North American Fiction and Film

Chapter 10: Walter Abish

Chapter Ten: Walter Abish's How German Is It
Introduction
In this chapter, we will make a few brief introductory remarks about Walter Abish's How German Is It as a guide to your reading of the novel. We will then ask you to look at two readings which deal with the novel in more depth before moving on to the review questions.
The text
To begin with, we would like to say something in general about the detective genre, and then to examine the narrative in these terms.
The detective genre
The detective-story genre usually concerns social norms and the law along with their "interpretations," transgressions from these, and how the guilty (transgressors) are caught and punished. The detective is usually concerned with three things: motive, means and opportunity. In other words, the detective must discover or sort out from sets of imbricated data who did it and why. But in order to do this, he or she needs to determine a clear motive (revenge, jealousy, temporary insanity, business advantage), some sort of means (the murder weapon or the hit-man), and the opportunity (e.g. if the murder was committed in person, the suspect's alibi must be penetrated; if the murder was done by someone else then some connection must be made with the suspect). The narrator of How German Is It is concerned with all three (motive, means and opportunity) and the suspect is Germany itself.
The title: How German Is It
One of the ways in which How German Is It can be read is as a kind of detective novel with the narrator playing the role of a sort of tour-guide (he provides much of his descriptions of Germany in the fashion of a tour-guide brochure) and detective (he interrogates everything as he goes). However, although the guide-detective asks all sorts of questions, he does not answer many. The reader is left up in the air, so to speak. This process is evident in the title itself, which at one level appears to outline the central problem the narrator has set himself: how German is it? However, we are not told what the "it" refers to, and the title appears to be missing a question mark.
Does the "it" refer to certain activities or behaviour? Is the question focusing on Germany now? Sometime in the past? Both? Perhaps the question refers to the notion of what it means to be German (that is, to the idea that there is a German essence-as the German philosopher Brumhold believes (5)-which makes German people what they are); or perhaps the question is asking whether what happened during the Second World War was an aberration which the Germans have overcome.
Does the alibi hold up?
In a detective story, as one might expect, a good deal of the detective's time is taken up with checking out alibis and talking to witnesses or people who provide information about motive, means and/or opportunity. The detective's game is to unravel disinformation (intentional or otherwise) and to establish a clear "interpretation" of the facts. In this, and the analogy has been made many times, the detective is very much like a reader or critic. In all this, the detective relies heavily on analytical and/or forensic reason. Our guide-detective appears to be involved in these kinds of activities.
However, nobody, least of all the suspects, are expected to tell the truth. Even the detective is allowed a "porky" or two if it helps out his case. Moreover, the detective is often forced to go down false trails in order to discover the "truth." It's the detective's job to sort all these "false" leads out, and the intensity and interest of any detective story may hinge on just how interesting these false leads are. We as readers know that the "revelation" or exposure of the criminal (including motive, means and opportunity) is left more-or-less to the last minute although this revelation is often made in a way that makes it seem that it should have been obvious all along.
It's up to you
In How German Is It, the guide-detective sifts and weighs a great deal of evidence in the course of his narrative, tracks down many false leads ("Nothing can be ruled out" 7), and interrogates various characters and practices ("Answer. Answer immediately" 15). What we discover, however, is that, having convinced us that he is a detective with its implied promise that he will eventually provide all the relevant answers, the guide-detective leaves us not knowing who did it or why. It is as if, as with most detective novels, the reader is asked to go on a quest with the narrator (that is, we also sift evidence, follow false trails, and so on). However, when we get to the moment of revelation, the detective leaves the room and says: it's up to you. What this suggests is that there is more significance in the evidence than we might have first allowed, even though there may not be a definitive answer to the question. In other words, we may in fact learn a great deal simply by sifting the evidence. This is one way to read How German Is It; another is that the narrator is simply pulling our leg (see Tony Schirato's reading below).
Now let's look in more detail at the opening section of the text: "The edge of forgetfulness."
"The edge of forgetfulness"
An arrival: "Ihren pass, bitte"
From the opening words of the novel, the narrator appears to be interrogating someone: "What are the first words a visitor from France can expect to hear upon his arrival at a German airport?" (1). He immediately answers his own question, but also as a question: "Bonjour? or, Guten Tag? or Ihren Pass, bitte?" In our haste to get into the story, we might overlook the significance of these possibilities. If the German official opens with "Bonjour," this might suggest that the Germans are an open, friendly, welcoming sort of people. This might also apply in the case of "Guten Tag," except speaking in German to a French visitor suggests a certain nationalist, even parochial, pride. Opening with "Ihren pass, bitte," however, brings back memories of times when officials were very powerful in that every person in Germany, citizen or other, had to have a pass which could be checked at any time. Failure to produce an appropriate pass could have serious consequences. It is significant that the narrator does not resolve this question, but moves on to another.
