3 ___________________________

Natural History: Fossil

[. . . B enjam in had,] as no one else, the a b ility to regard h is to ric a l things,

m anifestations o f the objectified s p irit, “ c u ltu re ,” as i f they were n a ture
[ . . . ] . H is entire th o u g h t could be characterized as “ n a tu ra l-h is to ric a l”
[ naturgeschichtliches]. T h e p e trifie d , frozen, o r obsolete in v e n to ry o f c u ltu ra l
fragm ents spoke to h im [ . . . ] as fossils o r plants in the h e rb a riu m to the
c o lle cto r.1

W ith in the concept o f history, tim e indicates social change and the
uniqueness and irre v e rs ib ility o f hum an events. T ra d itio n a lly , it
has taken on m eaning in opposition to “ nature,” in w hich tim e is
change only in the sense o f cyclical repetition. Charles D a rw in ’s
theory o f evolution underm ined this b inary, however, by arguing
th a t nature its e lf had a unique, nonrepetitive, historical course. In
the late nineteenth century, Social D arw inists applied the terms o f
D a rw in ’s natural history to discussions o f “ social evolution.” O rig ­
in a lly, D a rw in ’s theory had a c ritic a l im pulse, in vo lvin g an under­
standing o f history in scientific, em pirical terms th a t challenged
theological m yth and B ib lic a l dogma. B u t w ith in Social D a rw in ­
ism, th a t c ritic a l im pulse was lost. T he idea o f social “ evolution” in
effect glorified the b lin d , em pirical course o f hum an history. I t gave
ideological support to the social status quo by claim ing th a t com­
petitive capitalism expressed true hum an “ nature,” th a t im p e ri­
alist rivalries were the healthy result o f an inevitable struggle fo r
survival, and th a t the ru lin g “ races” were ju s tifie d as the dom i-
nators on the basis o f “ n a tu ra l” superiority. W ith in this pseudo-
59_______________________
3 N a tu ral H istory: Fossil

s c ie n tific discourse, the cla im o f social in ju s tic e became a lo g ic a l

im p o s s ib ility .
Social D a rw in is m was based on an in h e re n t c o n tra d ic tio n , one
w h ic h had been exposed by m ore th a n one c ritic in B e n ja m in ’s
tim e. D o lf S ternb erg er (w h o m B e n ja m in kn ew in F ra n k fu rt before
1933)2 argued in his 1938 book, Panorama: Views o f the Nineteenth
Century, th a t the “ endless p a n o ra m a ” o f social e v o lu tio n m ade
b a re ly p e rce p tib le the b a ttle fie ld le ft b e h in d by “ n a tu ra l selection” :

[. . . C iv iliz a tio n [ . . .] stoutly keeps corroborating w ith extinction and

exterm ination as i f indeed civilization were not itself; i f the “ civilized
races” have in fact gained the upper hand, they are for this very reason
more savage than the savages. This paradox lies concealed in D arw in ’s
theory o f transitions.3

I n 1932 T h e o d o r [W ie s e n g ru n d -] A d o rn o , as n e w ly a p p o in te d p ro ­
fessor a t F ra n k fu rt U n iv e rs ity , gave a le ctu re th a t called fo r a
“ re o rie n ta tio n o f the p h ilo s o p h y o f h is to ry [ Geschichtsphilosophie] . ” 4
E n title d “ T h e Id e a o f N a tu ra l H is to r y ,” it tu rn e d the p a ra d o x in ­
h eren t in th is te rm in to a d ia le c tic a l a rg u m e n t. T h e speech shows
the in flu e n ce o f his talks w ith B e n ja m in in 1929 at K o n ig s te in w hen
the A rcades p la n was discussed, and i t makes d ire c t reference to the
Trauerspiel stu d y th a t had been the reason fo r B e n ja m in ’ s rejectio n
b y F ra n k fu rt U n iv e rs ity several years e a rlie r. A rg u in g against the
p h ilo s o p h ic a l synthesis o f n a tu re and h is to ry in H e id e g g e r’s p re ­
m ise th a t “ h is to r ic ity ” ( Geschichtlichkeit) is the “ n a tu re ” o f Being,
A d o rn o e m p loyed n a tu re and h is to ry as d ia le c tic a lly opposed con­
cepts, each o f w h ic h p ro v id e d a c ritic is m o f the o the r, and o f the
re a lity each was supposed to id e n tify .5 I n such an analysis

