27 Lässig, Jüdische Wege ins Bürgertum, 667. As she notes, the argument has been anticipated by others, notably David Sorkin in The Transformation of German Jewry; cf. 109. Lässig employs Pierre Bordieu’s notion of “cultural capital” as an aid in understanding this phenomenon, although she notes that his general attribution of primacy to economic capital does not fit the situation she finds among her subjects. I both use and question Bordieu’s notion in regard to various levels of culture in Chapter 13. It is worth noting at this point that if Jews did indeed make use of “cultural capital” for their entry into bourgeois society, it was at least partly of a negative sort, since one thing that oriented them away from traditional social relations was their exclusion from guild organizations and the values they imparted to German life. Bordieu’s thinking offers little scope for recognizing the importance of such “negative” capital, that is the advantages that sometimes accrue from outsider status.
28 Lässig, Jüdische Wege ins Bürgertum, 596ff., citing Monika Richarz, Der Eintritt der Juden in die akademischen Berufe (Tübingen, 1974); also Lässig, ibid., 618–19, where she emphasizes the importance of diffuse family ties in providing the conditions for upwardly mobile Jews to attend Gymnasien or universities away from their parental homes, often making important social contacts. For Austria, Helga Embacher, “Middle Class, Liberal, Intellectual, Female, and Jewish: the Expulsion of ‘Female Rationality’ from Austria,” in Women in Austria, ed. Günter Bischof et al. (New Brunswick, NJ, and London, 1998), 6.
29 Erik Lindner, “Deutsche Juden und die bürgerich-nationale Festkultur: Die Schiller-und Fichtefeiern von 1859 und 1862,” in Juden, Bürger, Deutsche: Zur Geschichte von Vielfalt und Differenz, 1800–1933, ed. Andreas Gotzmann, Rainer Liedtke and Till van Rahden (Tübingen, 2001), 171–91, 177–78 for the quotations. Lindner notes that Jews took much less part in the celebrations for Fichte (well known as an anti-Semite). In England too Jews participated together with their neighbors in the Schiller celebrations. See Todd Endelman’s article in Assimilation and Community, cited above.
30 Sorkin, The Transformation of German Jewry, 118.
31 These features of family life are well documented by Marion Kaplan in The Making of the Jewish Middle Class.
32 Sorkin., 118–23. For more detail on the relations between Jews and the masonic lodges in Germany, see Ludwig Hoffmann, “Bürger zweier Welten? Jude und Freimaurer im 19ten Jahrhundert,” in Juden, Bürger, Deutsche, esp. 110ff. (although the basis on which Hoffmann accounts for the story he tells seems to me questionable). For an interesting account of twentieth-century Jewish life in this regard see the first part of Fritz Stern’s memoir, Five Germanies I Have Known (New York, 2006).
33 Lässig, Jüdische Wege ins Bürgertum, 669.
34 Michael Graetz, “The History of an Estrangement,” 159–69; 168 for the quotation from Philippson.
35 Todd M. Endelman, “German Jews in Victorian England: a study in drift and defection,” in Assimilation and Community, 57–87.
36 George L. Mosse, German Jews beyond Judaism (Bloomington, IN, and Cincinnati, 1985), ch. 1 (18 for the sentence quoted). Shulamit Volkov, “The Ambivalence of Bildung: Jews and Other Germans,” in The German-Jewish Dialogue Reconsidered: a Symposium in Honor of George Mosse, ed. Klaus L. Berghahn (New York, 1996).
37 Malachi Haim Hacohen, “Popper’s Cosmopolitanism: Culture Clash and Jewish Identity,” in Rethinking Vienna 1900, ed. Stephen Beller (New York, 2001), 173. On Jews in Prague see Gary B. Cohen, The Politics of Ethnic Survival: Jews in Prague, 1861–1914 (Princeton, 1981). On Freud’s circle of youthful nationalist friends see William J. McGrath, Dionysian Art and Populist Politics in Austria (New Haven, 1974). Hannah Arendt’s views were developed in her classic book The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York, 1951; new edn., 1966), part I.
38 Hacohen, “Popper’s Cosmopolitanism,” 174. On Popper’s family and his career see Hacohen’s larger study, Karl Popper – The Formative Years, 1902–1945: Politics and Philosophy in Interwar Vienna (Cambridge and New York, 2000).
39 See above, Chapter 4.
40 Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of [the] Religious Life, trans. James Ward Swain (New York and London, 1915; reprinted 1965), 493.
