Montauk (narration)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Montauk is a short story by the Swiss writer Max Frisch . It first appeared in September 1975 and occupies a special position in his work. Although Frisch's earlier characters were often autobiographical , the stories were fictional . In Montauk, on the other hand, the protagonist is named like its author, and he reports an authentic experience: a weekend that Frisch spent with a young woman on the American east coast .

Frisch takes the temporary love affair as an opportunity to look back at his own biography. He talks about the women he was connected with and his failed relationships. Further reflections apply to old age, the closeness to death and the mutual influence of life and work. The genesis of the text Montauk itself becomes the theme of the narrative: As an alternative to the previous work, Frisch describes his decision to document the weekend without adding anything to the direct experience.

When it appeared, Montauk caused very different reactions. Frisch's former partners saw themselves as compromised by the open descriptions of their past. Some readers felt embarrassed by Frisch's self-exposure. Other critics hailed the story as the author's most important work and praised the achievement of transforming one's own life into a literary work of art. Marcel Reich-Ranicki took Montauk in his canon of German literature.

Surf of the Atlantic at Montauk

content

Montauk Lighthouse
Sunrise at Montauk
View of the UN headquarters from the intersection of First Avenue and 46th Street

The framework of the story Montauk describes the weekend of May 11 and 12, 1974, when the narrator, the literary alter ego of his author Max Frisch, ends up on a reading tour of the United States . Two days later, one day before his 63rd birthday, Frisch's flight back to Europe is booked. At his side is Lynn, a 30-year-old publishing employee who is supposed to look after him during the trip, but has not read a line from the author's work. On their last weekend, Lynn and Frisch get closer and take a trip to Long Island to the village of Montauk on the Atlantic coast .

This weekend the author feels the need to describe the days they spent together without adding anything to what happened. In the process, Lynn's presence triggers reflections and memories in Frisch. He ponders age and his increasing feeling of being an imposition for others, as well as his success and its effect on envious people, admirers and women. Frisch reveals intimate details from his life, the death of his mother, his impotence and four abortions in three women.

The author also reflects on his work, starting with the parallel work of the young architect on the construction site and as the author of the first plays to the same questions that his later novels raise at press meetings. Frisch shows himself to be dissatisfied with his stories, with which he only serves the audience, but with which he has concealed large parts of his own life. He feels that he has betrayed his real self through his work.

In a longer episode, Frisch remembers his childhood friend and patron W., by whom he felt dominated in his youth. With Frisch's successes and the inability of his friend to accept him as a writer, their friendship ended, which, in retrospect, Frisch sees as ominous. Another episode reveals Frisch's inability, during his first marriage, to deal with a paralyzed neighbor who turns out to be his first love.

In particular, Frisch's former companions are at the center of the story. Lynn triggers memories of her predecessors, starting with the Jewess Käte, the real role model of Hanna from Homo faber , the first wife Trudy, the separated from him Marianne, whom he still loves, to the relationship marked by bondage and jealousy Ingeborg Bachmann . In view of the no longer distant death, Frisch does not want to bind a woman to his futility. He wishes Lynn was the last woman in his life. At the same time, it is clear to both of them that their relationship will be limited to this one weekend and that they will not want to reconnect afterwards. Frisch hopes that Lynn will not become the name for a debt like the women before.

At the end of the story, Lynn and Frisch parted ways with a "Bye" in New York . At the intersection of First Avenue and 46th Street, Frisch watches the passing Lynn, who doesn't turn back to look at him again.

shape

Structure and style

Max Frisch himself described Montauk in the subtitle as a story . He emphasized the literary form of the text, which despite its autobiographical content neither autobiography nor report or diary is. In part, the book is also classified as a novel . Marcel Reich-Ranicki saw prose in its "wealth of characters and episodes [...] like a novel", although its scope barely suffices for EM Forster's classic novel definition .

The narrative style is mirrored ironically at the beginning of the narrative: a sign with the inscription “overlook” promises a view of the island that is not observed. Instead there is "a path that leads through the undergrowth [...] It is a kind of path, not always clear, an overgrown path." In the same way, the reader, who has been promised an overview of Frisch's life, becomes sent on a path which, through its associative narrative style, is likely to confuse the reader. It is not always clear "which woman is being spoken of". The style is erratic, "it's not easy to read in". Details are often only hinted at, so that they are not immediately understandable to a reader without knowledge of Frisch's biography. Even the title of the story Montauk is ambiguous, means the actual place as well as the foreign that has fallen out of place and time, directing the reader's gaze more towards the periphery of the event than towards its center.