[. . . ] the moments o f nature and history do not disappear into each

other, but break simultaneously out o f each other and cross each other in
such a way that what is natural emerges as a sign for history, and history,
where it appears most historical, appears as a sign for nature.6

B e n ja m in expressed the same idea in an e a rly Passagen-Werk note

th a t lays d o w n as “ the a xio m o f the w a y to a void m y th ic th in k in g ” :
“ N o h is to ric a l category w ith o u t n a tu ra l substance; no n a tu ra l sub­
stance w ith o u t its h is to ric a l filte r .” 7 T h e m eth od relies on ju x ta p o s ­
in g b in a ry p a irs o f lin g u is tic signs fro m the language code (here
h is to ry /n a tu re ), and, in the process o f a p p ly in g these signs to m ate ­
r ia l referents, crossing the sw itches. T h e c ritic a l p o w e r o f th is
60
Part I I

m an eu ver depends on b o th the code, w h e re in m e a n in g arises fro m

b in aries o f s ig n ifie r/s ig n ifie d s in d e p e n d e n t o f the referents, and the
referents, the m a te ria lly e xistin g objects, w h ic h do n o t s u b m it to
language signs m eekly, b u t have the sem antic stre n g th to set the
signs in to question.
T h a t a c ritic a l, d ia le c tic a l “ id e a ” o f n a tu ra l h is to ry can also be
expressed in an im age was d em on strate d several years la te r by
J o h n H e a rtfie ld , w ho developed the new te chn iqu e o f p h o to m o n ­
tage. H is im age, e n title d “ G e rm a n N a tu ra l H is to r y ” (fig u re 3.1),
appeared on the A u g u s t 1934, cover o f Arbeiter Illu strie rte Z e itsckrift
(the Workers' Illustra ted Jo u rn a l) as a d ire c t p o litic a l a tta ck aga in st
H it le r ’s R eich b y c ritic iz in g its “ e v o lu tio n ” o u t o f the W e im a r
R e p u b lic.
H e a rtfie ld was a m e m b e r o f the B e rlin M a rx is t c irc le o f B re c h t,
Lacis, R e in h a rd t, and P iscator. I n the late W e im a r p e rio d , he de­
signed th ea te r sets fo r th e m th a t in c o rp o ra te d p ho to g ra p h s, p la c in g
the new technologies o f im a g e -re p ro d u c tio n “ consciously [ . . . ] in
the service o f p o litic a l a g ita tio n .” 8 H e was q u ite close to B re c h t,
and B e n ja m in knew b o th h im and his w o rk .9 In tr ig u in g fo r B en­
ja m in in H e a rtfie ld ’s w o rk m u st have been the use o f a lle g o ric a l
form s o f re p re sen ta tion in c o m b in a tio n w ith the m ost m o d e rn te ch ­
niques o f p h o to g ra p h ic m ontage.
L ik e m ost o f H e a rtfie ld ’s images, the poster, “ D eutsche
N a tu rg e s c h ic h te ,” is a m o d e rn -d a y e m b le m ,10 using the co nve n ­
tio ns o f inscriptio (title ) and subscripts (ca p tio n ) to m ake the im a ge
fu n c tio n as a fo rm o f m o ra l and p o litic a l in s tru c tio n . G e rm a n
“ n a tu ra l h is to ry ” is represented a lle g o ric a lly in the three b io lo g ic a l
stages o f d e ve lo pm e nt o f the D e a th ’ s H ea d M o th , a progression o f
m etam orphoses th a t suggests a causal lin k betw een the W e im a r
R e p u b lic and fascism (E b e rt was the firs t ch a n ce llo r o f W e im a r,
H in d e n b e rg its last p re sid e n t, w h o in tu rn approved H itle r as ch a n ­
c e llo r). A t the same tim e , th is progression (on a d y in g tree b ra n c h )
is seen as retrogression, and “ d e ve lo p m e n t” applies o n ly to increa s­
in g c la rity as to the n a tu re o f the beast: the visib le m a rk o f the s k u ll,
o r d e a th ’ s head, in its fin a l H itle r ia n fo rm . I have chosen to discuss
th is p a rtic u la r poster, n o t to stress H e a rtfie ld ’s in flu e n ce on B e n ­
ja m in , b u t to m ake a d id a c tic p o in t. ( I t m ig h t have been m ade
instead, fo r exam ple, w ith K a fk a ’s sto ry, “ M e ta m o rp h o s is ,” in
w h ic h the hero, O d a re k , tu rn s in to an insect, an a lle g o ric a l im age
61___________________________
3 N a tu ral H istory: Fossil