41 On Durkheim’s intellectual difficulties in this regard see my discussion in The Idea of the Self, ch. 14.
12 Public places, private spaces
1 Raymond Williams, Culture and Society, 1780–1950 (New York and London, 1958), part I. Keywords: a Vocabulary of Culture and Society (New York, 1976), 76–82. Brad Evans, in his book Before Cultures: the Ethnographic Imagination in American Literature, 1865–1920 (Chicago and London, 2005), shows that the word culture, especially in the plural that seemed to be implied by many uses of it, was relatively absent from anthropological writing until nearly the time of World War I.
2 For France I take the figures assembled from various sources by Sara Maza, Private Lives and Public Affairs: the Causes Célèbres of Prerevolutionary France (Berkely, Los Angeles, and London, 1993), 36. For Germany see Wolfgang Ruppert, Bürgerlicher Wandel: Studien zur Herausbildung einer nationalen deutschen Kultur im 18. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt am Main and New York, 1981), 118.
3 William St Clair, The Reading Nation in the Romantic Period (Cambridge and New York, 2004), ch. 6 for the 1774 decision and its consequences, 13 for the quotes in the text. St Clair’s observations suggest at various points that the early existence of a national market was an important contributor to the high incidence of reading in Britain; see 191, 199. He notes too that in England new works were more expensive than reprints of earlier literature and that the latter category was what most people read; see e.g. 202.
4 Ibid., 35–37, 42–43. For a general discussion of piracy in the German book trade in the eighteenth century see Pamela E. Selwyn, Everyday Life in the German Book Trade: Friedrich Nicolai as Bookseller and Publisher in the Age of Enlightenment (University Park, PA, 2000), ch. 4. For the limited circulation of periodicals see David Blackbourn, History of Germany, 1780–1918: the Long Nineteenth Century (2nd edn., Malden, MA, and Oxford, 2003), 29–31. For a general discussion of the size of the German reading public see Helmiuth Kiesel and Pul Münch, Gesellschaft und Literatur im 18. Jahrhundert (Munich, 1977), 159–65.
5 The best overall source is still Maurice Reclus, Émile de Girardin, le créateur de la presse moderne (Paris, 1934); see 70–73 for most of these details. Girardin’s strategy had been anticipated a few years earlier by Benjamin Day’s New York Sun; see Paul Starr, The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communication (New York, 2004), 131–32.
6 On Charpentier see Frédéric Barbier and Catherine Bertho-Lavenir, Histoire des médias: de Diderot à Internet (Paris, 1996), 81–82.
7 Ibid., 82–83. Elisabeth Parinet, Une historie de l’édition à l’époque contemporaine (xixe–xxe siècle) (Paris, 2004). Martyn Lyons, Le Triomphe du livre: une histoire sociologique de la lecture dans la France du xixe siècle, traduit de l’anglais (Paris, 1987). I have not consulted the recently published English text: Readers and Society in Nineteenth-Century France (Basingstoke and New York, 2001)
8 Kenneth Hudson, A Social History of the Museum: What the Visitors Thought (Atlantic Highlands, NJ, 1974), 3–6.
9 Andrew McClellan, Inventing the Louvre: Art, Politics, and the Origins of the Modern Museum in Eighteenth-Century Paris (Cambridge and New York, 1994).
10 Ibid., 91–99.
11 Ibid., 135–49.
12 The French critic was the Comte de Caylus, a close friend of Watteau, quoted by Jean Starobinski, The Invention of Liberty, 1700–89, trans. Bernard C. Swift (New York, 1987), 57. For the German artists see Dieter Hein, “Bürgerliches Künstlertum. Zum Verhältnis von Künstlern und Bürgern auf dem Weg in der Moderne,” in Bürgerkultur im 19ten. Jahrhundert. Bildung, Kunst und Lebenswelt, ed. Dieter Hein and Andreas Schulz (Munich, 1996) 104, 108. For the English societies and for Théodore Rousseau’s agitation for similar groupings in Paris
see Robert Jensen, Marketing Modernism in Fin-de-Siècle Europe (Princeton, 1994), 83–86.
13 I called attention to Saint-Cheron’s position in Bohemian Paris: Culture, Politics, and the Boundaries of Bourgeois Life (New York, 1986; reprinted Baltimore, 1999), 14–15.
14 For Duret’s and Renoir’s comments and for Sylvestre, see Bohemian Paris, 306–07, where the sources are cited. I also discuss Courbet there. For the new activities of art dealers, especially Paul Durand-Ruel, see Harrison C. White and Cynthia A. White, Canvasses and Careers: Institutional Change in the French Painting World (New York, 1965; new edn., Chicago, 1993).
