eJournals Colloquia Germanica 41/3

Colloquia Germanica
cg
0010-1338
Francke Verlag Tübingen
Es handelt sich um einen Open-Access-Artikel, der unter den Bedingungen der Lizenz CC by 4.0 veröffentlicht wurde.http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/91
2008
413

Hermann Kant’s Abspann: Shifting Paradigms and the Fiction of Facts

91
2008
Rachel Halverson
cg4130211
Hermann Kant’s Abspann: Shifting Paradigms and the Fiction of Facts RACHEL HALVERSON W ASHINGTON S TATE U NIVERSITY , P ULLMAN Hermann Kant’s Abspann: Erinnerungen an meine Gegenwart, published in 1991, disappointed and frustrated literary critics and fellow East German authors. 1 Lacking apologies and regrets for decisions and actions that had dire consequences for others in the East German literary community, Abspann delivered neither the longed for admissions of guilt nor confessions of complicity with a corrupt regime. The revolutionary events of 1989 leading to the dissolution of the German Democratic Republic toppled Kant, vice-president of the East German Schriftstellerverband from 1969 to1978 and president from 1978 to 1989, from his prominent position in the East German literary community and turned him overnight into a persona non grata. The peaceful revolution however did not shake his confidence in the country to which he had committed much of his life. Left with only his tarnished image and contested career achievements, Kant hastily published Abspann at a time when there was great interest in publications by former East German authors. As Dennis Tate points out in Shifting Perspectives: East German Autobiographical Narratives before and after the End of the GDR, The evidence of most of the post-Wende writing by what might now be more accurately called «eastern» German authors is that it was driven by shorter-term needs across a spectrum extending from the often shocking «victim discourses» of those who suffered most at the hands of the Stasi (Reiner Kunze, Erich Loest) to the unconvincing acts of self-defense by SED establishment figures such as Hermann Kant. (9) Tate’s assessment, published almost twenty years after the fall of the Wall, reflects the clarity and insight that the passage of time brings. 2 Freed from years of censorship and attempting to find firm footing in the rapidly evolving landscape of postunification Germany, literature, albeit quickly written, remained the one constant medium with which authors could tell their life stories for whatever reason was most pressing at that time. Tate’s placement of Kant’s Abspann as anchor on the negative end of the spectrum, however, resonates with the critical reception of Abspann and its author at the time of publication and entices one to return once again to the stories and experiences Kant recounted in Abspann and the variety of forums in which he has chosen 212 Rachel Halverson to address the shift in paradigms that transformed the reception of his career in the intervening twenty years. Removing the negatively biased lens through which Abspann heretofore has been read and analyzing its packaging, contents, and narrative structure in tandem with key interviews with Kant published since the fall of the Wall reveals a different man and message than the one damned by colleagues and critics. At issue is whether this negative lens has prevented Kant’s own assessment of his life and work from being heard and objectively evaluated. At the height of his career Hermann Kant was one of the poster children for East German literature with his picture featured prominently on the cover of the 1981 paperback edition of Wolfgang Emmerich’s seminal Kleine Literaturgeschichte der DDR. 3 For Emmerich at that time, these authors «haben damit der DDR-Literatur ein Darstellungsmittel zurückerobert, das zu Zeiten einer verhärteten Doktrin vom sozialistischen Realismus tabuiert war» (143). How ironic that Kant’s novel Die Aula was noted for its narrative which linked the present to the author’s past - or as Emmerich states, «das gelebte mit dem zu lebenden Leben assoziativ-reflexiv verknüpft» (143), while the autobiographical underpinnings in Abspann, written with no concern for the fickle judgment of state censorship, prompted a critical response that was immediate and damning. Among those who reviewed Abspann are representative and former East German authors. Günter de Bruyn, Günter Kunert, and Erich Loest each published statements in the press on the book and are unanimous in their condemnation of Kant’s wordy, evasive writing style and his account of the Biermann Affair in 1976 and the expulsion of nine authors from the writers’ union in 1979. They also articulate succinct and damning final verdicts on Kant’s attempt to tell his life story. De Bruyn, for example, concludes, «Den Vorwurf der Wendehalsigkeit kann man Kant also wirklich nicht machen. Er trauert der Vergangenheit nach, bleibt sonst aber der alte» (66). While Kunert states simply, «Es ist sein letzter Versuch, sich selber aus der Verantwortung zu stehlen» (L9), Erich Loest sees Kant’s intentions in the much broader post- Wende political landscape and postulates, «Kant will wieder oben und vorne sein, diesmal als Wegbereiter der PDS-Legendenbildung: Es ließ sich gar nicht schlecht leben in der DDR» (XV). This uniformly negative response to Abspann by Kant’s peers is not surprising. The complicity with the SED and the Stasi that he practiced as president of the Schriftstellerverband damned him in the eyes of other East German writers, many of whom suffered severe consequences as a result of their critical view of their homeland. In a brief article in the newspaper Neue Zeit announcing the forthcoming publication of Abspann, the announcement is prefaced by the statement that not a single Hermann Kant’s Abspann 213 author responded positively to the invitation issued to fellow authors by the East German magazine Wochenpost to submit a laudation on the occasion of Hermann Kant’s sixty-fifth birthday in the summer of 1991. 