DEUTSCHE NATURGESCHICHTE
O e O T S C H tt T O T tN C O M -f A I T * *
W i> im **o o>rcx» pMwonfcv i i*

3.1 “ Germ an N a tu ra l H is to ry ,” photom ontage by Joh n H eartfield, 1934.

62_____
Part I I

in w h ic h the e v o lu tio n a ry process fro m a n im a l to m an is s im ila rly

in v e rte d .) Y e t B e n ja m in was e v id e n tly s tru c k b y th is p a rtic u la r
p h o to m o n ta g e (w e ll a fte r he had conceived o f s im ila r m o tifs fo r the
Passagen-Werk) . I n 1936, the ye ar a fte r a m a jo r H e a rtfie ld exposi­
tio n in P a ris ,11 the id e n tic a l im age appears in his correspondence,
in a c ritic a l co m m e n t on bourgeois in te lle c tu a l d eve lo p m e n t since
F ic h te : “ T h e re v o lu tio n a ry s p ir it o f the G e rm a n bourgeoisie has
been tra n s fo rm in g its e lf in to the ch rysa lis fro m w h ic h the D e a th ’s
H e a d M o th o f N a tio n a l S ocialism la te r c ra w le d .’ ” 12
H e a rtfie ld tells us in the ca p tio n to “ G e rm a n N a tu ra l H is to r y ”
th a t “ m e ta m o rp h o sis” has three m eanings: one fro m the discourse
o f n a tu re (the in se ct’s stages), one fro m th a t o f h is to ry (E b e rt-
H in d e n b e rg -H itle r), and one (liste d firs t) fro m the discourse o f
m y th : “ I n m y th o lo g y : the m eta m orph osis o f h u m a n beings in to
trees, a n im a ls, stones.” I t is th is m e a nin g w h ic h b o th e xplain s the
re p re se n ta tio n and p ro vid e s a c r itic a l ju d g m e n t o f the referent.
H e a rtfie ld presents the n a tu ra l e v o lu tio n o f G e rm a n p o litic a l h is­
to ry in the m y th ic a l fo rm o f a m eta m orph osis o f h um an s in to
n a tu re , in o rd e r to m ake the c ritic a l p o in t th a t the b e lie f in e v o lu ­
tio n a ry progress as social h is to ry ’ s n a tu ra l course is a m y th , in the
fu lly negative sense o f illu s io n , e rro r, ideology. H e a rtfie ld , a C o m ­
m u n is t, was n o t a tta c k in g the c a p ita lis t class’ a ffirm a tio n o f Social
D a rw in is m to ju s tify its o w n d om in a nce , b u t, ra th e r, the a ffirm a ­
tio n b y Social D em ocra ts o f the idea o f h is to ric a l progress, w h ic h
had lu lle d th em in to a false sense o f se cu rity re g a rd in g the ade qu a ­
cy o f W e im a r p a rlia m e n ta ria n is m fo r so cia list p o litic s .13
N o te th a t the id e o lo g ica l fu sion o f n a tu re and h is to ry w he n re ­
p ro d u ce d b y H e a rtfie ld th ro u g h an a lle g o rica l use o f p h o to m o n ta g e
a llo w s the gap betw een sign and refe ren t to re m a in v is ib le , thus
e n a b lin g h im to represent th e ir id e n tity in the fo rm o f a c ritiq u e .
B e n ja m in h ad w o rke d s im ila rly in One Way Street, c o n s tru c tin g a
m on tag e o f ve rb a l ra th e r th a n p h o to g ra p h ic im ages th a t, instea d o f
c o n fo u n d in g n a tu re and h is to ry in to one, re lie d on the se m a n tic
gap betw een these term s to id e n tify c ritic a lly the o b je ctive essence
o f W e im a r’s econom ic in fla tio n and the b ourgeoisie’s social decline.
I n “ Im p e ria l P a n o ra m a ” :

