Cinema and Social Change in Germany and Austria

11 German Fascination for Jews in Oliver Hirschbiegel’s Ein ganz gewöhnlicher Jude

11 German Fascination for Jews in Oliver Hirschbiegel’s Ein ganz gewöhnlicher Jude Myriam Léger Abstract This chapter discusses Oliver Hirschbiegel’s film as the site both of an imagined contemporary struggle for German-Jewish identity and the construction of the spectator’s problematic involvement in it. As the Jewish protagonist unravels the powerful discourse of postwar German–Jewish relations in which he feels trapped, the chamber-drama style of the film as well as its cinematography mark the spectator as a fascinated and implicitly German observer, who gazes at the protagonist’s intimate engagement with his troubled self-image. This film comments on the existing cultural alienation between Germans and Jews that continues to shape this discourse , and perpetuates a German fascination for “things Jewish.” S hortly after Oliver Hirschbiegel attracted international attention with his 2004 box-office success Der Untergang (Downfall), he directed the chamber -drama-style film Ein ganz gewöhnlicher Jude (Just an Ordinary Jew) with Ben Becker, which was released in 2006. While Der Untergang attempts to depict Hitler’s last days in the bunker from a historical and, according to film producer Bernd Eichinger, authentic viewpoint, Ein ganz gewöhnlicher Jude redirects the discussion to a contemporary setting, where the effects of this period have created a discourse of German–Jewish relations based on political correctness and cultural difference. It is striking that Hirschbiegel chose to direct afilmaboutthedifficultiesofJewishlifeinpostwarGermanyonlytwoyearsafter directing Der Untergang, a film that had repeatedly been accused of depicting the character of Adolf Hitler in an inappropriately human light, evoking pity and compassion. Before considering the possibility that Hirschbiegel took on 191 Ein ganz gewöhnlicher Jude in order to counter such criticism, it is important to note that, as Hirschbiegel pointed out in an interview in 2006 with HannsGeorg Rodek, it was rather due to the elaborate preparations for Der Untergang that the production as well as release of Ein ganz gewöhnlicher Jude were delayed considerably.Inthesameinterview,Hirschbiegelwasaskedwhetherhefollowed a particular strategy when choosing his films, whereupon he explained that “[I] like jumping between themes and genres. I do not follow money but subjectmatter .”1 Althoughotherreviewers,suchasPeterZander,havenotedthatthefilm “almost seems to be an afterthought because he was criticized for having deliberately avoided any reference to the Holocaust in his bunker drama,”2 it seems evidentthatanyrelationshipbetweenthesetwofilms,similartootherfilmsabout Germany’s postwar legacy, can only be established in terms of their criticism of contemporary German discourses about guilt, victimhood, and contrition. From the outset of Ein ganz gewöhnlicher Jude, the rather uncommon genre of the chamber drama turns the spectator into an intimate witness of the protagonist ’sfuriousspeechaboutGerman–Jewishrelations,madewhileheisalone in his Hamburg apartment. As the son of Holocaust survivors who has lived all his life in Germany, Emanuel Goldfarb demands for himself an ordinary life that allows him to avoid any participation in the German–Jewish dialogue. An invitation from the high-school teacher Emanuel Gebhardt to speak about his life as a “Jewish fellow citizen” (jüdischer Mitbürger), however, deprives him of his ordinariness and marks him as standing outside of the ordinary. Furious about this request, Goldfarb begins dictating a letter addressed to Gebhardt to refuse the invitation. The ensuing dialogue with the imaginary interlocutor dominates the film as he comes to terms with his troubled self-image as a Jew in Germany,whofeelstrappedinthepowerfuldiscourseofpostwarGerman–Jewish relations.Aswillbeshown,thefilm’srathersimplestorylineconstitutesaninteresting counterpoint to the film’s cinematography. As Goldfarb speaks about his albeit problematic wish to be just an ordinary Jew, the camera constructs the spectator as curious observer who, implicitly identified as German, is fascinated by Goldfarb’s exotic appearance. The spectator’s fascination is created through theidentificationofthecamera’sgazeatGoldfarbwiththespectator’sgazeatthe images captured by the camera. This cinematographic construction of the spectator -protagonist relationship crafts the spectator’s fascination as an intense but questionably reserved interest in Goldfarb and his Jewishness. Underlying both Goldfarb’s identity struggle and the problematic relationship between him and thespectatorisatensiongroundedintheculturalspacesharedbyJewsandnonJewish Germans in Germany. In order to further explore the workings of this cultural space, I will draw on theoretical concepts introduced by Michel FouQUESTIONING COLLECTIVE IDENTITIES 192 cault, Stuart Hall, and Homi Bhabha, who examine the cultural dimensions and dynamics of ideology, communication, and identity. For the cinematic adaptation of his screenplay,3 Charles Lewinsky was hoping to win Ben Becker for the role of Emanuel Goldfarb. The reason for his preference, stated in a TV interview in 2008, speaks to the problematic...