The narrative consists of a collage of current scenes and remembered life situations, broken up by key words, quotes, location information, small talk sprinkles or interview questions from Lynn that are typographically highlighted in small caps and used as a leitmotif . Frisch used an evolved form of his literary diary style. The sequence of the mosaic-like dates and events is chronological , but without causality . A total of 192 individual scenes vary in length from one-liner to a self-contained 21-page short story about Frisch's childhood friend. Marcel Reich-Ranicki judged Frisch's style in the narrative: “He has never written more succinct and sparse and at the same time more precise and concise, never more vivid and stimulating.” The documentary filmmaker Richard Dindo emphasized the visuality of the writing: “You get the impression when you read , the author experiences and describes a film. It is as if he were taking a 'photographic look' at things. "

Narrative position

Frisch specifies the program for the narrative perspective in Montauk in the narration itself: “I would like to describe this day, nothing but this day, our weekend and how it came about, how it continues. I want to be able to tell stories without inventing anything. A simple-minded narrator position. ”The direct reproduction of the events requires a narrator who takes on the role of observer. The more external relationship between Lynn and Frisch is adequately expressed in the Er-form of the narrative.

In contrast, the I used in the flashbacks and reflections stands for Max Frisch, the writer and person with all his memories and fears, his successes and his private failures. I and he form offer two perspectives on the same figure. The perspective of the narrative jumps, depending on the narrative object, continuously from the he to the first person and back again. Only at the end, when the experience of the weekend is already transformed into memory, only the self remains. The you of the story is reserved for Marianne, Frisch's second wife. It shows Frisch's fixation, which Lynn also recognizes: "You love her."

In his diary 1966–1971 , Frisch's theoretical examination of the narrative position can be found in the section On Writing in the First Person . In this he sees the first-person form more directly, but also at the risk of becoming an imposition for the reader. Some sentences only gain objectivity in the first-person form; in the he-form they appear cowardly. For a “maximum sincerity towards oneself”, however, the Er-form can do more. “At the beginning it is easier with the ER form than later, when the conscious or unconscious ICH depots in various ER forms have become notorious; not because the writer takes himself more seriously as a person, but because the camouflage has been used up, he can later see himself forced to the bare I-form. "

interpretation

Montaigne , from whom the motto of the story comes, in a lithograph by François-Séraphin Delpech

Montauk gives his non-fictional program the preceding motto of Montaigne's story : “This is a sincere book, reader, [...] because it is me who I represent. My mistakes will be found here as they are, and my uninhibited nature, as far as public decency allows. ” The author Frisch himself called the preface“ naive, as we can hardly be ”. His protagonist of the same name wants to clean up the "environmental pollution caused by feelings that are no longer needed" by describing them and thereby "consciously saying goodbye". About his previous attempts to process his life in art, he is devastating: “I kept my life from myself. I served some public with stories. I've exposed myself in these stories, I know beyond recognition. [...] I have never described myself. I just gave myself away. ”As an alternative, Frisch decided to“ tell this weekend: autobiographical, yes, autobiographical. Without inventing personnages; without inventing events that are more exemplary than his reality [...]. He just wants to tell [...]: his life. ”But Frisch is not planning a pure autobiography. He sets himself the task: "I would like to know what I, while writing under the pressure of art, learn about my life as a man." He writes a story about his personal, unencrypted reality using literature.

Despite the intention of “autobiographical correction”, Frisch himself is repeatedly thrown back on what was once written: “Life in quotations.” The present reminds us not only of one's own past, but also of the works that have been created. Lynn becomes a mirror image of Marianne Frisch or Ingeborg Bachmann, in the next moment she reminds of Sabeth from Homo faber with a red horse tail or playing ping-pong . Frisch falls under the “spell of another time, which can be called both the past and literature”. He recognizes: "Literature cancels the moment" - in a double sense: it erases it as the present and preserves it as a memory. It stands in opposition to direct experience, to love. "Literature has the other time, as well as a topic that concerns everyone or many - which one cannot say about their two shoes in the sand". Not literature, but "[a] body lets him feel that he is there in the moment". He conveys to Frisch “the crazy need for the present through a woman”. And Frisch recognizes: “He doesn't want any memoirs. He wants the moment. "

Nevertheless, there is an unbridgeable distance between Lynn and Frisch. “It was never said: I love you .” Age, the different realities of life, and the foreign language alone separate the two. The limited time of the weekend prevents them from getting to know each other better: "Lynn will not get to know his vice." "Lynn will not get to know his hysteria." "[You] you will not get to know each other". It is precisely because of this futility that the weekend in Montauk, “this thin present”, becomes a “time-lost moment”: “A long, light afternoon. Hermes is passing . ” Hermes , who is leading the dead to Hades , does not turn to Frisch yet. But his presence is not only present in this quote from a fresh opera draft that was never implemented. In the awareness of death that is no longer distant, Frisch knows "that it is forbidden to want to bind a younger woman to my futility". Frisch thinks about parting: “One will be the last woman, and I wish it was Lynn, we will have an easy and good farewell”. When he is looking for Lynn at the end, her former colleague's answer to death echoes : "Lynn is no longer with us". The final monologue from Homo Faber takes on an existential meaning for old Frisch: “To be in the world: to be in the light. [...] withstand the light, the joy of knowing that I am going out [...] to be eternal: to have been. "

In the end, the doubt remains whether even with the means of unreserved sincerity an accurate description of the self can be achieved: “as if a person could tell himself”. Frisch adds a postscript to Montaigne's motto: " This is a sincere book, reader and what is it withholding and why?" The postscript is not an allusion to an intentional withholding of facts, but the recognition that even the truest attempt does not lead to a complete description of life can lead. Montauk becomes “a work about a work that does not come about”. Although the correction of the autobiography failed on a large scale, the weekend was successful on a small scale: “a day of fulfillment, a present”: “max, you are a fortunate man” In the simultaneous confession of the past, Frisch experienced the present as liberation. What is “happy” lies in the experience of “having realized a piece of freedom from the mechanisms of pathological sensitivity and from the constraints of stereotypical behavior”.