A curious paradox: people have only the narrowest private interests in

m ind when they act, yet in their behavior they are more than ever deter-
63__________________________
3 N a tu ra l H istory: Fossil

STIMME AUS DEM SUMPF

'Dreitausend Jahre konscquenter fruucbt beweisen die Uberiegenheit memcr Rasse 1

3.2 “ V oice from the Swamp: ‘Three thousand years o f stric t inbreeding demonstrate the
sup eriority o f m y race,’ ” photom ontage by J oh n H eartfield, 1936.
64
Part I I

mined by the instincts o f the mass. And, more than ever, mass instincts
have grown mad and hostile to life. Where the dim instincts o f the
anim al— as numerous stories relate— finds a way o f escaping from an
approaching yet still-invisible danger, here society, wherein people have
only their own low ly well-being in m ind, falls victim to even the most
nearby danger w ith brutelike dullness, but w ithout the dim knowledge o f
animals, as a blind mass [ . . . ]. Thus in this society the picture o f im becil­
ity is complete: uncertainty, indeed, perversion o f the instincts v ita l for
life, and helplessness, indeed, decay o f the intellect. This is the state o f
m ind o f the entire German bourgeoisie.14

A g a in s t the a n im a lis tic ye t se lf-d estru ctive b e h a v io r of the

bourgeoisie— w ho w ere d e m o n s tra tin g a ll the signs o f a v a n is h in g
species— B e n ja m in opposed the co n stru ctive p o te n tia l o f the new
in d u s tria l era: “ H u m a n s as a species reached the end o f th e ir
d e ve lo pm e nt tens o f thousands o f years ago; b u t h u m a n ity as a
species is ju s t at its b e g in n in g ” 15— so ra d ic a l a b re ak w ith the
“ n a tu ra l” state o f th in g s was the social promise o f te chn olo gy, the
b e g in n in g o f a tr u ly h u m a n h is to ry . M a r x had argued s im ila rly
th a t u n til the new p o te n tia l o f in d u s tria lis m was rea lize d, a ll h is­
to ry was o n ly “ p re h is to ry ,” d o m in a te d b y the “ n a tu ra l la w s ” o f
c a p ita lis m th a t resulted in a re p e titiv e cycle o f in fla tio n , depression,
a nd u n e m p lo ym e n t. So lo n g as people w ere held u n d e r the p ow er o f
these b lin d forces, the p ro m ise o f a u n ive rsa l h u m a n h is to ry co uld
n o t come in to its o w n .16
E x tre m e o p tim is m c o n ce rn in g the pro m ise o f the “ n e w ” n a tu re
o f techn olo gy, and to ta l pessim ism co nce rn ing the course o f h is to ry ,
w h ic h w ith o u t p ro le ta ria n re v o lu tio n w o u ld never leave the stage o f
p re h is to ry — th is o rie n ta tio n characterizes a ll stages o f the A rcades
p ro je ct. T h e m ontage o f n a tu re and h is to ry w ith w h ic h B e n ja m in
had a lrea d y e xpe rim en ted in One Way Street was developed in i t as
an expression o f the p re h is to ric state o f present h is to ry , b u t w ith
th is difference. T h e Passagen-Werk treats the h is to ric a l origins o f the
present: N a tu ra l h is to ry becomes u r-h is to ry . Its goal is n o t o n ly to
p olem icize against the s till-b a rb a ric level o f the m o d e rn age, b u t,
ra is in g polem ics to h is to ric o -p h ilo s o p h ic th e o ry, to disclose th e es­
sence o f the “ new n atu re ” as even m ore transient, m ore fleeting th an
the o ld . N a tu ra l h is to ry as u r-h is to ry m ea nt b o u rg eo isjD reh istory as
p re h is to ric . T h is was a ce n tra l im age in the Passagen-Werk.
T h e s h o rt h a lf-life o f technologies and co m m o d itie s, the ra p id
tu rn o v e r in style and fashion, was experienced in h ig h c a p ita lis m as
65_______________________
3 N a tu ral H istory: Fossil

