a lamp
tormented by the wind are contrasted with the illusory benefits associated with an active making of
(narrative) history. But these very illusions are simultaneously presented as compensatory indulgences or necessary self-deceptions on the part of those whose actual fate it is to be, not the producers
of history, but its ragpickers, those who stagger along, buffeted by events and picking up the dbris
that history throws up like a vomissement but attempting also to recycle the bits and pieces into a
form that might make sense of their experience. (Recycling 18990)
Comparative Literature
There remains the common retort that Benjamin was not trying to offer close
literary readings but rather something else: a theory, a philosophy, a tool for the
revolution. For example, after acknowledging in a footnote t hat Benjamin
actually got Baudelaire wrong, Irving Wohlfarth offers a typical version of this
defense: Benjamin does not mention certain obvious ironies in [The Ragpickers Wine] which would surely complicate his reading of it if he were not proposing to use the poem rather than interpret it (149). It would behoove those who
have in turn found such great use in Benjamin to worry over a tool so carelessly
built. In all he says on the poet, Benjamin rightly highlights Baudelaires prodigious aesthetic labor in making sense of a modern world in the absence of any
visible or reassuring metahistory and metaphysics. But for him to characterize
Baudelaires claims for that labor, manifested, among other ways, by a commitment to form and technique, as less a great achievement of the will than an
indication of a lack of conviction, insight, and steadiness is, to say the very least,
to misunderstand Baudelaires accomplishment (Paris 94).13 Here is Burtons
rather more considered and generous assessment:
In attempting to explain these shifts and switches of meaning, it will not greatly avail us to fall back
on the proverbial waywardness of Baudelaires convictions, that alleged love of contradiction for
contradictions sake that has so often functioned as an all-purpose stand-by solution to any intractable problem arising from the poets work. Baudelaires mind proceeds by contradiction but wayward or whimsical it is not, and if it often seems capable of espousing antithetical positions virtually
simultaneously or of oscillating perpetually between affirmation and negation, it is not, as some
would have it, through sheer capricious perversity but as part of a tortuous life-long quest for synthesis and totality. (260)14
Comparative Literature
antique cultural achievement, The Swan correctly shows that, in fact, decrepitude constitutes the closest connection between modernism and antiquity. This
claim for the poems orientation is grounded entirely in this paraphrase: The
stature of Paris is fragile; it is surrounded by symbols of fragility living creatures (the negress and the swan) and historical figures (Andromache ...). Their
common feature is sadness about what was and lack of hope for what is to come
(Paris 82). However, while sadness undoubtedly figures prominently in the
poem, fragility, decrepitude, and hopelessness do not, even if they are central to
Benjamins theory of history. A comparison of the ninth aphorism in On the
Concept of History and The Swan makes this unmistakable.
Paul Klees watercolor Angelus Novus is the inspiration for Benjamins aphorist,
who describes in detail the expression and bearing of Klees angel, but then interposes the quasi-apodictic claim that the angel of history mu so aussehen (Gesammelte Schriften 1.2: 69798; must look like this). His next claim that the angel
hat das Antlitz der Vergangenheit zugewendet (has his face turned towards the
past) seems intended equally for Benjamins imagined angel and Klees; however, in the watercolor the angel seems to be looking off to the viewers right. For a
reader invested in Benjamins metaphysics, the misreading of the Klee painting
would be inconsequential to the aphorisms truth-content, which is not susceptible
(as is always true of metaphysics) to direct disconfirmation. Because Benjamin
presumably is not interpreting Klee, but using him, I will limit myself to elucidating the logical structure and aporias of Benjamins historical vision in order to
contrast it with Baudelaires. Klees distracted angel, then, is merely an occasion
for Benjamin to send his own imagined angel aloft into a metaphysical space.
Unlike us, with our earthly perspective of what vor uns erscheint (before us
appears), the angel is not limited in what da sieht er (he sees there) of humanity
(Benjamins emphases throughout).