Biographical background

Max Frisch (approx. 1974)

In April 1974, Frisch traveled to the United States to accept honorary membership of the Academy of Arts and Letters and the National Institute of Arts and Letters . On this occasion, his American publisher Helen Wolff organized a reading tour for Frisch. She put the young Alice Locke-Carey at his side, who was named Lynn in Montauk . Except for the change of this name , the facts told in Montauk about Frisch's stay in America coincide with reality. Only the name of childhood friend W., the art collector Werner Coninx, is given in abbreviated form . Although the narrative thus reveals its autobiographical background largely unencrypted and claims authenticity rather than fiction, it has been classified variously as a roman a clef. Gerhard vom Hofe emphasized, however: "It would be a [...] misunderstanding to understand Montauk as a kind of 'key narrative' [...]", the intention of which is to provide "autobiographical breakdowns and unraveling" of Frisch's earlier work or "life-historical sources and backgrounds " showcase.

Jürgen H. Petersen answered the question of how directly from the narrative one could infer Frisch's life by stating that, in contrast to other works, this had hardly been investigated by Frisch research at Montauk : “The correspondence between life facts and textual statements should be indubitable be". Hans Mayer , on the other hand , saw Max Frisch from Montauk as an “art figure” whose yearning for honest storytelling “ultimately doesn't produce sincerity, but a beautiful story”. He drew the conclusion: “Frisch did not reveal any of his secrets here either.” Gerhard P. Knapp also agreed with this interpretation and in his analysis made a strict distinction between the “Diarian I” and the “fictional character Max Frisch” as the narrator . In doing so, he contradicted Montauk's reading as chronique scandaleuse . Konstanze Fliedl dealt with Frisch's judgment on his relationship with Ingeborg Bachmann: "We didn't pass the end well, neither did either." The sentence is "subjectively certainly sincere", but it is an interpretation and through language becomes "a story - one." interpreted fact ”. She came to the conclusion: “There is no such thing as a 'real' me, there cannot be any. 'I' is always an 'I' in texts ”. In an interview published in Playboy in December 1980 , Friedrich Dürrenmatt judged his Swiss colleague: “What bothers me about Frisch are these falsehoods, also in the novels, for example Montauk . He passed it off as an autobiographical work. But if you know him personally, just shake your head. Nothing is right there. ”However, Dürrenmatt later distanced himself from the content of this interview. Frisch himself addressed the question of truth and lies in Montauk when the narrative suddenly jumps from he to first person: "He looks to see whether his tenderness really relates to Lynn ... Or am I lying to ourselves?" At another point, Frisch has Lynn exclaim: "max, you are a liar". In doing so, he contradicts Montaigne's motto of the sincere book.

In contrast to the end announced in Montauk , the real affair between Frisch and Locke-Carey had consequences. After Frisch had searched in vain for the young woman on another trip to the USA, she contacted him following the publication of the American translation by Montauk in the summer of 1976. After Frisch's second marriage in 1979, he met Locke-Carey again in May 1980 . From then on, Frisch and Locke-Carey lived together for a few years, alternately in New York and Berzona . The time they spent together between spring and November 1982 formed the basis of the drafts for a third diary published posthumously in 2010 , which Frisch dedicated to Locke-Carey.

History of origin

Uwe Johnson , friend of the Frisch couple and first reader of the story, in a sculpture by Wieland Förster

After his return from the United States in May 1974, Frisch put into practice the decision he had made there to describe the weekend with Alice Locke-Carey. The story was created “in a long-lasting frame of mind of forgiveness [...] and fearlessness”, in which Frisch left behind the “playing hide and seek” of his earlier work: “I no longer wanted to laboriously turn the architect Frisch into an engineer so-and-so, and from the one other, and from the other, where everyone who knows the situation knows exactly who is meant, or at least thinks he knows. I wanted to write without diversions and adjustments. "

