ection>
Fragile Minds and Vulnerable Souls
MATERIAL TEXTS
SERIES EDITORS
| Roger Chartier | Leah Price |
| Joseph Farrell | Peter Stallybrass |
| Anthony Grafton | Michael F. Suarez, S.J. |
A complete list of books in the series is available from the publisher.
Fragile Minds and Vulnerable Souls
THE MATTER OF OBSCENITY IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY GERMANY
Sarah L. Leonard
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS Philadelphia
THIS BOOK IS MADE POSSIBLE BY A COLLABORATIVE GRANT FROM THE ANDREW W. MELLON FOUNDATION.
© 2015 University of Pennsylvania Press
All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations used for purposes of review or scholarly citation, none of this book may be reproduced in any form by any means without written permission from the publisher.
Published by
University of Pennsylvania Press
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-4112
Printed in the United States of America
on acid-free paper
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Leonard, Sarah L.
Fragile minds and vulnerable souls : the matter of obscenity in nineteenth-century Germany / Sarah L. Leonard. — 1st ed.
p. cm. — Material texts
Includes bibliographical records and index
ISBN 978-0-8122-4670-4 (hardcover : alk. paper)
1. Pornography—Germany—19th century—History and criticism. 2. Pornography—Appreciation—Germany—History—19th century. 3. Erotic literature—19th century—History and criticism. 4. Erotic literature—Appreciation—Germany—History—19th century. 5. Underground literature—Germany—19th century—History and criticism. 6. Underground literature—Appreciation—Germany—History—19th century. 7. Books and reading—Germany—History—19th century. 8. Obscenity (Law)—Germany—History—19th century. 9. Literature and society—Germany—History—19th century. 10. Self—Germany—History—19th century. 11. Sex (Psychology)—History—19th century. 12. Censorship—Germany—History—19th century. 13. Germany—Cultural policy—History—19th century. 14. Germany—Moral conditions—History—19th century. I. Title. II Series: Material texts
HQ472.G3 L46 2015
| 363.4'7094309034 | 2014028288 |
For Trevorand in memory of Mieze
CONTENTS
Introduction: The Cultivation of Inner Life and the Dangers of Reading
1. Inventing Fragile Readers: The Origins of Secular Obscenity Law, 1788–1830
3. Defending Forbidden Texts: The Strategies of Editors, Publishers, and Authors
4. Liberalism and the Codification of Obscenity Laws in the 1830s and 1840s
5. Redefining Obscenity in an Era of “Progress,” 1848–1880
Introduction
The Cultivation of Inner Lifeand the Dangers of Reading
What kind of society sends its citizens to prison for their fantasies?
—LAURA KIPNIS, Bound and Gagged, 3
In the diverse, decentralized patchwork of states that constituted the German Länder in the decades following the Napoleonic Wars, citizens and subjects were not sent to prison for their fantasies. Yet authorities were increasingly preoccupied with the contents of people’s minds and souls, and those caught producing or distributing “heart-destroying texts” faced confiscations, fines, loss of their business, and even jail. Meanwhile clerics, doctors, and pedagogues occupied themselves with understanding how souls were constructed and minds shaped. As books, pamphlets, and images traveled new routes and found untapped audiences along the way, these readers and texts were scrutinized and categorized. In a world quickened by revolutions and wars, expanding transportation networks, novel ways of living, and widening mental horizons, the circulation of print suggested that visible changes in the material world were accompanied by invisible transformations in the inner lives of individuals. Because people operated with fundamentally different concepts of inner life, both within and across periods, they conceived of the effects of print in various ways. What was consistent, however, was the conviction that exposure to certain kinds of texts and images could transform selves and societies, for better and for worse.
Print mattered, and because it did, various groups of people—from police and censors to publishers and pedagogues—devoted their energies to sorting through publications in an effort to identify which ideas, knowledge, and stories should be excluded from circulation. There was no consensus, of course, but together these groups forged a category of texts flexible enough to include a remarkably diverse assortment of ideas, expressions, stories, and knowledge. Most often referred to as “obscene and immoral texts” (obszöne und unsittliche Schriften or unzüchtige Schriften), the publications and images assigned to this category shifted dramatically over time. So too did the underlying assumptions about mental, physical, and social vulnerability that animated this category and legitimated efforts to eliminate certain ideas, stories, and knowledge from circulation.
Conceptions of obscenity and pornography have historically rested (and continue to rest) on a series of assumptions about the harm incurred by individuals and societies exposed to certain narratives, ideas, or images.1 While content matters a great deal when it comes to differentiating acceptable from obscene representations, so too do modes of expression. In contemporary America, for example, a “graphic” or “prurient” quality is often considered decisive in definitions of obscenity and pornography. A style of presentation perceived as “mechanical” may evoke visceral responses ranging from fascination to disgust. Yet such responses