4 Not surprisingly, the sentiments articulated by de Bruyn, Kunert, and Loest reflect the general tenor of reviews published in the German press; the book itself garners criticism of its convoluted style, excessive verbiage, and misrepresentation of events, as well as of the author’s portrayal of himself. Konrad Franke, well-known expert on East German literature and author of Kindler’s Die Literatur der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, terms Kant an «Opportunist aus Überzeugung» (VI) in his review for the Süddeutsche Zeitung, while Jürgen Grambow cynically reduces Kant to an «anekdotenliebender (sic) Geschichtenerzähler» (13). The gap between Kant in the flesh and his self-portrait in Abspann prompts the Spiegel reviewer to surmise, «Der Mann mit der Kerbe des Machtmenschen am Kinn muß einen Doppelgänger gehabt haben» («Laotse» 240). In the Berliner Zeitung, Waldtraut Lewin feigns shock that Kant has not included the nickname for him widely used by fellow East German authors, «Meisterschlangenzunge» (17). Horst Haase’s review for Neues Deutschland distinguishes itself as the only positive reception of Abspann and it assures readers that they will find everything in the book that they have grown to cherish in Kant’s writing: «sprachliche Originalität, lockere, teils heitere, teils ernste, vergnügliche und polemischaufklärerische Schilderungen von Erfahrungen und Erlebnissen, die sie selbst berühren oder an denen sie sich reiben können, nicht zuletzt auch jüngster, uns alle betreffender Geschehnisse» (5). A positive review in this venue is not surprising, given the position Neues Deutschland held as the SED-sanctioned newspaper in the GDR. Literary scholars do not advance the discussion of Abspann much beyond that provided by the reviewers in the press. Fritz Rudolf Fries, 5 critic and fellow East German author who was forced to publish his first novel Der Weg nach Oobliadooh (1966) in West Germany with Suhrkamp after publication was refused in the GDR (Emmerich 1981: 32), concludes, «Den Romanen Hermann Kants bescheinigte Hans Mayer ‹hemmungslose Plaudertechnik und kurzatmige Anekdoktik›. Der heutige Leser, von der freien Sensationspresse entmündigt, aber kann sich hier [Abspann] seitenweise an kauzig und gekonnt erzählten Kalendergeschichten laben» (135). In other words, Kant has not evolved beyond being simply a good story teller. Reinhard Andress frames his analysis with the literary theories of de Man and Lejeune and demonstrates that Kant has indeed broken the «autobiographical pact» with his readers with his intentional digressions and misrepresentations (145). Although there are differing innuendoes in the response to Kant’s Abspann, 214 Rachel Halverson critics and literary scholars across the board read it as an autobiography and as a result expect Kant’s full disclosure of his complicity with the corrupt SED regime. In contrast, Frank Thomas Grub takes issue with the overwhelmingly negative response itself: «An diesem Umgang mit Kants Autobiografie zeigt sich, dass oft weniger der Text als die Person des Autors im Mittelpunkt des Interesses steht. Reaktionen dieser Art mögen im Falle Hermann Kants nachvollziehbar sein, akzeptabel sind sie trotzdem nicht» (314). Beginning with the book’s jacket and title page, Abspann confronts readers with the paradox of Kant’s endeavor. His choice of title conjures up images of a rolling list of credits at the end of a film. Indeed, he includes an appended index of names (Namenregister). Its eight-page length and the names included verify its intended significance. Among the chosen are actors (Humphrey Bogart and Ernest Borgnine), politicians (Willy Brandt, Michail Gorbatschow, Erich Honnecker), authors (Bertolt Brecht, Christoph Hein, Anna Seghers, Christa Wolf), and family members (his father Paul Kant, his son Myron Kant). When one reads Abspann, however, it quickly becomes apparent that Kant did not know all the people in this index personally, a fact pointing to two possible purposes this index serves. It can be read as a reinforcement of the book’s focus heralded by its title. Specifically, these are the individuals whom Kant credits with playing a role in his life. Yet it also functions in an additional, less-than-subtle way. With this roster, Kant creates a version of himself as an individual who values relationships and whose identity is tied to that of others. This interpretation reflects his current need to anchor his identity within a constellation of mostly still respected people, a situation which