Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Letter To My Father

    Uploaded by

    api-233376764
    26 views56 pages

    Original Title

    letter-to-my-father

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    26 views56 pages

    Letter To My Father

    Uploaded by

    api-233376764

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 56
    Dearest Father Franz Kafka “Translated by Hannah and Richard Stokes 8 Engsh Tralaton © Hea and Richard Sth, 2908 [Nactand eduction © Hasek nd Riad Stoke, 2008 ootcorerimape Csi Alle marin hi le resin wih prminon prone be "oes dai, Eey cli er em ce ron edn pte ald be happy rex th ern uses iting. gh rv No ut of hi eon may be read, mre i ot ‘Seated ns tele or werd Erm ya me ‘ween pina oe pub Tr ld abet tthe enon thot ha wtb ool ied ot oer ed without he eprat Contents Introduction Dearest Father ‘Bxracs fom Kat's Davies Extracts from Katha’ Leters [Note on he Teste Noter Introduction ce much of Kafka’s work, Brief an den Vater (Dearest Father) provides interesting insight into the author's attitudes to law and order. Kafka often described his relationship with hie father, Hermann Kafka, as « "Prose ral"), and legal terms such as “Ureell” (judgment” or sentence") and “Sch” (“guilt”) featare repeatedly in the leer. When he sentitto his mistrest, Milena Jesenshé, Kafka himself wrote: “Und verte beim Les lle advokatorschen Kriffees ist cin Advohatenbrief** ("As you read it ry to understand all the lawyery tricks, afterall iis lawyer's leer”). Kafka was interested in systems of social contrl, and in the Brief he criticizes hi father as ruler and judge ofthe family. Kafka finds fault with the inconsistency of Hermann’ system: “Da imustet} gar ichs Ronsequent sein nd doch nich axftorest Recht zu haben” (*You did not even have to beat all con- sistent, and could sill never be wrong”) Inso doing he usurps the judicial role and gains intellectual supremacy over his father, Ifhis argument appears aggressive, however, we are reminded by its written medium that Kafla was too timid to address his father fae to face — in direct confrontation, Hermann would interrupt and throw him off course. Even in writing, Kafka confesses not entirely to have been able to express his argument, which ia inconsistent asthe system it antacks, He admits (whether or notin earnest to deliberately angering his father and at times defends Hermann: “Du wires so auf ich, wie Da wirken musest* Your effect fon me was the effect you could not help having"). Kafka's tone changes as often as hs standpoint: a sober description of the sons banishment to a distant world of subservience is directly preceded by « comically grotesque depiction of the father digging in his eacs witha toothpick: and sending seraps of food Aying. These escilations of argument and tone, combined with a highly idiosyncratic approach to punctuation (discussed below), undermine any assertion that the leter is an “Advokatebrief. It lacks the requisite persuasion and reasonableness ‘And so the letter presents systems of law and order in a chaotic way. Thomas Anz appears to notice this Fasion of conder and chaos when he distinguishes berween the two thematic level ofthe leer. ts surface structures controlled, "Themes are dealt with one by one and include “upbringing, business, Judaism (Kafc'd] existence as a weiter, occupation, senualty and marsiage”* In the former three of these sections, Kafka criticizes the examples that his father set: hypocttically subjecting others to rules that he himself never followed; treating his employees appllingly and neglecting the religious traditions that were important to his son." In the later four sections, Kafka explores his own selfloathing, which stems from his inability to equal his father ither by succeeding financially or by founding his own family. Try as he might to impose structure on his thoughts, however, the does not fully confront, analyse or communicate certain underlying issues identified by Anz Canxiety and guilt accusations and condemnations, freedom and power, art istry and profession, seauality")* These unresolved issues dominate much of Kafka’s literary output and day-to-day correspondence. They bleed into each of the letters seven proposed thematic sections, subtly undermining the author's superficial assertion of structure and rationality. Ac first glance the letter may appear to document Kaf's ‘exploration of his own insecurities, and his finding their igns in his relationship with his domineering father. As already mentioned, however, the conclusionshe drawsare not entirely reliable. He wrote the Brief in November 1919 ata sanatorium in Schelesen, while recovering from tuberculosis, which had been diagnosed the previous year. At titty, Ihe was just four years away from death. Kaflat illness, coupled with the recent breakdown of his relationship with Julie Wonryzek (his second significant lover), may well have agitated his mind and increased his self-confessed tendency co exaggerate It is unclear whether the leer was ever truly intended forthe eyes of Hermann Kafka, After writing it by hand, Kafla made a second typed copy (minus the lst few pages. He later annotated icin places, with the intention of having it proofread by Milena. Kafka asked his mother to forward ‘one copy to his father ~ bu she could not bring herself to Aeliver it and this may have been exactly what the son had hoped for, The Brif was part of the bundle of fragments and esters that Kafka entrusted to Max Brod on his death. “The instruction was to burn everything of course, the fiend famously published ical, and the whole leter ist appeared in 1953, ‘Kafka’s insecurities and motives for writing the leer seem very real. But the work's thematic styization, its duplication and proofreading, and its filure to reach its addressee are ot reminiscent of usual letter-writing practice, Pechaps this is why Brod published the letter with a collection of ictional short stories” and not with Kafka’s autobiographical mate rial. Interestingly the leer beats many similaritiesto Kafka’s carliee fictional work, Dar Ute! (1912). Thisstory describes a confrontation between is protagonist Georg Bendemannand his father, triggered when the father reads eter written by the son. The story begins with the son poised to acquire a w wife and enter adulthood, the father ady to die. The father prevents this natural handover of familial power, however, by forbidding Georg to marry ("Teh fog se dir von der Sete ecg (Tl sweep her away fram your side"), and using his last vestige of paternal authority to sentence Georg to death. Some of this occurs in the Brief an dem Vater. Kafka holds his father in part responsible for his ows failure to marry and enter true adulthood. Meanwhile, Bendemann Seniors disapproval of Georg’ fiancée ~ “wel sie die Récke so gehoben at, die widerliche Gans (because she bitched up her skirts, like this the disgusting cow") —i reminiscent of Hermann’ comment about Kafka's fiancée (Felice Bauer) in the Brief: “Sie hat wabracheinlic rgendeine aupgesuhte Bluse angezogen, wie das die Prager Jinnen verseln® (“She probably put on some sort of faney blouse, as only those Prague Jewesses know how"), Like Georg, furthermore, Franz falls o pieces in face-to-face confit with his father. And so in writing about Geore’s death, Kafka was pethaps anticipating his ‘own father’s reaction tothe real-life Brief. He admitted the autobiographical significance of Das Ui! in a private diary entry: “Georg hat so viele Bucketaben wie Fran... Bende aber hat ebenso viele Bucketaben wie Kaffa..."* (Georg bas the same numberof eters as Franz... Bendehas exactly as many lewters as Kafka”) Even ifthe leter's narrative is tue, much cof ie was fire rchearsed in fetion. The leter's ambiguous position beeween fact and fiction, order and chaos, makesita fascinating subject for translation, Hie tis worth considering two questions: How far can any piece of writing be purely factual and objective? And how far should translators sek to impose order on a text whose chaos is integral to its meaning? Firs, che question of objectivity No “fuctual" writing is without an element of fiction. Even if Kafka had intended the letter ta be a true representation of evens, its composition would have involved some inter- pretation and translation ~ the author fist forming a biased and: retrospective view of his childhood, then ordering his thoughts and emotions, and then converting them into words on paper. Much information would have been lostand created in these transformations, and what appears on the page could not be a purely factual reproduction of original events. By confessing vo indulgein further erative exaggeration, Kafka is arguably embracing the fictional clement of his writing and encouraging the reader to acknowledge his identity as a weiter (am identity with which he struggled, according to ‘Anz)* Translatorsin turn mustbe aware that, although they attempt to recapture the original text accurately, they will inevitably transform it forther. How much transformation is desirable here? This