In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

CHAPTER 4 Cultural Performances in the Struggle over National Community after 1871 The dynastic center of of‹cial nationalist politics in Germany came under intense public scrutiny in the year 1888. William I, already revered in nationalist lore as the “beloved old” uni‹cation kaiser, died in March 1888. After three months as emperor, his own son, Frederick III, also died and was succeeded, in turn, by his son, William II, on June 16. While loyal monarchists could feel secure in the smooth workings of legitimate hereditary succession, these transitions nonetheless introduced elements of deep uncertainty over policy and purpose from above. Frederick’s speech “to my people” on March 14 had con‹rmed his father’s military reputation, evoking one pole of dynastic rule in the “untiring sovereign concern (landesväterlicher Fürsorge) for the Prussian army.” Prussia’s strength had, indeed, paved the way for the “victory of German weapons” in war and laid the foundation for the uni‹cation of the German nation.1 Assured of its power position in world affairs, the new Reich subsequently turned to “the work of peace,” as Frederick phrased it, a coded reference to the complementary pole of dynastic rule, anchored in a concern for community well-being. At the time, of‹cial nationalists were embroiled in serious controversies over state obligations and responsibilities , as the last chapter has shown. While Frederick’s rendition of dynastic history found applause in of‹cial circles, his pointed reference to “religious toleration” as a fundamental principle of “[his] house” evoked considerable tension and debate over its practical meaning for social life among the same loyal groups.2 On careful examination, the Conservative 133 1. Reprinted in KZ, no. 63, March 14, 1888. 2. For controversies over Frederick’s memory, among others, KZ, no. 380, October 3, 1888; and Emil Ludwig, Wilhelm Hohenzollern: The Last of the Kaisers (New York, 1927), 48–64. triad of monarchy, army, and Christendom proved elusive and ambiguous even for its most vocal proponents. In the midst of the uncertainties of death, political transition, and con›ict, a devastating ›ood of unparalleled ferocity inundated areas in east and central Germany, affecting the lives of tens of thousands of people along the Elbe, Oder, and Weichsel (Vistula) Rivers. In late March 1888 the “shocking news” of a community in danger hit the newspapers throughout Germany.3 The situation was serious, indeed. In the province of Posen alone, nine cities and eighty rural communities were under water; eight thousand people were left homeless in the city of Posen itself. Twenty thousand were affected in the province of Hanover, and thousands of families were in dire need in East Prussia. The ›ood immediately activated the dynastic states’ philanthropic associations throughout the nation and, speci‹cally, the Red Cross–af‹liated women’s groups. In the glare of the public limelight, the disaster permitted the Landesmutter to demonstrate what had been merely glimpsed in Frederick’s speech: the force of a mobilized nation responding with a dramatic performance of relief for a community in danger—a drama that, however, was political rather than aesthetic. If in nationalist circles, controversies over de‹nitions and meanings of words might divide adherents, of‹cial nationalists also used the power of cultural performances to create community and solidarity, which they did time and again when natural disasters struck. While this effort to “tame fear” was not a secular ritual in the strict sense, it had a highly developed structure and a set of symbols that were reenacted repeatedly in moments of natural calamities. For authorities, such moments invariably are charged with danger.4 These performances 134 Staging Philanthropy 3. To assess the effects of the patriotic public, I have read not only the Conservative Kreuz-Zeitung but also several newspapers of the “bourgeois” public that also were “national” in scope: the Vossiche Zeitung and the Berliner Tageblatt. In 1911, at the time of a disastrous railroad accident in Müllheim, Baden, I added the main socialist organ, Vorw ärts, to the sample. While future research is needed to demonstrate greater nuances of politics and region, my reading reveals the power of civic relief practices to transcend distinct public realms, working, indeed, to shape common concerns, public responses, as well as wider national identi‹cations. For the importance of these national papers, see Mommsen, Imperial Germany, 190. 4. The idea of secular ritual is taken from a discussion in Mach, Symbols, Con›ict, and Identity, 76–77. Disasters bring...

Share