The Pariah And Her Shadow. On The Invisibility Of Women In Hannah Arendt's Political Philosophy ...

21 Pages·2007·0.55 MB·English

The Pariah and Her Shadow: Hannah Arendt's Biography of Rahel Varnhagen
Author(s): Seyla Benhabib
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Political Theory, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Feb., 1995), pp. 5-24
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/192171 .
Accessed: 30/11/2011 17:31
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
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].
Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Political Theory.
http://www.jstor.org
THE PARIAH AND HER SHADOW
Hannah Arendt's Biography of Rahel Varnhagen
SEYLAB ENHABIB
Harvard University
A METHODOLOGICAPLR EAMBLE
HannahA rendt'ss elf-consciousnesso f herself as a Jew andh er belief that
in the twentiethc enturyt o be Jewish had become a "political"a nd unavoid-
able fact stand in sharpc ontrastt o her almost total silence on the woman's
question.' While the fate of the Jewish people is at the center of her public-
political thought,h er identity as a woman and the sociopolitical and cultural
dimensions of being female in the modernw orld do not find explicit recog-
nition in her work. We know from her biographerE lisabeth Young-Bruehl
that Arendt "was suspicious of women 'who gave orders,'s keptical about
whether women should be political leaders, and steadfastlyo pposed to the
social dimensions of Women'sL iberation."2
This perplexing constellation becomes clearer, if also more troubling,
when one readst he openings ections of TheH umanC ondition.T hrought hese
pages one can easily gain the impression that Arendt not only ignored the
woman's question but that she was almost a reactionaryo n the issue in that
she accepted the age-old confinement of women to the privater ealm of the
household and theire xclusion from the public sphere.3T his was certainlyt he
conclusion drawn by Adrienne Rich in her caustic and powerful comments
on The Human Condition:
In thnlaknga bout the issues of women and work I turnedt o HannahA rendt's The
Human Conditiont o see how a majorp olitical philosophero f our time, a woman greatly
AUTHOR'SN OTE: Thuse ssay is part of aforthcomungb ook called The ReluctantM odermsm
of HannahA rendt( Sage Publications) and was delivered as a paper at the annual meetings of
theA mericanP olitical Science Association Conventioni n September1 993. The researchf or this
project has been supportedb y an Amercan fellowshupf rom the Leona J. Beckmanna nd Susan
B. Anthony Endowment of the American Association of Umversity Women( January 1992-
December 1992).
POLITICATLH EORYV,o l.2 3 No. 1, Februar1y9 95 5-24
? 1995S ageP ublicationIsn, c.
5
6 POLITICALT HEORY/ February1 995
respectedi n the intellectuale stablishment,h ad spoken to the theme. I found her essay
illuminating,n ot so much for what it says, but for what it is. The withholding of
women from participationi n the vita activa, the "commonw orld,"a nd the connection
of thusw ith reproductivityi,s somethingf rom which she does not so much turnh er eyes
as stare straightt hroughu nseeing, To read such a book, by a woman of large spirit
and great erudition,c an be painful, because it embodies the tragedyo f a female mind
nourshed on male ideologies. In fact, the loss is ours, because Arendt'sd esire to grasp
deep moral issues is the knd of concern we need to build a common world which will
amountt o more than "life-styles."4
Adrienne Rich's verdict on Hannah Arendt is based on certain heurstic
assumptions that lead her to the conclusion that one should read Arendt's
work "not so much for what it says but for what It is." Reading Hannah
Arendt's work though from the standpoint of a question that she herself did
not place at the center of her thought, namely the woman's question, and
examining her political philosophy in this light require certain innovative
hermeneutlcal and interpretive principles that go beyond those traditionally
deployed and shared by Rich as well. One very commonly shared principle
in the interpretation of texts can be characterized as historicist indifference.
Histoncist indifference requires that we understand a text, a theory, a thinker's
views in the context of their genesis. This obvious and unproblematic
beginning point of any interpretive effort is inadequate when it is accompa-
nied by the further assumption that to understand can only mean to understand
in context and that to pose contemporary questions to historical texts is to fall
into anachronism.