leads tothe secnd question: that of ‘orderliness. The Brief contains awkward patterns of syntax and repetition, idiosyncratic use of punctustion and numerous other irregularities, Although Kafka uses only the simplest of words, he arranges them in complex ways to creste obscure linguistic effets and produce a text that is often ambiguous Perhaps these effects are deliberate and intended to put the reader ill aeate. Or perhaps Kafka meant to express himself clearly but was prevented by his illness and emotional in- stability. Whatever their cause or purpose, the iregularities leave translators in a quandary: should they tidy up Katkas awkwardness and gloss i for the reader, or rather attempt to preserve tin translation? I is commonly held that a good translation should read smoothly and idiomatially, as ifthe text were written in English originally. A reader should not ‘expect to have to stumble through a clumsy translation, But where that clumsiness erucial tothe essence ofthe original, surely it would be insensitive to remove i? Rewriting the Brief in sefined, consistent or idiomatic English will under rine the awkwardness of Kafka’ fevered, fermented Ger- ‘man original and do an injustice to its emotional content. In this instance we must therefore break some ofthe laws of translation, in an attempt to satisfy the demands ofthe text, Hannah and Richard Stokes, 2008 Hannah Stokes read German and French at Emmanuel Col- lege, Cambridge. There she studied Kafka’ Brian den Vater under the guidance of Dr Michael Minden, to whom she is sort grateful, She went onto study law and is now a trainee solicitor Thies her frst book Richard Stokes i Visiting Profesor of Lieder at the Royal ‘Academy of Music in London. He has published 2 number of books on French, German and Spanish Song, including ‘The Book of Lieder ~the orginal texts of over 1000 songs with parallel translations, and an introduction by Ian Bostridge (aber, 2005). Dearest Father Dearest Father, Youaskedme recently why Iclaim tobeafiaid of you. did not Iknov as usual, ow to answer, partly forthe very season that Tarn afraid of you, partly because an explanation of my fear would require more deals than I could even begin to make coherent in speech. And if | now try to answer in writing it will sill be nowhere near complete, because even in writing ayy fear and its consequences raise a barrier between us and because the magnitude of material far exceeds my memory and my understanding. “To you the matter always seemed very simple, atleast in 25 far as you spoke about tin front of me and, indiscriminately, in front of many others. To you it seemed like this: you had worked hard your whole lif, sacrificed everything for your children, particularly me, a a result I ived “like a lord’, had complete fredom to study whatever I wanted, knew where my next meal was coming from and therefore had no reason to worry about anything; for this you asked no gratitude, you knowhow children show thir gratitude butatleastsomekind ” ‘of cooperation, a sign ofsympathy; instead I wouldalwayshide away from youn my room, buried inbooks, with eazy frends and eccentric ideas; we never spoke openly, never came up to yousinthe synagogue, never visited you in Pranzensbad* nor ‘otherwise had any sense of family never took aninterestinthe business or your other concerns, [saddled you with the factory and then lefryou inthe lurch, I encouraged Orla’ obstinacy and while Thave never to this day lifted a finger to help you (1 never even buy you the occasional theatre ticked), Ido allTean for perfect strangers. Ifyou summarize your judgment of me, itis clear thar you do not eceually reproach me with anything really indecent or malicious (with the exception, pethaps, of ‘my lates marriage plans), but rather with eoldnes, alienation, ingratitude. And, what is more, you reproach me as fit were ry fait, as iF might have been able to aerange everything differently with one simple change of direction, while you are notin the slightest o Blame, except pethape for having been too goad to me. This, your usual analysis agree with only insofar as sso believe you tobe enticely blameless for our estrangement. But too am equally and utterly blameless. IF could bring you toacknowledge tis, then —although a new life would not be possible for that we are both mach too old — there could yet bea sortof peace, not an end to your unrelenting reproaches, but atleast a mitigation of them, ‘Strangely enough, you seem to have some idea of what 1 ‘mean, This might have been why you recently sai to me, “I have always been fond of you if, on the outside, I have not treated you at fathers usualy treat theie children, iis just because'I cannot pretend as others can.” Now, Father, have on the whole never doubted your goodness towards me, but this statement T consider wrong. You cannot pretend, that is true, but purely for this reason to claim that other fathers pretend was either sheer indisputable bigotry, oF —and this, in my view, is more plausible ~ a veiled way of saying that something is wrong between us, and that you are partly responsible fori albeit through no faut of your own. If this is what you really meant, then we are agreed. Tam not saying, ofcourse, that I have become what I am. purely under your influence. That would be a very great exaggeration (although I do have a tendency to exaggerate). Ieis very posible tha, had I groven up entirely free of your influence, I sill could not have become a person after your own heart. { would probably still have become a weak, anxious, hesitant, restless person, neither Robert Kafka nor Karl Hermann,” yet still very different from what I am today, and we would have been able to get on very well T would have been happy to have you 25 a friend, 2 boss, an unele, a grandfather, even indeed (though rather more hesitantly) asa fatherin-law. [eis only as a father that you » ‘were too strang for me, particularly since my brothers died young and my sisters did not come along until much late, so Thad to endure the inital conflicts all alone, for which I was far too weak, ‘Compare the two of us: me, to putt very briefly, Lowy" with a certain Kafka core that is simply not driven by the Kafka will to live, prosper and conquer, but by a Liwy like force that moves more secredy, more timid, in a different direction, and which often breaks down completely. You, by contrast, «true Kafka in strength health, appetite, loudness of voiee, eloquence, sefsatisfaction, worldly superiority, taming, presence of mind, understanding of human nature, a certain generosity, of course with all the faults and weak- nesses that go with these advantages, into which you are riven by your natural disposition and sometimes your hot temper. Pethaps you are not wholly a Kafka in your general worldly outlook, in as far as Tcan compare you with Uncles Philipp, Ludwig and Heinrich That is odd, and here the picture is no clearer. However, they were al cherie, fresher, more casual, more relaxed, lessstrier than you. (In thisrespect, incidentally, Ihave inherited much from you and have taken far too grat a cave ofthat inheritance, admittedly without having the necestary couner-qualities chat you do} Yet on the other hand, you to have gone through various phases in this respec, you were peshaps cheerier before your children 0 (especially) disappointed and depressed you at home (you were quite different when visitors came), and you have pethaps become cheerier agai, now that your grandchildren and your son-in-law show you some ofthe warmth that your ‘own children, except pethaps Valli never could Tn any case, we were so different, and in our differences such a danger to each other that, had anyone wanted t0 predict how I, the slowly developing child, and you, the fally-grown man, would behave towards one another, they could have presumed that you would simply trample me ‘underfoot until nothing of me remained. Well, that did not happen, what happens in life cannot be predicted, but maybe something even woree happened. In saying this, Task you not to forget that Iin no way find you guilty. Your effect on me was the effect you could not help having, but you should stop considering it some particular perversity on my part that I succumbed to that effect. Twas an anxious child, and yer I am sure ¥ was alo disobedient, as children are, Tam sure that Mother spoilt, ‘me too, but I cannot believe that I was particularly difficult to handle, I cannot believe that you, by directing a friendly word my way, by quietly taking my hand or by giving me a kind look, could not have got everything you wanted from ‘me. And you are fundamentally a kind and tender person (oehat follows does not contradict that, afterall it refers ” only to how I saw you asa child) but not every child has the tenacity and fearlessnes to search unt he finds the kindness ‘within You, Father are only capable of treating child with the same means by which you were moulded, with vigour, noise and fis of rage, and in my eate you found these means ‘expecially appropriate because you wanted to bring me up