The narrator wonders whether Ulrich Hargenau, who, we soon find out, is a German returning after some time in France, will be remembered by the officials, both for his aristocratic connections and for his involvement in "a maniacal attempt to overthrow the democratic government of the Bundesrepublik" (1). The narrator then reassures us that "Ulrich has nothing to fear," and suggests that the best answer to give when asked the purpose of one's visit is "pleasure." Apparently, the German officials understand this answer for it implies that the visitor is going to admire German "castles, churches, cathedrals."
The tour guide
The narrator then shifts his mode, for he provides a kind of tour-guide brochure (why not visit the Rhine, and enjoy a music festival or two, and so on). Then he shifts mode again, this time as a sort of omniscient narrator where he answers a question he has not asked (i.e. why do people visit Germany?):
They come to peer into their past, to look up their relatives or the places where their parents were born. They come to rediscover their German roots. They also come to visit the grave of Goethe and to walk in a German forest and absorb that spiritual attachment to nature that underlies all things German. (2)
Compare this with the description the narrator provides a short time later about the philosopher Brumhold's quest of the German essence:
Brumhold might well ask of his metaphysical quest, which is rooted in the rich, dark soil of der Schwarzwald, rooted in the sombre, deliberately solitary existence that derives its passion, its energy, its striving for exactitude from the undulating hills, the pine forests, and the erect motionless figure of the gamekeeper in the green uniform. (5)
We could almost say that what the visitor wants, Brumhold wants-that is, to ascertain the "essence" of being German.
This issue turns out to be significant in the context of the novel but a false lead at this point in the story, for the only character introduced so far, Ulrich, is himself German, and as the story progresses, visitors to Germany feature in none but the first chapter, and then only in the abstract. Moreover, why all this changing of modes (interrogator, tour-guide, detective)? Why this apparent apologia for even thinking of going to Germany? Why treat Ulrich as a visitor when he is not? Perhaps we as readers are the visitors the guide-narrator is addressing. If we are, we have already learnt not to trust the guide-detective for the answers he provides are not the answers to the questions he has asked.
In a sense, the guide-detective makes the reader work for understanding. For instance, he goes on to mention (after all the discussion about visitors) that Ulrich's return to Germany is taken for granted anyway as he is a German with a "respectable" German name: "He is free to come and go. France? Why not? A fondness for all things French is not unusual. It does not invite criticism. The past has been forgotten" (2).
The first lie: The past has not been forgotten
Here the narrator tells his first direct lie. The past has not been forgotten, least of all by the guide-detective. He has been busy reminding us about it in all sorts of ways, and will continue to do so for the rest of the section (and the novel). The characteristics he reminds us of are those identifiable "German" stereotypes associated with even the most cursory familiarity with Germany. Our guide-detective "reminds" us by asking what we would notice on our arrival:
Undoubtedly the cleanliness. The painstaking cleanliness. As well as the all-pervasive sense of order. A reassuring dependability. A punctuality. An almost obsessive punctuality. Then, of course, there is the new, striking architecture. Innovative? hardly. Imaginative? Not really. But free of that former sombre and authoritative massivity. (2-3)
Here our guide-detective provides a catalogue of stereotypes: the Germans are not just clean but painstakingly so, and they are obsessively punctual. They love order (which is why officials are so powerful). They are well-mannered, well-behaved and (even) friendly to foreigners (4).
The architecture reflects their character-sombre, inward, needing an authoritarian hand to keep them in control, or to control their passions:
True, now and then-it could happen anywhere else-this smooth and agreeable surface is broken by a sudden boisterousness, an unexpected violence, an outburst punctuated by the pounding of beer mugs on a table until they shatter, not to mention the broad, red-faced, meaty anger that is thrust aggressively forward and made to appear, with its accompanying black leather coat and black leather gloves, more menacing than it actually might be. (3)
Like the glass surface of the skyscrapers which reflect the carefully re-constructed pre-war buildings, the veneer of the friendly German our guide-detective has portrayed so far is also surface. Lurking beneath this surface is the old Germanness-red-faced, meaty anger dressed in menacing black leather. What the visitor sees, then, is what the guide-detective doesn't explicitly show. Nonetheless, under the guise of pointing out the new Germany's new surfaces and gleaming cars, he continually apologises for a past which he is determined we shall not forget.
Assurance as foreboding
In this context, the guide-detective's constant assurances that everything is perfectly OK ("It is possible to arrive in Germany without the slightest fear of an imminent clash with someone in authority. No, there is no reason to fear the Germans any longer" 4) work, in effect, as remembered forebodings. For instance, when he says that to fear the Germans is "preposterously unrealistic," that it represents "a deeply buried desire to retain the image of the Germans as collectively dangerous and destructive, bent on destroying and eradicating anything that might remotely be considered a threat to their existence," we begin to feel a little anxious that we ever decided to come on the tour at all. Even the guide-detective's positive assurances that Germany is now a stable post-industrial society which has learned to accept foreigners in that it has allowed some foreign words into its language is made in a threatening tone, for we are told that Brumhold is keeping an eye on the language because he believes that it is the key to the German soul (5).
