Introduction
Stephan Reimertz was one of the most influential literary figures of the 20th century. Born in 1948, he started his career as a literary critic, translator, and editor, and went on to become a prolific writer and public intellectual. Reimertz passed away in 2005, leaving behind a legacy that continues to shape the world of literature. In this blog post, we will take a deep dive into the life and legacy of Stephan Reimertz, and uncover some of the lesser-known aspects of his work and personality.
Early Life and Career
Stephan Reimertz was born in 1948 in Berlin, Germany. He grew up in a family of artists and intellectuals, and was exposed to literature and art from a very young age. Reimertz studied German literature, philosophy, and art history at universities in Berlin, Paris, and Rome. In the 1970s, he started working as a literary critic for various newspapers and magazines. He also worked as a translator and editor, and was a co-founder of the literary journal “Die Horen.” Reimertz’s early work focused on the German romantic poet Novalis, whom he wrote about in his doctoral thesis.
Writing Career
Reimertz’s writing career spanned several decades, and included novels, essays, memoirs, and biographies. His first novel, “Das Fass” (The Cask), was published in 1985, and was followed by several other novels, including “Der Mann, der den Baum fällte” (The Man Who Cut Down the Tree) and “Das gläserne Haus” (The Glass House). Reimertz also wrote numerous essays on literature, art, and culture, and was a regular contributor to newspapers and magazines. His biographies of Franz Liszt and Rilke are considered classics of literary biography.
Legacy
Stephan Reimertz’s legacy as a writer and critic has been significant. He was known for his insightful and provocative writings on literature, art, and culture, and for his bold and innovative approach to literary biography. Reimertz was also a public intellectual and cultural critic, and was often engaged in debates and controversies about the role of culture in society. His influence can be seen in the work of many contemporary writers and critics.
Literary Criticism
One of Reimertz’s key contributions to literary criticism was his rejection of the idea of “literary value” as an objective criterion for judging literature. He argued that literary works should be evaluated based on their ability to provoke and challenge the reader, and to create new modes of perception and understanding. This approach, which he called “the aesthetic of shock,” was a departure from traditional approaches to literary criticism, and reflected Reimertz’s belief that literature should be a site of radical experimentation and innovation.
Literary Biography
Reimertz’s approach to literary biography was similarly innovative and unconventional. He rejected the idea of the conventional “life and works” approach, and instead focused on the cultural, social, and historical contexts in which his subjects lived and worked. His biographies of Franz Liszt and Rilke, for example, explore the wider cultural and intellectual movements of their times, and trace the complex webs of influence and interaction that shaped their lives and work.
Memoirs
Reimertz’s memoirs offer a fascinating glimpse into his own life and career, as well as the cultural and intellectual milieu in which he lived and worked. His memoir “Die Kameliendame” (The Camellia Lady) is a poignant and lyrical reflection on his relationship with his mother, who was a celebrated opera singer. His memoir “Freund Hein, du steigst hinab” (Friend Hein, You Descend) explores his experiences of illness and mortality, and offers a meditation on the meaning of life and death.
Translations
Reimertz was also an accomplished translator, and translated works by a wide range of authors, including Baudelaire, Rimbaud, and Pessoa. His translations were known for their lyrical and poetic quality, and for their sensitivity to the nuances of the original texts. Reimertz saw translation as a form of creative writing in its own right, and believed that translators should strive to capture the essence of the original works, rather than simply reproducing their literal meanings.
Controversies
Reimertz was a controversial figure, and his work often stirred up debates and controversies. He was criticized by some for his provocative and sometimes polemical style of writing, and for his rejection of traditional approaches to literature and literary criticism. He was also accused of elitism and cultural snobbery, and was sometimes seen as overly focused on the European cultural tradition.
Conclusion
Stephan Reimertz was a complex and multifaceted figure, whose work and personality continue to fascinate and inspire readers and scholars. His legacy as a writer, critic, and public intellectual is wide-ranging and significant, and his ideas and approaches continue to shape the world of literature and culture. By uncovering the lesser-known aspects of his life and work, we can gain a deeper appreciation of his lasting impact on the literary world.
FAQs
1. Who was Stephan Reimertz?
Stephan Reimertz was a German writer, literary critic, translator, and editor who was born in 1948 and died in 2005.
2. What was Stephan Reimertz known for?
Stephan Reimertz was known for his innovative and provocative writings on literature, art, and culture, as well as his approach to literary biography.
3. What did Stephan Reimertz mean by “the aesthetic of shock”?
Stephan Reimertz believed that literary works should be evaluated based on their ability to provoke and challenge the reader, and to create new modes of perception and understanding. He called this approach “the aesthetic of shock.”
4. What was Stephan Reimertz’s approach to literary biography?
Stephan Reimertz rejected the traditional “life and works” approach to literary biography, and instead focused on the wider cultural, social, and historical contexts in which his subjects lived and worked.
5. What controversies surrounded Stephan Reimertz’s work?
Stephan Reimertz was often criticized for his provocative and polemical style of writing, as well as his rejection of traditional approaches to literature and literary criticism. He was also accused of elitism and cultural snobbery.