SPEYER: I have nothing against the interpretation, for it reflects the Berlin of a certain social class today. You know, it’s not so easy for me to show how these three people of noble convictions carry their death sentence around in their pockets, the man in the pocket of his dinner jacket and the two women in their evening bags.
BENJAMIN: Or better yet: each the death sentence of the other.
SPEYER: It’s not so easy to be in love with a certain social class, as I am, and to point the finger at it, saying: you are despicable, you are lost. And how difficult these occasional hints are in comedies when one tries to avoid the perils of becoming obtrusive.
BENJAMIN: But do you not experience the consolation, the great consolation of the comedy writer: that the audience takes its castigation as entertainment?
SPEYER: Of course! And the comedy of today, in contrast to the relentless and cruel comedies of Molière — think of Georges Dandin—is a mirror, but in a silver frame. No matter how much it reflects the misshapen and murky nature of today’s society, it’s still enclosed in a finely wrought metal, and he whose gaze falls upon it takes it not as a mirror, but as a painting.
BENJAMIN: Right you are. But it’s a good thing no one heard us.
“Rezepte für Komödienschreiber, Gespräch zwischen Wilhelm Speyer und Walter Benjamin,” GS, 7.2, 610–16. Translated by Jonathan Lutes.
Broadcast on Southwest German Radio, Frankfurt on May 9, 1930. The Südwestdeutsche Rundfunk-Zeitung announced the broadcast for this date from 6:05–6:35 pm.
1 Wilhelm Speyer (1887–1952) was a writer, former classmate, and friend of Benjamin’s with whom he collaborated on several projects. In addition to “Prescriptions for Comedy Writers,” Benjamin consulted on Speyer’s novel Gaby, weshalb denn nicht? [Gaby, Why Not?] (Berlin, 1930), and his plays Jeder einmal in Berlin [When in Berlin] (Berlin, 1930), Es geht. Aber es ist auch danach [It Works. And How!] (Munich, 1929), and Der große Advokat [The Great Advocate] (1932). According to a written agreement between them, Speyer promised to pay Benjamin “ ‘10 % (ten)’ of the ‘box-office takings’ or max. RM. 5,000 (five thousand) as payment for his advice” (quoted in Momme Brodersen, Walter Benjamin: A Biography, trans. Malcolm R. Green and Ingrida Ligers, ed. Martina Derviş [London: Verso, 1996], 198, 298 n.84; on their collaborations and the remuneration Benjamin received, see also GS, 6, 794, and GS, 7.2, 609).
2 Stefan Großmann’s play, Apollo, Brunnenstraße, written with Franz Hessel, debuted on January 9, 1930 at Berlin’s Volksbühne, directed by Jürgen Fehling.
3 Victorien Sardou (1831–1908), and Eugène Scribe (1791–1861), French dramatists best known for their pursuit of the “well-made play,” a term associated with formulaic, commercially motivated theater.
4 In the first version of Goethe’s play Stella (1776), the play ends with the three protagonists vowing to live together under the motto, “One apartment, one bed, one grave.” In the second version (1806), Fernando and his lover Stella commit suicide, he by pistol and she by poison, while the wife, Cecilia, lives on. For the quotation that follows, see Goethe, Stella: Ein Schauspiel für Liebende in fünf Akten [Stella: A Play for Lovers in Five Acts] (Berlin: August Mylius, 1776), 115.
5 In place of the implied line by Marie, Benjamin’s typescript provides a reference: “see pp. 68–69 of the manuscript … Welt [world].” The manuscript of Speyer’s play containing this quotation was not available to the editors of the GS, who indicate that the published edition (Wilhelm Speyer, Es geht. Aber es ist auch danach! [Munich and Berlin: Drei Masken, 1929]) contains a significantly different version, in which the character of Walter does not appear.
CHAPTER 36. Carousel of Jobs
Put yourselves, ladies and gentlemen, in the position of a fourteen-year-old who has just left primary school and is now faced with choosing a job. Think about the largely vague, sketchy images of jobs that float in his mind, about how impossible it is to attain a more exact insight into them without paying for a costly experience, about the many considerations that must influence a well-deliberated decision and of which he can only act upon a few: the economic situation of each line of business, the demands on or dangers to one’s health, the special nature of professional colleagues, the possibilities for advancement, etc. Does not the image of a carousel seem particularly apt — a carousel of jobs that whirls at such a speed past the candidate, who stands there ready to leap on, that it is impossible for him to study the individual spots that it offers? And, furthermore, you know how grave and oppressive all questions of career choice have recently become, because of unemployment in Europe. Where previously the question of aptitude — the expectation of producing one’s top performance in this or that profession — could direct a young person, now what predominates is the task of snatching a spot where the risk of slipping back down — the danger of being driven out of the production process, never perhaps to gain access to it again — seems as low as possible. The simple slogan “The right man in the right place”1—still often heard these days — actually comes from a more idyllic era of professional life; in fact, it comes, at least in its official recognition, from the time of demobilization. At that point, it was about directing the fifteen- to seventeen-year-old apprentices who had earned eighty to ninety marks a week in the munitions factories toward a regular job. For this reason, the commissioner for demobilization promoted career counseling. But the slogan that circulated then has a very different meaning today. Today, the right place is the place where there’s a chance of holding on.
In this sense, the position of the skilled worker has also changed. In very many cases, he can no longer count on keeping his job. But the prospects of quickly adapting to a new job are much greater for him than for an unskilled worker. We have just mentioned the term “career counseling.” Qualified authorities, so I hear, have just informed you about this topic in numerous reports on Southwest German Radio. Many of you will have gained insight into the great system of tests and manifold methods of evaluation, into the powerful laboratory that has so rapidly generated a new science, the science of work, particularly in Germany. However, today we will scarcely touch upon the concept that will be most familiar to you: the concept of the performance test. Just as we will merely glance at career counseling. The science of work has two sides: on the one hand, it studies the individual, to determine for which job he is particularly suited; on the other, it approaches the job itself and enquires: What hidden, and therefore strongest, drives in a person are best suited to individual jobs? Above alclass="underline" how does the job develop and change — not just the task itself, but the milieu in which it occurs, the transference of job habits to life at home, and the character of colleagues — and how does that all change and develop a person?
How does the job impact the individual, and through what? This is the question to which I would not only like to call your attention today, but for which I would also like to ask for your assistance. Hopefully, the following explanations will make the purpose of our request, which the radio station has asked me to direct to you, completely clear. The request: to send to the station communications of any kind in which you describe the influence of your own job on your mood, your views, your relationship to your colleagues, what strikes you when you think about the person you were when you took the job compared to the person you became in the job. It is possible that you would rather, or more easily, make these observations about colleagues than about yourself. Such communications are equally welcome. The material you provide will be reviewed in a second report, and presented along with the conclusions that can be drawn.2