15 For the role of dealers in the “Secession” movements of the 1890s, see Robert Jensen, Marketing Modernism in Fin-de-Siècle Europe (Princeton, 1994).
16 Carl Dahlhaus, Nineteenth-Century Music, trans. J. Bradford Robinson (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1989), 22–24. Dahlhaus emphasizes the role Beethoven’s admirers played, after his death in 1827, in solidifying the idea of a core “classical” repertoire, but the notion was certainly given importance earlier; see Lydia Goehr, The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works (rev. edn., Oxford and New York, 2007), 245–46. See also Tim Blanning, The Triumph of Music: the Rise of Composers, Musicians, and their Art (Cambridge, MA, 2008), 111–14.
17 William Weber, Music and the Middle Classes: the Social Structure of Concert Life in London, Paris, and Vienna (London, 1975); see the table on 159. James Johnson, Listening in Paris: a Cultural History (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1995), esp. ch. 11, “The Birth of Public Concerts,” and 257 for the comment from the Journal des débats. Ute Daniel, “Vom fürstlichen Gast zum Konsumenten. Das Hoftheaterpublikum in Deutschland vom 18. zum 19. Jahrhundert,” in Le Concert et son public: mutations de la vie musicale en Europe de 1780 à 1914 (France, Allemagne, Angleterre), ed. Hans Erich Bödeker, Patrice Veit, Michael Werner Julia Kraus, Dominique Lassaigne, and Ingeborg Allihn (Paris, 2002), 347–86. Blanning notes a spread of public concerts in eighteenth-century Germany and properly locates it chiefly in the context of princely Residenzstädte and their often aristocratic officials. The Triumph of Music, 85–89. For contemporary observations on the importance of private musical settings in Germany still in the 1840s, see the very interesting comments of the young Richard Wagner, in Wagner Writes from Paris: Stories, Essays, and Articles by the Young Composer, ed. and trans. Geoffrey Skelton and Robert Louis Jacobs (New York, 1973).
18 McVeigh, “The Musician as concert promoter,” in Le Concert et son public, 76. “Benefits” were a common feature of theater productions in the same period; some of them are described by Dickens in Nicholas Nickelby.
19 On the promenade concerts see Weber, Music and the Middle Classses, 109ff. For Chopin see Dahlhaus, Nineteenth-Century Music, 63. On the Paris Opera see Henry Raynor, Music and Society Since 1815 (New York, 1976), 80–81. Weber provides a good account of the overall transition, but I think he gives too much significance to the pleasure Liszt expressed in a letter about the increase in “my originally tiny capital” brought by one of his tours (132): he had no intention of investing the money to make more, and in the more general sense he employed “capital” has little or nothing to do with “capitalist enterprise.”
20 For these numbers, Arthur Loesser, Men, Women and Pianos: a Social History (New York, 1954), 251–52. For the development of printing see the account in H. Edmund Poole and Donald W. Krummel, “Printing and Publishing of Music,” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie (London and New York, 1980), XV, 243ff. The quotation from the first volume of the Musical Library appears there, 247; it went on: “before this work appeared, the exorbitant sums demanded for engraved music amounted to a prohibition of its free circulation among the middle classes; at a time too when the most enlightened statesmen saw distinctly the policy of promoting the cultivation of the art in almost every class of society.” For the importance of Haydn in the development of publishing at the end of the eighteenth century see Blanning, The Triumph of Music, 18–21.
21 Gunilla-Frederike Budde, Auf dem Weg ins Bürgerleben: Kindheit und Erziehung in deutschen und englischen Bürgerfamilien, 1840–1914 (Göttingen, 1994), 136–42. Much of this material can also be found in her article, “Musik in Bürgerhäusern,” in Le Concert et son public, 427–58. Dahlhaus, Nineteenth-Century Music, 49, 116–17. For information about piano makers and the music collections see Loesser, Men, Women, and Pianos. There is an interesting account of the Jewish “love affair with the piano” in Marion A. Kaplan, The Making of the Jewish Middle Class: Women, Family, and Identity in Imperial Germany (New York and Oxford, 1991), 121–22.