extrem e te m p o ra l a tte n u a tio n . F o r those liv in g in the 1920s, the

novelties o f even one’ s p a re n ts’ y o u th — g a slig h t instead o f neon
signs, buns and bustles instead o f bobbed h a ir and b a th in g suits—
belonged to a d is ta n t past. T hose e arly bourgeois a rtifa cts w h ic h
m anaged to su rvive in the aging arcades w here, “ fo r the firs t tim e,
the m ost recent past becomes d is ta n t,” 17 w ere the a rch aic residues,
the p e trifie d u r-fo rm s o f the present.

When as children we were given those great collected editions, The Cosmos
and Humanity, New Universe, or The Earth, would our gaze not fall first o f all
on the colored [illustrations] o f petrified landscapes or the “ lakes and
glaciers o f the first ice age” ? Such an idealized panorama o f a scarcely past
ur-epoch opens up when we gaze into the Passages that have spread into
every city. Here is housed the last dinosaur o f Europe, the consumer.18

A la te r fo rm u la tio n specifies:

Just as there are places in the stones o f the Miocene or Eocene Age that
bear the impression o f huge monsters out o f these geological epochs, so
today the Passages lie in the great cities like caves containing fossils o f an
ur-anim al presumed extinct: The consumers from the preim perial epoch
o f capitalism, the last dinosaurs o f Europe.19

T h e pre-1850 consum ers are “ u r-a n im a ls ” n o t because consumption

has disappeared, b u t because i t no lo n g e r exists in its e arly c a p ita l­
is t fo rm . B y the tw e n tie th c e n tu ry the o rig in a l arcades had fa ile d
fin a n c ia lly , because th e ir s m a ll sp ecialty shops o f lu x u ry goods
w ere u n a ble to com pete w ith huge new d e p a rtm e n t stores th a t sold
m ass-produced co m m od ities at a pace ra p id enough to com pensate
fo r fa llin g rates o f p ro fit. I t is fo r th is reason th a t B e n ja m in calls the
e a rly bourgeois consum ers “ the la st d inosaurs o f E u ro p e ,” g ro w n
e x tin c t due to the “ n a tu ra l” e v o lu tio n o f th a t in d u s tria l c a p ita lis m
w h ic h the bourgeoisie its e lf unleashed. I n the d y in g arcades, the
e a rly in d u s tria l co m m od ities have created an a n te d e lu via n la n d ­
scape, an “ u r-lan dsca pe o f c o n s u m p tio n ,” 20 b e a rin g w itness to the
“ d ecline o f an econom ic epoch” w h ic h the “ d re a m in g c o lle c tiv e ”
m istakes fo r “ the d ecline o f the w o rld its e lf.” 21 L ik e the caves o f an
a rch ae olo gica l site, th ey co n ta in the last c e n tu ry ’s fashions in situ :

In the windo4w displays o f beauty salons are the last women w ith long
hair. They have rich, undulating hair masses w ith a “ permanent wave”
— fossilized hair curls.22
66
Part I I

L e fto v e r co m m od ities “ g ro w on the w a lls ” o f these deserted caves

lik e scar tissue, “ a n cie n t, w ild flo ra w h ic h , blocked o ff fro m the
“ sap” o f consum er tra ffic , “ e n tw in e w ith each o th e r in the m ost
irre g u la r fa sh io n .” 23 F aded w a ll posters co n ta in “ the firs t dro ps o f
a ra in o f letters th a t to d a y p ours d o w n w ith o u t le t-u p d ay and n ig h t
on the c ity and is greeted lik e the E g y p tia n plague. . . .” 24 T h e lig h t
filte rs th ro u g h th e ir d in g y glass roofs as in to an a q u a riu m o f p r im i­
tiv e sea life .25 Shop signs h ang in th em lik e zoo signs, “ re c o rd in g
n o t so m uch the h a b ita t as the o rig in and species o f c a p tu re d
a n im a ls .” 26 A lre a d y in the n in e te e n th c e n tu ry , the in te rio rs o f
bourgeois d w e llin g s w ere “ a k in d o f casing,” in w h ic h the
bourgeois in d iv id u a l as a “ c o lle c to r” o f objects was em bedded w ith
a ll his appurtenances, “ a tte n d in g to his traces as n a tu re attends to
dead fa un a em bedded in g ra n ite .” 27 T h e p h ys io g n o m y o f Paris,
w h ic h has been shaped b y social forces, is com pared b y B e n ja m in
to a geological fo rm a tio n th a t has the a ttra c tio n o f a v o lc a n ic la n d ­
scape:

