Version classiqueVersion mobile
OpenEdition Books

Emotions in History – Lost and Found

 | 
Ute Frevert

Chapter 2. Gendering emotions

Texte intégral

1Emotions, whether lost or retrieved, come in socially specific and culturally diverse forms. Honour, for instance, was an emotional disposition deeply ingrained in nineteenth-century European society, and yet, it took multiple shapes and translated into different practices. The latter varied according to social class, age, religion, and national belonging. Most conspicuously, they varied according to gender. Although honour was relevant to both men and women, its manifestations and meaning differed vastly. For women, honour was exclusively linked to their sex and sexual behaviour. For men, it was more socially complex and could be attacked by a wide range of offenses, from verbal insults to a slap in the face. The gravest offense, however, was also a sexual one, namely the seduction of a female family member. In such cases, husbands, brothers or fathers felt dishonoured in their own right and challenged in their quest for manliness.

2Even though male honour had a sexual subtext as well, there remained a crucial gender difference. First, while it was a subtext for men, it was the main text for women. Second, men were masters of their own honour while women were not. Female honour, once impaired and insulted, could not be restored by the woman herself. Strictly speaking, it was lost forever. Even male family members could not redeem it. By calling the offender to account, they protected their own honour, since a “fallen” woman never got her honour back. In contrast, a man found ample opportunity to prove himself honourable and silence those who dared to sully the shining shield of his honour.

  • 1 Davis, Natalie Zemon, Fiction in the Archives: Pardon Tales and their Tellers in Sixteenth-century (...)

3Honour thus provides a good example of how emotions and their related practices were gendered. Here as everywhere, gender differences, as Natalie Zemon Davis has shown in her work, are a fascinating research topic. This applies to every field, and every period of history. Emotions are no exception, as Fiction in the Archives has eloquently proven. When appealing for clemency, a woman who had killed her husband would give different reasons in comparison with a man who had killed his wife. While men invoked rage that had led them to retaliate against a violent wife, women preferred to speak about anguish and desperation. They did so, in Davis’s view, because rage was not a proper excuse for them. Even if women were known to be furious, and legitimately so, their rage was considered harmful. It was passion rather than affect, and thus far more enduring and dangerous. While men were deemed hot and dry beings whose indignation could erupt in short fits of rage and aggression, women were thought to be cold and humid. This allowed them to harbour long-term and premeditated passions detrimental to their own well-being and that of others.1

4Natalie Zemon Davis’s stories and pardon tales were about the sixteenth century which, as the evocation of humoral pathology reveals, was still in great proximity to ancient concepts of human nature. What, then, happened when those references gradually passed into oblivion? How did modern science, as it developed from the seventeenth century onwards, change ideas about men and women, about their temperaments and character? What did it disclose about their emotions, their passions, affects, sentiments, and appetites? And how did this new knowledge shape social norms and practices?

Rage and insult

5To answer those questions, encyclopaedias offer a good starting point. They began to be published at the beginning of the eighteenth century and were explicitly aimed at informing the public about any matters of interest. These included technological innovations as much as debates on moral philosophy. Encyclopaedias processed knowledge generated in all fields of empirical research and metaphysical reflection. They did so in order to enlighten readers and familiarise them with what learned men and scientists had discovered about nature and culture. At the same time, they helped to canonise certain forms and contents of knowledge (and discredit others). But they also kept pace with the dynamics of knowledge production. Unlike earlier forms of lexica, the famous Britannica or the German Brockhaus appeared in numerous editions that quickly succeeded one another and thus accounted for the rapid expansion and innovation of available knowledge.

  • 2 Zedler, Johann Heinrich, ed., Grosses vollständiges Universal Lexicon Aller Wissenschafften und Kü (...)
  • 3 Izard, Carroll E., The Psychology of Emotions (New York: Plenum Press, 1991), p. 243: “Anger mobil (...)

6The first German-language encyclopaedia was published between 1734 and 1754. With sixty-eight volumes and approximately 288.000 entries, it became the most comprehensive lexical project of its time. Volume sixty-three from 1750 contained a thirty five column article on rage (Zorn). Forty per cent of the text dealt with the wrath of God, sixty per cent with the rage of man. The definition was gender-neutral: “Rage, in Latin, Ira, is the affect that emerges when one feels insulted, either directly or indirectly (through a person for whom one cares). The affect aims to fight off the perceived evil.”2 It is important to note that rage is seen as an affect rather than a passion. The affect enables the offended to act out, offer resistance, and force back the “evil” influence. Rage or anger clearly empowers a person and fills them with vigour. This is acknowledged by present-day psychologists who perceive anger as expressive and highly mobilising: they call it a powerful or sthenic emotion, in contrast to asthenic ones that weaken a person’s energy and dampen their spirit.3

  • 4 Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie für die gebildeten Stände [Brockhaus], 7th ed. (Leipzig: Bro (...)
  • 5 Schlegel, Friedrich, Theorie der Weiblichkeit, ed. Winfried Menninghaus (Frankfurt: Insel, 1983), (...)
  • 6 Ibid., p. 171.
  • 7 Kant, Immanuel, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View, ed., trans. Robert B. Louden (Cambrid (...)

7And where is gender? The 1750 definition did not allude to men or women. The semantics, however, did. When contemporaries talked about “feeling insulted,” they implicitly talked in gendered terms. Insult, in those days, always targeted a person’s honour, and honour concerned men in different ways and qualities than women. A man who felt offended had to react or would otherwise be deemed a coward, his masculinity defied. The more determination he showed, the better. Rage here acquired a downright masculine quality, as reflected in a lexicon entry from 1827 describing rage as “an affect of annoyance in its manly, vigorous expression.”4 Romantic writer Friedrich Schlegel took a similar view when he associated rage with masculinity. Women, he claimed, “know nothing about rage”; only the “higher-minded female character is capable of rage and thus manly.5” Schlegel’s friend Novalis likewise thought of les femmes as characteristically asthenic.6 Sthenic emotions, and in the first place rage, were non-accessible to those feeble creatures disqualified to act energetically on their own behalf. Weakness was what defined and characterised femininity. “Feminine ways are called weaknesses,” noted Immanuel Kant in 1798, and popular encyclopaedias readily agreed.7

Power and self-control

  • 8 Basedow, Johann Bernhard, Das Elementarwerk, vol. 2 (Dessau: Crusius, 1774), p. 299; vol. 1, p. 21 (...)

8Weakness, though, was not only associated with the absence of physical strength. It also indicated a lack of moral and social power. Since Antiquity, rage had been seen as a feature of the powerful. Only those at the top could afford and enact it. They alone had the power to let others feel their rage. This social attribution still resonated in the 1770s when the German pedagogue Johann Bernhard Basedow published his acclaimed Elementarwerk. It instructed parents as well as public and private teachers on how to educate boys below the “academic age.” Basedow strongly advised his young pupils against feeling rage: “Do not believe that rage adds to your reputation, because noble and superior men often give themselves to rage.” According to the educational reformer, rage did not procure social credit, but rather lowered the enraged person in front of others. As a cautionary tale, he mentioned the example of a woman who erupted over her maid breaking a jar. “How disgusting, how abominable her gestures are!” Rather than exerting power, she ridiculed herself, just like “powerless” children did. When the latter showed rage, they were “simply laughable.”8

Fig 4. Basedow, Elementarwerk “The furious rage of a woman; its effect on the tea table and the mirror; the servant’s indiscreet laughter.”

  • 9 Zedler, ed., Universal Lexicon, vol. 63 (1750), col. 507; Real-Encyklopädie [Brockhaus], 7th ed., (...)

9There is one more aspect ushering gender into the semantics of rage. From the early modern period, and culminating in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, European society took a growing interest in affect regulation. As much as it was deemed necessary for a person to have and show feelings, those should be moderated and appear in a well-tempered form. Letting rage take possession of one’s mind and actions was considered inappropriate, irrational and uncivilised. Instead of displaying affect and passion, and resorting to raw force, men needed to tone down their irritation and control their rage. A man should “at least be able to master his rage and avoid those words and deeds that might cause further distress.” The more educated and refined he was, the better he had learnt to keep his passions under control.9

  • 10 Cureau de la Chambre, Marin, Von den Kennzeichen der Leidenschaften des Menschen, vol. 2, (Münster (...)

10Here, the language was clearly and openly gendered. Self-control was something of which only adult men seemed capable. Women and children were regarded as lacking the moral willpower and discipline to moderate their affects. If their constitution was as delicate as Novalis and others assumed, it did not offer them the strength to hold back or regulate their emotions. Marin Cureau de la Chambre, who was Louis XIV’s personal doctor, referred to his medical expertise when he stated in the mid-seventeenth century: “Due to their constitution, youngsters and women do not have a strong mind and thus have to apply great effort to resist their passions.” More often than not, those efforts failed, and women (as well as children) abandoned themselves to unrestrained rage.10

Women’s strength, women’s weakness

  • 11 Zedler, ed., Universal Lexicon, vol. 63 (1750), col. 510; Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie fü (...)

11We see a paradox here: on the one hand, women were granted feelings that without doubt had an empowering effect. As Cureau de la Chambre saw it, women’s uncontrolled rage came about as a “rapid torrent that cannot be stopped and that overflows with words and threats.” Women here entered the stage as forceful actors who lashed out and frightened their opponents, even if their aggression was only verbal, not physical. Rage thus transformed women’s weakness into strength. On the other hand, this very strength was increasingly judged inappropriate for several reasons: first, it was thought to be utterly harmful, above all to women’s offspring. According to prevailing medical opinion, angry mothers who breastfed endangered their children’s health. The milk would turn sour and cause convulsions which might eventually kill the baby.11

  • 12 Meyer, J[oseph], ed., Das große Conversations-Lexicon für die gebildeten Stände, 1st ed. (Hildburg (...)

12Second, female strength contradicted the ideology of gender characteristics that had become enshrined in a complex system of social and cultural practices since the late eighteenth century. In this ideology, women were the passive and men the active sex. Passivity, though, did not work in harmony with a sthenic emotion like rage. Rather, it accommodated sentiments of anger described as rage held back by the “feeling of impotence.” Anger, as Meyer’s Conversations-Lexicon stated in 1842, was mostly to be found in “nervous and testy” people who had been spoilt by a “slack education.” Often it was accompanied by “abdominal ailments.” All this was relevant to women and the “peculiarities” of their gender as contemporaries interpreted them.12

  • 13 Real-Encyklopädie [Brockhaus], 7th ed., vol. 12 (1827), p. 548.
  • 14 Ibid., 11th ed., vol. 15 (1868), p. 775; ibid., 10th ed., vol. 1 (1851), p. 630 (stressing the fac (...)

