Women Writing Home
Heimat and Belonging in Exile Writing after 1933
Summary
Using Heimat theory, nomadic subjectivity and transnationalism, the women’s works are interrogated to encourage a reassessment of traditional conceptions of Heimat and belonging for refugees, exiles, and those distanced – whether physically or emotionally – from «home».
Excerpt
Table Of Contents
- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Chapter 1 Introduction
- Chapter 2 Belonging, Heimat and Transnationalism
- Chapter 3 Historical Context
- Chapter 4 Gerda Mayer and the Exile Experience through Verse
- Chapter 5 Gabriele Tergit: A British Berliner
- Chapter 6 Ruth Feiner: A Young Woman of Europe
- Chapter 7 Eva Priester: An Austrian by Choice
- Chapter 8 Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my utmost thanks and appreciation to all the staff and students at the School of Advanced Study’s Institute of Languages, Cultures and Societies, to my wonderful supervisors, Professor Charmian Brinson and Professor Godela Weiss- Sussex, and to the generous funding from the Martin and Hannah Norbert- Miller Trust.
Thank you to my Nana, Brunhild, whose childhood in Germany inspired me to pursue my area of study, and to my parents, sister, and to all who helped me on my journey.
Finally, a very special thanks to Jamie, my constant cheerleader, and to my son, Felix, who brightens every day.
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
The concept of ‘home’ takes on a different meaning entirely when one is distanced from it. Home moves from a place of everyday comfort to a desired idyll, the memory of it becoming increasingly embellished over time. For the thousands of German-speaking refugees exiled from Nazi-occupied Europe in the 1930s, the relationship to, memory of and feelings towards home proved complex and ever-changing. Once in Britain, the many refugees forced to leave Germany after the Nazi’s assumption of power were faced with having to learn a new language, understand a new culture – and create a new home.
Attitudes towards home are inextricably tied up with feelings of belonging, and for the German-speaking world, Heimat represents a very specific type of belonging. Traditionally a highly gendered notion, the concept of Heimat has evolved over the past few decades and is now seen to represent a more fluid type of belonging, no longer restricted to a geographical location, but expanded to represent belonging in a time, space and/or community. Through exploring the work of German-speaking writers in exile, it is possible to gain an insight into attitudes towards and presentations of home, Heimat and belonging for those forced from their countries of origin.
Historically, those exiled German writers who were male have received much more scholarly attention than their female counterparts: the names Stefan Zweig, Erich Fried and Bertolt Brecht are relatively well known, even outside of German and Austrian Exile Studies. Yet where women writers are concerned, only a handful of the more successful ones have been researched, and even then, the names Martina Wied or Hermynia zur Mühlen remain largely unheard of. As Sonja Hilzinger, writing on the subject of Jewish German women writers in exile, states: ‘[A]ll too often the silence imposed by exile turned into permanent neglect.’1 In light of this oversight and underrepresentation, this book aims to shed light on some of the lesser-known female German-speaking women writers who were exiled in Britain from 1933, exploring the life and work of Gerda Mayer, Gabriele Tergit, Ruth Feiner and Eva Priester. Focusing on the issues of home, Heimat and belonging as represented both in the writers’ literary output, but also in their private and personal lives whilst in exile, this book endeavours to give these women writers the attention they have often lacked in this field.
Gerda Mayer, Gabriele Tergit, Ruth Feiner and Eva Priester can all be seen as exceptions to the ‘norm’, not only in terms of their occupations as writers (the majority of female exiles were at this time in domestic service or other menial labour) but also in the way in which they wrote. Notably, the four women writers do not write about specifically ‘female’ issues yet choose to focus on more universal – and often political – subjects such as exile life, government policy, history and national belonging. Rather than centring on the female experience, and perhaps only discussing gender-specific concerns, the women’s writing demonstrates a certain amount of gender-neutrality as well as activism and presents the writers as independent women who were not defined by their gender. These writers should thus be described as exile writers, rather than women exile writers, seen on an equal footing to male exile writers, and their work viewed as equally valuable, articulate and important in our understanding of the exile experience.