to bea strong, courageous boy. Ofcourse, cannet accurately recall and describe your way ‘ofbringing me wpin the very early years but can form some idea fit, drawing on my more recent experience and on your treatment of Felix. In doing this 1 am increasingly aware that you were younger then, therefore fresher, wilder, more natural and carefree than you are today, and that in addition you were largely occupied with the busines, meaning you barely had time to see me once a day, so the impression you made on me would have been all che greater, and virtually impossible for me to become accustomed to, “There is only one episode from those carly years that 1 remember diceetly, pechaps you remember it too. Twas whining persistently for water one night, certainly notbecause | was thirsty, but in all probability partly to be annoying, pardy toamuse myself. After a numberof fierce threats had failed, you lifted me ovt of my bed, carried me out onto the peolatche* and left me awhile all alone, standing outside the locked door in my nightshirt. Tdo not mean to say that this a ‘was wrong of you, pechaps at that time there really was no other way of having a peaceful night, but I mention it as a characteristic example ofthe way you brought me up and the effec it had on me. This incident almost certainly made ‘me obedient fora time, but it damaged me on the inside. 1 ‘was by nature unable to reconcile the simple act (sit seemed to me) of casually asking for water with the utter horror of being carried outside, Years later it still tormented me that this giant man, my father, che ultimate authority, could enter my room at anytime and, almost unprovoked, carry me from, my bed out onto the pavlatche, and that I meant s litle to him. “That was merely the beginning of things, but this feling of powerlessness which sill regularly overcomes me (in other respects admittedly a noble and productive feeling) stems in many ways from how you treated me. What I needed was a File encouragement, litle friendliness, a litle elp to keep my future open, instead you obstructed it, admittedly with the good intention of persuading me to go down a different path, But Iwas notfitfor the path you chose. You encouraged sme, for example, whenever [saluted or matched well, but I ‘was no budding soldier, or you encouraged me when T could bring myself to eat heartily, especially when T drank beer, oF when I managed to sing songs that I did not understand, or to parrot your own favourite clichés back to you, but none 2 ‘of chad a place in my future, And even today, itis typical of you only to encourage me in something when t engages your intrest, when your own self-esteem is at stake, threatened cither by me (for example with my mariage plans) or by others through me (for example when Pepa* insults me). ‘Thea you give me encouragement, remind me of what I am worth, what sortof woman Teould marry,and condemn Pepa ‘out of hand, But apart from the face chat I am, even at my present age, already virally impervious to encouragement, have task myself what good iecould do me anyway, asitis only ever offered when Iam not its primary abject. ‘At char time, and throughout all uhat time, what I really needed was encouragement. I wae already weighed dowe by your sheer bodily presence. I remember, for example, how we often undressed together in the same cubicle. I skinny, frail, fragile, you strong, tall, thickset. Even in the cube I fle a puny wretch, and not only in front of you but in front of| the whole world, because for me you were the measure ofall things. But when we stepped out before all the people, I with my hand in yours, lite skeleton, unsteady and barefoot on the planks afraid ofthe water, unable copy your swimming strokes which you kept on demonstrating with the best of intentions bur actally to my profound shame, then T would love myselfin despair and atsuch moments all my pas failures would come back to haunt me. I felt happiest when you sometimes undrested first and I could stay in the cubicle alone and delay the shame of my publi appearance until you finally came looking for me and forced me to leave the eabicle, I was thankful to you for seeming not to sense my despair, besides, was proud of my fathers bods Incidentally, this difference between us remains much the same to this day ‘Your intellectual domination had a similar effect on me. ‘You had reached such heights, solely by your own efforts that you had unbounded confidence in your own opinions. That ‘was nowhere near so dazzling for me as 2 child a it was for ime later as a maturing young man. In your armchair you ruled the world. Your opinion was right,any other was mad, cccentrie,meshugge,” not normal Infact, your self-confidence _was so great tha you did not even have tobe atall consistent, and could still never be wrang. It was even possible for you to have no opinion whatsoever on a mater and in such cases all potential opinions on that matter had robe wrong without exception. You might tail agsinst the Czechs, for example, then the Germans, then the Jews, and not only selectively but inall respects, and by the end of t you would be the only one left standing. You took on, for me, that enigmatic quality of all eyrants whose right to rule is founded on their identity rather than on reason, Atleast, it seemed that way tome. "Nout, where Iwas concerned, you were in factastonishingly often right, notonly in conversation and this would not have 8 been surprising, for we hardly ever conversed), but alo in reality, Although even that was not especially difficult to understand, I suffered, after all, in my every thought under intense pressure from you, even (and infact expecially) where ‘my thoughts were completely diferent from yours. All hese thoughts that seemed independent of you buckled from the outst under the burden of your derogatory judgments for me to endure this and sill to achieve the complete and lasting development of any thought was virtually impossible. {am not talking here of any lofty thoughts, rather of every litte childhood undertaking. I had only to be happy about something or other, beinspited by it,come home and mention it and your response was an ironic sigh, a shake ofthe head, a finger capping the able: "I that what all the fuss is about? or “T wish T had your worries!" or “What a waste of time!” ‘or "That's nothing!” or “That won't put food on the table!” "Naturally one could not expect you to be enthusiastic about very childish tivity, since you had your own worries, Even that was not the point The point was rather that, thanks to your antagonistic nature, you disappointed the child with such determination and principle, and your antagonism. constantly intensified as it accumulated material, until it became a permanent habit, even when your opinion was for ‘once the simeas mine, and these childhood disappointments ‘were’ the end not just everyday dseppointments; but, since they concerned you, the measure of ll things they struck me to the very heart, Courage, resolution, confidence or delight inthis and that could not long survive if you opposed it, or even if I could safely assume that you would oppose is, and this could assume in practically every case ‘This applied to people as well as thoughts. Toaly had t0 take a ltde interes in someone = which, given my nature, did not happen very often —for you, without any respect for my feelings or judgment, to weigh in with insults, sander and humiliation, Victims included such innocent, childlike people as the Yiddish actor Lim.” Before you even knew him you compared him, in some dreadful way that I have already forgotten, to vermin and, as so often with people dear to me, you automatically had that proverb of the dogs and fleas” to hand. Hire I remember the actor in particular bbeeauseI made s note of what you said about him at the time: “This i how my father speaks about my frend (Whom he does not even know), simply beenuse he is my friend. I will alwaysbe able to reproach him with this whenever he accuses ime of lacking child’ love and gratitude”. I was never able to understand your complete obliviousness to the kind of _grcfand shame you could inflict on me with your words and judgments, it was 2s ifyou had no idea of your power. There can be no doubs that I, 00, often hurt you with my words, but then I was always aware oft, it pained me but I could not ” restrain myself, could not suppress the words, I would regret them even a5 I uttered them. You, on the other hand, lashed ‘out with yours without a second though, you felt sorry for ‘nobody, cther during or afterwards, people were lef utterly defenceless, Butthat was the way you brought me up. YouhaveT think, gif for bringing up children; and such an upbringing could cettainly have benefited someone like yous such a person ould have grasped the reasoning behind what you told him, would not have conceened himself with other things and would quietly have done your bidding. For me asa child, though, everything you barked at me was as good as God's las, I never forgor iit eemained for me the most important ‘means for