13Third, the notion of women’s rage as it had been evoked by Louis XIV’s doctor, violated concepts of civilised conduct that were to gain currency throughout the nineteenth century. Self-control and “rational” behaviour ranked highly on the list of bourgeois expectations and virtues. Women who could not resist their passions thus became marginalised in a twofold way: they lost their femininity, and they lacked civility. For men, the story was somewhat different. They, too, had to comply with the expectation to hold back strong and overwhelming emotions. If they failed, they betrayed their social class and upbringing. Instead of acting like an “educated and cultivated” person, they resembled “raw creatures of nature.”13 At the same time, however, they were allowed to show what contemporaries called “noble rage.” It sprang from moral indignation about evil and resulted in warding off injustice and “protecting the weak.” In such cases, rage did not only legitimately relieve one’s soul, but it also helped men to perform good deeds.14

  • 15 John Rawls distinguishes “resentment” and “indignation” (as moral reactions to injustice) from “an (...)
  • 16 See, e.g., Brockhaus-Enzyklopädie, 17th ed. (Wiesbaden: F.A. Brockhaus, 1966–1974), vol. 20 (1974) (...)
  • 17 Kring, Ann M., “Gender and Anger,” in Gender and Emotion, ed. Agneta H. Fischer (Cambridge: Cambri (...)
  • 18 Hess, Ursula et al., “Facial Appearance, Gender, and Emotion Expression,” Emotion 4, no. 4 (Dec. 2 (...)

14The notion that rage could include an ethical element and thus qualify as “rational” is acknowledged by today’s psychologists and philosophers as much as it was by their nineteenth-century colleagues.15 What has changed, though, is its gendering. While earlier scripts had reserved noble rage exclusively for men, more recent lexicon entries dropped any mention of gender. This does not mean, in fact, that rage or anger have become gender-neutral in our times. Conventional wisdom still suggests “that anger is a ‘male’ emotion; women don’t get angry, and if they do, they certainly don’t show it.”16 Even when women do feel anger, they express it differently: “Men hit and throw things more often, and women cry more often.” Those gender differences bear a strong moral touch, and are institutionalised in expectations, standards of behaviour and “display rules.” Thus, women who give free rein to their rage, tend to feel “uncomfortable” because they have violated a social norm.17 Surveys show that women in Western societies smile more than men; in turn, “men’s displays of anger have been reported to be both more pervasive and are generally more acceptable.”18

15Hence, stereotypical expectations about male and female emotional behaviour prevail and are in wide use. They not only structure how people perceive and judge that behaviour; they also bear an impact on how men and women feel and express their feelings. A dominant way for women to express anger is, as present-day psychologists observe, to shed tears. Tears here stand for desperation, grief, and sadness, i.e. for emotions described as passive, self-referential and asthenic. They thus perfectly fit the nineteenth century notion of women as weak, powerless human beings. When tears are shed because of anger, aggression is turned inward rather than acted out (although it may also have an external referent who is supposed to feel guilty because of the sadness that he—or she— has caused the crying person).

  • 19 Messner, Elisabeth M., “Emotionale Tränen,” Der Ophthalmologe 106, no. 7 (Jul. 2009): pp. 593–602, (...)

16The established fact that women in Western societies cry four to five times more often than men (and that they cry differently: longer and sobbing) has nothing to do with biological differences.19 Rather, it is a cultural phenomenon that casts light on social norms, habits, and customs. It is the outcome, so to speak, of learning processes rather than genetic programming. Even though men and women have the same biological and neurological equipment to shed tears, they use it differently.

  • 20 Newmark, Catherine, “Weibliches Leiden—männliche Leidenschaft: Zum Geschlecht in älteren Affektenl (...)

17This insight points back to the early modern period when the topic “gender and emotions” was first publicly discussed. In older teachings on affects and passions, the gender issue had been conspicuously absent. In 1661, however, a French rhetoric academy posed the question of whether “women’s passions are stronger than those of men.” There was no consensus among those who sent in their replies: some speakers bluntly denied the proposition, others supported it. Strictly speaking, though, all participants were less concerned with how women and men experienced emotions. Instead, they focused on how they dealt with and expressed what they felt.20

18There was a reason why. What “really” happened to people when affected by an emotion, strong or weak, short-lived or long-lasting, seemed basically impossible to tell. On the one hand, medical knowledge about what was going on within a person’s body and/ or soul was highly speculative and rested, above all, on observations of how the person acted. Appearances then allowed the observer to make a sound guess about the “inside.” In this way, behaviour reflected temperament, and temperament referred to a specific mixture of bodily fluids. On the other hand, behaviour was also seen to depend on social rules and power relations. Since pre-modern societies were strictly socially stratified, they paid close attention to how differences were symbolically and practically performed. The display of passions and affects likewise followed sophisticated rules which varied firstly according to social rank and estate and secondly according to gender.

Modernity and the natural order

19Modern societies emerging in the eighteenth century radically reversed that order. While they dynamised social differences, they naturalised gender differences. Whereas all men were supposed to be (more or less) equal, men and women were thought to be profoundly unequal. As much as their inequality was based on nature, it seemed to be eternally given and unchangeable. Social differences, in turn, were open to change and moderation. After the Ancien Régime had been abolished, any poor peasant could, at least theoretically, move up the social ladder to become a wealthy entrepreneur or doctor. Social mobility became part and parcel of modernity’s credo, and so did meritocracy. No woman, in contrast, could ever become a man, nature forbid!

20Apparently, the natural order as it was revealed and explored by modern scientists had also provided men and women with substantially different emotions. Biological and medical knowledge tried to leave no doubt that those emotions were genuine phenomena: natural facts that had nothing to do with social display rules or canonised standards of behaviour. Rather, it seemed the other way round: modernity had allegedly found the perfect way to at once accommodate and cultivate women’s (and men’s) natural faculties and propensities. In civil societies of the kind Europe saw gaining momentum from the late eighteenth century on, nature and culture worked splendidly together rather than against each other.

  • 21 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, “The Social Contract,” in Social Contract: Essays by Locke, Hume, and Rous (...)

21Upon closer examination, the congruence between nature and culture was thought to be achieved predominantly by the middle classes. While aristocrats appeared over-cultured, peasants and lower classes seemed prone to the “state of nature” and its animal-like “instincts,” “physical impulses,” and “appetites.” According to French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, man had to ennoble his feelings in order to proceed to the “civil state” and become a “citizen” capable of signing the “social contract.” Such a citizen should neither fall prey to his “natural” inclinations, nor master an artificial and polished “language” which was only “playing at sentiment” without feeling it. Moral and civil education, in Rousseau’s view, was all about raising man above the physical or animalistic, and, at the same time, minimising the level of pretension and camouflage. It was about finding the right balance between man’s nature and culture.21

  • 22 Rousseau, “Emile,” Book V.

22And what about woman’s nature and “civil state”? Here, Rousseau was much less committed. His famous 1762 educational treatise Emile did dedicate a chapter to women, since Emile needed a congenial companion. Still, Sophie’s education followed a completely different trajectory. Woman, so Rousseau argued, had no place in civil society: she was made to please and be useful to man only. Since she depended on him more than he depended on her, her conduct had to speak to his sentiments and appeal to his judgments. Education should thus train her to accept constraint and compulsion from early on. A girl was to be taught to master her temper and bow to the will of others. What mattered most to a woman was chastity, and pudency. Her inner feeling led her to obey her husband and be faithful to him, as well as to tenderly care for her children.22

  • 23 Laqueur, Thomas, Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud (Cambridge: Harvard Universi (...)

23Those were, in a nutshell, Rousseau’s ideas on emotional gender characteristics and relations. They were shared, in one way or another, by a great many philosophers, theologians, pedagogues and doctors who, since the late eighteenth century, had enshrined them in school curricula, sermons, advisory manuals, educational and medical texts. Normative literature as well as novels overflowed with prescriptions and propositions as to what kind of behaviour was expected of men and women. As a justification, they all referred to the natural order. Nature, so the argument went, had established a “radical difference” between men’s and women’s physical and mental organisation. Since it was women’s natural destiny to give birth, their limbs were more delicate than men’s, their nerves highly irritable, and their emotions feeble and unstable. “What we love about femininity,” the eminent pathologist Rudolf Virchow stated in 1848, “is but a dependence of the ovaries.” To a much higher degree than men, women seemed dominated by their sexual organs. Consequently, a “special anthropology” developed that later turned into the separate science of gynaecology. By the beginning of the twentieth century, gynaecologists could claim to be the “natural” authority on all issues that concerned women, including their social position in the modern world.23

  • 24 Kant, Anthropology, pp. 204–05.

24Nature was hence ascribed a peremptory position in defining women’s and men’s purpose and status. It served to legitimise male privileges as well as constraints that barred women from higher education, from entering professions and casting their vote in political elections. At the same time, though, nature happened to be an elusive category. “In the crude state of nature,” Kant argued (echoing Rousseau), the “characteristic features” of the female sex could not be recognized. As with apples and pears, only culture allowed those features to develop.24 Social groups and strata that seemed closer to nature, often displayed a lack of culture, which educated men found disturbing. More often than not, the state of nature was associated with rawness and violent behaviour inappropriate for civil society and civilised human beings. Progress, as it would go alongside the history of civilisation, expressed itself in refined manners and self-control— and in a world that acknowledged women’s special nature, allowed for a clear division of male and female spheres of action, and paid equal respect to both. By 1800 that world already seemed to be in the making. Civil society as it was envisaged and gradually practised in Europe’s urban centres was thought to have correctly understood the “voice of nature” and to have translated it into a modern idiom.

Emotional topographies of gender

  • 25 Welcker, Carl Theodor, “Geschlechtsverhältnisse,” in Staats-Lexikon oder Encyklopädie der Staatswi (...)

25What did this voice say about gender and emotions? The message here was less lucid and precise. As a general rule, women were perceived as the sensitive sex while men owned a “creative mind” that privileged reason and a capacity to dissect, reflect, and abstract. Women in turn were highly impressionable and affected by all kinds of sentiments and “natural feeling.” While men were capable of making “cold decisions,” women were tuned to warm sympathy and mild softness. Whereas the male character displayed a certain “harshness or rigour,” the female character was all gentleness and benevolence.25 Although men, too, could harbour gentle feelings of sympathy and compassion, they were mostly given to “hot passions,” thus tending to appear harsh and insensitive to other people’s worries or ailments. Furthermore, their worldly lives and professions filled them with anger and sorrows that stirred their blood. The female sex, in contrast, found it easier to be well-tempered, softspoken, and cheerful. As Joachim Heinrich Campe, an influential educator, saw it in 1789, women’s physical nature allowed them to cultivate a sunny disposition. Due to their frail and delicate nerves, they were less capable of enduring strong and deep emotions.

  • 26 Campe, Joachim Heinrich, Väterlicher Rath für meine Tochter (Braunschweig: Verlag der Schulbuchhan (...)

26As a result, they were less susceptible to those grievous and gloomy sentiments that often haunted men. While women’s minds could effortlessly move from unpleasant to pleasant feelings, men harboured their passions much longer.26

  • 27 Kant, Anthropology, pp. 149–182; Löchel, Rolf, “Frauen sind ängstlich, Männer sollen mutig sein: G (...)