22 For the early organization of concerts see Simon McVeigh, “The musician as concert-promoter in London, 1780–1850,” in Le Concert et son public, 71–89, and William Weber, “The origin of the concert agent in the social structure of concert life,” in the same volume, 134. Blanning gives a lively and interesting account of the concerts Johann Peter Salomon organized for Haydn in London, and the importance of this public exposure for Haydn’s career, The Triumph of Music, 18–30, but Salomon’s activities were mostly limited to London, he was only a partial precursor of the later impresarios. Johann Nepomuk Hummel organized his own concert tour in London in 1825. See Weber, “From the Self-Managing Musician to the Independent Concert Agent,” in his edited volume The Musician as Entrepreneur, 1700–1914: Managers, Charlatans and Idealists (Bloomington and Indianapolis, 2004), 105–29; 109–10 for Hummel, and 117 for the quote.
23 Simon Gunn, The Public Culture of the Victorian Middle Class: Ritual and Authority and the English Industrial City, 1840–1914 (Manchester and New York, 2000), 135–49. For reasons I will try to explain later on, I have not given this story the coloration Gunn does based on the perspective he shares with Pierre Bourdieu.
24 Georg Simmel, The Philosophy of Money, ed. David Frisby, trans. Tom Bottomore and David Frisby from a first draft by Kaethe Mengelberg, 2nd edn. (London and New York, 1990), 291.
25 M. H. Abrams, “Art as Such: the Sociology of Modern Aesthetics,” in Doing Things with Texts: Essays in Criticism and Critical Theory, ed. Michael Fischer (New York and London, 1989), 113–34.
26 See Weber, “The Aesthetic Sphere,” in “Religious Rejections of the World and their Directions,” in From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, trans. and ed. By H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills (New York, 1946), 340–43. Richard Wolin, The Terms of Cultural Criticism: The Frankfurt School, Existentialism, Poststructuralism (New York, 1992), 66.
27 Lydia Goehr, The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works (rev. edn., Oxford and New York, 2007), 1–2 on Hoffmann; for earlier eighteenth-century approaches to this notion see her references to Bach and Couperin, 28–29. Rossini was unhappy with the liberties taken by performers of his music, and Mendelssohn gave instructions to performers intended to bring out the unity of his works (240). See also Blanning, The Triumph of Music, 111–14.
28 Quoted by Detlef Hoffmann, “The German Art Museum and the History of the Nation,” in Museum Culture: Histories, Discourses, Spectacles, ed. Daniel J. Sherman and Irit Rogoff (Minneapolis, 1994), 6.
29 Denis Diderot, “Eloge de Richardson,” in Oeuvres, IV: Esthétique–Théatre, ed. Laurent Versini (Paris, 1996), 157–58. Jean Starobinski, “‘Se mettre à la place’: la mutation de la critique de l’âge classique à Diderot,” Cahiers Vilfredo Pareto 38–39 (1976), 363–78.
30 Thomas W. Laqueur, Solitary Sex: a Cultural History of Masturbation (New York, 2003), 210. For the quotation from Goethe, see Wilhelm Meister’s Apprenticeship, ed. and trans. Eric A. Blackall in cooperation with Victor Lange (New York, 1989), 248.
31 Isabel V. Hull, Sexuality, State and Civil Society in Germany, 1700–1815 (Ithaca and London, 1996), 274.
32 Ibid., 261–62. Laqueur makes this point too; see the reference just below. I discuss letters between readers and writers in The Idea of the Self, ch. 7. For other literature about it, see above, Chapter 10, n. 12.
33 Laqueur, Solitary Sex,
311–12. For a stronger emphasis on the importance of public discussion in creating the masturbation panic, and the ways in which it revealed anxieties on this score that would grow during the nineteenth century, see Roy Porter, and Lesley Hall, The Facts of Life: the Creation of Sexual Knowledge in Britain, 1650–1950 (New Haven and London, 1995), ch. 4.
34 The French circular is quoted in Barbier and Bertho-Lavenir, Histoire des médias: de Diderot à Internet, 122. On the whole history of postal relations see Yves Maxime Danan, Histoire postale et libertés publiques: le droit de libre communication des idées et opinions par voie de correspondance (Paris, 1965). A recent general account of the coming of the penny post and its effects is Catherine J. Golden, Posting It: the Victorian Revolution in Letter Writing (Gaineseville, FL, 2009). For the limited impact of the penny post outside the middle classes in England and the much greater importance of the post card, see David Vincent, Literacy and Popular Culture: England 1750–1914 (Cambridge and New York, 1989), esp. 43ff. and 276. In France the number of letters exchanged in 1876 had not risen much from 1847 (the only dates with enough information to allow for comparison), but exploded before and during the world war. See Cécile Dauphin et al., “L’Enquête postale de 1847,” in La Correspondance: les usages de la lettre au XIXE SIèCLE, ed. Roger Chartier (Paris, 1991), 57–60.
Modernity and Bourgeois Life Page 77