judging the world, above all for judging you, and there you failed completely. Since a child I was with you mainly at mealtimes, your lessons were for the most part lessons on correct table manners. Whatever was brought to the tablehad tobe eaten up, the quality ofthe food was not to bbementioned — you, though often found the meal uncatable, 8 the cook) had ruined it, Because you, driven by your own predilection and sizeable appetite, called ie “sil” the ate everything fast, hot and in large mouthfuls, the child had ‘eo hucry, gloomy silence reigned atthe table, interrupted by admonitions: "First at, then speak" of "Faster, faster faster or "Look, see, finished ages ago". We were not allowed 28 to crunch bones, you were. We were not allowed to slurp vinegas, you were, The main thing was forthe bread to be cat straight; but that you did so with a Inife dripping with gravy was irrelevant, Wehad to take care not tolecany scraps fall onto the lor, in the end they lay mostly under your seat, At the table we were todo nothing except eat, but you cleaned and trimmed your Fagernails, sharpened pencils, ug in your ears with your toothpick. Please understand me correctly, Father, these would in themselves have been utterly insignificant details, they only came to depress me because they meant that you, figure of such tremendous authority for me, did not yourself abide by the commandments you imposed, Hence there were for me three worlds, one where Tied, a slave under laws that had been invented solely for me and, morcover, with which I could never fully comply (did not know why), then another world, infinitely distant from mine, in which you dwelt, busy with ruling, issuing ‘orders and being angry when they were not obeyed, and Finally third realm where everybody else lived happily, ree fom orders and obligation. I was forever in disgrace either obeyed your orders, which was a disgrace for they applied, fier all, only tome; or I was defiant, that was aso disgrace, for how dare I presuane to defy you, or my reason for failing to obey war that I lacked, for example, your strength, your pptit, your aptitude, although you expected it of me as matter ofcourse; that was infact the greatest disgrace of ll This was not how I thought as a child, but ather how I felt 1 see my situation at that time more clearly, perhaps, if 1 compare it with Felix’s* You treat him in a similar way, indeed you even employ a particularly feerfol method of upbringing against him in that, whenever at mesltimes he docs something you consider unclean, you da not content yourself as you would with me, by saying, “What a pig you are" but add “A true Hermann,” oF “Just like your father” Now, this may perhaps ~one cannot say more than perhaps” — not rally harm Felix a great ded, since for him you are no more than a grandfather, albeit an especially important one, certainly not everything as you were For me, moreover Felix sa quiet, even already to some extent manly character who may be bewildered bya thunderous voice, but ot peemaneatly affected by it, and above ll he is relatively seldom in your company, he is subject to other influences you are for him rather something ofa lovable curiosity from whom he can pick and choose whatever he wants, For me you were nothing like a eurosty,I could not pick oF choose, Thad to accept everything. And, what s mor, without being able to voice ay abjecton, for youare completely incapable ofhaving acalm discussion on any topictharyoudo notapproveof orindeed onethatyoubave ‘ot yourself raised your imperious temperament prohibits it In recent years you have blamed ths on your heart condition, in realty do not know that you were ever any different, your heart, condition isa the very least a means by which you dominate mote absolutly, as the mere thought of itis enough to stifle any contradiction, Naturally T arm not reproaching yu for this, Tam merely establishing a fact. You used to say for example: There ie simply no reasoning with hes,” she flies in your Face ut in face it was never she who atacked firs repudles tend to confuse iesues with people; the issue under discussion fis in your face and you react wit without even listening to the person; whatever is said with hindsight can only aggravate you farther, never change your mind, All you can then say is "Do what you want; as far as V'm concerned ies your choice yov're old enoughs ite not for me to give you advice” and all tha: spoken with the awful hoare undertone of anger and utter convlemnation that admittedly makes me shudder les today than in my childhood, bu only because che sense of guilt tht 0 perrasively consumed me asa child hassince been superseded in pry insight into the helplessness we shared ur inabilicy eo get on calmly had one more very natural coosequence I ost the ability to speak. I probably never would hve turned out to bea great speaker in any case, but I would atleast have grasped language to @ normal degree of fluency. However, you forbade me to speak from» very early age your threat, "Nota word in contradiction!” together with the a image of your raised hand, has haunted me ever since lean ‘remember. In your presence ~for you are, when on familar round, an excellent speaker—I stuttered and sputtered that angered you too, in the end I stopped speaking, perhaps at first in defiance, bu gradually because I really was a0 longer able to think or speak in your presence. And because you were Present throughout my upbringing, this went on to affect ‘very aspectofimy life. Inanycase, you arecuriously mistaken if you believe that I was bent on disobeying you. “Persistent contrariness" was relly never my guiding principle where yu were concerned, as you believe and reproach me for. On the contrary: fT had tried less hard to follow you, Lam sure you would have been much more satisfied with the resule. As itis, the steps you took to discipline me always hit their tage; I could never escape you; what I have now become, {have bocome (excepting my innate disposition and any ‘external influences, of course) through the combination of your upbringing and my obedience, Ifthe result embarrasses, you inspite ofthis, f you unconsciously refuse to accept that it isthe result of your upbringing, then it is precisely because your method and my substance were at such odds with one nother. When you said “Not a word in contradiction!” you ‘ant only toslence in me that opposition which you found objectionable, but your influence in this respece was much too strong for me, Twas 00 obedient, | fll completly silent, crept anxiously away from you and only dared speak when 1 as so far away that your power could no longer reach ime, at least not directly. You looked on and saw deliberate “contrariness” in everything, but in ceality it was only an inevitable consequence of your strength and my weakness “The rhetorical devices you used in bringing me up, which were extremely effective, and at least in my case never failed, inchaded: insults, threats, ion, spitefal laughter and = srangely — self-pity 1 cannot remember your ever having abused me directly or explicily. Nor was that necessary, you had so many other methods, and besides, conversation at home, oF particularly in the shop, brought the abuses you directed at others fying around my head in such abundance that I was sometimes slmost stunned by them as a young boy, and had no reason. rot t apply them to myself, as the people you abused were certainly no worse than me, and you were certainly no more lissatsGied with them than you were with me. And here I saw further evidence of your enigmatic innocence and impregnabiliry, you would abuse people without reservation ‘or miagiving yetyou criticized anyone else who wsed abusive language, and forbade i You intensified your abuse with threats, and these some- times were aimed at me I found this one particularly terri fying: “I'l gu you like a fish" ofcourse I knew that nothing 3 worse would follow (as small child, admittedly, did not know cha) but it allied with my impression of your strength that you would have been capable of it. It terzified me too When you ran around the table sereaming, trying to catch one of ts, you obviously had no intention of catching us bu still pretended, until Mother would eventually step in torescte us ‘As the child’ life had been spared only by your merey, or soit seemed, it was to be duly lived out as an undeserved present from you. The same can be said of your threats concerning the consequences of disobedience. Whenever I embarked (on something that you disapproved of and you threatened ‘me with Failure, my respect for your opinion was such that ny failure became inevitable, even if Tcould pechaps defer it fora while. lost faith in my ovn abilities. I became ereatic, doubting. The older I grew, the more I provided you with cvidence of my worthlessness, gradually you really came, in certain respects, to be right about me, Here I must be carefil otto claim that I only became like this because of you; you ‘merely intensified what was already there, but you intensified it gready, simply bocause