a. kaes - silent cinema

8/2/2019 A. Kaes - Silent Cinema

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-kaes-silent-cinema 1/12

Silent CinemaAuthor(s): Anton KaesSource: Monatshefte, Vol. 82, No. 3 (Fall, 1990), pp. 246-256Published by: University of Wisconsin PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30155279 .

Accessed: 12/04/2011 14:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uwisc. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of Wisconsin Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Monatshefte.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uwisc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30155279?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30155279?origin=JSTOR-pdf




Silent Cinema

ANTON KAES

Universityf California, erkeley

The era of silent film-spanning more than thirty years from the

beginningsof film in 1895 to the coming of sound in 1928/29-has beenin all countriesan era of innovation and experimentation.In Germany

in particularfilmmakers were eager to explore the artistic potential ofthe new medium in order to prove to a skepticalBildungsburgertumhatfilm could be more thanjust a technological fairgroundamusement forthe masses.They wanted to transform he new medium from a mechan-ical recording nstrument to a modern electrical Gesamtkunstwerkhatcombined the crafts of photographyand cinematography,heaterstagingand acting, storytellingand writing, painting and set design, as well asmusic (since silent film was almost always accompanied by piano or

orchestra).Most of the silent films from Germany are part of a self-proclaimedart cinema, self-consciously in competition with the otherarts. Recourseto classicalliterarysources,the use of famousstageactors,and the wooing of such established writers as Gerhart Hauptmann and

Hugo von Hofmannsthal to produce film scripts-these tactics of the earlycinema were intended to break the resistance that German intellectuals

and the educated middle class instinctively felt (and still often feel today)

against the originally plebeian and unrefined mass entertainment of film.

How can a product that was mechanically produced by a machine ever

be more than unformed nature, "ungeformter Stoff'? The existence of astrong Bildungsbiirgertum, oasting their "klassische Kultur"(with its

emphasison the word, not on visual pleasure),slowed the developmentofa commercial ilmculture n Germany.'The cinema evolved differentlyin the United States where the movies respondedfrom the beginningtothe entertainmentneeds of millions of newly arrived, unschooled im-

migrantswho enjoyedthe silent movies preciselybecause they requiredno knowledgeof Englishand adopted,as in earlyChaplinand Keystone

Kops films, a subversivelyanti-authoritarianpoint of view. Unlike theAmericancinema,Germancinema was less susceptible o economic thanto (high-)culturalpressures.Thevariousattemptsof German ntellectuals

Monatshefte,Vol. 82, No. 3, 1990 2460026-9271/90/0003/024601.50/0c 1990byThe Board f Regents f TheUniversity f Wisconsin ystem



Silent Cinema 247

to come to terms with the cinematic medium in its relation to literature

and theater are amply documented in sourcebooks(Greve, Giittinger,

Kaes 1978)2and described n detail(Heller,Kaes 1987, Koebner,Lorenz).This emphasis on the art of film has made the silent cinema of

Germanya preferredarea of film studies. Some of the films(The CabinetofDr. Caligari,Nosferatu,TheLast Laugh, Metropolis, orinstance)havebecome classicsof world cinema and are now partof anundisputedcanonin film courses everywhere.3Not surprisingly,most research so far hascentered on close readingsof these canonized films4and on "life-and-works" studies of their directors.5Research outside of this canon will

most likely requirevisits to German film archives and museums which,however, preserveno more than the traces of a once prolificand diversesilent film production.6From an averageof 300 to 400 feature films peryearbetween 1919 and 1929 no more than a third has survived.7Silentfilms were destroyedin a first wave around 1910 when the "primitive"cinema (operatinguntil then out of tents on fairgroundsand consistingmainly of one-reelers)was considered to be antiquatedand worthlessincontrastto the new artistic featurefilms (shownin luxurious,theater-likemovie palaces and lasting an average of 90 minutes) and in a second