As a social form ation, Paris is a counterimage to that which Vesuvius is as

a geographic one: A threatening, dangerous mass, an ever-active June o f
the Revolution. But ju s t as the slopes o f Vesuvius, thanks to the layers o f
lava covering them, have become a paradisiacal orchard, so here, out o f
the lava o f the Revolution, there bloom art, fashion, and festive existence
as nowhere else.28

As is obvious p a r tic u la rly in the la st q u o ta tio n , the new n a tu re th a t

com prises the P a risia n landscape has its “ a llu rin g as w e ll as
th re a te n in g face.” 29 S im ila rly , the fossilized c o m m o d ity rem ain s
are n o t m e re ly “ fa ile d m a te ria l.” 30 As traces o f p rio r life , th ey are
h is to ric a l clues, w ith an o bjective m ea n in g th a t separates B e n ­
ja m in ’ s “ id e a ” o f n a tu ra l h is to ry fro m the s im p le r, m ore p o le m ic a l
fo rm o f H e a rtfie ld ’ s m ontage. B e n ja m in perceived h is to ric a l n a tu re
as an expression o f t r u t h ’s essential tran sitorine ss in its c o n tra d ic ­
to ry extrem es— as e x tin c tio n and death on the one h a n d , and as
creative p o te n tia l and the p o s s ib ility fo r change on the o the r.
N o t o n ly n a tu re , b u t a ll the categories in B e n ja m in ’s th e o re tic a l
co nstructio n s have m ore th a n one m e a nin g and value, m a k in g i t
possible fo r th em to e n te r in to va rio u s conceptual co nste lla tion s.
A d o rn o , in his speech on “ N a tu ra l H is to r y ,” showed the in flu e n ce
o f B e n ja m in w hen he spoke o f a “ lo g ica l s tru c tu re ” d iffe re n t fro m
th a t o f tra d itio n a l p h ilo s o p h y , w here concepts lik e n a tu re and his-
to rv . m v th a n d t r a n s ie n c v h a d b e e n d is tin g u is h e d f r o m o n e a n o t h e r
67_______________________
3 N a tu ral H isto ry: Fossil