27The notion that women were superficial, capricious, unsteady, and irrational, was widespread among men who, like Rousseau, Campe or Kant, set out to define the anthropological topography of gender. But there was also a fair amount of disagreement. According to Rousseau, women’s passive and weak nature exposed them to unrestrained passion, lust and desire. Since passions were seen as originating externally and overpowering the person, women became their immediate victims. Strong and active men, in contrast, could withstand and control passions far more easily. Kant, writing several decades later, seemed to share this view. Over and over again, he emphasized that man’s reason helped him to moderate and master his passions. Passions, as such, were introduced as a male prerogative and defined as long-term and imbued with reason. Women instead were given to affect (defined as short-term and without reason).27

  • 28 Kant, Anthropology, p. 150. Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyclopädie für die gebildeten Stände [Brock (...)

28Still, how did this distinction fit Campe’s observation that men often held hot, irascible tempers? How could women’s inherent gentleness and kindness be in harmony with the notion of affect, superficiality and capriciousness? What about women’s natural propensity for “slow, hidden, withdrawn” emotions that clearly resembled Kant’s idea of passion as a “river that digs itself deeper and deeper into its bed”? And how to account for the outright contradiction between Rousseau and the anonymous author who, in 1824, claimed: “Man bursts with loud desire, woman takes to calm longing”?28

  • 29 Kant, Anthropology, pp. 131–32. In English, Empfindsamkeit is translated into “sensitivity,” Empfi (...)

29Quite obviously, gendering affects and passions posed serious problems to philosophers, pedagogues, doctors and publishers. The lack of a consistent view was mainly due to the fact that the world of emotions appeared extremely diverse and complicated. Apart from affect and passion, it consisted of appetites, desires, drives, sentiments, sensations, humours, and moods. Making sense of all those, and specifying their connection to gender, was more than even Kant could manage. Still, he tried his best. With regard to the concurrent tide of sensibility, he distinguished, as many others did, between the right and the wrong kind. “Good” sensibility went along with proper judgment and was deemed “manly”; “bad” sensibility (Empfindelei) by contrast was sheer weakness, “silly and childish,” since it allowed oneself to be affected “by sympathy for others’ condition” in a “merely passive way.”29 Passivity, as we saw earlier, was clearly more relevant to the female sex.

Sensibility

  • 30 Darnton, Robert, The Great Cat Massacre and other episodes in French cultural history (New York: R (...)
  • 31 Krünitz, ed., Encyklopädie, vol. 75 (1798), pp. 367–80.

30Passivity was also what critics of sensibility feared for the male sex. They condemned men who gave themselves over to reading sentimental novels and weeping over broken flowers and captured butterflies. In fact, those novels—Samuel Richardson’s Pamela (1740) and Clarissa (1748), Rousseau’s Julie ou la Nouvelle Héloise (1761) and Johann Wolfgang Goethe’s Die Leiden des jungen Werther (1774), among many others—had drawn large numbers of enthusiastic readers. Women and men alike identified with the heroes and heroines and were moved to tears by their unhappy fate.30 Such an excess of feeling, though, seemed to threaten men’s masculinity, turning them into women or “eunuchs.” Fathers were thus well-advised to put a stop to the Werther “epidemic” and instead teach their sons how to become real men and “useful citizens.” This implied “stifling pain, enduring hardship, resisting danger, in one word, beating the needs of one’s own flesh and blood.” Bad sensibility in Kant’s terms, feminine tenderness and whimpishness, were incompatible with holding public office since the latter called for “reason, seriousness, courage, and strength,” i.e., genuine manliness.31

Fig 5. Front-page vignette by Daniel Chodowiecki illustrating
The Sorrows of Young Werther.

  • 32 Kant, Anthropology, p. 209; Herlosssohn, Carl, ed. Damen Conversations Lexikon (Leipzig: Volckmar, (...)

31Hence, men increasingly distanced themselves from sensibility. Nineteenth-century authors associated it almost exclusively with women and defined it as “one of the noblest assets of the female heart.” Nevertheless, they warned women against mistaking sensibility for sensitivity translated as “frenzied feeling” and “abnormal agitation of the senses.” Especially since women’s feelings were supposed to be more lively and subtle than men’s, they had to be filtered through reason and thought. It was not enough to be sensitive, as Kant had described women’s character and virtue, because this put them on a par with animals. Being human meant supplementing sense with sensibility, to invoke Jane Austen.32

  • 33 Ibid., vol. 6 (1836), pp. 321–22.
  • 34 Real-Encyklopädie [Brockhaus], 10th ed., vol. 6 (1852), pp. 322, 681.

32Although not completely devoid of reason, women’s nature tied them to feelings both more elementary and more passive. “Susceptibility, irritability, compassion, patience and noble weakness are the sources of female sentiments,” a lexicon author wrote in 1835. Even if men and women basically shared the same emotions and passions, their “lifestyles” were so far apart as to make them “feel differently.” Women’s feelings were less destructive, finer, and softer.33 Emotions like shame seemed to suit them better than men; conversely, rage would thwart their natural decency and delicacy. Women, the Brockhaus stated in the 1850s, “represent love and shame,” men “honour.” In other words, “man is conquered more by rage, fume and fury, woman by ruse, jealousy and melancholy.”34

  • 35 Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon, 6th ed. (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1902–1905), vol (...)

33Emotional gender features and differences as they had been discussed in detail since Rousseau’s and Kant’s times remained surprisingly stable throughout the nineteenth century. The “special anthropology” reserved for women engaged with emotions, sentiments, affects and passions to a much higher degree than the male standard model. A popular illustrated lexicon from 1837 reserved the benefits of grace, tenderness, patience, sweet temper, shamefacedness and “foreboding mindfulness” for women. Yet when it came to “reason, willpower, audacity,” women ranked behind men. A 1904 edition simply claimed: “Women are governed by emotion and a sentimental mind, men by intellect and reason.”35

  • 36 Brockhaus’ Conversations-Lexikon. Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie, 13th ed. (Leipzig: Brockh (...)

34This did not mean, however, that men were to be purely rational beings. Even if they were called upon to apply reason and prudence before making decisions and taking action, they would be ill-advised to discard emotion altogether. Those who did were considered as deficient as those who let emotion overpower them. In 1884, a “healthy and manly character” was understood as essentially needing “capability and openness for all kinds of higher feelings. This has to go along with the ambition to get a clear idea about what is at stake in those feelings. Somebody who lacks this capability and openness is called numb and insensitive.”36

  • 37 Ibid.; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon, 5th ed. (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut , 1893–1898), vo (...)
  • 38 Schlegel, Theorie der Weiblichkeit, p. 61.

35Being called numb and insensitive was not what middle-class men strove for. It was either associated with “natural crudeness” resulting from “bad breeding, dire conditions and vulgar morals,” or with a certain bluntness or smugness often associated with “excessive or over-refined pleasures of life.” Faced with those daunting alternatives, men of the educated bourgeoisie chose rather to cultivate “higher feelings.” This allowed them neither to be regarded as an unmanly Gefühlsmensch whose thoughts and actions were driven by emotions only, nor to change over to the other camp: that of the “cold” and calculated Verstandesmensch.37 As early as 1795, Friedrich Schlegel had demanded “soft masculinity” (alongside independent femininity).38 There is evidence that this softness was not just praised and propagated, but also practiced.

Romantic families, passionate politics

  • 39 Trepp, Anne-Charlott, Sanfte Männlichkeit und selbständige Weiblichkeit: Frauen und Männer im Hamb (...)

36Especially during the first half of the nineteenth century, many doctors, lawyers and businessmen were eager to pursue domestic bliss and cherished their wives and children. They fell madly in love and talked eloquently about the “ecstasy of romantic love.” Although women were regarded as guardians of love, men, too, spoke of and enacted love in a passionate and consuming way. The family became an intimate and quasi-sacred space, and was imagined as a heaven of sincere affection and authentic feeling. Here, religious rituals were performed by men and women alike. Even if women were particularly taken to tears and constantly conjured up emotions, their husbands readily joined in. As much as private Christian religion developed into a highly emotionalised social practice, both genders participated in its rituals of praying, singing and reading.39

  • 40 Staël, Anne Germaine de, Über Deutschland, ed. Monika Bosse (Frankfurt: Insel, 1985), pp. 39, 46. (...)
  • 41 Welcker, Carl, “Bürgertugend und Bürgersinn,” in Rotteck and Welcker, eds. Staats-Lexikon, 2nd ed.(...)
  • 42 Scheidler, Karl Hermann, “Gemüth,” in Allgemeine Encyclopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste, eds. (...)

37For some observers, the cult of the happy family was actually too much. As early as 1810, the French aristocrat Madame de Staël half-criticised the German (protestant) habit of turning love into a “religion” and “a sort of secular service.”40 In 1846, Carl Welcker, a liberal academic and politician, mocked the “bestial family love” advocated by the German middle classes. It made him fear for the country’s political culture: the emotional focus on the private sphere and domestic bliss, he argued, kept men away from the public sphere. Instead of fulfilling the “supreme and holiest duties” of a citizen, electoral delegate and lawmaker, German philistines (Spießbürger) and civil servants preferred to sacrifice those duties on the altar of family love. Patriotic politics were lost on them, and the fatherland left emasculate, subservient to foreign domination and internal despotism.41 In a similar vein, Professor Karl Hermann Scheidler, who as a student had participated in the liberal-national Wartburg festival of 1817, later complained about the “dark side of our German Gemüthlichkeit.” He located that strange sense of community and cosiness, first, in contemporary student fraternities (different from those he had joined in his early years) and, second, in the “small world of the family” that was idealised above all things. Both inevitably led to “political apathy” and a widespread reluctance to get involved in social action.42

  • 43 Arndt, Ernst Moritz, Kurzer Katechismus für teutsche Soldaten (s.l., 1812), pp. 9, 30; idem, Was b (...)

38That reproach, however, was overstated. The political movements of the 1830s and 1840s had mobilised hundreds of thousands of middle-class men to join clubs and associations, sign petitions and raise money, participate in demonstrations and march on the streets advocating liberal democracy and the nation-state. Conservative-minded citizens also got organised, and so did socialist workers campaigning for social rights. Even before 1848, men had not been as obsessed with family life and soft masculinity as Welcker and others claimed. The wars of the early nineteenth century had triggered emotions that had nothing to do with domesticity and marital intimacy. In the place of paternal love, they elicited love for the fatherland, and hatred towards the enemy. Propagandists on all sides appealed to patriotic sentiments and xenophobic feelings. Writers such as Ernst Moritz Arndt (who in 1848 became the senior president of the first German national parliament) lashed out against the French and condemned them for being “mean, lascivious, ravenous and cruel,” for defiling German women and poisoning men’s honour. German men were called to war in order to wipe out the “disgrace” and rekindle “German love, fidelity, and militancy.”43

39When the Napoleonic wars were over and German honour restored, those collective and publicly shared emotions subsequently shifted to domestic politics. Welcker drew on the analogy in 1838, when he used the term “war” literally (war with weapons) as well as metaphorically (war about political rights). Both were fought with a passion that left no man untouched. The struggle for a liberal constitution, male suffrage and responsible government pitted party against party, faction against faction. Emotions surged up that had never been encountered in former times. Instead of being obedient subjects and paying reverence to prince and king, citizens now self-confidently engaged in tough negotiations with the monarchy. They threatened to withdraw their trust and loyalty, and they referred to a new kind of love: for fatherland and nation rather than for the monarch himself. Still, the “war about rights” was not only waged between the latter and his rebelling subjects. It also took place horizontally, among citizens who held different views on the form those rights should take and how evenly or unevenly they were to be distributed. Political quarrels bore a high level of heat and noise, violent conflicts and passionate dispute. Men were insulted and physically attacked because others disagreed with their opinions, and in some cases, political opponents were assassinated.