wave around 1929 when the silent cinema was seeminglymade obsoleteby the advent of sound. Silent films were melted down for their silverand celluloid contents or sold in small pieces as novelty items. Therewere no film archives then to preserve even major films by Murnau,Lang, Wegener (whose first Golem film of 1914 is missing), and others.Once in a while an early silent film is discovered (such as Lang's 1919filmHarakiri),but the chancesof still finding, say, Murnau'sDer Knabein Blau or his Satanas (both 1919) are slim. The new internationally

sharedconcern for the

preservationand restorationof old silent films

has resulted in some spectacularrestored versions of such classics asMetropolisand the two-partNibelungen,which, billed as special eventsat film festivals, have acquired cult status.8Missing films have to belaboriouslyreconstructed romcensorshipcards,whichprovide plot sum-maries and casts, from reviews in contemporaneousfilm periodicals-Film-Kurier,Licht-Bild-Biihne,and Kinematograph,all of which areavailable on microfilm-and from articles about these films in journalsand newspapers.Despite these losses, several hundred films did survive

and provide evidence of a once flourishingfilm culture in Germany,peakingin the WeimarRepublic, a period that is now often referred oas the Golden or ClassicalAge of German cinema. (See the comprehen-sive overviews by Barlow,Brennicke/Hembus,Buache, Dahlke, Eisner1969, Fraenkel,Kracauer,Monaco).

With its emphasison "expressionistic" tylizationand theatricality(over realism), on mise-en-sc6ne and atmosphere (over narrative and



248 Kaes

suspense),on camera movement and composition (over montage),andon charactergaze(over action), German silent cinema has come to serve

in most film histories as a counter-modelto Hollywood's classical nar-rative cinema as developedby D.W. Griffith.Germany'ssilent film the-matizes the magic spectacle of the new medium itself; it persistentlyforegrounds he power of the look and the power of the apparatus.Re-

curringmotifs referring o the uncanny effectsof film (hypnotism, par-anoia, hallucination,dreams,somnambulism,magicand occultism)andallusions to the cinematic apparatus(shadows, mirrors,machines, pro-jections) mark the high degree of self-referentialityn the German artfilm.

Drawingon

lightingand

stagingtechniques of the Expressionist

stageand using its symbolic acting style, German silent cinema evolvedfrom,and carriedon, conventionsof GermanExpressionist heaterwhichitself was indebted to RichardWagnerand Max Reinhardt(see Collier,Cossart,Kaes 1979,Kurtz).The verbal dimensionwasexpressed hroughmore or less literary(in Lubitsch'scase often ironic)intertitles and com-

pensated for by exaggeratedgesturesand facial expressions, by subjec-tively distortedmise-en-scrneas well as by carefullycalculated camera

placementand movement. More research s still needed on the art his-

torical side of silent film: what are the connections between visual signsand the written word in silent cinema? What are the similarities anddifferencesbetween the Expressionistarts (painting, illustration,wood-cuts, architecture)and Expressionistfilm?

When teaching German silent film, one of the most strikingdis-coveries for students(anda point of departure or teachers) s invariablythe unexpected amiliarityof the distinct visualstyleof the silent art film.The classical Americangenre films-the horror,vampire, Frankenstein,and sciencefictionfilm, the melodrama,the thriller,and the film noir ofthe 1940sand '50s-seem to be prefiguredn theiriconographyand evennarrativeconstructionby suchprototypefilms as Dr. Caligari,Nosferatu,Golem,Metropolis,The Last Laugh, Joyless Street,Pandora'sBox, Dr.Mabuse,and M. These films have visualized a literary raditionthat itselfis rooted in the Romantic novel, the Schauerdrama, he melodramatic

Familientragadie,the intimate Kammerspiel (in the tradition of Ibsenand Strindberg),and the British detective novel. EarlyGerman cinema

acted, then,as a relaystation betweenEuropean iteratureand the popular

cinema of Hollywood.9One of the main reasonsfor the visible influenceof Germansilent

film techniques on American cinema was, of course, the massive emi-

grationof Weimar'sfilm community. Hundreds of film directors, pro-ducers, cameramen,lighting and stage technicians as well as actressesand actors emigratedto Los Angeles between 1933 and 1941;so manyin fact that Los Angelescame to be called "Weimar am Pazifik." More