There is much discussion among exile scholars about the use of ‘exile’ and ‘refugee’ to describe those people who came to Britain to escape Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Traditionally, the term ‘exile’ was preferred: indeed, the many organisations founded to research this area include ‘exile’ in the title, such as the Gesellschaft für Exilforschung, or the Research Centre for German and Austrian Exile Studies. Now, there is increasingly a move towards using ‘refugee’ to describe this group of people. Although much of a generalisation, exiles as a group can be seen as those who intend to return ‘home’, whereas the refugees, on the whole, do not see this as an aim.
This trend to move away from ‘exile’, and towards ‘refugee’ can be seen as a way to reserve the term ‘exile’ for those more prominent individuals who were forced to leave Nazi Germany, such as Thomas Mann, Oscar Kokoschka and Alfred Kerr, setting them apart from the other more ‘ordinary’ refugees who left Germany. These ‘exiles’, often political figures, generally did not make much of an effort to integrate and intended to return home to rebuild a better Germany. In contrast, many of the more ordinary ‘refugees’, such as Kindertransportees and those women who were forced to become domestics, largely attempted to assimilate into British culture and did not intend to return to their place of origin. Thus, the change from ‘exile’ to ‘refugee’ can be seen to reflect the changing nature of the people who are being researched.
The way in which these groups of people are described can also be seen in a more political light. The term ‘exile’ is seen by some as elitist, as it places the Germans in the 1930s above other refugees who came to Britain throughout history, such as the Belgian refugees in the First World War. In German, the term ‘Emigranten’ is commonly used, although its equivalent, ‘emigrant’ is rarely seen in English texts. ‘Émigré’ is also used, for example, in Daniel Snowman’s ‘The Hitler Emigres’, yet this term carries certain class connotations.2
Despite the nuanced differences in definition of ‘exile’ and ‘refugee’, this book will utilise both terms. It will discuss ‘exile writing’, and thus the women who produced this will be defined as ‘exiles’. Further, those organisations, such as the Austrian Centre, and Free German League of Culture (discussed in later chapters) which were seen as ‘exile organisations’ will also be referred to in this way. However, when discussing the larger groups of people who sought refuge in Britain from Nazi Europe, I will use ‘refugees’. Where the women themselves refer to exiles or refugees, I will discuss their work using the term used by them in that instance.
The Writers
As experiences of exile differ greatly, a diverse selection of women writers has been chosen for comparison in this book. The four writers explored had very different lives and experiences before exile, and all came to Britain at different ages, which is a factor to consider when evaluating themes such as identity, home and belonging. Those women who came to Britain at a younger age would have learned English much earlier in their lives, which not only may have influenced their writing but also their sense of identity. Further, for those who had spent the majority of their life in Germany or Austria and came to Britain as adults, their ties to ‘home’ may have been stronger. The variation in age and circumstance, then, was a strong factor in choosing these women.
Despite all being German speakers, the four women researched in this book all came from different countries: Germany (Gabriele Tergit and Ruth Feiner), Czechoslovakia (Gerda Mayer) and Russia/Austria (Eva Priester). It is therefore fruitful to explore whether the country they came from impacted their feelings of belonging towards their former home during and after the war. Relations to Germany, for example, may have been more difficult than to Czechoslovakia, due to the impact of National Socialism, and it could be assumed that those German-speaking exiles who had come from countries other than Germany might be more likely to return.
The reasons for these women’s exile in Britain were largely due to their anti-Nazi political stances (in the cases of Gabriele Tergit, Eva Priester and Ruth Feiner). Gerda Mayer, however, who came via the Kindertransport, is an exception and, being a child, was not in the public eye with regard to her political views. Race was also an issue, as all four women, being Jewish, sought an escape from racial persecution. However, on the whole, none of the women strongly identified as religiously Jewish: Gabriele Tergit and Gerda Mayer rarely mention their Jewishness; Eva Priester never refers to her religion; and Ruth Feiner, although she does reflect on the subject of Jewish identity in one of her novels, never discusses her own Jewish identity. As Jewishness is not a main aspect of these women’s lives, the experience of exile itself, as well as that of home, can be more thoroughly and accurately examined.
