Persephone Book No 39: Manja by Anna Gmeyner

 

 

 

 

‘Mother and Child’ by Käthe Kollwitz. 1916
‘Mother and Child’ by Käthe Kollwitz. 1916

 

Germany, Spring 1921 – five children, conceived on the same summer night, are born, within days of each other, at the same hospital. Manja opens on 25th May 1920. The war is over. The future appears as bright as the sparkling lights advertising cafés and bars. The humiliation of the Treaty of Versailles signed the previous year can be forgotten; if the foundation of the Nazi party is a blot on the political horizon, it is a very small one; the man who will shortly become its leader is still a relative unknown. The novel ends in 1933. The children are twelve years old. Adolf Hitler is Chancellor of Germany.

 

 

'The Artist's Family' 1927. Otto Dix
‘The Artist’s Family’ 1927. Otto Dix

 

Writing at the start of her English exile in the 1930s (Manja was published in Holland, in German, in 1938, and in English the following year), Anna Gmeyner, Austrian-Jewish by birth,  was well acquainted with the political and economic situation in Germany, the social turmoil, the inexorable rise of Nazism. She had observed ever-growing anti-semitism as first hand. The word ‘liquidieren’ was already being used in connection with the Jews, ‘liquidieren’, to brand, or punish severely. Even when she left Germany in 1933, the word had not yet taken on the full force of ‘to liquidate’. Gmeyner set her novel in turbulent times, suspecting, but not knowing the depths to which the turbulence would descend. Her contemporary reader would have known as we do that the optimism of the opening page would be fleeting, that no good fairies attended the births of even the most fortunate of the children. They didn’t know and Gmeyner herself didn’t know what awaited them, their families, Germany and the whole of Europe. The horror was beyond all imagination. No need to apologise for the ‘spoiler’: we read Manja now, knowing that beyond the final chapter what awaits the children who remain are the War, and the Holocaust.

 

 

'Bread' by Käthe Kollwitz. 1933
‘Bread’ by Käthe Kollwitz. 1933

 

We may know more about the bigger historical picture than Anna Gmeyner could have known, but what she gives us in Manja  is a moving, vividly detailed and utterly absorbing view of the lives of five very disparate families, lives which intersect, unpredictably but convincingly, observed  not continuously but at significant intervals, at a time of profound uncertainty, of triumph for some and tragedy for others.

At the centre of the novel is the eponymous Manja, the only girl of the five children, loved, revered, protected in their different ways by the four boys, Heini, Franz, Harry and Karl (as in Marx).  The children are eight when they meet– a shared lodging house for two, parental business link and shared school for the others  – and pledge to meet regularly at their riverside wall: ‘till we’re big’, swears Manja.

But their paths have already crossed: Heini’s father, Ernst Heidemann, a doctor, has saved the lives of both Manja’s mother and Harry’s after childbirth; Harry’s father, Hartung, a half Jewish businessman, profiteer and philanthropist has endowed Heidemann’s hospital and paid for him to recuperate, together with his family, from a troubling war wound; Karl’s mother, Anna Müller, has put Manja to her full breast, when the little girl’s mother lay between life and death. Franz Meissner’s family, the only committed Nazis cross the others on their way down – his father is dismissed from Hartung’s business– and on their way up.

By 1933, when the novel ends, it is the Meissners and their like who have risen to the top; Hartung has fled Germany, the Communist Müllers are living in fear; Ernst and Hanna Heidemann, are struggling to keep their liberal principles alive;  Manja’s Jewish mother, Lea, so bright and young, passionate and impulsive at Manja’s conception, is set on a downward spiral, helpless against crude and vicious racial attacks, and against her own flawed character.  The five threads are deftly held together.

Before writing Manja, Anna Gmeyner had enjoyed some success as a playwright, librettist and a writer of film-scripts: she brings all of those skills to bear in the novel, using a tight focus and discrete scenes to carry the complex narrative. The opening chapters describe the conception of each child, from the happy pre-marital embrace, to a cold coupling and a marital rape. If the descriptions are, for their time, sexually graphic, they are also visually graphic. She is a master, mistress, of detail bringing characters and settings to life with stark realism.  Hanna, waiting for her fiancé, Ernst, to return, desperately passes the time counting the repeat of the purple flowered wallpaper in her pension bedroom; Lea, embarrassed by her poverty, is careful not to hang her clothes over the screen in the hotel bedroom, because the straps of her petticoat are fastened with safety pins; Hartung approaches his wife in striped green pyjamas, reflected and distorted in the mirrors he has placed in the bedroom to ‘capture and multiply his wife’s beauty’; Anton Meissner whistles as he unlaces his shoes, looking at the thin little plait of his wife’s hair. Twelve years later when the Meissners have left their cramped little apartment and are enjoying the wealth that comes with their fierce adherence to the new political correctness, Frieda will raise her eyes from her plate over dinner, looking up ‘from the intertwining wreaths of little roses between puddles of gravy’, and see Anton with ‘strawberry jam clinging to the corners of his mouth and his moustache’. Jam and gravy, the crude symbols of new money, new status.