The second commonly shared postulate of interpretation, and the one most
prominently displayed by Adrienne Rich, can be named the self-righteous
dogmatism of the latecomers. In posing questions to the past, this attitude
assumes that our already attained answers are the right ones. This lund of
reading of past texts is particularly prevalent among activists of social
movements who, very often, simply juxtapose the misunderstandings of the
past to the truths of the present. For the art of reading and appropriating the
past such an attitude is inadequate. If we approach tradition and thinkers of
the past only to "debunk" them, then there really is no point in seeking to
understandt hem at all. Such dogmatism kills the spirt and dres up the soul, and
it is certainly not conducive to the task of "building a common world," in
Adnenne Rich's words, "which will amount to more than mere 'life-styles.' "5
In approaching Hannah Arendt's thought from where we stand today and
in probing it from the standpoint of her identity as a German-Jewish woman
neither princlple is adequate: historcist indifference Is inadequate since it
kills the interests of contemporary readers in past texts by blocking the asking
Benhabib/ BIOGRAPHYO F RAHELV ARNHAGEN 7
of any questions that transcendt he immediate historical context in which
these texts were written. The self-rghteousness of the latecomers is also
misleadingi n thati t would lead us to assumet hatw e can no longer learnf rom
Arendt, that her work has ceased to engage us, that we can treat her as a
sociological and psychological curiosity exemplifying the "male-identified
female mind." Applied to HannahA rendt's work, this would mean that all
questioning of her work, particularlyo n the woman's issue, would be con-
sidered anachronistica nd insensitive to her own historicalc oncerns.Y et as I
hope to show in ther est of this essay, such questioningi s neithera nachronistic
nor insensitive to Arendt'so wn concerns,b ut to the contraryc, an allow us to
pursue certain lines of interpretationt hat shed unusual light on the initial
concerns that motivatedA rendt'sw ork. In view of the enormityo f Arendt's
contributiont o political thoughti n this century,I also resist the conclusion
that we should only treath er as a sociological curiosity.
How then should we proceed?A sking the woman's question, as always,
signifies a movement from center to margini n the hermeneuticalt ask.6W e
begin by searchingi n the footnotes, in the marginalia,i n the less recognized
works of a thinkerf or those "traces"(S purren)t hata rel eft behindb y women's
presence and more often than not by their absence. For HannahA rendt's
work, this methodm eans that one begins not with TheH uman Conditionb ut
with a text that certainly does not occupy a centralp lace in any systematic
interpretationo f herp oliticalp hilosophy,n amelyR ahel Varnhagens, ubtitled
"The Life of a Jewish Woman."
RAHELL EVINV ARNHAGEN'SQ UESTF OR THE "WORLD"
HannahA rendt'si ntellectualb iographyo fRahel Varnhagenb, orna s Rahel
Levin in Berlin in 1771, was begun in 1929, shortly afters he completedh er
dissertationo n Augustine'sc oncept of love underK arlJ aspers'sd irectorship
in Heidelberg.T his study appearst o have been intendeda s her Habilitatlons-
schrift, which was to win her the right to teach in a GermanU niversity.7I t
was completed in 1933 except for the last two chapters,w hich were finished
subsequentlyd uringh er exile in Francei n 1938. The book appeareda lmost
twenty years later in 1957 in English translation;t he first Germane dition
came out in 1959.8 Rahel Varnhagen,w hich Arendt subtitled in German
"Lebensgeschichte einer deutschen Juedin aus der Romantik," "the life
history of a GermanJ ewess from the Romanticp eriod,"i s a difficult text. An
early reviewer found thati t
8 POLITICALT HEORY/ February1 995
is a relentlessly abstractb ook-slow, cluttered,s tatic, curously oppressive;r eading it
feels like sittingi n a hothousew ith no watch. One is madet o feel the subject,t he waiting
distraughtw oman; one is made aware, almost physically, of her intense feminimty,h er
frustration.( Sybille Bedford)9
"The relentless abstractness"o f the book is in part due to Arendt's
methodologicala ngle, which she herself admitsi s "unusual."" It was never