On November 13, 1974, Frisch wrote to Uwe Johnson that he had finished work on the story, but "for the time being without thinking about publication". He wanted to submit the manuscript to his wife Marianne first. Frisch quoted their refusal to publish in the story itself: "I have not lived with you as literary material, I forbid you to write about me." In a letter to Marianne Frisch on January 13, 1975, Johnson sided with his friend and the publication of the story, the achievement of which is "to create a work of art from one's own life using literature". In her reply, Marianne Frisch emphasized that she had never thought of "dealing with Max even just three syllables before the manuscript was published". However, the text moves them into a “past in which I do not feel comfortable at the present time, living at Max's side”. At the same time, Max Frisch discovered the text Departures by Donald Barthelme , published in The New Yorker in 1971 , in which the latter suggested his relationship with Frisch's wife and made fun of Max under the pseudonym "Frederick". This solidified Frisch's plan to publish Montauk and even to add the new details about his wife's affair: “Marianne can get a divorce; Literature as adultery. "

In March 1975, Frisch sent a revised version to Uwe Johnson, to which he wrote: "It has been shown that there are not many more memoirs to stow away on the fragile weekend". The episode about Frisch's childhood friend W. appeared in May 1975 as a preprint under the title Autobiographical in the Neue Rundschau . The text had its predecessor in an entry under the title Gratitude in the diary 1966–1971 . On September 20, 1975, the short story Montauk was published by Suhrkamp .

Classification in literary history

Position in Frisch's oeuvre

First edition 1975

Montauk has a strong connection to Frisch's previous prose, which is constantly referred to both in the plot and in explicit quotations. In its form, Montauk combines "diary writing with the nesting and collage techniques of the novels Stiller and Gantenbein ". In the previous works, Frisch's poetics were always based on the principle expressed in Stiller : “You can tell everything, just not your real life”. In the first published diary 1946–1949 , Frisch derived the consequences for his literary work from it. In Montauk , Frisch broke with this principle for the first time. He told exactly that: his real life, and at the same time brought the thought from Stiller , which was worked out in Homo faber and Mein Name sei Gantenbein , to an end: even in the sincere attempt at the autobiographical narrative Montauk , the self cannot be expressed.

Montauk stands in particular contrast to Frisch's previous prose work Mein Name sei Gantenbein . While all stories are presented there as fiction, Frisch postulates authentic narration in Montauk . Nevertheless, he quotes the central point in Montauk from My Name is Gantenbein : “I try on stories like dresses” . But in contrast to the fictional stories, which for Gantenbein become variants of his own self, in Montauk it is autobiographical stories that Frisch tries out. “No longer: My name is Gantenbein, but: My name is Frisch. No longer: 'I imagine', but: That's how it was. ”The intention in both cases is the same:“ To outline the reality of man through the representation of his possibilities ”.

After Frisch had "repeatedly made himself the case of his writing" in his entire work, for Heinz Ludwig Arnold Montauk was "the final point that reveals the own I: Max Frisch and openly introduces him as a literary figure into the story". The idealistic attempts to combine self-realization and dialogue with the environment, which always failed in Frisch's previous prose texts, are replaced by reality and the recognition of failure. Arnold came to the conclusion: "When Max Frisch finally arrived at himself as a figure and showed its failure, he finally accepted himself as a writer and as a person." The story becomes "an escape forwards and at the same time an escape all the way back." oneself". In Montauk, Frisch performed “coping work” and confirmed “that this way of literary content makes sense despite all the risks - and for him the only possible way”.

Frisch originally planned Montauk as the end of his work, as he admitted in a conversation with Volker Hage in 1982 : “I thought this would be the last book. I wanted to take a look at everything again. ”He also wanted to break artistic bridges with the story and was aware that afterwards he would not have been able to write a subliminally autobiographical novel. However, in retrospect, the openness of Montauk did not go far enough. He found the book "unnecessarily veiled - it is far too little direct". In a letter to Uwe Johnson he explained: "My book suddenly seems a bit cowardly, [...] a bit intimidated, too timid, and in the treatment of other people".

Johnson judged that Frisch had aesthetically “written himself in a corner” with Montauk , from which a return to the form of the diary or to later memoirs was hardly possible. Frisch will have "pretty difficult" to surpass the narrative with future works. Frisch confirmed this assessment in a television interview with Philippe Pilliod: “What is left after this book? Silence, philosophizing or fiction. ”In his following works he followed the path of fiction, even if autobiographical influences remained recognizable. However, the author fiercely resisted reading the story Man appears in the Holocene as a continuation of his autobiography, simply because the protagonist is old and lives in Ticino . With his late work, Frisch turned even more than in Montauk to the existential problems of old age and death, the texts became more pessimistic and resigned, more condensed in form to the restrained imagination and the laconic dialogues of Bluebeard .

Position in literary history

In retrospect, Jürgen H. Petersen saw Montauk as a "poetic ontological novelty" at the time of its publication, in which, unlike previous writers such as Grimmelshausen , Goethe , Strindberg or Thomas Mann, life facts are not used as encrypted material for the work, but the unreserved representation of one's own Life itself becomes the goal of literature. At the same time, the story moves at a distance from the “classic” autobiography such as Poetry and Truth , which constructs a “mediation of the self and the world” and interprets biographical facts with a view to a reconciling path through life. In Montauk , the focus is on self-doubt and self-consciousness in roles and ultimately "coming to terms with the world as resistance". Hans Bänzinger judged, however, that the history of Montauk moves "on the edge of the trivial" and lacks "the artistic persuasiveness of the great denominations of world literature or older and more recent evidence of real poetry and truth books".