you held so much power over me and used this power tots full extent. ‘You set particular store by the use of irony in bringing me up, it was also expecially iting given your superiority over ‘me. You usually reprimanded me ike this: “Can you do it this way instead? Isn't that abit coo much for you? Surely “ you don't have time for that” or similar And all of these ‘questions were accompanied by a spitefl laugh and spiteful face. You punished me sometimes even before I knew what baad done wrong. When you particularly wanted toantagonize me you would refer to me in the thitd person, af were not ‘even worthy of an angry addres; you would say ostensibly to Mother, ut actually to me as Isat there too, something like "We simply can’t have that kind of behaviour from our son" (This produced a counter habit in me: I never dared, or later never even thought, out of sheer habit, to address you directly while Mother was presen, It was far less dangerous for me te put questions to Mother as long as she sat beside you, s0 ‘would ask Mother: “How is Father?" thus protecting myself rom any surprises). Ofcourse, there were times when I agreed ‘with your extreme irony, notably when its target was someone ls Ell for example, with whom Thad been on bad terms for years. For meit wasan orgy of malice and Schadenfude when. you referred to her like thie at almost every meal: "Look tthe fat cow, she has to sit ten metres from the table”, and again ‘when you imitated her, in spiteful and exaggerated fashion as you sat in your chair, without the faintest hint of warmth oF humour, bu rather with bitter enmity, as if trying t show how terribly she offended your sensibilities. How often scenes like this must have occurred, and how litle they actually achieved. This I think, was bocause the extent of your anger and spite was so disproportionate othe matter in hand, we Fle caused by such 8 trivial thing as siting 2 far From the table, rather that your anger could aot actully have have been latent in you from the beginning, tiggered in this case purely by chance. Since we were convinced that would eventually be triggered anyway, we did not relly let ittrouble Us, we were also desensitized by your constant threats; litle by litle we gradually became virtually certain tha there was ‘no danger ofa real thrashing. We became surly, unobservant, disobedient children, constantly preoccupied with escape, ‘mostly internal escape. And so you suffered, and we suffered, In your opinion you were doing no wrong when you stood there with clenched teth and that gurgling laugh which had riven me my first idea of hell ata child, and sid bitty as you did recently on receiving a leer from Constantinople): “Whats rabble!” Ik seemed entirely incompatible with this atitude to your children that you should complain publicly ~ which you did very frequently. I admit chat a8 a child (and probably later too) I was insensitive enough not to understand how you ‘could ever expect to find sympathy. You were so immense in every respect, why should our sympathy or even ous help be ‘fconcern to you? Indeed you surely would have scorned i, 188 you soften scorned us Far this reason I refused to believe "hat your complaints could be genuine, and searched for some biden motive behind them. Ie was only later that I grasped how truly you suffered at the hands of your children, but while under different cieumstances your complaints could sll have prompted in me a childlike, open, wahesitating willingness to help, as things were T could never see them 8 anything other than transparent tools of teaching and humiliation, not very effective in themselves, but with the damaging side effect, to which I geew accustomed asa child, thatthe things I should have taken most seriously would be precitely those that I did not lean to take seriously enough. Fortunately there were some exceptions to this, mostly when you suffered in silence, and your love and goodness joined forces to succeed in moving me, inspite of all che obstacles, This was admittedly rare, but it was wonderful For instance whenever I aw you exhausted and nodding off ernoons, elbows on the desky in the shop on hot summer ‘or on Sundays when you came running to us breathless in the fresh summery weather; or once when Mother was seriously illand I witnessed you shaking with tars, steadying yourself ‘bythe bookeatesor the lasttime wasill and you camesilendy to me in Ot’ room, standing in the doorway and merely peering round to see me in bed, acknowledging me with a single considerate gesture of your hand. At mes like these [lay back and cried with happiness, and T am erying again now as [write these lines, You also have a particularly wonderful, very rare sort of serene satisfied, approving smile that can make a person truly hhappy. Ieannot remember any particular occasion on which you bestowed iton me asa child, butt probably happened at some sage, Ice no reason why you would have reused it to ‘me then, when I wasstillinnocent in your eyes, besides which 1 was your greatest hope. Incidentally, even such feiendly Aestures have in the long term served only to intensify my guilt and make the world even harder to understand, 1 preferred to rely on what was real and permanent. In order to assert myself alittle against you, partly also out of a sore of revenge, I soon begen to observe, collec and ‘xaggerate all the little absurdities in your behaviour, For ‘example, how you would be easily dazzled by certain people, for instance some Imperial Councillor who for the most part only gave the illusion of being superior in rank to you, and how you would go on and on about them (on the other hand icalso hurt me that you, my father, thought you needed such insignificant confirmations of your worth and bragged about them so much). Or T observed your predilection for those «rude expressions, which you bellowed at maximum volume and followed with ala Zh that suggested you thought you had said something particularly splendid, when in realty it had been only a fecble, uninspired obscenity (this was at the same time yet another humiliating manifestation of Py | 90 wgou. OF oure made many diverse observations of this kind; they made me happy, they were a rare cause for exuberance and laughter, you noticed this sometimes and grew angry, thought it was spite, disrespect, but I ean assure you, for meit was nothing more than an atempt—an ineffectual attempt ~atself-preservation, they were the sort of jokes one makes abou gods and kings, jokes that not onl arelinked toa deep respect, but indeed form an integral part oft Incidentally, you made your own attempts 0 defend ton, You yourself agsinst mo, as befited our reciprocal st ‘sed to point out how excessively well ived and how well was tally treated. Though these observations were correct donot believe that they did me any appreciable good under the cireamstances Ie is true that Mother was boundlesly good to me, but f could only sce her treatment of me in relation to yours that isto say, negatively. Mother unconsciously played the role of beter in the hunt. Whenever, in some improbable situation, the way you brought me up might have made me stand | on my own two fet by insling in me defiance, aversion | oceven hatred, Mother would offer it with gentleness and | semonaenes (nthe cao of my childhood she was he epitome of reason} she pleaded my cae and T was driven buck into your orbit, rom which I perhaps otherwise would have ecapd tothe advantage of us both At ater cine | from you in secret, gave me something in secret, allowed me | Of course, I grew accustomed to seek by these means even | and in front of others; you had no idea how this humiliated ‘me, your children’s aff allways public) with Living aa «ay life in peace, warmth and plenitude al at your expense | | | | | | am referring hereto those remarks that must literally have become etched in my mind, such a: “When T was no more than seven [had to posh the cart fom village to village”. “We all had to sleepin one room. “We counted ourselves lucky when we got potatoes”. "For years my legs were covered in open sores for want of warm clothing”. "When T was just a My litle boy Twas sent away to work in a shop in Pisek parents never sent me anything, not even inthe army, bu still Tsent money back home”. “Butin spite, in pte of everything my father was sll my father. Nobody appreciates that these days! What do these children know? Nobody's been through what Ihave! What child can understand that today?” Under diferent ciecumstances, ancedotes like these could have been an excellent way of teaching me, they could have given me strength and encouragement to survive the same trials and deprivations that my father had endured. But that was nota all whatyou wanted, you had taken eae tomake my situation quite different, there was never an opportunity for me to distinguish myself ae you had done. Such an opportunity could only have been achieved by violence and upheaval, 1 ‘would have had to break away from home (assuming that I hhad had the strength and resolve todo so, and that Mother for her part had not