  • 44 Welcker, “Geschlechtsverhältnisse,” quotes pp. 641, 648– 50, 657. As mentioned earlier, though, th (...)

40The fact that passions played such an important role in modern politics was the reason why the latter should be reserved for men only. This was Welcker’s main concern in the 1830s when he reflected on gender relations and the status of women. Due to their “mild, soft nature,” women were in no position to mix with politics. Should they decide to take their chances, they would inevitably be crushed by the more passionate men while they risked losing their lovely femininity and charm. Here, the conventional argument got turned upside down: instead of linking women to emotions and men to reason, the author perceived men as passionate beings driven by “rage, defiance, and impatience.” By contrast, women were imagined as smooth and gentle, showing “temper and feeling” rather than passion and affect. They were good at tolerating and enduring, whereas men went with their heads against the wall.44

  • 45 As to how those rules were voiced in popular encyclopaedias and advice manuals, see, e.g., Ersch a (...)
  • 46 Meyer, ed., Conversations-Lexicon, vol. 19 (1851), p. 1457; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon, 5th ed., (...)

41It is not altogether clear whether the liberal professor actually approved of men’s passionate behaviour in politics, or if he judged it inappropriate. On the one hand, it violated the rules of emotional restraint to which educated middle classes were well-advised to adhere.45 On the other hand, it was commonly understood that “great deeds” came out of “great passions.” “All great men” were “more or less passionate men” since “mental power, as much as organic power, from time to time needs a strong stimulus and impulse.” But if exceptional achievements and triumphs were often triggered by passions, the latter should and could, under certain conditions, be accepted as morally sound.46 For contemporaries like Welcker, who put all his energy into promoting liberal principles and a constitutional order, politics was certainly a cause meriting passionate commitment—at least for men, and men only.

42What happened when eternal laws of nature were neglected and women were allowed to exert powerful and empowering emotions could be observed during the French Revolution. To many a sceptic, it had turned women into those horrible “hyenas” immortalised in Friedrich Schiller’s famous Song of the Bell. Published in 1799, the poem found strong words and images to condemn the “uproar” of the people fighting for freedom. Women, as Schiller saw it, had behaved in a particularly outrageous way. Driven by “blind rage,” they “change into hyenas / And make a plaything out of terror, / Though it twitches still, with panthers teeth, / They tear apart the enemy’s heart.”

  • 47 Geitner, Ursula, “‘Die eigentlichen Enragées ihres Geschlechts’: Aufklärung, Französische Revoluti (...)
  • 48 Welcker, “Geschlechtsverhältnisse,” quotes pp. 649–50, 656. Similar arguments were put forward by (...)

43For Schiller as much as for Welcker, revolutions that let women take an active political stance allowed them to mutate into wild beasts thus ultimately becoming a threat to humanity. Equally unacceptable were those enragées, who, though in a less violent form, demanded a share in political debates and decisions.47 To grant women political rights was tantamount to denouncing their natural calling and social order. Passionate election campaigns or disputes in parliament, men argued, would harm femininity and put the fatherland in danger. Healthy and well respected women would never want to participate in those flaming struggles, but would leave them to their husbands, fathers and brothers. Still, this did not rule out women becoming educated and publicly involved. According to liberal opinions, they should be allowed to listen to political debates, follow court trials, attend university lectures, establish associations and publish newspapers in support of “legitimate, worthwhile public causes.” Women were out of place, though, in those arenas where political (and military) power had to be passionately fought for, gained and defended.48

Intense emotions versus creative minds

  • 49 Hanslick, Eduard, Vom Musikalisch-Schönen. Ein Beitrag zur Revision der Ästhetik der Tonkunst (185 (...)

44Women were also out of place in other areas, such as music. “Why is it,” asked the famous Viennese critic Eduard Hanslick in 1854, “that women, who are by their nature inclined towards emotions, cannot achieve anything when it comes to composing music?” He gave the answer himself: precisely because the “intensity of emotions cannot dictate a musical composition. It is not emotion that composes music, it is the particular, musically trained artistic talent”—a talent women were supposedly lacking. They could, in the right circumstances, develop a performing virtuosity, interpreting pieces of music in a sensible manner. But they would never be capable of creating those pieces.49

45Hanslick’s argument was somewhat different from Welcker’s. When he dismissed women’s contribution to art, he sided with ideas about men’s innate activity and women’s innate passivity. In order to produce outstanding work, a person needed not only talent, but also discipline, willpower and energy, all inherent in men’s physical and mental apparatus. Conversely, women seemed too dependent on their frail body and susceptible to their emotions to accomplish anything impressive in the arts and sciences. Imaginative creativity was thus reserved for men, as they could cultivate and combine talents, intellect and discipline free of any physical and emotional constraints.

  • 50 Kirchhoff, Arthur, ed., Die Akademische Frau (Berlin: Steinitz, 1897), quotes pp. 5, 29, 67, 148–4 (...)

46How deeply embedded and widespread these ideas about gender difference were, came to the fore in the 1890s. More than a hundred German university professors, teachers and authors were interviewed and asked if they considered women to be capable of attending university and successfully starting a career in the professions or academe. If at all, most men could not imagine women as scientists or in any higher and independent position. At best, women were thought eligible for jobs in which they assisted men rather than pursuing their own research or professional work. Theologians saw women as inept in analysing dogmatic or historical problems because they were overly “intuitive.” In law, women were found too emotional and self-righteous; as judges, they lacked the appropriate character: “They are too soft, and have too little energy to wield the sword of justice,” “they tend to sentimentality” and suffered “from an abundance of feeling” that made them follow their “compassion” rather than “legal logic.” In medical practice, women proved unable to use their brains independently of their emotions; they could neither reach decisions quickly nor take a strong responsible line. As women’s pronounced emotionality directly affected their blood vessels and consecutively led to erratic fluctuations in the brain’s blood flow, the latter caused “vertigo, dizziness, convulsion, and tremor.” Altogether, they inevitably reduced women’s “intellectual clarity” disqualifying them from any serious academic work50.

  • 51 Venedey, Jacob, Die Deutschen und die Franzosen nach dem Geist ihrer Sprachen und Sprichwörter (He (...)

47Nevertheless, there were other professions that might benefit from female inclinations and feminine virtues. Nursing or educating young children were deemed a perfect fit for women precisely because of their inherent sensibilities. Women were also thought to be at their element with charities or when working in the customer services sector. Industrial labour, in contrast, posed a threat on women’s health and sensitivity. Most people (men and women alike) agreed that women were ideally suited to family life. This was the sphere where their physical and mental “nature” would unfold and thrive. Here they could “represent love” and gently care for their husband and children. The family was, as democrat Jacob Venedey wrote in the 1840s, a “school of emotions”: “Without family, emotions cannot develop, without emotions, there is no family.” Mothers occupied centre stage: they taught their children how to feel and what to feel; they taught them love, morality, and friendship.51

Schools of emotions: The media

  • 52 Flaubert, Gustave, Correspondance (1862–1868) (Paris: Conard, 1929), p. 158 (letter from October 6 (...)

48Yet, the maternal lessons were different for boys and girls, and they were not the only ones. L’éducation sentimentale took place in numerous institutions and with the use of various media. Novels, for instance, were thought to make a considerable impact on the manner in which male and female readers ordered and organised their “emotional economy.” They provided role models, typologies and stereotypes, but they also offered bemusement and reflection. Rather than vesting their protagonists with one dominant feeling, the modern social novel as it was invented in France and Britain (less so in Germany) presented a full panoply of different and alternating emotions. As much as the narrator immunised himself against those and privileged a cold diagnostic view on his heroes and heroines, the latter usually stumbled from one to the other, always in search of true, strong and deep feeling. This fate was suffered by Emma Bovary just as it was by Frédéric Moreau, whose sentimental education, as Gustave Flaubert claimed, represented the “moral and emotional history” of his own generation.52

  • 53 Kolesch, Theater.

49Whether this claim was legitimate is open to further investigation. As a general rule, novelists could not help but be close observers of contemporary mores and habits. At the same time, though, they took their distance. They chose to highlight some issues and downplay others, they radicalised certain behavioural syndromes and neglected what did not fi t their argument. As to their readers, very little is actually known about how they received the message and what it meant to their own sense of belonging and being in the world. Suffice it to say that literature, both highbrow and popular, was seen as a crucial medium of educating emotions. Along with theatre and opera, it was thought to move its audience and evoke (emovere) appropriate feelings. Since the early modern period, plays, even more than poems and literary texts, had sought to impress men and women with affections that apparently travelled faster in the company of theatre-goers than in the more isolated act of reading.53

  • 54 Cavallo, Guglielmo and Roger Chartier, eds., A History of Reading in the West (Cambridge: Polity P (...)
  • 55 Cavallo and Chartier, eds., History of Reading, ch. 13; Schlaffer, Hannelore, “Lektüre und Geschle (...)

50In the course of the nineteenth century, rising rates of literacy and the expansion of cultural markets made novels and plays available to more and more people. Even men and women of the lower classes, whose literary canon had formerly been monopolised by the bible and religious calendars, increasingly took to reading. While women preferred (romantic) novels, men favoured history books, science and war stories.54 In the twentieth century, movies and, later, TV extended the consumption of cultural commodities to a degree that had been inconceivable in earlier times. What this meant for the education of feelings and its gendered practices has hardly been discussed, let alone analysed in any detail. While the cultural market’s growing diversity makes it difficult to identify clear pathways and trends, research on reading patterns reveals a stunning continuity. Women still give preference to what nowadays is called human interest stories while men rather turn to newspapers, professional journals, or historical biographies.55

Self-help literature

51What has become attractive to both genders is the genre of self-help literature promoted on the modern book market. The range of topics is huge: from breastfeeding to financial investment, from how to improve one’s emotional intelligence to simplifying one’s life. Some of these advisory manuals target men or women exclusively, but the majority figures as unisex literature and is relevant to both. The type of guidebook which is explicitly gendered and addresses either male or female concerns is harder to find on bookshelves today. On closer inspection, though, it still exists. Von Tag zu Tag (From Day to Day), for example, a book for girls in puberty, now available in its 33rd edition, was first published in 1954. From the first page to the last it spoke a highly gendered language of emotions.

  • 56 Schittenhelm, Rosemarie, ed., Von Tag zu Tag: Das Große Mädchenbuch, 23rd ed. (Stuttgart: Frankch’ (...)