Montauk can be seen as a commitment to the new subjectivity in German-language literature of the 1970s, without Frisch himself ever having joined a literary movement. Therefore Alexander Stephan expressed the assumption "that the 'structural engineer' Frisch had been overtaken by the development of literature". In Montauk, Frisch quotes Peter Handke's Desireless Misfortune : "a text that makes an impression on me". The trigger for his writing experiment is Philip Roth's likewise autobiographical novel Mein Leben als Mann , the title of which runs through the narrative as a recurring theme: “ my life as a man is the name of the new book that Philip Roth brought to the hotel yesterday. Why would I shy away from the German title: My life as a man? I would like to know what I learn about my life as a man when I am forced to write. ”In addition, Montauk is also Frisch's most direct examination of Ingeborg Bachmann, whose novel Malina is seen as the answer to My Name is Gantenbein . He refers to her radio play The Good God of Manhattan and quotes her poem Days in White : " In these days I don't hurt that I can forget and have to remember."

reception

Marcel Reich-Ranicki , the Montauk in his canon recorded

Marcel Reich-Ranicki expressed himself enthusiastically in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in a “sentence with no less than six superlatives”: “And yet this Montauk story surpasses everything we have known from Frisch in some respects. It is his most intimate and tender, his most modest and at the same time bold, his simplest and perhaps for that very reason his most original book. "He concluded with the conclusion:" This self-exposure is free of exhibitionism, Frisch's intimacy never approaches shamelessness, his mood of farewell shows no loyalty to noise , no complaints. Montauk is a poetic balance sheet: a book of love, written by a poet of fear. "In 1976, Walter Jens mocked in his speech on the awarding of the Heine plaque to his friend at the time:" When Max Frisch sings about old men and young girls, is it happened to Reich-Ranicki. "But in 1991 in an obituary for Frisch, Reich-Ranicki stuck to his assessment that Montauk was" one of the very few prose works of German literature of the seventies that have outlasted their time ". In 2002 he included Montauk as one of twenty novels in his canon of German literature: "I think Montauk is most likely to stay with Frisch's prose."

The book polarized when it came out. The question of whether Montauk had “ upheld the limits of public propriety” remained controversial. Frisch's former partners felt "unanimously duped" by the story. Frisch's first wife Gertrud Frisch-von Meyenburg felt “undressed in public” in the story, his childhood friend Käte Schnyder-Rubensohn commented on her mention as “not very noble”. In particular, Frisch's current wife Marianne Frisch-Oellers protested against her husband's exposure. Although he exposed himself through his story, "there is a huge difference whether I say 'me donkey' or 'you donkey', whether I voluntarily present myself or someone else presents me without my consent". Frisch's fellow writer Peter Bichsel commented: "It will be a great book when its background - people, biographies - is no longer of any interest."

For Rolf Michaelis it was "to be foreseen [...] that Montauk would be reviled as a wistful glorification of manhood madness". However, in the “scenes of pathological jealousy, male self-assertion and self-affirmation mania”, he did not see the “life confession of an individual, but […] shaping life possibilities, […] forms of passion”. Reinhard Baumgart found no immediacy in Frisch's self-reflection, it “does not reach beyond the degree of self-reflection and ends in self-presentation”. Dieter Fringeli called the story in which he discovered “miserable German” “too domestic, yes, too home-made”. He judged: "His notes on love and life ultimately only concern one person: Max Frisch." Criticism also came "mainly from women". Sybille Heidenreich was disappointed with the "new fresh". The intimate confessions left embarrassment, Frisch would become a "Hanswurst in front of a curious audience". She was bothered by the role of Lynn, who was not a partner, but "means to an end" as "proof of the old man that he is not yet too old". Finally she asked the question: "If life is boring, if it offers nothing more to experience, why does Frisch write anything at all?"

Hellmuth Karasek , who has seen Max Frisch since his play Biography: A Game on the “literary ego trip”, contradicted the feeling of embarrassment. Although the author apparently never served the reader's curiosity to snoop around in someone else's biography so unreservedly, "Karasek took the view that Frisch, through his sincerity, the ability of his serene and painful distance and the formal mastery of one cool and at the same time concerned writing style can avoid any intrusive smell of sweat of an unreasonable proximity to privacy ”. Volker Hage was enthusiastic about how Frisch made his own person the object of observation: “That is the captivating thing about Montauk : How someone talks about himself and himself without spreading the certainty: That's how I am, that's how I was, look here - my life! And the astonishing thing: the more he reveals about himself, this Max Frisch, the more he becomes a character in a novel. " For him, Montauk was" just like that, fragmentary, suggestive and sketching [...] a key work of the epoch: a modern romance novel ”. Alexander Stephan judged: " Montauk is not only the most private, it is also one of the most artistic books by Max Frisch." The story is "a book about the difficulties of describing life and living literature". Not those voyeurs who hoped for a glimpse into the intimate sphere are served, but those "who like to take a look at the literary workshop of an author" who has been transforming his own biography into fiction for four decades. Joachim Kaiser concluded: "No fresh friend or contemporary should ignore this book."