my intention,"e xplainsA rendt,
to write a book about Rahel; about her personality,w hich nmghtl end itself to various
interpretationsa ccordingt o the psychological standardsa nd categoriest hat the author
introducesf rom outside; nor about her position in Romanticlsma nd the effect of the
Goethe cult in Berlin,o f which she was actuallyt he orginator;n ora boutt he significance
of her salon for the social history of the period; nor about her ideas and her
"Weltanschauung,"in sofar as these can be reconstructedf rom her letters. Whati nter-
ested me solely was to narrate the story of Rahel s life as she herself might have told
it. My portraitt hereforef ollows as closely as possible Rahel's own reflectionsu pon
herself, althoughi t is naturallyc ouchedi n differentl anguagea nd does not consist solely
of variationsu pon quotations.( xv-xvi, emphasisa dded)
This claim to "narratet he story of Rahel's life as she herself might have
told it" is astonishing.A rendt's confidence in her judgments about Rahel
Varnhageni s so deep that she does not fear correctingR ahel's husband's
presentationo f her. In fact, at one level the book reclaims Rahel's life and
memory from the clutches of her husband-the generous and giving, but
uprighta nd boring Prussianc ivil servantK arlA ugust Varnhagenv on Ense,
who, Arendtm aintains,p resentedR ahel's life such as to make her "associa-
tions and circle of friends appearl ess Jewish and more aristocratic,a nd to
show Rahel herself in a more conventionall ight, one more in keeping with
the taste of the times" (xv). One might wish to ask what gives Arendt this
confidence that she, in fact, could know or could claim to know this woman
bettert hanh er husband?H ow can she, Arendt,s eparatedf romR ahel's death
in March7 , 1833 by almost one hundredy ears at the time of composing her
book on Rahel, claim to narrateR ahel's story as she herself "rmghth ave told
it?"W hath ermeneuticalm ysteriesd oes this little subjunctivep hrase," might
have told it," contain?
The facts of Rahel Varnhagen'sli fe story are well known:R ahel was born
in Berlin on May 19, 1771 as the eldest child of the well-to-do merchant
Markus Levin. She had three younger brothersa nd a younger sister. Her
parentalh ousehold was still OrthodoxJ ewish and uneducatedi n German
culture. Rahel's early letters are written in Yiddish, that is, with Hebrew
characters.'A0 ftert he deatho f herf atheri n 1790, herb rotherM arcusa ssumes
the family businessa ndp rovidesR ahel andh er motherw ith a regulari ncome.
Benhabib/ BIOGRAPHYO F RAHELV ARNHAGEN 9
Between 1790 and 1806, Rahel's salon in the attic room on Jaegerstrasse,
runs.A mong the guests aret he Humboldtb rothers( Alexandera ndW ilhelm),
FriedrichS chlegel, FriedrichG entz, SchlelermacherP, rinceL ouis Ferdinand
of Prussiaa ndh is mistress,P aulineW iesel, the classical philologist Friedrich
AugustW olf,J eanP aul,B rentanot,h eT ieckb rothersF. rom1 790 to 1804,R ahel
has a seres of friendshipsa ndl ove affairsw ith arstocratso f variousE uropean
origins, rangingf romt he SwedishA mbassadorK arlG ustavv on Bnnckmann
to CountK arlv on Finckenstein,a ndt o Friedrichv on Gentz (a careerd iplomat
who was to play a significantr ole in the ViennaC ongress of 1815)."
With the entry of Napoleon into Berlin on October2 7, 1806 Rahel's salon
and circle of friends are scattered.A wave of nationalisma nd anti-Semitism
begins to sweep the intellectual and aristocraticc ircles that had formerly
befriendedV arnhagenT. his period heralds the end of one of the first cycles
of "German-Jewishsy mbiosis."I n this period, family and financiald ifficul-
ties follow suit in Rahel's life. Her mother moves out of the home on
Jaegerstrassea nd dies shortly thereafteri n 1809. Rahel, who had met Karl
August von Varnhageni n 1808, now moves from Berlin to Teplitz. After
several short separations,s he is baptizedo n September2 7, 1814 and marries
Varnhagen.V on Varnhagen,w ho is a career civil servant,i s moved around
several cities like Frankfurat nd KarlsruheI. n 1819 they resettlei n Berlin and
from 1821 to 1832, the Berlin salon of the Varnhagenss tarts.A mong the
guests are Bettina von Arnim, Heinrich Heine, Pnnce Pueckler-Muskau,
G.W.F Hegel, Ranke, and EduardG ans. Rahel dies on March7 , 1833.