Other German-speaking women writers in exile, such as Hilde Spiel or Erika Mann are more widely known within Exile Studies: this book, though, considers women writers who are less known, and therefore less researched. The reasons for the lack of research on the four writers may include the fact that many of their texts are no longer published (with the exception of Gabriele Tergit, whose novel Effingers was republished in 2019).3 This is not to say that the women have never been written about: indeed they have, albeit briefly, and in very different contexts to that of this book and its focus. Gabriele Tergit, for example, has received academic attention, yet study has mainly focused on her writing in Weimar Berlin, or on her novels: little has been done where her writing in exile is concerned.4 Similarly, Eva Priester has also been studied in a few instances: she is probably best known for her involvement with Zeitspiegel, the Free Austrian Movement, and her political engagement, yet a comprehensive study of her writing in exile is missing. Gerda Mayer and Ruth Feiner are much under-researched, and only a couple of short studies exist about each woman: even then, these are admittedly just mentions in passing, or form a part of an analysis of a larger group of subjects.
The women’s differences in background invite comparison, but so do the variety in language and genre in which they wrote. Genre here is an important factor, and the four writers studied have used varying styles, tones and topics depending on the medium in which they were writing. Poetry, for example, can be a more fluid and abstract way of reflecting on themes of home, whereas an article for a newspaper, aimed at a specific audience and edited to appear in keeping with particular ideals, is likely to present a different image. In comparing poetry, journalism, essays and novels written in both German and English, we can gain a broader and more detailed understanding of the various approaches these writers chose to take in representing themes of home and belonging.
Gender and Exile
With regard to the study of gender in early Exile Studies, exile scholar Katherina Prager states that ‘persecution and expulsion first seemed to function as a “victim equaliser” and gender was deemed irrelevant’,5 and it was the ‘predominantly male elite’ that formed the subject of the so-called ‘first wave’ of Exile Studies.6 However, this soon gave way to more of a focus on the previously ignored women exiles in the mid-1980s. Prager notes that ‘the focus on women in exile also led to a fundamental expansion of the concept of exile itself, including research on aspects of everyday life, the second generation and interaction with recent migration theories’.7 Since the 1990s there has been a significantly greater focus on the specific experience of women in exile within the field. Reflecting on this initial neglect of the women exiles, and especially exiled women writers, Dagmar Lorenz explains that
the seemingly objective and gender-neutral perspective of earlier exile scholarship tended to exclude a differentiated examination of the exile experience from a gender-specific perspective – the male experience was implicitly treated as the norm, as too were the literary styles and messages of male authors.8
In contrast, women were traditionally ‘seen to write for the purpose of self-therapy or emancipation, rather than self-historicisation or epochal awareness. Seldom were they attributed with agency or independence.’9 As a result of this belief, men’s memoirs of the exilic situation were deemed more important. However, Barbara Louis explains that whereas the majority of memoirs, biographies and autobiographies concerning male exiles ‘predominantly focused on professional and public experiences, it was only examinations of the lives of women that began to provide detailed insight into daily life and the everyday challenges of exile’.10
Writing by women in exile can therefore play a central role in our overall understanding of life in exile, and thus must be treated not only as equally important as texts by male writers but also as texts which may provide a very different perspective of the exile experience.