Silent Cinema 249

investigation is needed into the interaction between Berlin's and Hol-

lywood's film cultures which began alreadyin the 1920s (Murnau, for

instance,went to Hollywood alreadyin 1926). More research s neededas well about the impact of German exiles in Hollywood'0ond, by thesametoken,aboutHollywood'sinfluenceon Weimarfilm culture.Charlie

Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and Douglas Fairbankswere admired in Ger-

many as representativesof a non-literary, rulycinematic cinema that tothe amazement of the GermanBildungsbiargermanagedto combine art-istry and mass entertainment.For German audiences American silentfilms acted as powerful agents of modernity, adventure, consumption,and luxury, undeniably quickeningthe cultural modernizationprocessin the Weimarperiod and expandingthe national horizon after the lostwar. Comparedto the Americancinema, the Russian silent films of Ei-senstein or Vertov had a more restricted eception n Germany,hamperedby censorshipand an obvious lack of revolutionaryspiritafterthe failedrevolution of 1918/19. Still, Battleship Potemkin (shown in Berlin in

1926) was essential for the emergence of a proletarianfilm culture in

Germany. (See Korte, Kiuhn,Murray, Plummer.)Any teacher or scholarapproaching he Weimar Cinema must con-

front the two majorclassicalstudies, Kracauer'sFrom Caligarito Hitlerand Eisner's The HauntedScreen,which have shapedour views for dec-ades now. Both books were writtenby exiles who actively participatedin Berlin'sliterary ife of the 1920s, Kracaueras a film critic and Berlin

correspondentof the FrankfurterZeitungand Lotte Eisneras ajournalistand art historian.Their books are therefore more thanjust books aboutfilms, they arealso personalaccounts of authorstryingto make sense ofwhy fascism could so easily overpowerGermanyin 1933.

While Eisner'sbook interprets he visual style of Expressionistfilmas an expressionof the anguishedand demoniac "Germansoul," Kra-cauer's more overtly political study is based on the "contention that

throughan analysisof the German films deep psychologicaldispositionspredominantin Germanyfrom 1918 to 1933 can be exposed-disposi-tions which influenced the course of events duringthat time and whichwill have to be reckoned with in the post-Hitler period."" He believesthat the films of a nation reflect its mentality in a more directway thanother media because films are never the product of an individual and

becausethey addressan "anonymousmultitude." Thus for Kracauer hepredilectionof Weimar cinema for authoritarianand power-hungrypro-tagonistsforeshadowsHitler'sascent anddisplayson a subconscious evelthe authoritariandisposition of all Germans uneasily torn between re-bellion and submission. To prove his hypothesis, Kracauer retells thenarrativesof a largenumber of films made between 1913 and 1933 and

presentsthe films as productsof the psycho-socialconditions of the Wei-



250 Kaes

mar Republic. But this methodology is problematicfor at least threereasons.First,earlyWeimar filmsrarelyhave traditionalnarratives; hey

areinstead full of gaps,ambiguities,excesses, ellipses and displacementswhich, as Elsaesser 1984, 59-65) has pointed out, Kracauerhas to glossover, smooth out and simplify so he can use them for his argument.Second,thedangerof circularreasoning s unavoidable: he veryselectionof the films determines the result,but the result has alreadydeterminedthe choice of films. Third, the totalizingnotion of a collective mentalityor underlyingdisposition is too undifferentiated or a nation as diverseand tornasGermany n the WeimarRepublic.Kracauer's oliticalagendaof showing the dangerous political implications in the allegedlyunpol-itical sphereof culturalproductionseems to have grownout of debatesduringhis exile yearsin America about the causes of fascismand the re-education of Hitler's Germany, debates based on the premise that allGermans are hereditarilyand collectively prone to authoritarian f notfascisticthinking.