 

bartering food for circus

 

It was not Gmeyner’s intention to provide a social history of what we think of as the ‘inter-war years’, but the details of everyday life at different social echelons (themselves in a constant process of fluctuation), tell a stark story. During the worst years of the Depression,  Frieda Meissner’s head had ached from trying to tally the household accounts, ‘There were no pfennigs now, no marks either, not even in hundreds or thousands. One spent billions and was still poor…’ The daily reality of soaring inflation left Frieda, struggling to make ends meet, to keep her family fed. She looks for someone to blame: across the courtyard, where there is sun enough for flowers, she finds her scapegoats – a prosperous Jewish councillor, with a maid, a wife with plucked eyebrows, jazz (negroid music) on the gramophone – ‘Jewish scum, taking baths in champagne.’ Meanwhile, to her embarrassment, she cannot pay Anna Müller for doing her laundry. Anna who is compelled to take in washing because in the prevailing political climate her Communist husband can no longer find work: ‘Reds’ are also being targeted, but Anna is resourceful, and kind and brave, like her son Karl.

 

'Boy' by Otto Dix. 1920
‘Boy’ by Otto Dix. 1920

 

In the background the ring of boots on cobbles can be heard,  young men in brown shirts are marching; before long Germans will be greeting each other in a new way, ‘Heil Hitler’.

The five children are growing up, becoming aware of the complex tensions within their families and beyond: Karl’s sister is in love with a Brownshirt, his father is in hiding;  Franz’s father is seducing the maids, even the Heidemanns’ solid, loving marriage shows signs of strain.  Harry’s mother is mad, his blind but kindly Jewish grandfather is an embarrassment, his father’s business practices are under scrutiny; Manja’s mother is neglecting the children, and making a living in the only way she is able; Franz can meet Harry only in secret. Manja must sit on the ‘Jewish bench’ at school.  Good teachers are losing their positions, good doctors are leaving the hospital, good lawyers are fearful for their jobs. Bad people are beyond the law, untouchable.

Manja had likened the children to the five stars of Cassiopeia. A year later, Franz, torn, more than the others, between his friends and his family, reflects that his new Hitler Youth comrades would describe the little group as ‘the sons of a racketeer and ungodly Liberal, a dirty little Polish Jew and his Red school friend’. But their loyalty one to another is unfailing, the wall, ‘a reef against which the flood of events impotently dashed itself’; better not to look forward when one comes to the end of this remarkably rich novel, but hold faith with Anna Gmeyner, wishing that it might remain so.

 

Cassiopeia
Cassiopeia

 

Persephone Book No 38: Cheerful Weather for the Wedding by Julia Strachey

Vita Sackville West in her wedding dress

 

The publication of Cheerful Weather for the Wedding coincided with the breakdown of Julia Strachey’s own marriage to the bisexual, depressive, alcoholic, sculptor, Stephen Tomlin, whose mother, according to Frances Partridge was the model for the monstrously self-absorbed Mrs Thatcham. Julia’s own mother had been a remote figure since her divorce from Julia’s father, Oliver Strachey, so one can only conjecture who might have fussed around Julia herself on the day of her own wedding:  one of the Strachey aunts perhaps, Elinor to whom she was sent aged only five, while her father remained in India, or Dorothea, married to the painter Simon Bussy, in whose house she would write Cheerful Weather.

 

'Dorothy Bussy at La Souco' by Vanessa Bell. Charleston
‘Dorothy Bussy at La Souco’ by Vanessa Bell. Charleston

 

Or might it have been her step-mother, Ray Costelloe, niece of Bertrand Russel’s first wife, Alys Persall-Smith, known to Julia as ‘Aunty Loo’. So many familiar Bloomsbury names.  Was Uncle Lytton present?  Tommy, as Stephen was known, had been involved both with Lytton Strachey and with Dora Carrington, breaking off his relationship with Carrington to marry Julia. Little surprise that Julia’s view of love and marriage as she entered her thirties should have been more than a little jaundiced.

 

 

Stephen Tomlin by John Banting. 1925. Radev Collection. Julia Strachey said that, though she loved him, 'no-one could live with him.'
Stephen Tomlin by John Banting. 1925. Radev Collection. Julia Strachey said that, though she loved him, ‘no-one could live with him.’

 

The weather may be cheerful for Dolly Thatcham’s wedding – certainly her mother insists that it is so, although Dolly’s friend Evelyn notes wryly that her one criterion for this is ‘whether or not is possible to see across as far as the Malton Downs’ – but little else is. Least of all the bride. A collection of Thatcham relations, friends, and a few old retainers are gathered together on a cold March day, more to observe than to support : the bossy younger sister, an aged aunt who must be cosseted, the  cousins, a precocious child, two quarrelsome grumpy teenagers, a drunken twenty year old who needs watching – anyone who has ever organised a wedding will be familiar with the cast – and Bob, Canon Dakin who will be giving Dolly away.  Cousin Bob is giving her away,  Mrs Thatcham is marrying her daughter to the Hon Owen Bigham, standard, accepted wedding language, but Julia Strachey uses it in such a way as to leave the reader in no doubt, from the opening sentence, that Dolly is not in control.  Little wonder that later, aware that ‘something remarkable and upsetting in her life was steadily going forward’, she will feel the need to fortify herself with a bottle of Jamaica rum.