Adaptations

In 1981 Richard Dindo implemented the story in the documentary Max Frisch, Journal I – III . Max Frisch, initially fascinated by the plan, later developed reservations about the fact that the picture should show "[w] as in the word a different and actual reality has gained through the reader's imagination". In addition, he has "no need for publicity in dealing with my past". For him, the topic is concluded with the Montauk text. In the end, Frisch agreed to the shooting, but did not take part in it himself. In the end, the originally planned three-part film turned into a 122-minute film, according to Ruedi Christen "a cinematic essay that demands a lot of stamina and intellectual work from the viewer".

In 2008 Hörverlag published a complete reading of Felix von Manteuffel's novel .

In 2011, SWR and SRF co-produced the radio play by Leonhard Koppelmann Max Frisch Montauk . Koppelmann composed a Montauk montage using all sorts of archival material from the previous, secondary and post-story stories, thus expanding the otherwise heavily abridged piece by the questions raised by the novel: How should the indiscretions about third parties be assessed, how they react and act this? How should the confidentiality of letters and personal papers be dealt with? The central role is played by the correspondence between Max and Marianne Frisch and Uwe Johnson. Lynn now appears under her real name, and for the review, original soundtracks by Ingeborg Bachmann are installed. Koppelmann directed it himself; Ueli Jäggi played Max, Monica Gillette Lynn, Thomas Sarbacher Uwe and Susanne-Marie Wrage Marianne. In 2012 Audiobook Hamburg published the radio play as an audio carrier.

The story inspired Volker Schlöndorff for his feature film Return to Montauk (2017). The novel Eden Roc by the Swiss publicist and publisher Matthias Ackeret , published in the same year, provides a literary continuation of Max Frisch's story in chapter Montauk 2 . The identical location of Montauk of the American television series The Affair, which has been broadcast since 2014, led various reviewers to reference Max Frisch's story.

literature

Text output

  • Max Frisch: Montauk . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1975, ISBN 3-518-02871-5 . (First edition)
  • Max Frisch: Montauk . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1981, ISBN 3-518-37200-9 . (The specified page numbers refer to this version)