Still, the obsession of German silent cinema with medieval tyrants,golems,phantoms,and blood-suckingvampires,with mad scientists andhypnotiseurshas to be explained. The answer that Lotte Eisner offers-

that these narrativeand visual motifs derive from the romantictraditionand display a typical German heritage-does not account for the re-emergenceof these motifs in the WeimarRepublic.To answer this ques-tion adequately,a shift of interpretativeparadigmsin film studies wasneeded. Less concerned with questions of influence, reflection, realism,and the expressionof collective mentalities, recent film theory insteaddefines the cinema as a specific mode of address to the spectatorandemphasizesthe social and psychological unctions that filmsplayin theirattempts to construct and position their viewing subject. Using socialhistory, psychoanalysisand semiotics, Elsaesser 1982) has attemptedtostudyGermansilent film along these lines, overcoming therebythe splitbetween Kracauer's verly ideologicalandEisner'soverlyformalreading.He arguesthat in stories alluding to social mobility and economic de-privation,the fantasticrepresentsa textualdisplacementof a social am-bition that cannot be fulfilledexcept through magic;oftentimes the fan-tasticappears n the shapeof a divided self, as a Doppelginger,or as thesorcerer'sapprenticewho unleashespowersthat he can no longercontrol,

pointing also to the changingrelations of the artist to the new technicalmedium. "Cinema enters the social arena,"writes Elsaesser,"not by amimesis of classconflicts..,. but as that form of social relations in whichthe consumptionof narrativesand imagesintervenes to block or displacethe contradictionsof history into effects of disavowal and substitution"(Elsaesser1982, 25). Elsaesser'spsychoanalyticalhypotheses are usefulfor illuminatingthe inner workings(displacements,substitutions,disa-



Silent Cinema 251

vowals, etc.) of a film text. His specific interest in the nexus betweenspectatorship,visual pleasure,identification and narrative still remains,

however,mostly on the semiotic-formal evel. A studyof, say, TheGolemor Nosferatuwill have to take into considerationiconographicand nar-rativerepresentationsof EasternJewsin Germanyafter 1918;both filmsare fictionalresponsesto deep-seatedGerman fears of alien forces threat-

eningthe damaged self-identityafter the lost War. Such historical recon-textualizationwill concretize questions of spectatorshipand add newsubtexts to our readingof these films which, preciselyas a consequenceof their canonization, often appearisolated and cut off from their his-

torical situation.In her book, Joyless Streets, Petro has also directed attention to

questionsof audience and historical context. She is first of all concernedwith specifyingthe historicalspectatoraccordingto gender. RepudiatingKracauer'sunquestioned assumptionof an emasculated,confused male

spectator,Petro reconstructsthe type of female audience who was spe-cificallyaddressed n melodramatic ilms and in popular llustratedmag-azines. Following the work of Heide Schlipmann and Miriam Hansenin their constructionof a female spectator n the silent filmperiod,Petroasserts hat WeimarGermanyhad a commerciallyviable female audiencefascinated with looking at images (in films, photojournalism,and in il-lustratedmagazines) hat called traditionalrepresentationsof gender nto

question. In unearthingthe emergence of a female viewer, Petro con-tributesto a much-neededhistoricalpoetics of spectatorship n film that

goes beyond the WeimarRepublic.I envision future work in earlyGermanfilm history to be increas-

ingly informed by currenttrends of culturaltheory, social history, and

the historiographyof everyday life ("Alltagsgeschichte").These meth-odological frameworkswill reposition film as part of the cultural pro-ductivity of a period-not as a mirror of social norms (as in traditionalsocial history) but as a complex appropriationof the world and as aspecific interpretationof experience.Film-historicalwork will thus notbe restricted to the study of individual films alone but will instead re-construct the largerdiscourses of which these individual films were an

integralpart; t will also recover and trace the variouswaysin which they

circulated n society, acquired specific meanings, intervenedin debates,and effected social action. A new social history of film will not take the

productionof films for grantedbut investigatethe conditions and func-tions of theiremergence n a certainplaceat a certain time. This culturalcontextualizationwill lead to a larger, nterdisciplinary extual basis thatincludes references o discourses n otherfields,such as literature, heater,visual arts, architecture,music, politics, religion,and philosophy.