From the start, Julia Strachey sweeps away conventional notions of the radiant bride:  Dolly has the ‘glittering eyes of a sick woman who is exhausted, yet feverish’; and plays mischievously with her readers’ expectations. When on the morning of her wedding a maid hands her a faded blue leather bag found behind an old bureau, surely, we think, she will find a touching memento, a love letter. She idly fantasizes about hundreds of lost cheques, or ‘that wretched gold thimble of cook’s I lost’, a casually dropped cutting reference to Dolly’s heartlessness towards the servants. The reality is that the promised repository of her past contains nothing but a crumpled bus ticket (no destination) and an achingly boring and implicitly critical letter from her mother. The biscuit crumbs may, as it turns out, be telling, but the author does not dwell on them.

Strachey relies, to a very large extent on dialogue to convey the narrative, and fill in, in a very limited fashion, the past (one is reminded rather of her near contemporary Ivy Compton-Burnett), trusting the reader to pick up details, weigh their significance, and judge their veracity. Cheerful Weather is a social comedy in the sense that The Cherry Orchard is a comedy:  like E.M. Forster and Virginia Woolf, and other Bloomsbury ‘elders’, Julia greatly admired Chekhov. She places a small cast on a restricted set and the principal action, the wedding of the title, takes place off-stage. The characters step ‘outside’ only for a moment, to wave goodbye to the newly-weds, when the weather turns out to be markedly less than cheerful (although Mrs Thatcham will deny this), and in ‘the cutting, furiously buffeting wind, amid the cries of good-bye, bowing down before the storms of rice and confetti, the lack of high spirits on the part of the bride and bridegroom passed unnoticed’.

Things unnoticed, unsaid, unheard, misunderstood make up the comedy and the tragedy. The characters talk, but fail to have any meaningful exchanges with one another. They talk at cross purposes, they don’t say what they mean, they don’t hear, they fail to understand each other or elicit an appropriate response for any number of reasons, mumbling, senility, obtuseness, because they are too self-absorbed or too drunk. Mad Nellie from the village talks to the tea tray.

Leitmotifs pepper the conversation, if it can be called that: a hideous hand-painted lampshade, wedding present from a rich neighbour, lime green socks worn by one brother and disapproved of by another, food, in the wrong place, at the wrong time – orders given, countermanded, repeated … And for added comedy, the traditional element of farce, several people are allotted the same bedroom: Dolly’s younger sister, the wisest, member of the extended family (not the kindest – her remark to Dolly, that life after her departure ‘will not be so demoralising for the servants’ is accurate, but ill-timed) tries to correct her mother. Predictably, she cannot make herself heard, but the reader hears and delightedly awaits the consequences of Mrs Thatcham’s misplaced confidence in her own powers of organisation.

If there is comedy in the mis-hearing, there is something unsettling rather than comic about the visual tricks that the house seems to play. Rooms are full, excessively full of greenery, potted plants, and a multitude of reflective surfaces, an Indian brass tray, Moorish paper knives, a Serbian embroidery (foreign travel is hinted at, but not confirmed), the light is constantly changing, sometimes almost blinding, often confusing. Dolly looks through an old blackened mirror at the drawing-room and it appears ‘forever swimming in an eerie, dead-looking, metallic twilight, such as is never experienced in the actual world outside.’ Neither ears nor eyes can be trusted. And things seem to take on a life of their own. Dolly is transfixed, suffocated, by her wedding veil: ‘Gigantic billowing fold upon fold of lacy birds and flowers seemed heaped up over the bed, the rocking chair, the table and everywhere.’

 

'Girl combing her hair' by Harold Knight. 1931. Bury Art Museum
‘Girl combing her hair’ by Harold Knight. 1931. Bury Art Museum

 

Eyes can be orange, flesh yellow and wrinkled as a grocer’s apricot, or black as ebony. Nobody is beautiful: Kitty’s hands look like ‘raw meat chops appearing from the delicate yellow gauze sleeves of her bridesmaid’s frock’, Dolly has a white face with ‘thick and heavily curled back lips’, little altered by the make-up that she applies ‘as a performing elephant might make its toilet sitting up in a circus ring – languidly, clumsily as though her arms were made of iron.’

Dolly is about to marry (or rather be married) to a man she hardly knows and doesn’t love, while downstairs sits Joseph Patten, a student of anthropology, with whom she may, or may not, have had a ‘fling’ the previous summer, who she may, or may not have loved ‘some time ago’. Neither ‘spoke’ then. Did Joseph love her? Does Joseph love her now? ‘Something had happened in their relationship, but he couldn’t for the life of him make out what it had been.’ Words fail him. Even the anthropology student can make no sense of this tribe.

 

Julia by Lawfence Gowing 1942 Lady with Book
‘Lady with Book’, Julia Strachey by Laurence Gowing 1942. PCF