Anthropology as Memory: Elias Canetti's and Franz Baermann Steiner's Responses to the Shoah

By contrast, Steiner – in comparison to Canetti – lays emphasis on ‘working through’ the Holocaust, that is to say, on overcoming the paralysis of trauma by reflecting critically on values that might transform a damaged society. However, Canetti’s depiction of humanity cannot entirely be seen in LaCapra’s notion of ‘acting out’: for through the shock of ‘acting out’, Canetti nonetheless wants to bring about a ‘working through’. Similarly, despite the ‘working through’ shock and trauma are dramatized in Steiner’s poetry and his aphoristic writings. Morever, Canetti thematizes an ethical impact on his readership in his aphorisms. In response to the Holocaust both writers advance a theory of power: what Steiner calls danger, Canetti attacks as death. Steiner’s and Canetti’s respective responses to the Holocaust consists in a critique of static ways of thought, affirming ‘metamorphosis’, and deconceptualized understanding of the world which connects linguistic fluidity to the everchanging contextualities of social and embodied life.