252 Kaes

If it is agreedthat the productionof a film is not exclusively theresult of an individual, sovereign"creativity,"but is involved with com-

munity, culture, class, gender, social formation, institutions, aestheticneeds, and shared values (however displaced), then a whole range ofunexploredareasopens up for research.Film historywill become a kindof culturalanthropologywhich is concernedwith the social, political,andaesthetic needs and desires which films address and control. More atten-

tion is neededalongthese lines to micro-histories n order to reconstructthe discoursesthat surroundeddecisive turning points in German film

history:for instance,the transition around 1904 from crudelydocumen-taryfilms(simply depictingwhat is in front of the camera)to earlyformsof fictional films like the popular"Tonbilder" 3-4 minute films accom-

panied by music from a grammophonerecord,showingscenes from op-eras,plays,revues,anddances); he transitionaround1910/11from thesemini-films to increasingly onger features under the influence of foreignfilms and the correspondingdevelopment of cinematic storytelling ech-niques;and finallythe transition from silent film to sound film between1928 and 1930-a shift that had majoreconomic, institutional as well asaestheticconsequences.Seen from the perspectiveof the sound film, an

aesthetics of silent film languageunfolds that is not yet fully grasped.Sourcesfor this workcan be found in the work of RudolfAmrnheim,6la

Balizs, Hans Richter,and a host of other early film theoristswho weretirelessly nvolved in explainingand definingthe characteristicpropertiesof the new languageof film. Again,a look outside the area of film wouldyield glimpses of a largerperspective:Maeterlinck'smusings on silence,Hofmannsthal'sessayson the non-verbal art of dance,and Rudolf Kass-ner's work on physiognomy.

Silent film is embeddedin a rich cultural field that traditionalfilm

historieshardlyever take into consideration.Situated at thejuncture ofvariousinstitutional,economic, social, psychological,politicalas well asaestheticpractices,film as a medium lends itself to, indeed requires,a

teachingthat is radically nterdisciplinary n orientation.

In a provocativearticle,Tilo RudolfKnops("VomWerdendeutscherFilmkunst,"Merkur483 (May 1989):444-452) deploredthe fact that Germancinemahas alwaysbeenan intellectual's inema, never a medium for the masses;popularfilmic narrativesas de-

velopedbytheHollywoodfilmfound ittle resonance n Germany.Thomas Elsaesser 1984)argues similarlythat Weimar cinema was more a laboratory or artistic endeavors thanmass entertainment.While it is true that there was more debate in Germanyabout theartisticpossibilitiesof the new medium than in any othercountry,it does not mean thatGermanywaswithoutpopular ilms. FritzLang, orinstance,madeDie Spinnen,a popularIndianaJones adventuremovie in twoparts n 1919,and the so-called sarwesterns mitatedthe Americangenreas earlyas 1910. In the late 1920sgenressuch as the Bergfilmor themusicalfilm also had largeaudiences.A study of the popularfilm in Germany s still tobe written.



Silent Cinema 253

2Names in parentheses efer here and in the followingto the bibliography.

Almost all of the classicalGermanfilms arereadilyavailableon 16 mm from WestGlen Films, Kit Parker,or the Museum of Modern Art and (with only a few exceptions)

also on videocassette rom Facets Video.4 A limited number of these films have engenderedveritable debates:On Caligari,

see, for instance,Budd and Kaul;on Dr. Mabuse,see Scholdt;on Metropolis, ee AndreasHuyssen,"The Vamp and the Machine.FritzLang'sMetropolis,"Afterthe GreatDivide:Modernism,Mass Culture,PostmodernismBloomington,IndianaUniversityPress, 1986),pp.65-81; PatriciaMellenkamp,"Oedipusand the Robotin Metropolis,"Enclitic 5 (Spring1981):20-42; PeterWollen,"Cinema/Americanism/The obot,"New Formations5 (1989):7-35; AntonKaes, "Americanism,Modernity,and the 'Terror f the Machine':FritzLang'sMetropolis,"n Kaes, WeimarCinema:A CulturalPoeticsof Modernity Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversityPress)in preparation.