Arendt's reconstructiono f Rahel's story is based prmarily on the un-
printed letters and dianes from the Varnhagenc ollection of the Manuscript
Division of the PrussianS tate Library.I n her 1956 preface she indicatest hat
these manuscriptsw ere stored in the easternp rovinces of Germanyd unng
the war and "whath appenedt o it remains a mystery,s o far as I know."'2W e
know now that the entire collection has turnedu p at the libraryi n Krakow,
Poland.'3A rendth erself had to rest content with quoting from old excerpts,
photostats, and copies of documents.
There are manifold layers of reading and interpretationt hat must be
disentangledf romo ne anotheri n approachingA rendt'sa ttemptt o tell Rahel's
story as she herself "mighth ave told it." In the early 1930s Arendt's own
understandingo f Judaismi n general and her relationshipt o her own Jewish
identity were undergoingp rofound transformationsT. hese transformations
were taking her increasinglya way from the egalitarian,h umanisticE nlight-
enment ideals of Kant, Lessing, and Goethe toward a recognition of the
inelirmnable and unassimilable fact of Jewish difference within German
culture.I n telling Rahel Varnhagen'ss toryA rendtw as engaging in a process
of collective self-understandinga nd redefinition as a German Jew.'4 Her
10 POLITICALT HEORY/ February1 995
correspondencew ith KarlJ aspers,w ho follows the developmento f Arendt's
worko n this book with amazementb orderingo n irritationa ndb ewilderment,
is quite revealing in this respect.
On March 30, 1930 Karl Jaspersw rites to HannahA rendtc oncerninga
lecture of hers on Rahel VarnhagenU. nfortunatelyt, his lecturei s no longer
available. The exchange of letters between Jaspers and Arendt gives the
distinct impressiont hatA rendth ere is breakingn ew grounda nd taking the
Existenzphilosophieo f her teacherJ aspersi n new directions.J aspersi ndi-
cates that he wants to "get a clearer idea in the give and take of our
conversationo f what you mean."15H e continues,
You objectify "JewishE xistence"e xistentially-and in doing so perhapsc ut existential
thinlang off at the roots. The concept of being-thrown-back-on-oneselcfa n no longerb e
taken altogethers erously since it is groundedi n terms of the fate of the Jews instead of
being rooted in itself. The passage from the letters, which you have chosen so well,
suggests something quite different to me: "Jewishness"i s a fafon de parler or a
manifestationo f a selfhood orginally negative in its outlook and not comprehensible
from the hlstorcal situation. It is a fate that did not experence liberation from the
enchantedc astle.1 6( emphaslsi n the text)
Jaspersi s clearly puzzled by the status of the category of "Jewishe xist-
ence," and by whethero r not Arendti s attributinga more fundamentasl tatus
to this fact than is allowable by the categones of existential philosophy.
Jaspersh imself sees "Jewishe xistence"a s a wholly contingento r accidental
matter-or as he puts it-"a faqond e parler,"a mannero f speaking,o r "the
manifestation of a selfhood originally negative in its outlook." Neither
individually nor collectively, however, can he see in the matter of "being
Jewish"m oret hana contingencyo f culturea ndh istoryo r an accidento f birth.
Arendt's answeri s cautious:s he indicates that she has not tried
to "ground"R ahel's existence in termso f Jewishness-or at least I was not conscious of
doing so. This lecturei s only aprelimmaryw ork meant to show that on the foundation
of being Jewish a certainp ossibility of existence can arise thatI have tentativelya nd for
the time being called fatefulness.T his fatefulness arses from the very fact of "founda-
tionlessness"a nd can occur only in a separationf rom Judaism1 7( emphasisi n the text)
Given the perspectiveo f hindsighta nd what it would signify to be Jewish
in Germanyb y the end of the 1930s, this exchange is almost astonishingi n
its abstractnessa nd aloofness.N either Jaspersn or Arendtc ould have antici-
pated a situationw hen the fact of being Jewish would indeed be the fate for
millions and millions. Yet it is interestingt hatA rendti s full of premonition,
that she seems to be sensing a certain "uncanniness"( das unheimliche)i n
Rahel's own attemptt o live life as her "fate."W ithr eferencet o Rahel,A rendt
Benhabib/ BIOGRAPHYO F RAHELV ARNHAGEN 11
writes, "What this all really adds up to-fate, being exposed, what life
means-I can't really say in the abstract( and I realize that in trying to write
about it here.) Perhaps all I can try to do is illustrate it with examples."'8
Eventually,A rendt comes to describeR ahel's own attitudet owardh er Juda-
ism as a move away from the psychology of theparvenu to thato f thepariah.