tried to prevent it by other means). But that was not atall what you wanted, you called it ingratitude, selfimportance disobedience, betrayal, madness.So while on the one hand you tempted me into it through your example, ancedotes and humiliation, you forbade it with the utmost severity on the other. Otherwise, apart from the incidental circumstances, you would surely have been charmed by Olas adventure in Zirau. She wanted to expecience the countryside where you had grown up, she wanted work and deprivation as you had had them, she did not want to relax and enjoy the fruits of your hard work, just as you had been independent from your own father. Were those such terrible aspirations? So far fom your own example and teaching? Admitedly, Ott’s aspirations filed ultimately in practice, were pethaps a litle ridiculous, were carried out ‘00 ostentatiously, she showed to9 litle consideration for her Darents. But was she entirely to blame, could you aot also lame her circumstances and particularly the fact that you and she were on such bad terms? Had she really been as vou have subsequently tried to convince yourself) aay ess of stranger to you in the family home and business than she was later in Zoran? And wa it ot within your power (had you nly found icin you) to turn that esapade ino something ‘uch more positive through encouragement, guidance and support or pethaps even simply through tolerance? connection with such experiences, you used to say inbitter jest that we had i too easy. But in a sense this was no joke at all. What you had had o fight fo, we were given stesght from 2 your hand; but chat stragele for an independent life which ‘vas granted to you from the beginning and which, ofcourse, even we cannot entirely void, that ia privilege for which we are forced to strive belatedly, as adults with the strength of ‘mere children. Iam not saying that cis necessarily makes our situation harder than yours rather the two ate probably equal (in saying this Ido not mean to compare theie basic nature), cour only disadvantage ie that we canot use our deprivation to glorify ourselves or to belittle others as you did with your deprivation, Nor doT deny that would have been possible for metohave tuly enjoyed the frit of your great and successful work, made good use of them and, o your delight, developed them further, but for our alienation preventing it. AS it was, 1 could enjoy what you gave me, but only with embarrassment, ‘weariness, weakness, «sense of guilt And that is why T could only ever receive your approbation with beggarly gratitude, 1 could never do anything to deserve it. ‘The next outward result of my whole upbringing was that Iran away from everything that even remotely reminded me of you, Pest the business. As a stree shop it should have Aelighted me, particulary in my childhood, ic was so lively, lit up in the evenings, I saw and heard so much, could help bhereand there, show my skills, but above all Teould marvel at your great talent for business how you sold things, dealt with people, made jokes, never tired, immediately knew what to 6 do in a dificult situation etc even the way you packaged goods or opened a box was a spectacle worth watching and the whole thing was ll in all, certainly not the worst ‘education fora child. Butas you came to scare me, gradually and in every respect and as I became unable to distinguish you from the shop, Ino longer felt comfortable even there ‘Things there that I had initially taken for granted came to torment and embarrass me, particularly your treatment of the staff. Tdo not know, perhaps it was normal for staff ro be treated that way inthe workplace (things were certainly similar during my term atthe Assicurazioni Generali forex ample, I justified my resignation tothe manager, not entirely truthfully but on the other hand not completely deceitful, by claiming that the abuse, of which I was incidentally not the direct target, was unbearable; my home life had left me too painfully sensitive rot), but asa child T was not concerned with other workplaces. I saw only you, screaming, shouting abuse and raging about the shop, something which I could rot believe ever happened elsewhere in the world, And there ‘was not only verbal abuse, bu other sorts of tyranny too, For ‘example, when you wanted certain goods not to be confused with others and, to prove your point, sent them Bying from the counter witha single swipe ~ only the Blindness of your sage excused you slightly ~ and the clerk would have to pick them up. Or your constant way of aking about one particular tuberculosis-stricken clerk: “The cripple should hurry upand die”, You called the employees “paid enemies" and sothey were, buteven before hey turned against you, you seemed to me to be their “paying enemy”. This also taught me the important lesson that you could be unfair; I would not have noticed i 3 soon on my own, I was too overcome wth guile, which led me to convince myself that you were right; bu these people were, in my childhood opinion (later a file but not very much altered) complete strangers who ponetheles worked For us and who, forall that had to liven continual fear of you. OF course I exaggerated the situation because I wrongly assumed that you were as frightening to hers. as you were tome, If thathad been the case they relly ‘would have been unable to cope; but since they were grown, adults with mostly excellent nerves, they shrugged off your insults effortlessly and you setualy suffered far worse than they did, For me, however, it made the shop unbearable, it reminded me all too acutely of my relationship with you quite apart from your interest as an employer and quite apart from your need to dominate, you were so superior 35 of businessman to all who ever learnt from you that no their achievements could ever satisfy you, and likewise must have disappointed you on a continal basis. Because ofthis, could not help but ally myself with the staff, also incidentally because, though my timidity, I could not understand how someone could insult a stranger like that, and this timidity made me want somehow, for my own safer, to recoil the staff with you, with our family for I thought they must be terribly outraged. In trying to achieve this it was no longer enough to teat the staff with normal politeness, nor even with modes rather I had to show humility, not only did I have to greet them at every opportunity, where possible also had to decline a greeting in return. And if, insignificant as 1 was, ad licked the voles oftheir fet, sul could not have made up for the way in which you, the master, etacked them from on high. My tendency to Form this kind of relationship with other people affected me beyond the shop and into my future (Ota demonstrates a comparable, if less dangerous and far-reaching phenomenon, in her keen involvement with che poor for example, in the way in which, to your great annoyance, she would inset on sitting with the serving girls, and so on) By the end I was almost afta ofthe shop and it cereainly ceased appealing to me long befare I tated school and became increasingly distant from it, Furthermore, my Skills did not seem up tothe job since even your, 8 you admitted, were inadequate. You then tried (which moves and shames me sil) to turn my aversion forthe shop into some degree of affection for you, for your work, by maintaining thar I lacked business sense, that my head was made for Iofter idea etc. Ofcourse this contrived explanation pleased Mother, and even I in my vanity and need, allowed myselfto believe it Had i ally been purely or mostly “ftier ideas” that hed come between me and the business (which T now, but only now, truly and honestly hate), they would surely hhave manifested themselves differently, they wuld not have allowed meto drift quietly and anxiously through school and legal studies, until I ended up behind a civil servant’ desk If | wanted to escape you, I would have had to escape the est ofthe family too, ever Mother. Ofcourse she always gave ‘me protection, but only in relation to you. She loved you too ‘much and was to faithfully devoted to you, for her to an independent source of moral support in my longer-term seruggleasa child, Moreover,my childhood instinct was right, for over the years Mother became even more closely allied to you; where she had once retained some independence in her own affairs ably and quidy, within the narrowest Kimis so as not to anger you too much, over the years she began more and more blindly to accept the way you judged and condemned your children, more out of emotional sympathy than rational agreement with you, and especially in Otda’s case, which was the most difficult one. OF course, we must remember what a punishing and wrterly exhausting postion “Mother held in the family. She slaved away in the shop and. at home, suffered doubly through all the fail illnesses, but most ofall she suffered in her role as mediator between us " FS and you. You always treated her with lave and consideration, bur in this respectyou spared her no more than we pared her We hammered away at her