reflects his reliance on connections, given his prominent role in the East German literary community, rather than solely on his own, now refuted laurels. The reasons for selecting this title appear later in the text when Kant confesses that «mit diesem Abspann nichts anderes als eine Auto- Enquete versucht wird» (364). The book’s subtitle, Erinnerung an meine Gegenwart, points to an intersection of the past (Erinnerung/ recollection) and the present (Gegenwart/ present) which is still very immediate to Kant; his life as a leading figure in the East German literary community has now been relegated to the past by everyone but Kant himself. The subtitle he has chosen thus foreshadows that Kant intends through his writing to reconstruct or essentially make present that time before unification. It is also noteworthy that the subtitle does not appear on the book’s jacket. There the name of the author and his picture dwarf the words «Abspann,» his publisher «Aufbau,» and «Erinnerungen.» In the picture, Kant appears to have just autographed one of his books and is returning it presumably to an avid reader, implying that the copy of Abspann Hermann Kant’s Abspann 215 buyers hold in their hands was personally signed and written for them. Although book titles and covers can be dismissed as simple marketing devices, in this case they accurately foreshadow the text that follows. Kant has expressed unequivocally that he is writing about his life in East Germany as he sees it, not the life others wished he had led. This overt articulation of narrative intent predominates in the first chapter, which opens with Kant’s reference to his mother who called him her «regierbarstes Kind» (5) in a television interview: «Die Mitteilung löste Gegensätzliches aus: Sie hielt mir den Atem an und setzte diesen Bericht in Gang» (5). Key here is Kant’s use of the term «Bericht.» This statement immediately creates tension between Kant’s reputation for complicity with the now discredited SED and his reputation for not conceding the error of his ways. Certainly quoting his mother is an endearing gesture, but the words «regierbarstes Kind» in the context of East Germany and his position as president of the Schriftstellerverband set in motion thoughts of his willingness to comply with the regime, regardless of how corrupt its demands may have been. This is followed on the next page by his statement that «Von den Konflikten, durch die man kam, darf keiner als ausgedacht und ertüfelt geschmäht werden; man schreibt im Schutze von Tatsachen, wenn man von seinem Leben schreibt. Denke ich jetzt, wo ich damit beginne» (6). When coupled with his statement on the factual dimension of writing one’s life story, these comments in the opening pages of his autobiography essentially read like a contrived prophylactic against anticipated attacks on his version of what happened in East Germany. In fact, the reviewers’ numerous criticisms of the details Kant presents in Abspann readily call the validity of these statements into question. Furthermore, Kant’s frequent narrative interruptions imply that even he does not trust the facts he is presenting to speak for themselves and therefore must steer the reception of the life story he has chosen to present to his readers. Kant himself concedes at a later point how flawed this opening statement actually is and acknowledges his role in selecting the information to be presented (156). In the pages that follow, it quickly becomes apparent that Kant’s need to control how his story is read extends from the book’s title and jacket to the body of the text where over eighty parenthetical asides ranging in length from a few words to over a page interrupt the narrative flow throughout the book’s 528 pages. As he explains, «Da bleibt dann, um die Angst zu dämpfen, man könne an einer besonders wichtigen Stelle nicht verstanden worden sein, oft nur der verklammerte Einschub» (493). Kant is clearly cognizant of the fact that his life story, particularly his version of it, will be highly contested. A relatively small number of these asides provide definitions to avoid possible 216 Rachel Halverson misunderstandings or corrections to clarify what Kant views as misinformation. For instance, his description of how his father became involved in a barroom brawl between the Republican Reichsbanner and the Monarchist Stahlhelmer exemplifies his definitional usage of parenthetical asides: «Er war in seiner Wirtschaft (in Berlin hätte sie Kneipe geheißen) gemeinsam mit Fritz Ritter, der gleich ihm als feuriger Parteiloser galt, in eine Schlägerei zwischen Reichsbanner und Stahlhelmern geraten» (14). Here Kant is interested primarily in clarifying subtle semantic differences that exist between regions in Germany, between historical periods, or between political systems. Kant’s parenthetical aside on Alfred Kantorowicz’ depiction of him in his diary as a student at the ABF in Greifswald more readily typifies the correctional function they play in the book. Kant points out that Kantorowicz portrays him as «ein fragwürdiger Dumpfnickel» (248) and cites two slightly negative quotes from Kantorowicz’ diaries. In a parenthetical aside, Kant addresses him directly: «(Verdammt noch mal, Professor, ich war mit einem Abitur, das die einsame