In an anomaly characteristic of metaphysical accounts, the aphorist from the
human community is at this point imbued with the impossible power to focalize
his report from the supra-human angelic perspective. This contradiction persists
until the final sentence. For the magical angel, the spatial elevation and expansion
is accompanied by an access to an extended temporality, but one quasi-apodictically
limited to past time a nother imposition, here on the entirely formless, unmarked
space in which Klees angel floats. Against the fixed present of humans below, who
process historical time sequentially and cumulatively as eine Kette von Begebenheiten (a chain of events), the aphorists angel is accorded a comprehensive view
from Paradise to the present, seeing events as part of eine einzige Katastrophe
(one big catastrophe) whose temporal and spatial source is ein Sturm that
weht vom Paradiese her (a storm that blows from Paradise).
Thus, despite the angels redemptive wish to das Zerschlagene zusammenfgen (reassemble the smashed), the storm from Paradise sich in seinen Flgeln
verfangen hat und so stark ist, da der Engel sie nicht mehr schlieen kann (has
caught in his wings and is so strong that the angel can no longer close them).
Once these metaphysical and metahistorical coordinates are established, the narrative-semantic content follows readily: the loss of Paradise precludes human
endeavor, despite any good intentions, from being anything but a process that
unablssig Trmmer auf Trmmer huft (relentlessly piles rubble atop rubble),
Comparative Literature
Comparative Literature
Comparative Literature
Comparative Literature
Comparative Literature
Conclusion
Benjamin writes in a note that es hat wenig Wert, die Position eines Baudelaire in das Netz der vorgeschobensten im Befreiungskampf der Menschheit einbeziehen zu wollen (Gesammelte Schriften 1.3:1161; it has little worth to want to
include the position of a Baudelaire in the network of the most advanced in the
liberation struggle of mankind). My aim in this essay has been to expose the
unfounded severity of such a judgment, as well as highlight the costs of automatically endorsing it. Both Adorno and Derrida have alerted us to the danger
of taking Benjamins messianism as something more hospitable to human interests than its eschatological rush to foreclose the realm of human endeavor warrants. Martin Jay echoes their warnings:
Benjamin may have wanted to salvage the redemptive project by secularizing it, but how successful
he really was remains very much in dispute. Benjamins critique of the impoverishment of experience ... has been frequently admired, and his search for a way beyond the dualism of subject and
object has often struck a respondent chord. But the ultimately theological premises of his alternative have rarely been scrutinized with any rigor ... . Frankly dogmatic and based on a doctrinal
belief in the Absolute, which could somehow manifest itself in mundane experience, Benjamins
maximalist definition of genuine experience could only be a utopian counter-factual to virtually
everything that is normally understood by the term. (34142)
Comparative Literature
Comparative Literature
. The Writing of Melancholy: Modes of Opposition in Early French Modernism. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1993. Print.
Clark, T.J. Should Benjamin Have Read Marx? Boundary 2 30.1 (2003): 3149. Print.
Culler, Jonathan. Apostrophe. Diacritics 7.4 (1977): 5969. Print.
. Feminism in Time: A Response. MLQ 65.1 (2004): 17794. Print.
De Man, Paul. Anthropomorphism and Trope in the Lyric. The Rhetoric of Romanticism. New York:
Columbia UP, 1984. 23962. Print.
. Conclusions: Walter Benjamins The Task of the Translator. The Resistance to Theory. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1986. 73105. Print.
Derrida, Jacques. Force of Law: The Mystical Foundation of Authority. Trans. Mary Quaintance.
Cardozo Law Review 11 (1990): 9211045. Print.
Elkins, Katherine. Stalled Flight: Horatian Remains in Baudelaires Le Cygne. Comparative Literature Studies 19.1 (1982): 117. Print.
Galignanis New Paris Guide. Paris: A. and W. Galignani and Co., 1855. Google Books. Web. 5 June
2009.
Gillespie, Gerald, ed. German Theater before 1750. New York: Continuum, 1992. The German Library
8. Print.
Greenberg, Udi E. The Politics of the Walter Benjamin Industry. Theory, Culture & Society 25.3
(2008): 5370. Print.