52In the beginning, there was the imperative: “Let us remain graceful!” The manner in which grace (Anmut) and beauty were defined, needless to say, referred to women only. Further on, “woman above all” was advised to continuously cultivate her sensibility and use the “fine compass of feeling” to align matters of everyday-day life. A paragraph on “The Miracle of Life” cautioned the female teenager not to let herself get carried away by “confused feelings” but to wait for the one and only who would eventually prove worthy to found a family. The chapter on “planning” mentioned how important it was for a young woman to have a job, and recommended a brochure on “313 female professions.” It also emphasized that those professions were solely meant to keep women busy before they became mothers since “children completely solicit their mother’s attention for a long time.” Even as mothers, though, women should know about the world, read the daily paper and be informed about politics. Since male and female spheres were no longer as wide apart as in former generations, men and women were supposed to meet on an equal footing. “At home, the husband expects the wife to be his equal, especially since he knows that she often has a much more reliable sense of handling people and situations.”56

Fig 6. Three editions of Von Tag zu Tag. Das Große Mädchenbuch (1954, 1961, 1972).

53The long-standing message about women’s particular sensibility and their finely tuned emotions was thus still present in the 1960s, though in a mitigated and less explicit form. That message had been a regular feature in the great number of advice manuals published since the late eighteenth century.

  • 57 Wobeser, Wilhelmine Karoline von, Elisa oder das Weib wie es sein sollte (1795) (reprint Hildeshei (...)

54While the prototypical Knigge had deliberately addressed a purely male audience, manners books for women followed suit. Even if they increasingly differentiated their target group according to age, religion, and class, they all conveyed a picture of the female sex as highly emotional but softly-spoken. The role model was and remained the woman who always appeared well-tempered, cheerful, and positively engaged. Such characteristics obviously did not come naturally but had to be nourished by way of constant self-inspection and scrutiny. Self-control was writ large, especially among the middle classes. Time and again, women were warned not to lash out against maids and servants and in any event to keep their emotional balance.57

55Men received different directions. First, their emotions seemed to matter less and did not figure as prominently as women’s. Second, men’s reading habits rapidly moved away from Knigge. From the 1870s onwards, German middle-class boys were given a copy of Wilhelm von Kügelgen’s Jugenderinnerungen eines alten Mannes on the occasion of their confirmation.58 This nationalised version of éducation sentimentale, however, was soon supplemented and then replaced by a completely different genre. 1880 saw the first edition of Das Neue Universum which became enormously popular during the twentieth century. As a yearbook for “maturing youth” regardless of religion or class, it merged science and adventure, technological knowledge and entertainment. An appendix told boys how to apply that knowledge at home, and contained instructions for experiments— in 1910, the construction of a steam engine; in 1929 radio supplies and loudspeakers.59

  • 60 This message was generally conveyed by nineteenth- and twentieth-century juvenile literature: Müll (...)

56Emotions were very much on the Universum’s agenda although they were not openly addressed. Emotional education worked silently, by eliciting excitement and wonder, provoking curiosity, assuring juvenile readers that everything was feasible and achievable if they had wits, discipline, and willpower. The series sought to build self-confidence, a firm belief in continual progress and in (Western) man’s capacity to master any problem whatsoever. The world was there to be conquered, and the universe to be explored and exploited. Life was a hard struggle, and boys prepared for that struggle from early on.60

More schooling: Armies, peer groups, politics

  • 61 Frevert, Nation in Barracks, pp. 157–99.

57The emphasis on toughness, discipline and daring was further strengthened in all-male institutions like the military. Under Continental Europe’s regime of general conscription, every young man was a potential recruit. Each year, millions entered the “school of manliness” as it was aptly named around 1900, and continued their emotional education. They were taught to love the fatherland and be ready to sacrifice their lives in its defence. They learned to obey orders and not flinch from danger or unpleasant duty. Being called a “sissy” was the worst thing that could happen to a soldier. What should appeal to him instead was the comradeship of his peers with its typical blend of support, repression and control.61

  • 62 Reulecke, Jürgen, “Ich möchte einer werden so wie die...Männerbünde im 20. Jahrhundert (Frankfur (...)

58Peers proved equally important in civil life, and they played a huge role in boys’ (and girls’) emotional coming of age. Youth groups, be they religious, political, paramilitary or independent, became a crucial factor of male socialisation. While journeymen’s associations and student fraternities had existed long before, organisations for younger and adolescent boys did not emerge until the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They cultivated emotional codes valuing warm and trusting relationships among their members while marking strict boundaries towards those outside that did not belong. Homoerotic feelings, more or less concealed, were part and parcel of all-male groups. Sensibility had its share, with lyrical texts sung around the campfire. At the same time, though, self-hardening and an intolerance of unmanly conduct were taken to heart.62

59Those features gained further currency in totalitarian regimes and movements flooding Europe mostly in the wake of World War I. Italian Fascismo, Action Française and Vichy, Falange Española, the Hungarian Arrow Cross Party, and German National Socialism all preached the gospel of male harshness. Adolf Hitler imagined his young followers to be “fast as greyhounds, tough as leather and hard as Krupp steel.”63 Nazi youth organisations were eager to achieve this goal and educate boys (and later girls) in the strict racial spirit of a conquering Volk. What its self-proclaimed elites could accomplish was highlighted by Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler in October 1943. Speaking to SS officers in occupied Poland, he defended the extermination of Jews as a political necessity that had to be performed in a personally detached and machine-like fashion. “Most of you will know what it is like when a hundred corpses lie together, when there are five hundred, or when there are a thousand. And to have seen this through, and—apart from exceptional cases of human weakness—to have remained decent, has made us hard and is a page of glory never mentioned and never to be mentioned.” Although the killing had been a “most difficult task” that made men “cringe” (schaudern) because of its sheer monstrosity, it had to be carried out “for the love of our people.” In conclusion, “we have suffered no injury or damage in our inner being, in our soul, in our character.”64

60Hitler’s most “willing executioners,” to quote Daniel Goldhagen, were thus endowed with emotions of two sorts: They held strong positive feelings towards their comrades, their people, and, of course, towards their Führer. They harboured equally strong but negative feelings towards those they considered enemies and traitors. Those latter emotions, however, as Himmler made crystal-clear, had to be overcome so that they would neither get in the way of personal decency nor obstruct political logic and necessity. Neither hatred nor compassion was appropriate in completing the monstrous task. Even professional killers had to learn how to become hard and unemotional, to block out empathy, lust or rage and to perform their job as matter-of-factly as possible.

61Himmler’s speech was supposed to be highly confidential. It did not address the wider German public whose emotional attitudes, as the Reichsführer SS knew only too well, could not be trusted in those matters. At the same time, though, that wider public was also undergoing a complex process of emotional reeducation. The Nazi regime (and fascism generally, as could be observed in other European countries) tried to evoke and manage the citizens’ feelings in an unprecedented manner. Love, pride, devotion, and trust were continuously appealed to and put on stage. As a general rule, those emotions were painstakingly ritualised and regulated. Preferably, they were displayed in large crowds, as at party and mass rallies. Grandiose theatrical staging including sophisticated light and sound shows helped participants to express and experience strong feelings—which, however, should never get out of control. On the contrary, their orderly and uniform performance was to defy what had already worried the ancients: emotions’ unruliness and unpredictability.

Collective emotions and charismatic leadership

62Arousing affects and passions in order to move an audience to take certain actions had featured in political rhetoric ever since Aristotle’s times. It was equally important, though, to effectively master and direct those emotions. Not coincidentally, the French noun émeute bears a close linguistic relation to emotion and is still used to describe a violent spontaneous manifestation mirroring collective emotions.65 Especially when performed in a crowd, those emotions could develop a thrust that went beyond anyone’s control. Liberals writing about passionate disputes in the 1830s, had no clue what was to happen to the political theatre during the era of mass politics. From the second half of the nineteenth century, more and more men voted in elections and participated in mass movements. Emotions were soon discovered to be powerful motivators and homogenizers. They mobilized citizens and attuned them to the “domestic warfare” (Churchill, echoing Welcker) that often turned election campaigns “savage.”66

63Emotions also helped to resuscitate the figure of the male leader and saviour, whose charisma largely rested on his ability to speak to the emotions of his followers. What has been called the Second Thirty Years War—the period between 1914 and 1945—brought to the fore an impressive number of charismatic leaders: Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin, alongside politicians like Churchill and Roosevelt. While pluralistic democracies like Great Britain or the USA, though, could never quite regulate and streamline the passions they aroused and kindled, totalitarian regimes like Italy, Germany, and the Soviet Union had a much firmer grip on their citizens’ emotional economy. Against the background of violent repression, they employed sophisticated propaganda techniques to whip up and sustain emotions without ever losing control over them.

64To a large degree, their success in the field of emotional politics was due to the manner in which they gendered it. Women and children were called upon to show unconditional love and reverence for the charismatic leader. Their enthusiasm, sincere or not, was publicly orchestrated and broadcast: they waved their arms, threw flowers, shouted, and cried. Men, by contrast, were sworn in to be loyal and obedient followers, marching in columns, showing hard-nosed, motionless faces that exhibited utmost determination and dedication. Their emotions were staged to be completely in sync with what the regime demanded: never unruly, always ready to spur actions that would demonstrate the efficiency and self-assertion of totalitarian politics.

  • 67 Przyrembel, Alexandra, “Rassenschande”: Reinheitsmythos und Vernichtungslegitimation im Nationalso (...)

65In one way or another, these stagings reproduced traditional patterns of gendered emotions: women (and adolescents) who were supposed to be more emotional anyway, could display their positive feelings openly and without restraint. Their emotional outbursts and exuberance conveniently testified to the public approval (and celebration) of the regime and its Führer. By contrast, men held back their emotions, controlled their passions and proved that they were capable of doing whatever had to be done without flinching. They were as hard on themselves as on others, hommes machines and efficient tools of mass murder. This went along with the deliberate revival and strengthening of emotional dispositions like honour and shame. As mentioned before, the regime purposefully appreciated the currency of honour both in racial and in gendered terms. German (i.e. non-Jewish) women who had a Jewish lover were shamed in public and accused of racial defilement. German men in similar cases were spared the public humiliation.67

  • 68 Frevert, Ute, Women in German History (Oxford: Berg, 1989), pp. 207–11, 240–47.

66Was there anything new about the way in which Nazism gendered emotions? Even if the regime only seemed to continue along a familiar line, it structured and radicalised it to an unforeseen extent. For one thing, girls and women became heavily involved in the public sphere. With some delay, girls were made to join youth associations and take part in the political theatre that had largely been closed to them before 1933. Women got organised as well and took over positions of responsibility that rendered them highly visible beyond the “small world of family, home and racial reproduction.”68 For another thing, the emotional capital women invested in these public appearances was closely monitored, managed, and exploited. Never before had women’s emotions—and their open manifestations—mattered so much to a government and its propaganda apparatus. Although National Socialism perceived itself as a purely male and masculine movement, it paid increasing attention to women’s passionate reverence and support. The propaganda media were full of photographs and newsreels that showed women cheering the Führer and offering him their babies to kiss.

Fig 7. Left: Sudeten German women welcome Hitler, October 1938. Right: Overview of the mass roll call of SA, SS, and NSKK troops. Nuremberg, November 9, 1935.