Secondary literature

  • Hanspeter Affolter: “Many allusions are lost anyway” Auto-fiction and intertextuality in Max Frisch's “Montauk”. Chronos, Zurich 2019, ISBN 978-3-0340-1499-1 .
  • Volker Hage : On the trail of poetry . Goldmann, Munich 1997, ISBN 3-442-75005-9 , pp. 163-181.
  • Lübbert R. Haneborger: Max Frisch - The late prose work . Books on Demand, Norderstedt 2008, ISBN 978-3-8370-2985-7 , pp. 29-56.
  • Rudolf Hartung: “Writing under the pressure of art”. On the autobiographical story Montauk by Max Frisch. In: Walter Schmitz (Ed.): About Max Frisch II . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1976, ISBN 3-518-00852-8 , pp. 435-442.
  • Sybille Heidenreich: Max Frisch: Stiller, My name is Gantenbein, Montauk. (= Analyzes and reflections. Volume 15). Beyer, Hollfeld 2007, ISBN 978-3-88805-152-4 , pp. 123-147.
  • Gerhard vom Hofe: Magic without a future. On the autobiographical correction in Max Frisch's story “Montauk”. In: Walter Schmitz (Ed.): Max Frisch. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1987, ISBN 3-518-38559-3 , pp. 340-369.
  • Gerhard P. Knapp: Once again: Playing with identity. To Max Frisch's Montauk. In: Gerhard P. Knapp (Ed.): Max Frisch. Aspects of the prose work . Peter Lang, Bern 1978, ISBN 3-261-02996-X , pp. 285-307.
  • Jürgen H. Petersen: Max Frisch . Metzler, Stuttgart 2002, ISBN 3-476-13173-4 , pp. 150-158.
  • Walter Schmitz : Max Frisch: Das Spätwerk (1962–1982). An introduction . Francke, Tübingen 1985, ISBN 3-7720-1721-5 , pp. 101-112.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Marcel Reich-Ranicki : Max Frisch . Ammann, Zurich 1991, ISBN 3-250-01042-1 , p. 83.
  2. ↑ a b Julian Schütt: Are you finished? I have work to do . Interview with Marcel Reich-Ranicki. In: Die Weltwoche , 32/2005.
  3. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), pp. 7-8.
  4. ↑ Klaus Müller-Salget: Max Frisch . Reclam, Stuttgart 1996, ISBN 3-15-015210-0 , p. 132.
  5. ↑ a b c d e Volker Hage: A sincere book . In: Der Spiegel . No. 50 , 2006, p. 188 ( online ).
  6. ↑ Knapp: Again: Playing with identity. On Max Frischs Montauk , p. 288.
  7. ↑ vom Hofe: Zauber ohne Zukunft , pp. 347, 359.
  8. ↑ Heidenreich: Max Frisch: Stiller, Mein Name sei Gantenbein, Montauk , pp. 124–129.
  9. ^ Reich-Ranicki: Max Frisch , p. 87.
  10. ↑ Richard Dindo : The relationship to the picture . In: Luis Bolliger (Ed.): Now: max fresh . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2001, ISBN 3-518-39734-6 , p. 218.
  11. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 82.
  12. ↑ See section: Petersen: Max Frisch , pp. 151–153.
  13. ^ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 187.
  14. ↑ See the section: Müller-Salget: Max Frisch , pp. 134-136.
  15. ^ Max Frisch: Diary 1966–1971 . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1979, ISBN 3-518-36756-0 , pp. 308-310.
  16. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 5.
  17. ↑ a b Quoted from: Celine Letawe: Max Frisch's 'Montauk' - a 'Chronique scandaleuse'? In: Stefan Neuhaus, Johann Holzner (Hrsg.): Literature as a scandal: cases - functions - consequences . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2007, ISBN 3-525-20855-3 , p. 452.
  18. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), pp. 21-22.
  19. ↑ a b Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 156.
  20. ^ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 155.
  21. ↑ a b Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 24.
  22. ↑ See section: Petersen: Max Frisch , pp. 150–153.
  23. ↑ a b c d Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 103.
  24. ↑ See the section Haneborger: Max Frisch - Das Prosa- Spätwerk , pp. 35–36.
  25. ↑ a b Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 130.
  26. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 140.
  27. ↑ a b Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 158.
  28. ↑ See section: Schmitz: Max Frisch: Das Spätwerk (1962–1982) , p. 105.
  29. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 89.
  30. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 94.
  31. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 97.
  32. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 114.
  33. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 138.
  34. ^ Müller-Salget: Max Frisch , p. 134.
  35. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), pp. 95-96.
  36. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 203.
  37. ↑ a b Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 185.
  38. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 197.
  39. ↑ See section: Petersen: Max Frisch , p. 157.
  40. ^ Schmitz: Max Frisch: Das Spätwerk (1962–1982) , p. 108.
  41. ^ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 198.
  42. ^ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 165.
  43. ↑ vom Hofe: Zauber ohne Zukunft , pp. 361–362.
  44. ↑ Walter Jens , Rudolf Radler (ed.): Kindlers new literary dictionary, volume 5. Ea – Fz. Kindler, Munich 1989, ISBN 3-463-43005-3 , p. 857.
  45. ↑ Alexander Stephan : Max Frisch . CH Beck, Munich 1983, ISBN 3-406-09587-9 , p. 118.
  46. ↑ vom Hofe: Zauber ohne Zukunft , pp. 343-344.
  47. ↑ Petersen: Max Frisch , p. 200.