Note ‹Mit Auszeichnung› trug, in das von Ihnen geleitete Haus gekommen und verließ es mit einem Einser-Diplom, das Ihre Unterschrift zierte.)» (248). As demonstrated by this example, the length of this aside and the shift from a first-person narrative to a direct address can result in a dramatic disruption of the text’s narrative line, reflecting Kant’s urgent need to set the record straight at the cost of narrative integrity. A number of the parenthetical asides serve to establish a tangential connection between the recounted event and another event, person, place, or time. The content of these asides ranges from the personal to the literary and professional. When Kant recounts his father’s call to report for military service in World War II, he describes how his parents took their savings, went with the family to Hamburg, bought two bicycles, and stopped at an ice cream parlor in the area that Kant knew from the days when he was taking a stenography course at the technical school in the neighborhood. The ice cream that once had been naturally fresh and fruity tasting now tasted horrible and artificial due to the shortage of fresh fruits and dairy products imposed by war rationing. In a parenthetical aside, Kant draws the line between this childhood memory and a visit to an ice cream parlor fifty years later. On their first family trip to Hamburg, Kant, his wife, and their three children enjoyed a scoop of ice cream from Mövenpick while Kant shared his memories of a family outing to get ice cream during times of war (92). In a similar manner, Kant uses a parenthetical aside to alert readers to the connection between his hospitalization in 1944, during which he shared a room with a young soldier who had been strafed during a bombing raid, and a similar episode in Die Aula, personally acknowledging and emphasizing the highly autobiographical na- Hermann Kant’s Abspann 217 ture of his fictional writing (207). Both examples cited here establish connections between the event recounted in the text and information that may not be known to the reader, underscoring one of the organizational threads interwoven throughout a complex text that critics have dismissed as excessively convoluted. As Kant notes on several occasions in Abspann, «Alles hatte mit allem zu tun» (466). This recurring theme of the interrelated events in Kant’s life figures prominently in the final and largest category of parenthetical asides which expand on the initial information provided in the text, furnish essential background information, or offer commentary on what has transpired. In a passage detailing his various and assorted physical ailments, Kant recalls speculating about where he would be in the fall of 1990, to which his doctor responded there would be moss growing on his grave by then if he did not get the recommended heart surgery. This prompted Kant to respond that the doctor clearly is unaware of the current availability of cemetery plots. Kant was fully aware of this and recalls how long it took to find an appropriate grave site for Erich Arendt. This shortage also explains why Walter Victor, first secretary of the Writers Union, secured his own grave site in a timely manner. This spiraling digression leads to a parenthetical aside in which Kant remembers when he was Kantorowicz’ assistant. Victor had engaged him and Frank Wagner to present papers at a Writers Union conference on the literature of war, and for this service, he offered them each a 700-mark honorarium (203). Such a recollection furnishes Kant with the opportunity to note that this was the only time he ever received payment from the Writers Union. Given the criticism of the privileged life Kant led in East Germany due to his position in that organization, this short imbedded statement is far more significant than the issue of cemetery plot availability; it transforms the recounted chain of events into packaging for Kant’s veiled self-defense. Closing the parenthesis at the conclusion of this aside, Kant continues with his narrative of the events leading up to his heart surgery. Kant’s defensive stance also is evident in his statements on Wolf Biermann and the events leading to Biermann’s expulsion in 1976. Tandem to his account of the difficulties he encountered in publishing Das Impressum, for example, he expands on a clash with Hermann Axen, chief editor of Neues Deutschland at the time: «der Verriß betraf die ‹Drahtharfe› eines gewissen Wolf Biermann, in dem ich freilich nicht die gewinnendste aller Persönlichkeiten sah. Oder sehe» (314). Kant’s actions during the Biermann affair complicated relationships in the past, and their legacy continues to have an impact on how Kant is perceived to this day. Yet with this clearly stated position on Biermann’s person, Kant leaves no room for misinterpretation of his feelings 218 Rachel Halverson towards Biermann; he did not think highly of him in the 1970s and he did not think highly of him 15 years later. As demonstrated by the examples cited here, the parenthetical asides enrich Abspann in terms of the sheer number of added details and insights they offer into Kant’s stance on significant events and personages. Undoubtedly though, they contribute to the disjointedness of Kant’s life story which he has chosen