Being a writer in exile meant either having to learn to write in the new language of their host country or finding an audience and publisher for work in its original language. More so than in other creative endeavours, such as art or music, trying to forge a career as a writer or an actor in a new country was extremely difficult, due to the linguistic differences. Axel Englund explains that in exile,
some writers continue to work in their mother tongue, which is nevertheless altered or influenced by the alien context; others take the leap into another language, in part or completely, and thus bring the experiences of their own language across into a foreign one; others yet mix multiple languages in their work and thus create a literature that resists translation by sprawling across linguistic borders.11
Writing, then, as a profession, was no easy feat for exiles. Arguably, women writers in exile experienced more difficulty in making a living from their trade than male writers. As it was generally easier for women to get paid employment, such as domestic labour or other menial labour, it was often the females who would have to earn the money for the family, which consequently left little time for ‘pastimes’ like writing. In contrast, many male writers had the time to put pen to paper. This scenario can be seen in the experience of Julia Kerr, whose husband Alfred, famous as a critic back home in Germany, yet unemployed in England, was able to continue with his writing (although this brought in little money) whilst she was unable to keep up her musical ambitions due to her secretarial workload and attempts to earn enough money to keep the family going.12 Likewise, Bertolt Brecht’s partner Helene Weigel, who was an actress prior to exile, ‘did all the housekeeping and sacrificed her career for her husband’, although she did manage to resume her career after her return to Germany.13 In addition, it has been stated that many men with high-status jobs back in Germany were simply unwilling to take a menial job whilst in exile due to pride. Many scholars were initially quick to suggest that women had a better experience of exile than men: Sybille Quack states that looking at many experiences of German-speaking women exiled from Nazi Germany, ‘one commonality emerges: Refugee women were better able to cope than refugee men were’.14 Marion Berghahn equally suggests that ‘[the women] seem to have coped better emotionally’.15 However, a number of articles, such as ‘A Woman’s Place … ?’ by Charmian Brinson,16 present a strong counterargument for this.
Structure
This book will use the themes of home and belonging as anchors through which to connect and compare the women’s texts. Chapter 1 will introduce the book’s approach and contextual reading. Chapter 2 will begin by exploring the theories through which the women’s writing will be analysed, looking at belonging, Heimat, transnationalism and Rosi Braidotti’s theories of nomadic subjectivity in order to provide a framework of the various theories used in subsequent chapters. Following this, Chapter 3 will discuss the historical contexts both of the countries Gerda Mayer, Gabriele Tergit, Ruth Feiner and Eva Priester left, and the Britain they arrived in. This chapter will explore the social and economic situations of Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Britain on the eve of the Second World War, before providing a background on the subject of women in exile. The latter section will briefly discuss refugee life in Britain, covering the exile organisations that were formed during the war, integration and assimilation as well as the attitudes of the host country to the German-speaking refugees. The next four chapters will be dedicated to each of the four women who form the subject of this book. Chapter 4 will analyse the life and work of Gerda Mayer, beginning with her biographical information before discussing her poetry with reference to the representation of Heimat, belonging and identity. Gabriele Tergit is the subject of Chapter 5, which similarly follows the approach of biography followed by a literary analysis of her work. In this chapter, the role of language and cultural institutions prove central concerns. Chapter 6 will focus on Ruth Feiner, whose biography will be explored before an analysis of her wartime novels, with pertinence to the concept of identity and transnationalism. Finally, Chapter 7 looks at Eva Priester, her complicated history and her dedication to the Communist cause which influenced her writing so greatly. The book will conclude with Chapter 8, in which the four women’s lives and writing will be brought together in a cross-comparison and overall conclusion.
Details
- Pages
- VIII, 244
- Publication Year
- 2024
- ISBN (PDF)
- 9781800796713
- ISBN (ePUB)
- 9781800796720
- ISBN (Softcover)
- 9781800796706
- DOI
- 10.3726/b18971
- Language
- English
- Publication date
- 2024 (December)
- Keywords
- belonging refugee literature refugee and migration studies women in exile women writers Heimat transnationalism translingualism identity
- Published
- Oxford, Berlin, Bruxelles, Chennai, Lausanne, New York, 2024. VIII, 244 pp.
- Product Safety
- Peter Lang Group AG