  48. ↑ Hans Mayer: The secrets of every man . In: Hans Mayer: About Friedrich Dürrenmatt and Max Frisch . Neske, Pfullingen 1977, ISBN 3-7885-0081-6 , pp. 112-113.
  49. ↑ Knapp: Again: Playing with identity. On Max Frisch's Montauk , p. 289.
  50. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 151.
  51. ↑ a b Konstanze Fliedl : Interpretation and Discretion. On the problem of biographism in the Bachmann-Frisch case .
  52. ^ André Müller : Interview with Friedrich Dürrenmatt 1980 . In: Playboy 1/1981 .
  53. ↑ Success in the evening . In: Der Spiegel . No. 1 , 1981, p. 150 ( online ).
  54. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 102.
  55. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 52.
  56. ↑ Stefan Helge Kern: The art of deception. Impostors, liars and fraudsters in the German-language novel after 1945 using the example of the novels Confessions of the impostor Felix Krull, My name is Gantenbein and Jakob the liar . (PDF) Dissertation, Hannover 2004, p. 196.
  57. ↑ Quoted from: Stephan: Max Frisch , pp. 116–117.
  58. ^ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 105.
  59. ↑ Uwe Johnson : To Montauk . In: Walter Schmitz (Ed.): Max Frisch , Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1987, ISBN 3-518-38559-3 , p. 339.
  60. ^ Rolf Kieser: Land's End. Max Frisch's farewell to New York . In: Luis Bolliger (Ed.): Now: max frisch , p. 236.
  61. ↑ Frisch: Diary 1966–1971 , pp. 253–254.
  62. ↑ Daniel de Vin: Max Frisch's diaries . Böhlau, Cologne 1977. ISBN 3-412-00977-6 , p. 75.
  63. ↑ Karin Tantow, Lutz Tantow: Max Frisch. A modern classic . Heyne, Munich 1994, ISBN 3-453-05755-4 , pp. 181-182.
  64. ↑ Max Frisch: Stiller . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt 2001, ISBN 3-518-39710-9 , p. 64.
  65. ↑ Petersen: Max Frisch , p. 157.
  66. ^ Reich-Ranicki: Max Frisch , p. 83.
  67. ↑ Petersen: Max Frisch , p. 157.
  68. ↑ Heinz Ludwig Arnold : Failed Existences? To Montauk . In: text + kritik 47/48, 3rd expanded edition 1983, ISBN 3-88377-140-6 , pp. 108–111.
  69. ↑ Heinz Ludwig Arnold : What am I? About Max Frisch . Wallstein, Göttingen 2002, ISBN 3-89244-529-X , pp. 47-48.
  70. ↑ Volker Hage: Max Frisch , Rowohlt, Hamburg 1997, ISBN 3-499-50616-5 , p. 126.
  71. ↑ Johnson: On Montauk , pp. 338-339.
  72. ↑ Haneborger: Max Frisch - Das Prosa- Spätwerk , p. 65.
  73. ↑ See Lioba Waleczek: Max Frisch . Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, Munich 2001, ISBN 3-423-31045-6 , pp. 144–145.
  74. ↑ Hage: Max Frisch , p. 118.
  75. ↑ See section: Petersen: Max Frisch , p. 158.
  76. ↑ vom Hofe: Zauber ohne Zukunft , p. 352.
  77. ↑ Hans Bänzinger : Life in quotation. On “Montauk”: A formulation problem and its history . In: Gerhard P. Knapp (Ed.): Max Frisch. Aspects of the prose work . Peter Lang, Bern 1978, ISBN 3-261-02996-X , p. 281.
  78. ↑ Haneborger: Max Frisch - Das Prosa- Spätwerk , p. 29.
  79. ↑ Stephan: Max Frisch , p. 116.
  80. ↑ Frisch: Montauk (1981), p. 141.
  81. ^ Reich-Ranicki: Max Frisch , p. 105.
  82. ^ Reich-Ranicki: Max Frisch , p. 81.
  83. ^ Reich-Ranicki: Max Frisch , p. 88.
  84. ↑ a b Reich-Ranicki: Max Frisch , p. 106.
  85. ^ Josef Rattner , Gerhard Danzer: European cultural contributions in German-Swiss literature from 1850-2000 . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2003, ISBN 3-8260-2541-5 , p. 222.
  86. ↑ a b c Urs Bircher: With the exception of friendship: Max Frisch 1956–1991 . Limmat, Zurich 2000, ISBN 3-85791-297-9 , p. 201.
  87. ↑ Bircher: With the exception of friendship: Max Frisch 1956–1991 , p. 200.
  88. ↑ Rolf Michaelis : Love Story and more . In: Die Zeit , No. 39/1975.
  89. ↑ Haneborger: Max Frisch - Das Prosa- Spätwerk , p. 46.
  90. ↑ Dieter Fringeli : The new old fresh . In: Basler Nachrichten of October 10, 1975.
  91. ^ Ruedi Christen: Max Frisch, Journal I-III . In: Luis Bolliger (Ed.): Now: max fresh . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2001, ISBN 3-518-39734-6 , p. 221.
  92. ↑ Heidenreich: Max Frisch: Stiller, Mein Name sei Gantenbein, Montauk , pp. 131-133.
  93. ↑ Hellmuth Karasek : Confessions at a Distance . In: Der Spiegel . No. 40 , 1975, pp. 196 ( online ).
  94. ↑ Stephan: Max Frisch , pp. 117-118.
  95. ↑ Stephan: Max Frisch , p. 121.
  96. ↑ Joachim Kaiser : Book of hours of a late love . In: Süddeutsche Zeitung of October 8, 1975, literature supplement.
  97. ↑ Max Frisch. Journal I – III / Conversations in Old Age ( Memento from December 19, 2014 in the Internet Archive ). On the website of Suhrkamp Verlag .
  98. ↑ Max Frisch to Richard Dindo . In: Bolliger (Ed.): Now: max frisch , pp. 226–227.
  99. ↑ Christians: Max Frisch, Journal I-III , p. 222.
  100. ↑ Max Frisch: Montauk . Complete reading by Felix von Manteuffel . The Hörverlag, Munich 2008, ISBN 978-3-86717-278-3 .
  101. ^ Montauk in the radio play database HörDat .
  102. ↑ Max Frisch: Montauk . Radio play by Leonhard Koppelmann . 2 CDs. Audiobook Hamburg, Hamburg 2012, ISBN 978-3-86952-118-3 .
  103. ↑ Christian Beck: "Aren't we all a little impostor sometimes?" . In: persoenlich.com, March 4, 2017.
  104. ^ Anna-Maria Wallner: Another affair in Montauk . In: Die Presse from January 16, 2015.
  105. ^ Ekkehard Knörer: Series booklet Countdown VII: The Affair . In: Cargo from December 16, 2014.
This article was added to the list of excellent articles on January 27, 2009 in this version .