New emotional profiles and social change

  • 69 Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon, 6th rev. ed. (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1905–1909) (...)

67Seen in a more long-term perspective, Nazism was both advanced and retrograde in its attempt to use and channel women’s emotions. Taking advantage of their public presence it capitalised on the inter-war trend of turning women into citizens, granting them political rights and recruiting them to political parties and associations. Even if citizenship and political rights were largely reduced to passive compliance (for women as well as men), women enjoyed a degree of public participation and political mobilisation unknown in the Weimar republic let alone in the political culture of the Imperial period. On the other hand, Nazism did not support the trend to level differences between male and female emotionality. Here, the 1920s had seen some initial steps. While a 1908 lexicon still emphasised women’s greater “emotivity,” an article in 1932 detected a growing discrepancy between younger and older generations. Young women preferred markedly clear and down-to-earth reasoning, while older women responded more emotionally.69

  • 70 Zweig, Stefan, The World of Yesterday. An autobiography (New York: Viking Press, 1945), pp. 73, 78

68The new emotional profile of younger women corresponded to the social, economic, and cultural changes that had occurred since the beginning of the twentieth century. In many European countries, women’s employment rates were on the rise, particularly in the expanding white-collar and service sector. While far away from closing the gender gap, it still allowed women to experience new challenges and freedoms. At the same time, single-sex institutions like the army or universities had either lost their prestige or were forced to include women. For some observers, the 1920s witnessed the birth of the “new woman” and the “new man.” Looking back in 1941, the Vienna-born author Stefan Zweig commented on the veritable “revolution” in gender relations that had taken place during his lifetime. Forty years earlier, men and women had lived in polar emotional worlds. Men were supposed to be “vigorous, chivalrous, and aggressive,” and women “shy timid, and on the defensive.” Adolescent girls were kept ignorant regarding sexual issues, a fact which made them even more “curious, dreaming, yearning, and covered them with an alluring confusion.” When a young man greeted them on the street, they blushed “full of shame” as if the other had found out “how much their bodies yearned for a tenderness of which they knew nothing clearly.” This had all changed, at least Zweig thought so: “are there,” he asked rhetorically, “any young girls today who blush?” Instead, the new generation of women “steeled” their bodies through sports and moved easily among men, without shame. They considered each other as companions sharing work, study and pastimes.70

69With respect to young women’s physical and emotional habitus, Nazism did nothing to turn back the clock, despite its ideological claims to the opposite.

  • 71 Der Große Brockhaus, 16th ed. (Wiesbaden: Brockhaus, 1952– 1963), vol. 4 (1954), p. 436.

70Nevertheless, it took great care to emphasise gender differences: first by staging women as overly enthusiastic and emotional, second by transforming young men into well-trained labour and party soldiers and, later, efficient war machines. When the war was over and men got demilitarised, the trend towards increasing gender equality continued. This was reflected, among others, in the advice literature and etiquette books mentioned above, as well as in encyclopaedias. In 1954, the West German Brockhaus boldly declared the long-standing view that women’s actions, more than men’s, were emotionally determined, to be simply “false.”71

  • 72 Ibid., vol. 7 (1955), p. 158; Meyers Lexikon, 8th ed. (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1936–1 (...)

71The Brockhaus also condemned Nazism’s emotional politics. To “disinhibit the masses’ passions” was altogether “reprehensible” and invited a “fanaticism” that proved utterly destructive. In fact, National Socialism had welcomed such fanaticism as a highly desirable means of collective mobilisation. In 1937, its lexical definition read as follows: “a feeling of being completely immersed in, and penetrated by, an idea, a religion, a conviction, a role model or a doctrine that inspires unconditional service and commitment, if necessary by sacrificing life and limb.” Fanaticism in this positive sense was “best exemplified” by the “National Socialist who does all he can do for the Führer and his idea.”72 It went without saying that this person was male.

Angry young men, angry young women

  • 73 Allsop, Kenneth, The Angry Decade: A Survey of the Cultural Revolt of the Nineteen-fifties (London (...)

72Later generations of men shied away from sacrificing life and limb for an idea, a doctrine or a charismatic leader. Those who had experienced a fanatic education as boys or teenagers felt betrayed and kept their distance. Some of them turned into “angry young men,” who first made their appearance in Britain, following John Osborne’s 1956 play Look Back in Anger. Dissatisfied with British upper and middle-class society, irritated by the persistence of class distinctions and proud of their lower-class mannerisms, this intellectual movement of playwrights and novelists dominated the literary mood of the 1950s and early 1960s expressing a generation’s “dissentience” with “majority sentiments and opinions.”73 In West Germany, meanwhile, zornige junge Männer (angry young men) took to the streets and protested against rearmament, nuclear weapons, neo-fascist movements and hierarchical structures in universities. They were joined by zornige junge Frauen (angry young women) who eventually turned their rage against men and accused them of patriarchal repression. Reacting in an openly aggressive way by speaking out, using explicit language and throwing tomatoes clearly moved them beyond traditional gender stereotypes. Rage here acquired an empowering quality—and was accordingly frowned upon by those who, like Friedrich Schiller two centuries earlier, did not like women to become “hyenas.”

  • 74 Brody, Leslie R. and Judith A. Hall, “Gender and emotion,” in Handbook of Emotions, eds. Michael L (...)

73What did the enragées of the 1970s accomplish? As much as feminism has succeeded in delegitimising gender inequality and women’s discrimination, it failed to eradicate beliefs and practices which keep those inequalities alive. The fact that women still feel bad about being angry, that they take to tears rather than scream or hit, that they cry much more frequently and intensely, that they express pride less than men do, has nothing to do with biology, blood vessels, genes, or neurons. The concept of women’s “special anthropology” dominating their physical and emotional apparatus clearly went out of fashion.74

  • 75 Hochschild, Arlie R., “Emotion Work, Feeling Rules and Social Structure,” American Journal of Soci (...)

74Nevertheless, cultural modes, patterns of socialisation and self-perception are still deeply gendered. This reflects the impact of social institutions which exploit and manipulate those patterns for their own purposes. The modern workplace is a case in point. Women’s jobs, much more than men’s jobs, are heavily involved in emotional labour. Managing one’s emotions so that they conform to occupational or organisational display rules has become particularly relevant for the ever-expanding service sector. Waitresses and flight attendants, nurses and cashiers, secretaries and saleswomen all do “service with a smile” conveying friendliness and a personal touch. Women’s positive emotions are thus manipulated and commercialised in order to cheer up the customers and keep them satisfied.75

Fig 8. “Service with a smile” campaign.

75As argued in this chapter, such feeling and display rules have been carved out and shaped since the late eighteenth century. With the emergence of modern civil society, affects and passions became not only closely observed and regulated, but also deeply and uniformly gendered. As much as certain emotions (like shame) pertained more or less exclusively to women, others (like rage) were men’s monopoly. Both genders, to be sure, had emotions, even though differing in intensity and substance. The “unemotional man” did not exist. His emotional experience and behaviour were as closely monitored as a woman’s. Still, they followed different norms and prescriptions.

Winds of change

  • 76 Schlegel, Theorie der Weiblichkeit, p. 99; Reddy, William M., The Navigation of Feeling: A Framewo (...)

76Those norms and rules were embedded in, rehearsed and enhanced by social institutions, practices and media that heavily influenced men’s and women’s self-concepts and behaviour. Yet, this influence was not altogether determinist and left room for individual and collective agency. First, norms and related practices were challenged by those who opposed their oppressive weight. This occurred around 1800 when romantic writers revolted against what they perceived as cold, sober, machine-like bourgeois manners and feelings. In France, at about the same time, public intellectuals questioned the political grip of “Jacobin sentimentalism” and wished to limit it to the private sphere of family and friendship. Being restricted to this realm of allegedly true and gentle feeling, however, was not in every woman’s interest. Authors like Mary Wollstonecraft or Hedwig Dohm (to name but a few) felt offended by men’s insistence on women’s vulnerability and weakness and instead asserted their claim to personal honour, moral strength and intellectual wit.76

77Second, such individual criticism often inspired collective movements. Around 1900, the youth movement set out to form and follow new emotional rules that strongly diverged from what they despised about bourgeois society. A few decades earlier, the women’s movement had started to question opinions and practices that excluded women from well-esteemed professions and spheres of activity. In the 1960s, students launched a radical critique of “authoritarianism” in families, universities, and politics. They not only discussed academic texts, but also took their resentment and contempt to the streets, in a highly emotional and passionate way.

  • 77 Mergel, Thomas, Propaganda nach Hitler: Eine Kulturgeschichte des Wahlkampfs in der Bundesrepublik (...)

78Third, even without those ferocious attacks, institutions were subject to change. Traditional family structures crumbled when more women got employed and earned their own money. The economic world underwent consecutive revolutions that increased the number of female employees as well as the weight of those sectors and branches that directly tended to clients and consumers. In their wake, so-called feminine qualities like empathy, care, and friendliness became ever more important. At the same time, institutions like the military, which had traditionally been identified with male emotional dispositions like honour, violence, and vigour, lost their appeal and power. Others, like schools or universities, opened themselves to new subjects and modes of communication that were less strictly and profoundly gendered. Politics, though since the early twentieth century no longer off-limits to women, largely kept its male attire both in content and style. Compared to the 1830s when liberals had commented on political passions going wild, sixty years later the political mass market had turned into a far more emotionalised arena. Post-World War I politics did nothing to attenuate emotions, rather the contrary. Even the alleged return to sobriety after 1945 could not do without whipping up collective worries, rage, and hatred as manifested in anti-Communist or, in the case of France, anti-anti-colonialist propaganda.77

79As a fourth element of change, the impact that institutions and, for that matter, institutionalised norms of emotional conduct bear on individuals has shifted over time. On the one hand, more and more people have been involved in the various institutions that make up civil society. Schooling is a case in point. Schools not only have become more inclusive in terms of both social class and gender; they also keep their students engaged for a much longer period of time. Their influence has thus risen considerably, while the army’s has been reduced. In a similar vein, the labour market has reached out to a growing number of people formerly not exposed to its particular requirements and expectations.

  • 78 See Illouz, Consuming the Romantic Utopia; eadem, Cold Intimacies.

80Still, the amount of time spent in gainful employment has dropped, as working hours and the age of retirement have decreased. This has allowed for the expansion of free and leisure time which in turn has become commercialised and subject to what might be called a veritable industry of emotions. The world of entertainment, vacationing and, generally speaking, consumer culture has come to exert an ever firmer grip on the economy of emotions as practised in high capitalism. As much as it has added an emotional flavour to certain goods and services, it has helped to standardise feelings and emotional behaviour.78

  • 79 Rieff, Triumph; Illouz, Saving the Modern Soul.