5See mainly Eisner'smonographson Lang and Murnau. See also books and an-

thologies by Goergen,Jansen/Schitte, Jenkins,Kaplan,Rentschler,Prinzler/Patalas.6 Themajorresearch rchives orsilentfilmareStiftungKinemathekn Berlin West),StaatlichesFilmarchiv n Berlin(East),Deutsches Bundesarchivfor Film in Koblenz,theMiinchnerStadtmuseum,and the Filmmuseumin Frankfurtam Main. See addresses nAppendixB.

Numbers of the yearlyproductionare taken from Brennicke/Hembus, 36ff.8 See essays in Filmrestaurierung: in Werkvon Kulturdetektiven,d. Christiane

Heringet al. (Disseldorf:FilminstitutDiisseldorf,1989);see also Ledig.German silent films are thereforeregularlydiscussed in studies on the American

populargenrefilm.'o On exile cinema, see Jan-ChristopherHorak, FluchtpunktHollywood:eine Do-

kumentationzur Filmemigrationnach 1933 2nd ed.(Minster:

MAKS, 1986);Eva Hil-chenbach,Kino im Exil: Die EmigrationdeutscherFilmkiinstler1933-45 (Munich/NewYork:Saur, 1982);John Russel Taylor, Strangers n Paradise:The Hollywood Emigres1933-1950 (New York:Holt, Rinehartand Winston, 1983).

" Kracauer,p. v. On Kracauer, ee Elsaesser1984;Petro, 9-17; Philip Rosen,"His-tory, Textuality,Nation:Kracauer,Burch,and Some Problemsin the Study of NationalCinemas,"Iris 2 (1984):71-75.

Silent Cinema:A Bibliography

Barlow, John D. German Expressionist Film. Boston: Twayne, 1982.Bartetzko.Dieter. Illusionen in Stein. Stimmungsarchitekturm deutschen Fa-

schismus. Ihre Vorgeschichte in Theater- und Film-Bauten. Reinbek: Ro-

wohlt, 1985.

Bathrick, David, et al., eds. "Weimar Film Theory." Special issue of New German

Critique 40 (Winter 1987).

Bathrick, David and Eric Rentschler, eds. "Weimar Film and Mass Culture."

Special issue of New German Critique 51 (Fall 1990).

Belach, Helga. Henny Porten. Der erste deutsche Filmstar 1890-1960. Berlin:Haude und Spener, 1986.

Berg-Ganschow, Uta and Wolfgang Jacobsen Film Stadt Kino

Berlin... Berlin: Argon, 1987.

Bergstrom, Janet. "Sexuality at a Loss: The Films of F. W. Murnau." Poetics

Today 67 (1985): 185-203.

Birett, Herbert, ed. Verzeichnis in Deutschland gelaufener Filme: Entscheidungender Filmzensur:Berlin,Hamburg,Miinchen,Stuttgart:1911-1920. Munich:Saur, 1980.



254 Kaes

Brennicke,Illona and Joe Hembus. Klassikerdes deutschenStummfilms1910-1930. Munich:Goldmann, 1983.

Bronner,Stephenand DouglasKellner,eds. Passion and Rebellion:TheExpres-sionist Heritage.London:Berginand Garvey, 1983.

Buache,Freddy.Le CinemaAllemand 1918-1933. Rennes:Hatier, 1984.

Budd, Michael,ed. TheCabinetof Dr. Caligari:A Reader.New Brunswick,N.J.:

RutgersUniversity Press, 1990.Collier,Jo Leslie. From Wagner o Murnau.The Transpositionof Romanticism

from Stage to Screen.Ann Arbor/London:UMI ResearchPress, 1988.

Cossart,Axel von. Kino--Theaterdes Expressionismus.Essen: Die blaue Eule,1985.