Such metaphysical significance cannot be taken lightly for we are told that the "Einzieh group" of left-wing radicals had organised their first acts of public disobedience in Würtenburg (where Ulrich has come), a comment which is immediately followed by an image of the tourist strolling about taking in the sights of Würtenburg, drinking coffee at the cafes and eying off the German pastries (i.e. violence could strike the unsuspecting tourist at any time).
"Nothing can be ruled out"
The narrator immediately warns us: "Nothing can be ruled out" (7), a statement he immediately qualifies by saying: "The question remains, do the Germans still expect to be asked embarrassing questions about their past and about their present and what, if any, ideas they may have about the future?" (7). Again, our guide-detective does not answer this question, but goes on to tell us that the Germans do have a reverence for the past (even if the past comes in the form of replicas) and the ideals that it represents, suggesting, perhaps, that the past will influence the future. The narrator notes that the Germans lack the flair of the French, "despite all their theories on aesthetics," which suggests that the obsession with the past is the cause.
The first section of the novel, predictably given the guide-detective's performance so far, ends with a list of questions which he "forgets" to answer (e.g. "What is well known? What is not known? What is surmised? What is omitted? . . ." 8). What we have worked out about our guide-detective by the end of this section is that he asks a lot of questions which he isn't prepared to answer, that he provides answers to questions that he hasn't asked, that he is determined not to let us forget that which he says we no longer need to worry about, that he is very selective in the "evidence" he does present, and that he has a penchant for sending us down false or misleading trails. Hardly the sort of guide one would want on any kind of tour.
The section finishes by switching to first person. Ulrich says: "I am returning from the edge of forgetfulness" (9). This raises the possibility that the guide-detective is really Ulrich (he is a writer, after all); this issue, like so many others, is not resolved by the end of the novel. Ulrich's comment does question the integrity of the alibi the guide-detective has carefully constructed and undermined in this first section: does the alibi of forgetfulness stand up to scrutiny? Probably not. The connection between the purpose of both the visitors' and Brumhold's project is not accidental: the gap between the "edge of forgetfulness" (9) and the embracing of a memory is as slim as the difference between the facade of surface order and meaty anger lurking beneath. The guide-detective is carefully establishing that Germans have the means, the motive and the opportunity for recidivism-that is, very little stands between the Bundesrepublik and the Third Riech except a kind of cultivated forgetfulness. What we have, then, is a narrator who is unreliable despite his apparent omniscience.
As the novel progresses, we discover that the guide-detective refuses to answer the question the philosopher Brumhold has asked and spent a life-time trying to answer: what makes Germans German? Nonetheless, the suggestion being made is that what the Germans have done, others also have done; the narrative draws specific attention to the Americans and their involvement with Vietnam. Consequently, the novel also shows that the question "how German is it" could easily be rewritten "how German it is" or "How European Is It" (it is) or "How American Is It" (it is)? In any event, by focusing on the "re-rebuilding" of Germany, the novel (with its numerous architectural metaphors) highlights the tensions between constructing sameness (re-building Germany as a replica of the past whilst leaving out the unpleasantness of WWII and Nazism) and recognising difference (showing how the tensions between the economic infrastructure and the cultural superstructure are repressed for the sake of the former, and how this repression is an originary gesture of fascism).
Readings
Please now read Tony Schirato's and Dieter Saalmann's discussions of How German Is It in the Resource Materials book (Readings 13 and 14).
Tony Schirato argues that the "apparently omniscient narrator" of Walter Abish's How German Is It appears determined to prove "that Nazism and its related tendencies constitute, not a kind of historical aberration but, instead, the essence of Germanness" ("The Politics of Writing" 69). This means that the novel undermines the view that the Nazis were an historical aberration, partly because it is a "comic deconstruction" of this "fiction of contemporary German innocence" (69), and partly because it, in Rene Girard's words, denies "'the sovereignty of the individual more radically than either god or destiny'" ("The Politics of Writing and Being Written: A Study of Walter Abish's How German Is It" Novel 24.1 (1990): 69.) Do you agree with Schirato's assessment of the novel?
Review questions
10-1 What do you think the (guide-detective) narrator is up to? How do you respond to his repeated questions?
10-2 What role does Franz play in the novel (especially his matchstick rebuilding of the concentration camp)?
10-3 What do you make of Brumhold's "quest" (e.g. 5, 19, 25)?
10-4 What is the significance of the repeated references to Ulrich's father (e.g. 11, 34)?
10-5 Ulrich makes "use" of those he meets for his own books (e.g. 46). Bearing this in mind, do you see any parallels between Ulrich and the narrator (e.g. an interviewer says to Ulrich: "One reads your books, always feeling as if some vital piece of information is being withheld" 52)?
10-6 What do you make of "the idea of Switzerland" (see 52-53)?
10-7 What is the significance of the section "The purpose of the antiterrorist film" (241-242), and how could you relate this to the narrative itself?

Works cited
Schirato, Anthony. "The Politics of Writing and Being Written: A Study of Walter Abish's How German Is It." Novel 24.1 (1990): 69-85.
Siegle, Robert. "On the Subject of Walter Abish and Kathy Acker." Literature and Psychology 33.3&4 (1987): 39-57.