Lately I have been thinking of perhaps the most famous
passage in Walter Benjamin’s work, the 9th section of his theses on
history.
“There is a picture by Klee entitled “Angelus Novus”. It
shows an angel who looks like he is trying to escape something that he stares
at. His eyes are wide open, his mouth too, and his wings are spread out. The
angel is history must look like this. He has his face turned to the past.
Where, to us, there is something like a chain of incidents, he sees a single
catastrophe, the is untiringly piling up ruin on ruin, and throwing them at his
feet. He would like to pause, to waken the dead and to conciliate the injured.
But a storm blows out of paradise, that is caught in his wings and is so
strong, that the angel can no longer close them. This storm drives him
helplessly into the future, to which he has turned his back, as the ruins
before him pile sky-high. That thing we call “progress” is this storm.”
This is a beautiful passage, a gorgeousness tinged with
atrocity – especially for readers who know that Benjamin is soon to hide his
work, flee Paris as the Germans defeat France, and commit suicide in a small
Spanish town trying to get away from the certainty of death in a concentration
camp. But this thesis is also a huge puzzle. How is the storm “progress”. And
what is paradise doing here? And why is it all ruin? And why can’t the dead be
re-awakened, if history truly has an angel?
Myself, I have long pondered on these things. Of course, for
a real answer, one would have to plunge into Benjamin’s work at length. There’s
an industry that does this. The angel has, in particular, been philologically
reconstructed from Klee, the Talmud, and perhaps the mythology of modern German
poetry (Rilke’s angels, which show up – as does Benjamin – in Wim Wender’s
Wings of Desire, a film that provides a coda to the whole experience of
modernism). I have been thinking about something that is, perhaps, more minor,
more off the point: the backwardness of
the angel.
I feel a sort of weird vibe coming from this figure who blown
backwards by progress – this figure behind whose back, literally, the future is
happening. It is an interesting challenge: to trace with a fine Auerbachian hand
the motif of backwards progress in European literature in the broadest sense. Everything depends upon the angel facing the past, and not the present: the angel could fold his wings if he could turn
around – for presumably there is no wind coming from the future. The backwards
motion is imposed on the angel – physically. The meaning of which for the
spectator is that an old assumption is reversed, for the future is not ‘ahead’
of us here. That inversion of our metaphoric assumptions has a deeply
disorienting effect. It stabs at our way of making time accord to space, and
our orientation in space.
Tracking a motif in the wilderness of books is a little like trying to catch one drop in a rain storm with a pair of pliers. But as this motif is especially rich to me, I think I’ll make some suggestions, cast a
broad net, see how this works out, and see, especially, why it so moves me. Cause
it does, this angel being blown from the past into a future it doesn’t face. This
reverse motion reminds me of something, there’s some kind of anamnesis at the base of it, some form
in which memory stirs. Along the way, probably I'll touch on the rebus, the transmission of motifs, entropy, slavery, and the disorientation of all the senses.
The backward image, I think, can more concretely be traced in part to film, to the perceptual changes brought about in the nineteenth and twentieth century to transportation, which are traced in Schivelbusch’s great book, The Railroad Journey, and finally to a metaphor going through Montaigne back to Plutarch. That is how I will do this. First I’ll think about film.
No comments:
Post a Comment