without consideration, you from your side, we from ours, We only dd it to amuse ourselves, ‘we could not see how it hurt her, we could not se beyond the war that we waged on you, you on us, and we Ww. happy to vent our frustration on her. It further damaged our upbringing that you ~ of course without being the slightest bit at fault — punished her instead of ws. It even seemed to justify the otherwise unjustifiable way we treated her. How she suffered at our hands because of you and at your hands because of us, not to mention those times when you were in the right because she was spoiling us, even if this “soiling ‘may sometimes have been nothing but «silent, unconscious retaliation om her part against your system, OF cours, all this ‘would have been unbearable for Mother, had her love for us, and her happiness in that love, not given her the strength to bear it My sisters were only partially on my side. Happiest in har relationship with you was Valli. The closest of us all to Mother, she submitted to you in much the same way without it costing her much effort or causing her much haem. But yousccepted her more readily too, despite her relative lack of Kafla-tike aributes, because she reminded you of Mother, (Or perhaps her lack of Kafla-tikestributes even suited you; « where there were none, even you could not demand thems farthermoreit relieved you ofthe Fecling that something had gone astray and required sslvaging by force. Besides, you may never particularly have liked the way that Kafko-tike features manifested themselves in women. Vallis relationship with you might have geown stronges still had the est of us ot spoilt it somewhat. Elliistheonlyoneofusto havealmosteompletely succeeded Jing fre of your influence —just what I would least pected from her ia her childhood. She was such a clumsy, ticed, anxious, morore guilt-ridden, self-effacing, spiteful, lazy, greedy, miserly child, [could hardly bring myself to look at he, she reminded me so much of myself she was so greatly influenced by the way you brought us 4p, as was. Her avarice was particulary repulsive to me, since imine was, if possible, even worse. Avarice is after all one of the surest signs of deep unhappiness; I was so uncertain of everything that [could only be sure of possessing what held between my hands or lips, or what was at feast on its way there, and it was precisely these things that she in postion similar to mine, delighted in taking away from me. But this, all changed when, still in her youth ~ that was the most ‘important Factor —she left home, martied, had children, be- came cheerful, carefree, spirited, generous, slfes, hopeful Ie is almost inconceivable that you failed to notice this, change, you certainly did not consider it praiseworthy, you | ‘ere so blinded by the resentment you always fle for Elli and which sill remains essentially unchanged, evenifit has become fa less acute now that Eli no longer lives with ws, besides which it has been lesened by your love for Felix and affection for Karl” Only Gert stil occasionally has to suffer fori. hardly dare write about Orla, I know that in doing +0 1 jeopardize everything I hoped to achieve with this letter Under normal circum ces, mean when she isin no real ‘eed or danger, you have nothing but contempt for her; you ven admitted to me that you think she deliberately causes you constant grief and anges, and that while you suffer om her account, she is happy and contented. A sort of devil. What 4 monstrous rift there must be between you and her, even ‘greater than the one between you and me, to engender such 4 monstrous misunderstanding. She isso distant from you that you barely see her any more, but instead sce @ ghost in hee place I admit that you found her particularly difficult. I cannot make complete sense of this very complicated state of affairs, but in ny case here was sort of Liwy equipped with the best Kafka-ike weapons. I was no real match for yous you soon disposed of me; all that then remained was escape, bitterness, grief, inner struggle. You two, onthe ather hand, ‘were constantly ready for bate, constantly fresh, constantly fall of eneegy. A sight as great as it was hopeless. Acthe very beginning you were certainly very cose, for even today Orla ps the purestemblem of your marriage to Mother and ofthe power implicitin hat marriage. donot know what put an end to that happy harmony between father and chi, Ian. only asume that her situation developed ina similar way 10 ‘mine. With you bebaving tyrannical, and she demonstrating a Livy like defiance, sensitivity, sense of justice, restlessness, er Kafka~ like strength, 1 probably influenced her too, but hardly and allthis reinforced through an awareness o deliberately, rather simply by being there, Moreover asthe laseborn, she entered into a pre-established family dynamic land was able to form her own judgment from the ample material already there, I ean even believe that she hesitated todo this fora while considering whether she should throw herself at your fect or your opponents clearly you neglected something at that time and pushed her away, otherwise you ‘would have become a splendidly harmonious par. Although T would have lost an ally in thi pairing, the sight of you together would have buen rich compensation, and moreover the immeasurable happiness of finding complete satisfaction in at least one child would have altered you significantly in my favour. That, however, is now no more than 2 dream. (Ota has no contact with her father, she must follow her own, path ike T do, and the additional confidence, velF-assurance, 3 geod health lack ofseruples ths she fas compared with me takes her even more site and treacherous in your eyes. That | understand; cen from your pont of view, she coukd notappea otherwise Indeed, ven seis capable oflooking at here rom your perspective empathizing with you, feting not despairing, despair my speciality ~ about th situation. Although you often se us topes in apparent contradiction toall [have sid — we whisper laugh, from time to time you hear us mention you. You ee us as intent conspirators. An od sore of conspirators, Admittedly you are a prominent subject of our conversations, as you have been of our thoughts Since the very beianing, however, we do no come together ‘ith the ienton of plotting against you but eather to tall through with one another — in every deta from all angles, at every opportnity, om acar and Far ander tres, in jest in sinceiy, with love, defiance, ange, revulsion, resignation, aul, wid all the strength of ovr heads and heats = that terrible tril that hangs over us and separates us from you, 2 train which you always claim the role of judge although, at Teast forthe most part (here T admit { may make many mistakes) you are just as weak and bined as we are. Jemat is «particularly ealightening example inthis whole saga of how you broughe people up. On the one hand admit- tel she was a ouside, she only entered the busines as an scl, dealt with you mostly as her boss and was therefore exposed to your influence in smaller doses atan age when she wea alteady capable of resitanceson the oer hand she was alsa blood relation she admized in you her fathers brother, and your power over er wa fer greater than ha of boss [And despite this she, who even in her bodily ei was s0 ompzent, lever igen, enodet,trstworthy, sles fifa, wholoved youasanuneeand admired you asa boss, sho preved her worth n other ports before and snce—never nade youa very goo employe. In her relationship with you she was like anther chil ofcourse we helped to ph her in tn direction and the buckling power of your presence wvighed down on her to sich a degree tat she developed (admieely onlin your presen and hopefilly without the deeper suffering of a chil) forgets, thoughtless, ‘morbid humou, perhaps even alle defence as far as she ‘wascapable oft although here! takeno accountofher sickly disposition, general low spitits and the burden of dreary domesticity that she shouldered. ‘The complex implications of your relationship with her were summed up by you in & single almost blasphemous sentence that nevertheless beeame classi for us it proved your obliviousness tothe way you treated people: "She died and eft me ina real mess” T could deseribe the wider implications of your influence and my struggle agaist it, but I would be treading on un- certain ground, besides the further you moved away from Ey ‘hebusinessand family the fiendlien, more accommodating, polite, moe considerate, more involved (outwardly a wel 2s inwardly) you became, just lke an autocrat who steps ‘outside his own land, who no longer has any reason to. b tyrannical he tiene and can associate affably with even the Jowriestf peopl. Inthe group photographs fom Franzens- ba for example, you stood tall and merry arong the sly creatures, like aking on his tavels, OF course even your children could have thrived on this, had they only been able torccognizeitas children, which wasin fact impossible, and Isfor instance, would noe have been so eternally confined to the innermost tits, suffocating