81Women here have been primary targets, but men have followed suit, in their own special ways. Since consumer items are often clearly gendered, so are the emotions attached to them. Nevertheless, gender differences seem to be becoming less explicit and farreaching. Ads or movies increasingly show women succeeding in their profession and buying expensive gadgets. At the same time, men can express caring emotions towards their children and friends. The overall endorsement of emotions, firstly, by capitalist consumer culture and secondly, by the “triumph of the therapeutic,” has quite evidently affected both genders.79 In its turn, women’s long-standing faculty to indulge in, reflect on, and talk about emotions has been re-evaluated. Men, too, are invited (and forced) to upgrade their emotional skills, become “emotionally intelligent” and literate, and try out new ways to communicate emotions. Schlegel’s ideal of “independent femininity” and “softened masculinity” has gained momentum—without, however, completely erasing demarcation lines. Girls, indeed, no longer blush when greeted by male peers. But they still cultivate emotional styles and practices quite different to those of boys.

Notes

1 Davis, Natalie Zemon, Fiction in the Archives: Pardon Tales and their Tellers in Sixteenth-century France (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987), pp. 77–84. As to the growing literature on anger in premodern times, see, e.g., Glick, Robert A. and Steven P. Roose, eds., Rage, Power, and Aggression (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993); Harris, William V., Restraining Rage: The Ideology of Anger Control in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001); Rosenwein, ed., Anger’s Past; Stearns, Carol Z., “‘Lord help me walk humbly’: Anger and Sadness in England and America, 1570–1750,” in Emotion and Social Change, eds. eadem and Peter N. Stearns (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1988), pp. 39–68. Generally, the authors pay little to no attention to gender.

2 Zedler, Johann Heinrich, ed., Grosses vollständiges Universal Lexicon Aller Wissenschafften und Künste (Leipzig/Halle: Zedler, 1732–1750), vol. 63 (1750), col. 501.

3 Izard, Carroll E., The Psychology of Emotions (New York: Plenum Press, 1991), p. 243: “Anger mobilizes energy for action, induces a sense of vigor and self-confidence, and thereby makes individuals more capable of defending themselves.”

4 Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie für die gebildeten Stände [Brockhaus], 7th ed. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1827), vol. 12, p. 548.

5 Schlegel, Friedrich, Theorie der Weiblichkeit, ed. Winfried Menninghaus (Frankfurt: Insel, 1983), p. 127: „Der höhere weibliche Charakter ist—zornfähig männlich.“

6 Ibid., p. 171.

7 Kant, Immanuel, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View, ed., trans. Robert B. Louden (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 205. Krünitz, Johann Georg, ed., Oekonomische Encyklopädie (Berlin: Pauli, 1773–1858), vol. 236 (1856), p. 12: defi ned Weiblichkeit (femininity) first as “female nature” (weibliche Natur), second as “female weakness and defect”(weibliche Schwachheit und Fehler).

8 Basedow, Johann Bernhard, Das Elementarwerk, vol. 2 (Dessau: Crusius, 1774), p. 299; vol. 1, p. 218.

9 Zedler, ed., Universal Lexicon, vol. 63 (1750), col. 507; Real-Encyklopädie [Brockhaus], 7th ed., vol. 12 (1827), p. 548.

10 Cureau de la Chambre, Marin, Von den Kennzeichen der Leidenschaften des Menschen, vol. 2, (Münster: Perrenon, 1789), pp. 180, 250, 280–81, 316.

11 Zedler, ed., Universal Lexicon, vol. 63 (1750), col. 510; Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie für die gebildeten Stände [Brockhaus], 11th ed. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1864–1868), vol. 15 (1868), p. 775.

12 Meyer, J[oseph], ed., Das große Conversations-Lexicon für die gebildeten Stände, 1st ed. (Hildburghausen: Bibliographisches Institut, 1840–1853), vol. 3 (1842), p. 424; Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie für die gebildeten Stände [Brockhaus], 10th ed. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1851–1855), vol. 1 (1851), p. 630 distinguishes passive anger (Ärger) and active rage (Zorn). In 1836, H.A. Pierer’s Universal-Lexikon attributed rage to “robust” people “with strong will,” while anger appertained to “weak and nervous” people (Pierer, Heinrich August, ed., Universal-Lexikon (Altenburg: Verlagshandlung Pierer, 1835–1836), vol. 26 (1836), p. 737).

13 Real-Encyklopädie [Brockhaus], 7th ed., vol. 12 (1827), p. 548.

14 Ibid., 11th ed., vol. 15 (1868), p. 775; ibid., 10th ed., vol. 1 (1851), p. 630 (stressing the fact that rage by engendering “deeds or words” relieved the soul ([Gemüt]).

15 John Rawls distinguishes “resentment” and “indignation” (as moral reactions to injustice) from “anger” and “annoyance” (“The sense of justice” in idem, Collected papers, ed. Samuel Freeman (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 96–116, quote p. 111).

16 See, e.g., Brockhaus-Enzyklopädie, 17th ed. (Wiesbaden: F.A. Brockhaus, 1966–1974), vol. 20 (1974), p. 738; ibid., 21st ed. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 2006), vol. 30, p. 675.

17 Kring, Ann M., “Gender and Anger,” in Gender and Emotion, ed. Agneta H. Fischer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 211–31, quotes pp. 211, 219, 223; Campbell, Anne, Men, Women and Aggression (New York: Basic Books, 1993).

18 Hess, Ursula et al., “Facial Appearance, Gender, and Emotion Expression,” Emotion 4, no. 4 (Dec. 2004): pp. 378–88, quote p. 378.

19 Messner, Elisabeth M., “Emotionale Tränen,” Der Ophthalmologe 106, no. 7 (Jul. 2009): pp. 593–602, esp. p. 601.

20 Newmark, Catherine, “Weibliches Leiden—männliche Leidenschaft: Zum Geschlecht in älteren Affektenlehren,” Feministische Studien 26, no. 1 (May 2008): pp. 7–18.

21 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, “The Social Contract,” in Social Contract: Essays by Locke, Hume, and Rousseau, ed. Ernest Barker (London: Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 185; idem, “Emile or on Education,” in The Collected Writings of Rousseau, eds., trans. Christopher Kelly and Allan Bloom, vol. 13 (Hanover: Dartmouth College Press, 2010), p. 374.

22 Rousseau, “Emile,” Book V.

23 Laqueur, Thomas, Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990), ch. 5; Honegger, Claudia, Die Ordnung der Geschlechter: Die Wissenschaften vom Menschen und das Weib (Frankfurt: Campus, 1991), Virchow’s quote p. 210.

24 Kant, Anthropology, pp. 204–05.

25 Welcker, Carl Theodor, “Geschlechtsverhältnisse,” in Staats-Lexikon oder Encyklopädie der Staatswissenschaften, eds. Rotteck, Carl von and Carl Welcker (Altona: Hammerich, 1834–1843), vol. 6 (1838), pp. 629–65, quotes pp. 638–41. Welcker heavily relied on Burdach, Carl Friedrich, Anthropologie für das gebildete Publicum: Der Mensch nach den verschiedenen Seiten seiner Natur (Stuttgart: Balz, 1837), who served as medical authority on gender differences.

26 Campe, Joachim Heinrich, Väterlicher Rath für meine Tochter (Braunschweig: Verlag der Schulbuchhandlung, 1789), pp. 26, 189–97.

27 Kant, Anthropology, pp. 149–182; Löchel, Rolf, “Frauen sind ängstlich, Männer sollen mutig sein: Geschlechterdifferenz und Emotionen bei Immanuel Kant,” Kant-Studien 97, no. 1 (Mar. 2006): pp. 50–78.

28 Kant, Anthropology, p. 150. Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyclopädie für die gebildeten Stände [Brockhaus], 6th ed. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1824–1829), vol. 4 (1824), pp. 180–82.

29 Kant, Anthropology, pp. 131–32. In English, Empfindsamkeit is translated into “sensitivity,” Empfindelei into “sentimentality.” This conflicts, though, with the translation on p. 209: “She is sensitive; he is sentimental” (“Sie ist empfindlich, Er empfindsam”).

30 Darnton, Robert, The Great Cat Massacre and other episodes in French cultural history (New York: Random House, 1985), pp. 215–56.

31 Krünitz, ed., Encyklopädie, vol. 75 (1798), pp. 367–80.

32 Kant, Anthropology, p. 209; Herlosssohn, Carl, ed. Damen Conversations Lexikon (Leipzig: Volckmar, 1834–1838), vol. 3 (1835), p. 400; vol. 4 (1835), pp. 342–43.

33 Ibid., vol. 6 (1836), pp. 321–22.

34 Real-Encyklopädie [Brockhaus], 10th ed., vol. 6 (1852), pp. 322, 681.

35 Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon, 6th ed. (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1902–1905), vol. 7 (1904), p. 685.

36 Brockhaus’ Conversations-Lexikon. Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie, 13th ed. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1882–1887), vol. 7 (1884), p. 649.

37 Ibid.; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon, 5th ed. (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut , 1893–1898), vol. 7 (1894), p. 292.

38 Schlegel, Theorie der Weiblichkeit, p. 61.

39 Trepp, Anne-Charlott, Sanfte Männlichkeit und selbständige Weiblichkeit: Frauen und Männer im Hamburger Bürgertum zwischen 1770 und 1840 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996), pp. 125–60; Habermas, Rebekka, Frauen und Männer des Bürgertums: Eine Familiengeschichte (1750–1850) (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), pp. 315–94.

40 Staël, Anne Germaine de, Über Deutschland, ed. Monika Bosse (Frankfurt: Insel, 1985), pp. 39, 46. Banned by Napoleon in 1810, the book was published in German in 1814.

41 Welcker, Carl, “Bürgertugend und Bürgersinn,” in Rotteck and Welcker, eds. Staats-Lexikon, 2nd ed., vol. 2 (1846), pp. 763–70.

42 Scheidler, Karl Hermann, “Gemüth,” in Allgemeine Encyclopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste, eds. Ersch, Johann Samuel and Johann Gottfried Gruber (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1818– 1889), sect. 1, part 57, 1853, pp. 317–18.

43 Arndt, Ernst Moritz, Kurzer Katechismus für teutsche Soldaten (s.l., 1812), pp. 9, 30; idem, Was bedeutet Landsturm und Landwehr? (s.l., 1813), p.10. See Frevert, Ute, A Nation in Barracks: Modern Germany, Military Conscription and Civil Society (Oxford: Berg, 2004), pp. 22–30; Hagemann, Karen, “Of ‘Manly Valor’ and ‘German Honor’: Nation, War, and Masculinity in the Age of the Prussian Uprising against Napoleon,” Central European History 30, no. 2 (Jun. 1997): pp. 187–220. As to British propaganda, see Colley, Linda, Britons: Forging the Nation 1707–1837 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992), ch. 7.

44 Welcker, “Geschlechtsverhältnisse,” quotes pp. 641, 648– 50, 657. As mentioned earlier, though, theories about women’s emotionality were diverse and inconsistent. Welcker’s colleague Johann Caspar Bluntschli could thus make the opposite argument in 1870: since women were overly “sensitive” and “passionate,” they did not fit into politics for which “insight” and “energy” were necessary. Writing after the turbulent 1830s and 1840s, Bluntschli obviously held different opinions both on women and of politics (Bluntschli, Johann Caspar and Karl Brater, eds., Deutsches Staats-Wörterbuch (Stuttgart: Expedition des Staats-Wörterbuchs, 1857– 1870), vol. 11 (1870), p. 130).