Grossman, Jeffrey. The Reception of Walter Benjamin in the Anglo-American Literary Institution. The German Quarterly 65.3/4 (1992): 41428. Print.
Gryphius, Andreas. The Beloved Hedgerose (Die geliebte Dornrose). Trans. J.T. Krumpelmann.
Poet Lore 39.4 (1928): 54472. ProQuest. Web. 5 Aug. 2009.
Hansen, Jim. Formalism and Its Malcontents: Benjamin and de Man on the Function of Allegory.
New Literary History 35.4 (2004): 66383. Print.
Haussmann, Georges Eugne. Mmoires du Baron Haussmann. Vol. 3. Paris: Victor-Havard, 1893.
Google Books. Web. 7 June 2009.
James, Henry. Charles Baudelaire. The Nation 22 (1876): 27981. EBSCOhost. Web. 14 Sept. 2011.
Jameson, Fredric. Marxism and Form. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1971. Print.
Jauss, Hans Robert. Recollections on the Chapter Modernity in Benjamins Baudelaire Fragments. Trans. Jim Gussen. On Walter Benjamin: Critical Essays and Reflections. Ed. Gary Smith.
Cambridge: MIT P, 1988. 17684. Print.
. Tradition, Innovation, and Aesthetic Experience. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism
46.3 (1988): 37588. Print.
Jay, Martin. Songs of Experience: Modern American and European Variations on a Universal Theme. Berkeley and Los Angeles: U of California P, 2005. Print.
Jennings, Michael W. Dialectical Images: Walter Benjamins Theory of Literary Criticism. Ithaca: Cornell
UP, 1987. Print.
. Introduction. The Writer of Modern Life: Essays on Charles Baudelaire. By Walter Benjamin.
Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2006. 125. Print.
. On the Banks of a New Lethe: Commodication and Experience in Benjamins Baudelaire
Book. Boundary 2 30.1 (2003): 89104. Print.
Johnson, Barbara. Passage Work. Mother Tongues: Sexuality, Trials, Motherhood, Translation. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2003. 94119. Print.
Kaufman, Robert. Lyric Commodity Critique, Benjamin Adorno Marx, Baudelaire Baudelaire
Baudelaire. PMLA 123.1 (2008): 20715. Print.
Klein, Richard. Baudelaire and Revolution: Some Notes. Yale French Studies 39 (1967): 8597. Print.
Larsen, Svend Erik. Benjamin: A Literary Critic? New Literary History 29.1 (1998): 13551. Print.
Marder, Elissa. Flat Death: Snapshots of History. Dead Time: Temporal Disorders in the Wake of Modernity (Baudelaire and Flaubert). Stanford: Stanford UP, 2001. 6887. Print.
Meltzer, Franoise. Acedia and Melancholia. Walter Benjamin and the Demands of History. Ed.
Michael P. Steinberg. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1996. 14163. Print.
Comparative Literature
Nelson, Lowry, Jr. Baudelaire and Virgil: A Reading of Le Cygne. Comparative Literature 13.4
(1961): 33245. Print.
Peyre, Henri, ed. Introduction. Baudelaire: A Collection of Critical Essays. Englewood Cliffs: PrenticeHall, Inc., 1962. Print.
Schlossman, Beryl. Benjamins ber Einige Motive bei Baudelaire : The Secret Architecture of Correspondances. MLN 107.3 (1992): 54879. Print.
Steiner, George. Introduction. The Origin of the German Tragic Drama. By Walter Benjamin. Trans.
John Osborne. London: NLB, 1977. Print.
Stevens, Anne H., and Jay Williams. The Footnote, in Theory. Critical Inquiry 32.2 (2006): 20825.
Print.
Weber, Samuel. Genealogy of Modernity: History, Myth and Allegory in Benjamins Origin of the
German Mourning Play. MLN 106.3 (1991): 465500. Print.
. Taking Exception to Decision: Walter Benjamin and Carl Schmitt. Diacritics 22.3/4
(1992): 518. Print.
Wohlfarth, Irving. Et Cetera? The Historian as Chiffonnier. New German Critique 39 (1986): 14268.
Print.