not to recount chronologically from his birth to the present. As he notes following a parenthetical aside of almost a page in length, Mit der umfänglichen Klammerbemerkung wollte der Verfasser eine der formalen Schwierigkeiten, die ihm beim Ordnen von Erinnertem zusetzten, im Beispiel vorführen. Wenn er schon riskierte, über sich selbst zu schreiben, was laut Urteil des Weisen ohnehin eine große Dummheit ist, muß er, und sei es nur in Grenzen, beim gewählten Gegenstand bleiben, kann nicht beliebig, wie etwas beim Roman, Einfälle darbieten, sondern ist auf die Vorfälle verwiesen, aus denen sein Leben bestand und das Leben besteht. (492-93) Here Kant positions himself as an omniscient narrator intentionally cultivating a sense of objective distance between himself and the stylistic decisions he has made in compiling the information he shares in this volume. Although the parenthetical asides at times create an almost impenetrable text, Kant embraces this interweaving of information to best reproduce the interconnectedness of experiences he maintains is inherent in remembering his past. In fact he sees it as an inevitable component of writing his life story, referring to the resulting text at several points as the «Geflecht» (171). Abspann has set the stage for Kant’s recent work, and the blurred lines between autobiography and fiction continue to figure prominently in the novels he has published following the Wende as well. The first - Kormoran (1994) - opens with a one-page statement identifying Kant as the source and writer of the story which will unfold over the remaining 264 pages. For uninformed readers, Kant sarcastically recommends a quick glance at the book cover or title page. The starting point for the novel is the sixty-sixth birthday of Paul- Martin Kormoran, an influential East German literary critic who, as Kant writes, «schon deshalb eine Erfindung sein muß, weil es, soweit meine Erhebungen verläßlich sind, keinen lebenden Menschen dieses Namens gibt» (6). On the heels of Kormoran, Kant published Escape. Ein Word-Spiel in 1995. In this book, Kant details his experiences learning to use the software program Microsoft Word, an undertaking that eventually becomes a game and discloses insights into being a writer and the writing process itself. His next novel Okarina, published in 2002, is narrated by Mark Niebuhr, a figure familiar to readers from Kant’s novel Der Aufenthalt (1977). Among other adventures extending into the 1990s, this novel tells of Stalin’s invitation to Hermann Kant’s Abspann 219 Niebuhr to join him for tea in Moscow, where he teaches him to play the «Okarina,» an ancient Roman instrument. Not surprisingly, Okarina is highly autobiographical. In his most recent novel, Kino (2005), Kant’s aging narrator literally takes to the streets of Hamburg, a city familiar to readers of Abspann as the place of Kant’s birth and of his mother’s home. He borrows his great nephew’s sleeping bag and space sheet and camps out in the Spitalerstraße pedestrian zone, a position which affords him a bird’s eye view of the city’s comings and goings. «Es ist Kunst,» he explains to those who do not believe what he has written on his sign: «Sinnstudie! - Nicht stören und nichts spenden! » (5). The meditative prone posture and location in the city he has chosen also affords him ample opportunity to contemplate the past and the present. Although these fictional works offer glimpses into the life of their author, it is the published interviews Kant has given that reveal the most candid information on his life and times. For example, Leonore Krenzlin’s early interview with Kant, conducted in the summer of 1976 and included in her 1979 study of the author, contains succinct chronological statements on significant events that are interwoven in the dense textual fabric of Abspann: his childhood, including places the family lived, schools, jobs that his father held, his and his family’s position in the social order, the Jungvolk, and his electrician apprenticeship (7-12); imprisonment in Poland (16-17); studies at the ABF in Greifswald (20-21); Kantorowicz’ description of Kant in his memoirs with which Kant took issue (23); his work as chief editor for Tua res (23); his difficulties publishing Das Impressum (27-29); background information on writing Der Aufenthalt (29-30); and even his second car accident and the resulting continuous pain he experienced (30-31). In response to Krenzlin’s question about his contact to his readers, Kant replies, «Ich kriege nämlich immer gern Post, aber ich beantworte sie höchst ungern. Ich schreibe meine Antworten in Form von Büchern» (31). Thirty-two years later this confession sheds light on Kant’s prolificness since unification; his novels continue to be his main avenue of communication with his readers. An interview with Günter Gaus eight years after the fall of the Wall on November 19, 1997 contains similar straightforward statements by Kant. A large-font, capitalized title - «IHN ZU BEKEHREN WIRD KEINER SCHAFFEN» (86) - heads the interview, forewarning the reader that Kant does not apologize for or concede any guilt about his complicity with a corrupt regime. The interview is prefaced by a brief descriptive statement in which Gaus sums up Kant’s current position: «Es gibt wenige Menschen, die so viel Feindseligkeit auf sich ziehen und an denen sich die Geister so sehr scheiden» (86). Living between these two contradictory legacies, Kant de- 220 Rachel Halverson scribes his life since unification: «Es ist das Leben eines Mannes, der weiß, daß seine Sache verloren hat, und sie nicht zuletzt auch deshalb verloren hat, weil er Teil dieser Sache war» (97). He undoubtedly still holds fast to the dream of a socialist Germany but concedes his role in its failure. Yet when Gaus asks him whether he was an East German Gustav Gründgens, Kant states unequivocally, «Ich fand dieses Regime in Ordnung. Mit all seinen Lücken und Fehlern war es in Ordnung» (96). In other words, he did not comply with or exploit the system in East Germany simply to promote himself and realize personal achievements, but rather he was committed to life in the country regardless of its shortcomings. The first significant collection of interviews with Kant appears ten years later with the publication of Irmtraud Gutschke’s Hermann Kant. Die Sache und die Sachen, a 250-page volume containing interviews with Kant that Gutschke conducted over a nine-month period. Reminiscent of Abspann, the seven chapters of materials are followed by a twelve-page index of names. Gutschke and Kant’s exchange also touches frequently on major personal, professional and historical events Kant included in Abspann, a point underscored when Gutschke cites the book frequently in her questions as she probes Kant for confirmation of details or for additional information and when Kant himself references comments he made in Abspann. Gutschke’s references to Abspann reinforce the impression that she has read extensively in preparation for her conversation with Kant as well as frame the interviews as a dialogue that will go beyond information Kant already has shared with the public. A quote from one of Kant’s novels heads each chapter, symbolically linking the author’s life and work, a symbiotic connection Kant has professed openly on numerous occasions. Similar to the 1976 interview with Krenzlin, Kant’s interviews with Gutschke touch on major events in his personal and professional life, and she has compiled the material gleaned from her conversations with Kant in a chronological manner. In a discussion with Gutschke about the filming of Der Aufenthalt, Kant expands on the strategic function of the autobiographical dimension of his fiction: «Die Ahnung, ich würde mit dem Buch [Der Aufenthalt] Schwierigkeiten kriegen, hat da eine Rolle gespielt. Deswegen habe ich auch immer von einem Roman gesprochen. Allerdings gibt es nur wenige Szenen, die hinzugedacht worden sind» (22). With this disclosure, Kant reveals that the interweaving of experience and fiction in his novels was simultaneously a literary device as well as a technique for publishing successfully within a system where political relationships influenced a book’s reception, specifically in the case of Der Aufenthalt East Germany’s relationship to Poland. Hermann Kant’s Abspann 221 Over the course of almost fifty hours of interviews with Gutschke, Kant repeatedly presents himself as a Realpolitiker, consciously working within the parameters of the system. This is seen most clearly in Kant’s statements on the workers’ uprising in 1953 and on the building of the Wall. Reflecting on the aftermath of the events on June 17, 1953, he concludes, «Zudem war mir klar: Umsturzversuche in der DDR hätten zuallererst dem Gegner genutzt» (50). Although he concedes that the long-term impact the Wall had was negative for East Germans, he recalls, «So verband sich mit dem 13. August 1961 für mich erst einmal eine positive Erwartung: die Herstellung ordentlicher Verhältnisse. Dagegen lag mir mit Deutschland als Einheit nicht so sehr am Herzen. Ich war Soldat im Zeichen des großdeutschen Reiches gewesen» (60). Opposition did not present itself as an option to Kant because he believed strongly in SED ideology. On a certain level, he remained to the end committed to the belief that presenting a united front to both external and internal attacks and criticism, regardless of the cost, was the best defense against the «Klassenfeind.» The reality of being an author in East Germany, however, did temper any naiveté Kant may have had. Just one year after the Wall was built, he recalls: «Ich habe >>Die Aula<< am 13. August 1962, also am ersten Jahrestag der Mauer, zu schreiben begonnen - im Vollgefühl, daß ich jetzt richtig loslegen kann. Das hat sich freilich später als Irrtum herausgestellt» (60-61). Time and experience have shown him the parameters of his creative existence in East Germany. As evidenced by the above statements, this was true for Kant in the early years of the GDR, but it remained true until the dissolution of the country. When approached by Heidrun Hegewald shortly before the dramatic events of 1989, Kant remembers his response: Ich habe ihr gesagt: Die Argumente leuchten mir ein, aber wenn es euch recht ist, gehe ich damit zu Kurt Hager und trage ihm das vor. Hinterm Rücken mache ich nichts. Da war sie nun wieder dagegen. Ich war kein Oppositioneller. Ich war ein - oft mehr als andere - kritischer Genosse, der dabei seine Prinzipien von Disziplin hatte. (Gutschke 50-51) This position exemplifies with excruciating clarity the chasm between Kant’s self-perception as a leader of the East German literary community and how he was perceived by his fellow authors. He sees himself as an open and direct leader while others view his compliant stance as an accommodation and facilitation of a corrupt regime at the cost of other authors’ creative voice. The sheer number of novels Kant has penned since the Wende creates the impression that he is doing his best to reclaim his position in society as a productive, respected author, while ultimately providing ample, albeit perhaps one-sided, documentation for his place in literary history and in posterity. 