The Jews and Germany: From the "Judeo-German Symbiosis" to the Memory of Auschwitz (review)

126 SHOFAR Spring 1997 Vol. 15, No.3 psychological problems. The theoretical section elaborates on a number ofpsychopathologic themes, such as that of the imposter, obedience as defense against narcissism, splitting, isolation, and compartmentalization as these have a bearing on psychoanalytic insights into the mentality ofNazis and its heritage for succeeding generations. For the most part, the writing is turgid and replete with technical jargon which may prove difficult for the lay reader who is fluent in German. The book is meant to be a guide for German psychoanalysts in hopes of sensitizing them to the problems of intergenerational contagion and, thus, to better assist in the rehabilitation of a people traumatized and deluded by a disturbed Filhrer. In this volume Eckstaedt uses indirection to emphasize that damage was done to perpetrators as well as to the victims of grandiose oppression and genocidal intent Werner Israel Halpern, MD. Roc):lester, New York The Jews and Germany: From the "Judeo-German Symbiosis" to the Memory of Auschwitz, by Enzo Traverso, translated by Daniel Weissbort. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1995. 215 pp. $33.50. Late in the nineteenth century, and then again more prominently during the 1920s, thoughtful analysts of the German and the Jewish experiences spoke of the relationship between the two peoples as a symbiosis. In part, this tum of phrase was an exercise in defense against antisemitic charges that Jews were "parasites" within the body politic of Germany. In part it was a positive statement noting that-though there were differences between Germans and Jews-they were quite capable of living together in mutually beneficial harmony. In part it was statement of desire, indicating the hope that in spite of the increasingly harsh antisemitism ofthe age, Germans and Jews would be able to live and work together in the interests ofboth groups. Surely there was some reason for hope. In the mid-eighteenth century the Jews of Germany were culturally fully separate from the German majority, a generally despised and ghettoized minority. By the first decades ofthe twentieth century they were fully emancipated and generally assimilated to German culture, and they referred to themselves as "German citizens of Jewish faith." The honor roll of German Jews who successfully contributed to the common culture was a distinguished one. Enzo Traverso, a Jewish scholar of Italian origin, now living and working in France, argues that this "symbiosis" was always a myth (p. xx). His slim volume, originally published in French in 1992, is an extended essay, documented with many references to published primary and secondary sources. Much of the argument is derivative rather than BookReviews 127 original, but American readers will nevertheless be interested in how this European takes his stand on many ofthe most important issues on German and Jewish history. Traverso is widely read in the French and German language literature on the subject and makes occasional references to the Anglo-American discourse. Few of his references are in his native Italian, and none are in Hebrew. He maintains that in German society Jews were never genuinely assimilated. Either they were pariahs, like the novelist Joseph Roth, or parvenus, like the industrialist and statesman Walther Rathenau. His selection ofthese two figures as his models allows him to make his case rather easily. Much of his argument follows that ofHannah Arendt, to whom he readily acknowledges his debt. His [mal two chapters deal with the post-Holocaust period, not so much addressing new relationships between Germans and Jews, but as an exercise in the interpretation of history and ofmemory. He articulatesjust why he prefers the term "Shoah" to "Holocaust." He spells out the "functionalist" vs. "intentionalist" approaches to explaining the Nazi genocide of the Jews. He describes the Historikerstreit. The reunited Germany, he concludes, still "is far from having overcome its past" (p. 161). Though he does not use the term "eliminationist antisemitism" coined by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen in describing Germany, one feels that he might well agree with the approach which that term implies. His essay would have been strengthened ifhe had noted that, in spite ofthe Shoah, the new Germany has attracted a growing Jewish population. These are not former "German citizens ofthe Jewish faith" and their...