Maxim Biller and German studies: No Jews in sight

Last fall, Martus published a major history of German-language literature, “Told World. A Literary History of the Present. 1989 to Today,” in which Biller also appears. To his disappointment, however, far too little, “unlike my native opponents. That always happened to me with this kind of standard work.”

Now this is typical writer narcissism; But the other thing is that Biller, who was born in Prague in 1970 to Jewish parents, asks in his column and also Martus when they meet why there are no Jews in his literary history. No Robert Schindel, no Barbara Honigmann, no Rafael Seligmann, the Menasse siblings only on the sidelines, instead “just pop, pop, pop and a lot of Strauss father, Strauss son, noise”.

Despondent defense of Martus?

In his column, Biller never misses an opportunity to make fun of Martus: his appearance, his eating habits, his attitude. Above all, however, he portrays the literature professor as almost speechless, as someone who has no conclusive answer to all his questions and who at best defends himself “despondently” by saying that he has written “not a history of literature”, but rather a “history of the new Germany as reflected in literature. A political book”.

Now there have been at least two reactions from literary studies to the Biller column. One comes from the German scholar Markus Steinmayr from the University of Duisburg, author of a “History of Literature of the 18th-21st Century”. But the “FAZ” only deals with the pop-journalistic and pop-literary aspects of Biller’s text and its autofictional style, as well as Biller’s free handling of the course of this meeting and conversation, which is immediately noticeable anyway. Which, as Martus confirms, really existed.

Only Steinmayr doesn’t say a word about Biller’s central concern that there is no Jewish literature in Martus’ treatise. A few days later, the literary and media scientist Jan Süselbeck, who teaches in Trondheim, Norway, did this in the “Süddeutsche Zeitung”. Süselbeck, who values ​​Martus as a colleague, recognizes the achievement of Martus’ “Told World” as a “comprehensive and complex portrait of German literary debates since 1989.”

But Süselbeck takes Biller’s question “And the Jews?” seriously and considers it possible that there could well be a blind spot regarding German-Jewish literature and Jewish writing. And, as the literary scholar that he is, he asks: “Why do we focus in our research and teaching on exactly those priorities that we choose and leave others out?” Isn’t contemporary Jewish literature in Germany political when, according to Biller, Martus claims to have written “a political book”?

While Süselbeck deals intensively with Biller despite the polemical and malicious acrimony, Steinmayr only deals with the garnish and presentation of his column. Which, ironically, has been a tradition in dealing with Biller since his “100 Lines of Hate” column in the 1980s.

Pop and pop literature are repeatedly used by Biller, he is always the author who is good for debates with his insults, and not just of contemporary German-language literature and its staff, it is always about Biller’s polemical sharpness, but in literary terms he is often found to be too easy.

The fact that he is the author of what has become a major work, of great literature such as the novellas “In the Head of Bruno Schulz” and “The Immortal Weil”, of novels such as “Biography”, “Six Suitcases” or “Mama Odessa”, to name just a few, is all too often overlooked. What is also significant, by the way, is reflected in the fact that, although Maxim Biller has been publishing books for forty years, apart from a few smaller prizes, he has not yet been awarded an important literary prize.