222 Rachel Halverson Although only the test of time will tell what his legacy truly will be, early verdicts do not look promising. In the revised edition of his Kleine Literaturgeschichte der DDR published in 1996, Wolfgang Emmerich sets the tone for future evaluations of Kant’s career. On the one hand he mentions Kant as one of the authors contributing to the growing popularity of East German literature in the 1980s on both sides of the border: «Gewiß konnten schon Stefan Heym oder Hermann Kant mit einzelnen Büchern Auflagen von über 100 000 Exemplaren erzielen» (521). On the other hand, Emmerich dismisses Kant’s two novels that had appeared by the time of the reissue of his literary history - Kormoran and Escape. Ein Wordspiel - as typical of the «ressentimentgeladenen Bücher der strammen Realsozialisten wie Neutsch oder auch Kant» (502). Even the webpage devoted to him on the Aufbau Verlag website is resignedly unexpansive; his one-paragraph bio statement closes: «Er lebt seit 1962 als freier Schriftsteller in Berlin. Von 1978 bis 1989 war er Präsident des Schriftstellerverbandes der DDR.» Escape. Ein Wortspiel is not even listed among his publications. In the television interview «Zur Person: Günter Gaus im Gespräch mit Hermann Kant» broadcast on July 21, 1999, Kant appears as an aging shell of his former self and a victim of horrifyingly poor dental hygiene. Even ten years after the Wende, he remained committed to East Germany and his efforts to put into practice a political ideology different from that of the Federal Republic. For many, his decades of successful work within the East German system and his collaboration with the Stasi have eliminated the possibility for the positive reception of his work. His signature blurring of genre lines between fiction and autobiography, what has essentially become his literary modus operandi, renders it impossible to separate Kant’s life, the compromises he has made, and his collaboration with the SED and the Stasi from the books he publishes. In the opening pages of Abspann, Kant proclaims, «man schreibt im Schutze von Tatsachen, wenn man von seinem Leben schreibt» (6). The reception of his autobiography and recurring themes he speaks to in interviews refute the validity of this statement on numerous counts, confirming that Kant must accept that the parameters in which he functioned successfully in East Germany no longer exist. As evidenced by interviews he has given, Kant’s now sees his task as not defending his actions as president of the Schriftstellerverband but rather educating others about East Germany in order to render those actions comprehensible. Viewed retrospectively, Kant’s autobiography, subsequent novels, and post-Wende interviews cannot be simply dismissed as futile justifications for his success in East Germany. In Kant’s new role as eyewitness to a singular phase in German history, he leaves behind his self-defensive stance and dis- Hermann Kant’s Abspann 223 closes information in interviews and his novels that unlocks Abspann to reveal insights into a country that existed for a brief forty years, yet transformed the lives of many. The fury in response to Kant’s exposure as a Stasi-IM in 1992 confirmed that this will not be an easy task. As Karl Corino notes with respect to one glaring gap between events portrayed in Abspann and evidence from Kant’s Stasi files, Kant’s version of reality is often «[o]ffenbar ein frommes Märchen, das nur haltbar war, solange Kants IM-Akte und die Dossiers der Opfer nicht gefunden waren» (21). 6 Kant’s fairy tale, however, is one with a preface that he wishes no one will forget. In a debate between Kant and Gerhard Zwerenz, who left East Germany in 1957 (Emmerich, [1981] 224), Kant confirms that his strong commitment to East Germany stems from his four years as a prisoner of war in Poland (12). As he explains in the exchange with Zwerenz, his commitment to the literary profession remains in the realm of fairy tales: «Das Schöne, das wirklich ganz Hervorragende, das ungeheuer Ermutigende an dem Schriftstellerberuf ist, daß er zu den wenigen gehört, dessen Angehörige sich wirklich à la Münchhausen an dem Zopfe selber aus dem Sumpf ziehen können. […] Da sitzt du nun drin in der Tunke, nun sieh mal zu, was kannst’n, du kannst nicht viel, du kannst ’ne Geschichte schreiben, nun sieh mal zu, daß es ’ne gute Geschichte wird; dann versucht man’s, und wenn’s klappt, zieht man sich ein bißchen raus.» (67) These sentiments explain Abspann and the numerous other novels that have followed in the intervening years. It is Kant’s devotion to the literary profession and the act of writing a good story that now more than ever not only sustain him but serve him as a buffer between his past deeds and demands for accountability. Notes 1 I would like to thank Carol Anne Costabile-Heming and Jennifer Redmann for the thoughtful feedback and suggestions they provided in the final preparation of this manuscript. 