Whereas the parvenud enies "fatefulness"b y becoming like the otherso f the
dormnantc ulture,b y erasingd ifferencea nd assimilatingt o dormnantt rends,
the pariahi s the outsidera nd the outcastw ho eitherc annot or chooses not to
erase the fate of difference.T he self-conscious pariaht ransformsd ifference
from being a source of weakness and marglnalityi nto one of strengtha nd
defiance. This is ultimatelyw hat Arendt admlresi n Rahel: commentingo n
Rahel's reflections on her life as "FrederikeV arnhagen,"th e respectablew ife
of a Prussianc ivil servants he writes,
She had at last nd herself of Rahel Levin, but she did not want to become Frederike
Varnhagen,n ee Robert. The former was not socially acceptable; the latter could not
summon the resolution to make a fraudulent self-identification. For "all my life I
consideredm yself Rahel and nothinge lse."19
Rahel'sJ ewish identitya ndA rendt'so wn changingu nderstandingo f what
this means in the 1930s in Germanya re the centralh ermeneuticalm otifs in
the Varhagen story.20I n telling Rahel's story, HannahA rendt was bearing
testimony to a political and spintual transformationt hat she herself was
undergoing.T here is thus a mirrore ffect in the narrative.T he one narrated
about becomes the mirrori n which the narratora lso portraysh erself.
There is an additionald imensiont o this narration,a nd it is one thatl eads
more directly to future themes in Arendt's political philosophy. In telling
Rahel's story,A rendt is concernedt o document a certain form of romantic
Innerlichkeit," inwardness."T o live life "as if it were a work of art,"w rites
Arendt, "to believe that by 'cultivation'( Bildung) one can make a work of
arto f one's life was the greate rrort hatR ahel sharedw ith her contemporaries"
(xvi). The "claustrophobic"fe eling aboutt he book thatw as noted above, the
sensation namely that "one is in a hothouse without a watch" (Sybille
Bedford), derives from Arendt'sl iterarys uccess in conveying this sense of
endless expectation, of an endless yearning without fulfillment, of inaction
coupled with the wish to live and experience most intensely-"What am I
doing?"a sks Rahel. "Nothing.I am letting life rainu pon me" (quotedi n xvi).
It is this "worldless"s ensibility thatA rendt finds most objectionablea bout
Rahel. In the opening chapterso f the Varnhagenb iography that deal with
romantici ntrospectionA rendti ndicates what she sees as the greatestw eak-
ness and ultimately as the "apolitical"q uality of romanticI nwardness.
12 POLITICALT HEORY/ February1 995
Introspectiona ccomplishes two feats: it annihilates the actual existing situation by
dissolving it in mood, and at the same time it lends everything subjective an aura of
objectivity,p ublicity,e xtremei nterest.I n mood, the boundariesb etweenw hati s intimate
and what is public become blurred;i ntimacies are made public, and public mattersc an
be experenced and expressedo nly in the realmo f the intimate-ultimately, in gossip.21
Romantic introspectionl eads one to lose a sense of reality by losing the
boundariesb etween the public and the prvate, the intimatea nd the shared.
Romantic introspectionc ompoundst he "worldlessness"f rom which Rahel
Varnhagens ufferst o the very end. The categoryo f the "world"i s the missing
link between the "worldless"r eality of Rahel Levin Varnhagena nd her
contemporariesa ndH annahA rendt'so wn searchf or a recoveryo f the "public
world"t hrougha uthenticp oliticala ction in her politicalp hilosophy.R oman-
tic inwardness displays qualities of mind and feeling that are the exact
opposite of those requiredo f politicala ctorsa ndw hich Arendth ighly valued.