45 As to how those rules were voiced in popular encyclopaedias and advice manuals, see, e.g., Ersch and Gruber, eds. Encyclopädie, sect. 1, vol. 2 (1819), p. 136; Real-Encyklopädie [Brockhaus], 10th ed., vol. 9 (1853), p. 489; Knigge, Adolph Freiherr von, Über den Umgang mit Menschen, ed. Gerd Ueding (Frankfurt: Insel, 1977), p. 45 (“the Knigge” published in 1788 became the archetypical manner book and received numerous editions). See Döcker, Ulrike, Die Ordnung der bürgerlichen Welt: Verhaltensideale und soziale Praktiken im 19. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt: Campus, 1994).

46 Meyer, ed., Conversations-Lexicon, vol. 19 (1851), p. 1457; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon, 5th ed., vol. 11 (1896), p. 185.

47 Geitner, Ursula, “‘Die eigentlichen Enragées ihres Geschlechts’: Aufklärung, Französische Revolution und Weiblichkeit,” in Grenzgängerinnen, eds. Helga Grubitzsch et al. (Düsseldorf: Schwann, 1985), pp. 181–220.

48 Welcker, “Geschlechtsverhältnisse,” quotes pp. 649–50, 656. Similar arguments were put forward by left- and rightwing authors, see “Geschlechtsverhältnisse,” in Blum, Robert, ed., Volksthümliches Handbuch der Staatswissenschaften und Politik (Leipzig: Blum, 1848–1851), vol. 1 (1848), pp. 408–12; Riehl, Wilhelm Heinrich, Die Familie (1855), 11th ed. (Stuttgart: Cotta, 1897), esp. pp. 10–11.

49 Hanslick, Eduard, Vom Musikalisch-Schönen. Ein Beitrag zur Revision der Ästhetik der Tonkunst (1854), 4th ed. (Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth, 1874), p. 74.

50 Kirchhoff, Arthur, ed., Die Akademische Frau (Berlin: Steinitz, 1897), quotes pp. 5, 29, 67, 148–49. There were more extreme views equalling women’s physiological weakness with intellectual deficiency, as suggested by the neurologist Paul Julius Möbius. In 1900, he published his book Über den physiologischen Schwachsinn des Weibes (Halle: Marhold, 1900) of which there were nine editions within eight years.

51 Venedey, Jacob, Die Deutschen und die Franzosen nach dem Geist ihrer Sprachen und Sprichwörter (Heidelberg: Winter, 1842), pp. 29, 99, 102.

52 Flaubert, Gustave, Correspondance (1862–1868) (Paris: Conard, 1929), p. 158 (letter from October 6, 1864); Koppenfels, Martin von, Immune Erzähler: Flaubert und die Affektpolitik des modernen Romans (Munich: Fink, 2007).

53 Kolesch, Theater.

54 Cavallo, Guglielmo and Roger Chartier, eds., A History of Reading in the West (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999), ch. 12; Langewiesche, Dieter and Klaus Schönhoven, “Arbeiterbibliotheken und Arbeiterlektüre im Wilhelminischen Deutschland,” Archiv für Sozialgeschichte 16 (1976): pp. 135–204, esp. p. 172; Schön, Erich, “Weibliches Lesen: Romanleserinnen im späten 18. Jahrhundert,” in Untersuchungen zum Roman von Frauen um 1800, eds. Helga Gallas and Magdalene Heuser (Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1990), pp. 20–40.

55 Cavallo and Chartier, eds., History of Reading, ch. 13; Schlaffer, Hannelore, “Lektüre und Geschlecht,” Neue Züricher Zeitung, July 31, 2010. http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/kultur/literatur_und_kunst/lektuere_und_geschlecht_1.7025813.html (last access: Dec. 19, 2010).

56 Schittenhelm, Rosemarie, ed., Von Tag zu Tag: Das Große Mädchenbuch, 23rd ed. (Stuttgart: Frankch’sche Verlagshandlung, 1961), pp. 13–14, 58, 287, 266–67, 273–74. The book was a bestseller in the 1950s and 1960s and saw 25 editions within ten years.

57 Wobeser, Wilhelmine Karoline von, Elisa oder das Weib wie es sein sollte (1795) (reprint Hildesheim: Olms, 1990); Christ, Sophie, Taschenbüchlein des guten Tones für die weibliche Jugend (Mainz: Kirchheim, 1888); Peters, F., Das junge Mädchen im Verkehre mit der Welt (Mainz: Kirchheim & Co., 1889); Anstandsbüchlein für junge Mädchen (Regensburg: Habbel, 1908); Reznicek, Paula von, Auferstehung der Dame (Stuttgart: Dieck, 1928); Beck, Fritz, Der Gute Ton für meine Tochter: Ein Anstandsbrevier für die junge Dame (Vienna: Pechan, 1960). My thanks go to Rhea Peters who helped to analyse the relevant literature.

58 The book was first published in 1870, had 15 editions by 1892 and 230 (!) by 1922.

59 http://web.archive.org/web/20060716064213/http://www. mediagrill.de/Universum.html (last access: Dec. 20, 2010).

60 This message was generally conveyed by nineteenth- and twentieth-century juvenile literature: Müller, Helmut, ed., Üb immer Treu und Redlichkeit: Kinder- und Jugendbücher der Kaiserzeit (1871–1918) (Frankfurt: Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, 1988); Baumgärtner, Alfred Clemens, ed., Ansätze historischer Kinder-und Jugendbuchforschung (Baltmannsweiler: Schneider, 1980). For Britain, see Olsen, Stephanie, “Towards the Modern Man: Edwardian Boyhood in the Juvenile Periodical Press,” in Childhood in Edwardian Fiction, eds. Adrienne Gavin and Andrew Humphries (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), pp. 159–76.

61 Frevert, Nation in Barracks, pp. 157–99.

62 Reulecke, Jürgen, “Ich möchte einer werden so wie die...Männerbünde im 20. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt: Campus, 2001).

63 Hitler, Adolf, Mein Kampf (Munich: Eher, 1933), p. 392.

64 http://www.nationalsozialismus.de/dokumente/texte/ heinrich-himmler-posener-rede-vom-04-10-1943-volltext.html (last access: Dec. 20, 2010).

65 http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Émeute (last access: Dec. 20, 2010). In 1835, Pierer’s Universal-Lexikon likewise defined Emotion as “revolt” (vol. 7, p. 21).

66 Quote from Times, November 13, 1922, in Cowles, Virginia, Winston Churchill: The Era and the Man (London: Hamilton, 1953), p. 242 (I owe this reference to Kerstin Singer). As to the emotional charge of election campaigns, see, for Britain, O´Gorman, Frank, “Campaign Rituals and Ceremonies. The Social Meaning of Elections in England 1780–1860,” Past & Present 135 (May 1992): pp. 79–115; for the US, Bensel, Richard Franklin, The American Ballot Box in the mid-Nineteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2004), pp. 287, 295.

67 Przyrembel, Alexandra, “Rassenschande”: Reinheitsmythos und Vernichtungslegitimation im Nationalsozialismus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003), pp. 65–84.

68 Frevert, Ute, Women in German History (Oxford: Berg, 1989), pp. 207–11, 240–47.

69 Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon, 6th rev. ed. (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1905–1909), vol. 5 (1908), p. 760; Der Große Herder: Nachschlagewerk für Wissen und Leben, 4th ed. (Freiburg: Herder, 1931–1935), vol. 4 (1932), col. 1327–1328.

70 Zweig, Stefan, The World of Yesterday. An autobiography (New York: Viking Press, 1945), pp. 73, 78.

71 Der Große Brockhaus, 16th ed. (Wiesbaden: Brockhaus, 1952– 1963), vol. 4 (1954), p. 436.

72 Ibid., vol. 7 (1955), p. 158; Meyers Lexikon, 8th ed. (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1936–1942) vol. 3 (1937), col. 1290.

73 Allsop, Kenneth, The Angry Decade: A Survey of the Cultural Revolt of the Nineteen-fifties (London: Peter Owen, 1958), p. 9; http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/25251/Angry-Young-Men; http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-41760001.html (last access: Dec. 20, 2010). As to post-war emotional codes in Britain, see Francis, Martin, “Tears, Tantrums, and Bared Teeth: The Emotional Economy of Three Conservative Prime Ministers, 1951–1963,” Journal of British Studies 41, no. 3 (Jul. 2002): pp. 354–87.

74 Brody, Leslie R. and Judith A. Hall, “Gender and emotion,” in Handbook of Emotions, eds. Michael Lewis and Jeanette M. Haviland (New York: Guilford Press, 1993), pp. 447–61; Timmers, Monique et al., “Ability versus vulnerability: Beliefs about men’s and women’s emotional behaviour,” Cognition and Emotion 17, no. 1 (Jan. 2003): pp. 41–63.

75 Hochschild, Arlie R., “Emotion Work, Feeling Rules and Social Structure,” American Journal of Sociology 85, no. 3 (Nov. 1979): pp. 551–75; eadem, The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983); Grandey, Alicia A., “Emotion regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize emotional labor,” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 5, no. 1 (Jan. 2000): pp. 95–110.

76 Schlegel, Theorie der Weiblichkeit, p. 99; Reddy, William M., The Navigation of Feeling: A Framework for the History of Emotions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 199–232; Dohm, Hedwig, Die wissenschaftliche Emancipation der Frau (Berlin: Wedekind & Schwieger, 1874); Frevert, Women, pp. 71–82, 113–30.

77 Mergel, Thomas, Propaganda nach Hitler: Eine Kulturgeschichte des Wahlkampfs in der Bundesrepublik 1949–1990 (Göttingen: Wallstein, 2010); Connelly, Matthew, A Diplomatic Revolution: Algeria’s Fight for Independence and the Origins of the Post-Cold War Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002).

78 See Illouz, Consuming the Romantic Utopia; eadem, Cold Intimacies.

79 Rieff, Triumph; Illouz, Saving the Modern Soul.

Table des illustrations

Légende Fig 4. Basedow, Elementarwerk “The furious rage of a woman; its effect on the tea table and the mirror; the servant’s indiscreet laughter.”
URL http://books.openedition.org/ceup/docannexe/image/1505/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 136k
Légende Fig 5. Front-page vignette by Daniel Chodowiecki illustratingThe Sorrows of Young Werther.
URL http://books.openedition.org/ceup/docannexe/image/1505/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 251k
Légende Fig 6. Three editions of Von Tag zu Tag. Das Große Mädchenbuch (1954, 1961, 1972).
URL http://books.openedition.org/ceup/docannexe/image/1505/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 143k
Légende Fig 7. Left: Sudeten German women welcome Hitler, October 1938. Right: Overview of the mass roll call of SA, SS, and NSKK troops. Nuremberg, November 9, 1935.
URL http://books.openedition.org/ceup/docannexe/image/1505/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 138k
Légende Fig 8. “Service with a smile” campaign.
URL http://books.openedition.org/ceup/docannexe/image/1505/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 76k

© Central European University Press, 2011

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540

Acheter

Volume papier

Chargement

Unavailable