2 In his Mapping the Contours of Oppression: Subjectivity, Truth and Fiction in Recent German Autobiographical Treatments of Totalitarianism, Owen Evans offers a contrasting view on this publishing phenomenon: «The truth is that the reasons for this autobiographical trend cannot easily be pinned down, and to do so would extend beyond the scope of the present study [i.e.Owen’s examination of autobiographical texts by Ludwig Harig, Uwe Saeger, Ruth Klüger, Günter de Bruyn, Günter Kunert, Christoph Hein, Grete Weil, and Monika Maron]» (2). 3 Tate in fact references Emmerich’s evaluation of the significance of the semi-autobiographical fiction by Strittmatter, Kant, Wolf, de Bruyn and Plenzdorf (Tate 4) 224 Rachel Halverson 4 The Wochenpost was the first publication to print advanced copies of individual chapters from Abspann. («Hermann Kant erinnert sich» 13) 5 For a critical analysis of the interplay between Fritz Rudolf Fries’ biography and his novels, including his exposure in 1996 as an IM and the resulting condemnation in the media, see Nause. 6 For an initial report of Kant’s complicity with the Stasi in Der Spiegel, see «Vermisse das Wort Pinscher.» Works Cited Andress, Reinhard. «Hermann Kants Erinnerungsbuch Abspann: ein Beispiel von Legendenbau.» Seminar: A Journal of Germanic Studies 34.2 (1998): 137-48. de Bruyn, Günter. «Scharfmaul und Prahlhans. Der ‹Abspann› des Hermann Kant: der ehemalige Präsident des DDR-Schriftstellerverbandes hat seine Erinnerungen geschrieben.» Die Zeit 19 Sept. 1991, natl. ed.: 65+. Corino, Karl. «Zuverlässig, verschwiegen, einsatzbereit. IM Martin alias Hermann Kant als Mitarbeiter der Stasi.» Introduction. Die Akte Kant. IM <<Martin>>, die Stasi und die Literatur in Ost und West. Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1995. 9-53. Emmerich, Wolfgang. Kleine Literaturgeschichte der DDR. Darmstadt: Luchterhand Verlag, 1981. -. Kleine Literaturgeschichte der DDR. Erweiterte Neuausgabe. Leipzig: Gustav Kiepenheuer Verlag, 1996. Evans, Owen. Mapping the Contours of Oppression: Subjectivity, Truth and Fiction in Recent German Autobiographical Treatments of Totalitarianism. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi, 2006. Franke, Konrad. Die Literatur der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik. München: Kindler, 1971. -. «Selbstporträt eines Regierbaren. Hermann Kants Rückblick auf sein ‹halb vertanes Leben›.» Süddeutsche Zeitung 2/ 3 Oct. 1991: VI. Fries, Fritz Rudolf. «Von der Einsamkeit des Langstreckenläufers. Hermann Kants Autobiografie.» Neue deutsche Literatur 39.11 (1991): 131-37. Gaus, Günter. Zur Person: Jurek Becker, Daniela Dahn, Walter Jens, Hermann Kant, Helga Königsdorf, Christa Wolf. 2nd ed. Berlin: edition ost, 1998. Grambow, Jürgen. «Bericht vom Hofe. Hermann Kants Erinnerungen ‹Abspann›.» Frankfurter Rundschau 17 Sept. 1991: 13. Grub, Frank Thomas. >Wende< und >Einheit< im Spiegel der deutschsprachigen Literatur: Ein Handbuch. Vol. 1. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003. Gutschke, Irmtraud. Hermann Kant. Die Sache und die Sachen. 2. verbesserte Ausgabe. Berlin: Das neue Berlin, 2007. Haase, Horst. «‹Abspann› von Hermann Kant. Bittere Bilanz.» Neues Deutschland 9-14 Oct. 1991: 5. Hermann Kant. Aufbau Verlag Website. 22 Sept. 2008 <http: / / www.aufbau-verlag. de/ index.php4? page=32&&show=908275>. «Hermann Kant erinnert sich.» Neue Zeit 4 Sept. 1991: 13. Kant, Hermann. Abspann: Erinnerung an meine Gegenwart. Berlin and Weimar: Aufbau-Verlag, 1991. Hermann Kant’s Abspann 225 -. Escape: ein Word-Spiel. Berlin and Weimar: Aufbau-Verlag, 1995. -. Kino. Berlin and Weimar: Aufbau-Verlag, 2005. -. Kormoran. Berlin and Weimar: Aufbau-Verlag, 1994. -. Okarina. Berlin and Weimar: Aufbau-Verlag, 2002. Kant, Hermann, and Gerhard Zwerenz. Unendliche Wende. Ein Streitgespräch. Ed. Joachim Jahns. Querfurt: Dingsda-Verlag, 1998. Krenzlin, Leonore. Hermann Kant. Leben und Werk. 1979. Westberlin: Verlag das europäische Buch; Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1979. Kunert, Günter. «Ein Präsident blickt zurück. Hermann Kants Geschichtsfälschungen.» Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 8 Oct. 1991: L9. «Laotse geht von Bord.» Der Spiegel 16 Sept. 1991: 240-44. Lewin, Waldtraut. «Wut auf silbernem Tablett. Überlegungen zu Hermann Kants ‹Abspann›.» Berliner Zeitung 16 Oct. 1991: 17. Loest, Erich. «Immer oben, immer vorne.» Die Welt 8 Oct. 1991: XV. Nause, Tanja. «How Life Becomes Literature: Uncovering the Principle of Writing in Three Novels by Fritz Rudolf Fries.» German Life and Letters 58.3 (2005): 326- 43. Tate, Dennis. Shifting Perspectives: East German Autobiographical Narratives before and after the End of the GDR. Rochester: Camden House, 2007. «‹Vermisse das Wort Pinscher.› Ein Staatsschriftsteller im Stasi-Dienst: Die Spitzel- Karriere des Genossen Hermann Kant alias IM ‹Martin›.» Der Spiegel 5 Oct. 1992: 323-36.