sphere of your influence, as was in reality Through this not only lost my sense of family a you see contrary T sill had sense of the fail, indeed a largely negative one, and of inner detachment from you, which could of course never succeed. But my relationships With people ouside the family suffered perhaps even more under your influence. You are entirely wrong if you believe ¥ do all I can for other people out of love and devotion, nothing for you or the family out of coldness and betrayal. repeat forthe tenth time:I probably would have turned outto bean anxious person in any cate, shy of people in general, but itis. long, dark path fom there to where I actually ended up, (Until this point inthe eter I have made relatively few deliberate omissions, but now and later I will have to omit certain tingsthatare too ard formetoconfess—toyouandto myself. say thisso that you do not believe, should the overall picture bea Fire unclear in places, that I lack evidence. On the contrary evidence exists that could create too unbearably rule picture tis not easy to find a mide ground here.) It will sufice inthis ease, incidentally, to cast our minds back: 1 Ina lost my self-confidence whenever I wasin your presence, had exchanged it fora boundless sense of guile(I was thinking of this boundlessness when T once summed it up perfectly ‘elation to someone else: “He is afraid that the shame will outlive him”) I could not suddenly transform myself when Teame into contact with other people, eather I developed a deeper sense of guilt towards them, because as [have already said, Ife compelled to:make amends forthe way that you had treated them inthe busines, something for which I fe jointly esponsible. Moreover, ou objected secretly or openly to everyone sith whom I associated, and I was obliged 10 rectify this too. The mistrust for people in general that ‘you tried to teach me at work and at home (name a single perion of any importance to me asa child whom you did not, roundly criticize on a least one occasion), and tha strangely did not weigh on you at al (jou were strong enough to bear it. besides which it may purely have been an emblem of your dominance) —that mistrust, which was never justified in my chile eyes, as I saw around me only inimitably excellent people, that mistrust developed within me into misteust of myself and a perpetual fea ofall other people. And so in this respect I vas generally unable to save myself feom you. You deceived yourself on this front, perhaps because you truly ‘were unaware of my invelvement with people and assured, suspiciously and jealously (am I denying that you love me?) that had to compensate for my lack offal life elsewhere, ‘sit was imposible for me to live lke that away fom home. Incidentally asa child [found one certain comfort in all his 4 comfort in distrust of my own judgment; I told myself “You exaggerate you think of every litle tiviaity as if i were a great anomaly, the way young people always do." I Inter almost completely lost this comfort, however, when f ‘ae to understand the world beter 1 found just as tile escape from you in Judaism. Escape would have been perfectly posible here, or ratheit would have been possible for us both to find each other in Judaism, or at least to finda starting point for our union. But what 4 version of Judaism you taught mel Over the years I have viewed itin thre different ways, AAs child I reproached myself, as you reproached me, for not going to synagogue enough, not fasting etc. I believed T ‘as wronging not myself bur you, and guilt in ever-ready supply, consumed me. Later asa young man, I filed to understand how you, given your negligible commitment o Judaism, could reproach me for not striving (even for the sake of p 25 you put it) t show the same negligible commitment. It seally was, at far 361 could see, negligible, a joke, not even, a joke. You went to synagogue four times a year, there you resembled mor, to say the leat, the indifferent throng than the few who took ie seriously, you patiently went through the prayers as formality, sometimes astonished me with your ability to turn to the passage currently being re fom the prayer book, incidentally I was allowed, 38 long as | was inthe synagogue (that was the main thing) to wander about as I pleased. And so I yawned and dozed my way through the many hours (in later years I believe Iwas only ever that bored again in dancing lessons) and tried total as much delight as possible in the Few litle variations ofthe service, such as the opening of the Ark of the Covenant, hich always reminded me of those shooting booths whe a similar box would open its doors if someone hit the target, only there something interesting would emerge, while bere it was always the same old headless dlls. Incidentally I was also very scared in the synagogue, not only, as one might expect, by the close contact with so many people, but aio because you once casually mentioned that even T could be called upon to recite from the Torah, I dreaded that for years. But apart from this my boredom knew no significant interruptions, the bar mitevah came closest, but it required only risible rotelearning, leading to the risible climax of passing an examin tion and then, as far as you were concerned, to other insignificant events, for example when aking in my eyes, and one in which you acquitted yourself well, you were called to the Torah, « purely social un ‘or when you stayed behind in the synagogue to say prayers forthe dead whi was banished, which, for along time, clearly because of my banishment and lack of any deeper interest, evoked in me the more or less unconscious feeling that something indecent was going on, That was the state of things in the synagogue, at home it was, iat all possible, ven more wretched, since worship was limited to the Brst Seder* which developed more and more into siesplitting farce, admittedly under the influence of the growing children. (Why did you have to submic to this influence? Because you inspiced if). Such were the religious belies 1 inherited from you, the only further addition being the way you eatended your whole arm to point out “millionaire Fuchs's sons” whenever they accompanied their fath the synagogue on High Holy Days*I did not know what to «do with this inheritance, other than to reject it atthe earliest, ‘opportunity; in the circumstances I felt rejection to be the ‘most pious option Later still,thoagh, Hooked ati differently and understood why you believed I had spitefilly betrayed you in this matter, 1 in so many others. You actually had brought some trace of Judaism with you fiom hat litde ghetto-like village community, it was not much and you lost another fraction of Jt uring your time inthe city and the army, but impressions just enough 0 ‘and memories from your youth sere sl allow you to live some sort of Jewish life, particularly as you strong did not aced much help to do that, you had a sense of your ots and were virtuslly impervious to religious seruples on a personal level unless they were closely bound up with social scruples. You life was essentially governed by your unequivocal belief in the opinions of a particular clas of Jewish society andy, since there opinions were « pact of your identity, you came to believe unequivocally in yourself Here too, there was enough Judaism, bur it wastoo litle robe hhanded down oa child,itsceped away evens youpassedicon. ‘Your impressions from yous owa youth were prevented fom reaching the child, parly duc totheirinexpressible natureand partly due to your dreaded personality. [twas also impossible tomake the child understand, as he observed al too well ut of shocr fea, tha the Few insigaificane rituals carried ovt by yo in the name of Judaism, with sn indifference befitting thele insignificance, could have a higher meaning. For you they meant something ae small souvenies from ealier times, ” and it was because of this that you wanted me to appreciate them, but as they no longer had any intrinsic worth even you, you could only achieve this through persuasion o intimidation; on the one hand, this could never succeed and ‘on the other, as you never recognized your weak postion here, ithad the unavoidable effect of making you angey with se fo ry apparent stubbornness ‘This whole thing is ofcourse, no isolated phenomenon, Something similar happened to a large part of sitional generation of Jews migrating into the cities from a sill relatively devout country; this happened automatically sad inevitably, but it added to out particular relationship, already somewhat acrimonious, a further considerable deg ‘pain, Although you like J, ought to believe in your ‘innocence on this count, you should atribute that innocence ‘to your nature and the conditions of the time, not merely to sternal circumstances, I mean you should not claim to have been prevented, by too much other work and strife, from concerning yourself with such things. You used, in this way, to turm the fact of your undeniable innocence into an unfair reproach towards others, Such reproaches are always very

    You might also like