Dahlke, Ginther and Ginter Karl, eds. DeutscheSpielfilme von den Anfangenbis 1933. Ein Filmfiihrer.Berlin:Henschelverlag,1988.

Diederichs,Helmut H. AnfangedeutscherFilmkritik.Stuttgart:Fischer/Wiedle-roither,1986.

Eisner,Lotte H. The Haunted Screen.Trans.RogerGraves.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1969.

Murnau.Berkeley:University of CaliforniaPress. 1973.Fritz Lang. New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 1977.

Elsaesser,Thomas. "Film History and Visual Pleasure: Weimar Cinema." InCinema Histories, Cinema Practices. Ed. PatriciaMellencampand Philip

Rosen. Frederick,Md.:University Publications of America, 1984. 47-84."SocialMobilityand the Fantastic:GermanSilentCinema."WideAngle

5 (1982): 14-25.Eskildsen,Ute and Jan-ChristopherHorak.Film undFoto derzwanzigerJahre.

Stuttgart:WiirttembergischerKunstverein,1979.Fraenkel,Heinrich. Unsterblicher ilm. Die grofe Chronik.Von der LaternaMa-

gica bis zum Tonfilm.Munich:Kindler, 1956.

Goergen,Jeanpaul,ed. WalterRuttmann.Eine Dokumentation.Berlin:Freundeder DeutschenKinemathek,1989.

Greve,Ludwiget al., eds. Hatte ich das Kino! Die Schriftsteller nd derStumm-film. Stuttgart:Klett, 1976.

Giittinger,Fritz.DerStummJilmm Zitatder Zeit.Frankfurt/M:DeutschesFilm-museum, 1984.

Kein Tag ohne Kino: Schriftstelleruberden Stummfilm.Frankfurt/M:DeutschesFilmmuseum, 1984.

Hansen,MiriamB. "EarlySilent Cinema: Whose PublicSphere?"New German

Critique29 (Spring/Summer1983): 147-84.Heller,Heinz-B.Literarische ntelligenzund Film. Zu Veranderungenerdsthe-

tischen Theorie und Praxis unter dem Eindruck des Films 1910-1930 in

Deutschland.TOibingen: iemeyer, 1985.Hickethier,Knut, ed. Grenzganger wischen Theaterund Kino. Schauspielerpor-

trits aus dem Berlin der ZwanzigerJahre.Berlin:Asthetik und Kommuni-kation. 1986.

Jacobsen,Wolfgang.ErichPommer.Ein ProduzentmachtFilmgeschichte.Berlin:

Agon, 1989.Jansen,Peter and WolframSchiitte,eds. Fritz Lang. Munich:Hanser, 1985.



Silent Cinema 255

Jenkins,Stephen,ed. Fritz Lang. London: BritishFilm Institute, 1980.

Kaes, Anton, ed. Kino-Debatte.Texte zum Verhciltnis on Literatur und Film

1909-1929. Tiibingen:Max Niemeyer Verlag,1978."The ExpressionistVision in Theater and Cinema."ExpressionismRe-considered:Affinitiesand Relationships.Ed. G.B. Pickar and K.E. Webb.Munich:Fink, 1979. 80-98.

"Verfremdung ls Verfahren.Dada und Film." Dada - Sinn oder Unsinn?TwelfthAmherstGermanColloquium.Ed.WolfgangPaulsen.Bern:Francke,1982. 71-83.

. "MassCultureand Modernity:Notes Towarda Social History of EarlyAmericanand German Cinema."America and the Germans.An Assessment

ofa Three-Hundred-Yearistory.Ed. FrankTrommlerandJosephMcVeigh.Philadelphia:Universityof PennsylvaniaPress. 1985. II: 317-331.

. "The Debate aboutCinema:Chartinga Controversy 1909-1929)." NewGermanCritique40 (Winter 1987):7-33.

Kaplan,Ann E. FritzLang.A Guide to Referencesand Resources.Boston: G. K.

Hall, 1981.

Kaul, Walter,ed. Caligari und Caligarismus.Berlin: StiftungDeutsche Kine-

mathek, 1970.