Whereas romantici ntrospectionb lurs the boundariesb etween the personal
andt he political,t he politicalq ualitieso f distinguishings harplya ndp recisely
between the public good andt he personals pherea ree xtremelyi mportantf or
Arendt. Whereas the ability to judge the world as it appearst o others and
from many differentp oints of view is the quintessentiale plstemlc virtue in
politics, romantici nwardnesst endst o eliminatet he distinctionb etweeno ne's
own perspectivea nd those of otherst hroughm ood. Finally,a n interesti n the
world and a commitmentt o sustain it is fundamentalf or politics, whereas
romantici nwardnessc ultivatest he soul rathert han sustainingt he world.
Varnhagen'ss earchf or a place in the "world"w as defined not only by her
identity as a Jew and as a romanticb ut also as a woman. Although Arendt
does not place this theme at the center,h er story of Rahel begins to reveal an
unthematizedg ender subtext. In Arendt's account, Varnhagena ttemptst o
regaina place in the world for herself by using typically female strategies.I n
the concluding paragraphso f her 1956 preface to Rahel VarnhagenA rendt
remarks,
The modem reader will scarcely fail to observe that Rahel was neither beautiful nor
attractive;t hata ll the men with whom she hada ny kindo f love relationshipw ere younger
than she herself; that she possessed no talents with which to employ her extraordinary
intelligence and passionateo nginality; and finally, that she was a typically "romantic"
personality,a nd that the Woman problem, that is the discrepancyb etween what men
expected of women "in general"a nd what women could give or wanted in their turn,
was alreadye stablishedb y the conditionso f the era and representeda gap thatv irtually
could not be closed. (xviii)
Rahel's strategiesf or dealing with the fate of her Jewishnessw ere stereo-
typically female ones: assimilation and recognition through love affairs,
Benhabib/ BIOGRAPHYO F RAHELV ARNHAGEN 13
courtships, ande ventually marriagew ithG entile males. The female strategy
of assimilation through marriage is of course made possible by a gender
asymmetricalw orld in which it is the husband'sp ublic statust hatdefines the
woman, rathert hant he otherw ay around.R ahel Levin Varnhagen'sl ife was
full of stories of failed love affairs, broken promises, and unsuccessful
engagements. By giving herself to the right man, Rahel hoped to attaint he
"world"t hat was denied her as a Jew and as a female.
But "where"i s the world, and "who" is it composed of? Interestingly,
Arendt'sm ost explicit definitiono f this categoryc omes much later,i n a 1960
essay on Lessing that focuses on Nathan der Weise." But the world and the
people who inhabiti t," writes Arendt,
are not the same. The world lies between people, and this in-between is today the
object of the greatestc oncerna nd the most obvious upheavali n almost all the countries
of the globe. Even where the world is still halfway in order,o r is kept halfway in order,
the public realm has lost the power of illuminationt hat was originally part of its very
nature. (The) withdrawalf rom the world need not harma n individual; but with
each such retreata n almost demonstrablelo ss to the world takes place; what is lost is the
specific and usually irreplaceablei n-between which should have formed between this
individuala nd his fellow men.22
Arendtg ave this speech in 1959, on receiving the Lessing Peace Prze of
the city of Hamburg.H er almost melancholy reflections on the loss of the
"world" as that fragile "space of appearances"t hat "holds men together"
standi n interestingc ontrastw ith the themeo f"worldlessness"t hatd ominates
the Varhagen book. Rahel and her contemporares failed to create a world,
except 'n that bref intermezzob etween 1790 and 1806 when a few excep-
tional PrussianJ ews could emerge into the world of genteel society, only to
be pushed back into obscurityw ith the onslaughto f anti-SemitismI n Prussia
after the victory of Napoleon. The fragility and almost illusory charactero f
the world of the "salons"t hat Jewesses like Rahel Varnhagena nd Hennette
Herz created for a brief moment stands in sharp contrast to the fate of the
"stateless" and "worldless" people that the Jews would become in the
twentieth century.
The "recoveryo f the public world"o f politics underc onditions of mod-
ernity is a guiding theme of Hannah Arendt's political philosophy at large.
The personal story of Rahel Varnhageno, f her circle of friends,t he failureo f
her salon, the political naivete of her generationo f Jews are like a negative
utopia of Arendt'sc oncept of political communityi n her subsequentw orks.
Nonetheless, this cluttereda nda t times awkwardy outhfult ext retainst hemes,
issues, and preoccupationst hat are much closer to the nerve of Arendt's
existential concerns than some of her subsequentf ormulations.