Koch, Gertrud."Mimesis, Mimikry,Simulation:Film und Modernitiit."NeueRundschau 100 (1989): 119-136.

Koebner,Thomas. "Der Film als neue Kunst-Reaktionen der literarischen n-telligenz.Zur Theorie des Stummfilms(1911-24)." Literaturwissenschaft-Medienwissenschaft. d. HelmutKreuzer.Heidelberg:Quelle&Meyer,1977.

Korte,Helmut,ed. Film undRealitit in der WeimarerRepublik.Munich:Hanser,1978.

Kracauer,Siegfried.From Caligarito Hitler:A PsychologicalHistory of the Ger-man Film. Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1947.

Krebstakies,Marlies,ed. Die Ufa-auf denSpureneinergroJienFilmfabrik.Berlin:ElefantenPress, 1987.

Kiihn,Gertraude t al., eds. Film undrevolutiondirerbeiterbewegungn Deutsch-land 1918-1932. 2 vols. Berlin: Hochschule fir Film und Fernsehen der

DDR, 1975.Kurtz,Rudolf.Expressionismusund Film. Berlin:Wolffsohn,1925.

Lamprecht,Gerhard.DeutscheStummfilme1903-1931. Berlin:Deutsche Kine-mathek, 1967ff.

Ledig,Elfriede,ed. Der Stummfilm.Konstruktionund Rekonstruktion.Munich:

Schaudig,Bauer,Ledig, 1988.Lorenz,Thorsten. Wissen st Medium.Die Philosophiedes Kinos. Munich:Fink,

1988.Manz,H.P. Ufa und der rithe deutscheFilm. Zurich:Sanssouci, 1963.Monaco, Paul. Cinema and Society. France and Germanyduringthe Twenties.

New York:Elsevier, 1976.

Murray,Bruce.Film and theGermanLeftin the WeimarRepublic.Austin,Texas:

Universityof Texas Press, 1990.Pauli, Hansjorg.Filmmusik:Stummfilm.Stuttgart:Klett-Cotta,1981.Pinthus, Kurt,ed. Das Kino-Buch 1914).Frankfurt/M:Fischer, 1977.



256 Kaes

Petro,Patrice.JoylessStreets: Womenand MelodramaticRepresentationn Wei-mar Germany.Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversity Press. 1989.

Plummer,Thomas et al., eds. Film and Politics in the WeimarRepublic.NewYork: Holmes and Meier, 1982.

Prawer,S.S. Caligari'sChildren:The Film as Taleof Terror.New York:Oxford,1980.

Prinzler,Hans Helmut and Enno Patalas,eds. Lubitsch.Munich:Bucher,1984.

Rentschler, Eric, ed. German Film and Literature:Adaptationsand Transfor-mations. New York/London:Methuen, 1986.

, ed. TheFilms ofG.W.Pabst:AnExtraterritorialCinema.New Brunswick:

Rutgers,1990.

Salt,Barry.Film Styleand Technology:HistoryandAnalysis.London:Starwood,1983.

Schliipmann, Heide. 'Statt Sittlichkeitfinden wir Sinnlichkeit':FriuhesKinozwischenEmanzipationundReform.Frankfurt/M:Stroemfeld/RoterStem,1990.

Schobert,Walter.Der deutscheAvantgardeFilm der20erJahre. Munich:GoetheInstitut, 1989.

Scholdt,Gianther, d. Dr. Mabuse. Roman. Film. Dokumente.St. Ingbert:W.J.

R6hrichVerlag,1987.Weihsmann,Helmut. Gebaute llusionen.Architektur m Film. Wien:Promedia,

1988.Zglinicki,Friedrichvon. Der Wegdes Films. 2 vols. Hildesheimand New York:

Olms Presse, 1979.

Second Graduate Student Conference in Germanic Studieswill be held 12-14April 1991 at Yale University.Interestedpersons may contactJim Fields or Meike Werner,GermanDepartment,PO Box 18A, YaleStation,New Haven, CT, 06520-7384.

a. kaes - silent cinema

Documents