by “ in v a ria n ts ” in th e ir m eaning. In ste a d , “ th ey come to gether

a ro u n d a concrete h is to ric a l fa c tic ity , one th a t opens its e lf up in
co nn ectio n w ith th e ir m om ents, in its o n e -tim e -o n ly uniqueness.” 31
T h e p o in t o f difference betw een A d o rn o and B e n ja m in , w h ic h even­
tu a lly became a source o f c o n flic t,32 was th a t B e n ja m in believed
such p h ilo s o p h ic o -h is to ric a l co nste lla tion s co u ld be represented by
a d ia le c tic a l im age ra th e r th a n b y d ia le c tic a l a rg u m e n ta tio n .
T h e co nce ptio n o f “ d ia le c tic a l im a g e ” is o verd e te rm in e d in B en­
ja m in ’s th o u g h t. I t has a lo g ic as ric h in p h ilo s o p h ic a l im p lic a tio n s
as the H e g e lia n d ia le ctic, and, indeed, the u n fo ld in g o f its c o m p le x ­
ities is a task o f each and every c h a p te r o f th is stu dy. In the present
co n te xt i t refers to the use o f a rch a ic im ages to id e n tify w h a t is
h is to ric a lly new a b o u t the “ n a tu re ” o f co m m od ities. T h e p rin c ip le
o f c o n s tru c tio n is th a t o f m ontage, w h e re b y the im a ge ’s id e a tio n a l
elem ents re m a in u nreco nciled , ra th e r th a n fu sin g in to one “ h a rm o ­
n iz in g p erspe ctive.” 33 F o r B e n ja m in , the te chn iqu e o f m ontage had
“ special, perhaps even to ta l rig h ts ” as a progressive fo rm because it
“ in te rru p ts the co nte xt in to w h ic h i t is in s e rte d ” and thus “ co un ­
teracts illu s io n ” 34 and he in te n d e d i t to be the p rin c ip le g o v e rn in g
the c o n s tru c tio n o f the Passagen-Werk: “ T h is w o rk m ust develop
to the h ig he st p o in t the a rt o f c itin g w ith o u t c ita tio n m arks. Its
th e o ry connects m ost closely w ith th a t o f m on ta g e .” 35
T h e re is, o f course, a n o th e r use o f m ontage th a t creates illu s io n
b y fu sin g the elements so a r tfu lly th a t a ll evidence o f in c o m p a ti­
b ility and c o n tra d ic tio n , indeed, a ll evidence o f a rtific e , is
e lim in a te d — as in the fa lsifie d p h o to g ra p h ic d ocu m e nt, as o ld as
p h o to g ra p h y its e lf (fig u re 3.3). T h is was the p rin c ip le as w e ll o f the
“ p a n o ra m a s,” those a r tific ia lly co nstructed , life lik e replicas o f
scenes fro m h is to ry and n a tu re — e v e ry th in g fro m b a ttle fie ld s to
a lp in e vista s— th a t were fa v o rite a ttra c tio n s in the n in e te e n th cen­
tu ry , and th ey p ro vid e d a ke yw o rd fo r the Passagen-Werk.36 “ P a no r­
a m a ,” was “ p la g ia riz e d ” 37 fro m B e n ja m in b y S ternberger as the
tid e fo r his book. I t co nta ine d a c ritiq u e o f the p o p u la riz a tio n o f
D a r w in ’s th e o ry as a “ p a n o ra m a o f e v o lu tio n ” (figu re 3.4) th a t
makes h is to ry loo k lik e a “ n a tu ra l pro gressio n ” fro m ape to m an, so
th a t “ the eye and the m in d ’ s eye can slide u n h in d e re d , up and
d o w n , back and fo rth , across the p ictures as they them selves
‘evolve ’ .” 38
N o t the m e d iu m o f re p re sen ta tion , n o t m e re ly the concreteness o f
the im age o r the m ontage fo rm is c ru c ia l, b u t w h e th e r the construe-
68
Part I I

3.3 Falsified photograph o f violence against the clergy by the Paris C om m unards,
photom ontage by E. A p p e rt, 1871.

tio n m akes v is ib le the gap betw een sign and referent, o r fuses th e m
in a deceptive to ta lity so th a t the ca p tio n m e re ly d u p lic a te s the
se m iotic co n te n t o f the im age instead o f se ttin g it in to q u e s tio n .39
W h e n h is to ric a l referents are called “ n a tu ra l” in u n c ritic a l a ffirm a ­
tio n , id e n tify in g the e m p iric a l course o f th e ir d eve lo pm e nt as p ro ­
gress, the result is m y th ; w hen p rehistoric nature is evoked in the act
o f n a m in g the h is to ric a lly m od e rn , the effect is to d e m y th ify . B u t
B e n ja m in ’s a im was n o t m e re ly to c ritic iz e “ n a tu ra l h is to ry ” as
ide olo gy; i t was to show h ow , w ith in the r ig h t c o n fig u ra tio n , the
id e a tio n a l elem ents o f n a tu re and h is to ry co uld reveal th e tr u th o f
m od ern re a lity , its tra n sito rin e ss as w e ll as its p rim itiv e stage.
I t was c ru c ia l to B e n ja m in ’s th e o ry th a t fo r the purposes o f p h ilo ­
soph ica l u n d e rs ta n d in g there was no absolute, ca te g o rica l d is ­
tin c tio n betw een te ch n o lo g y and n a tu re — L u d w ig K la ge s was
“ re a c tio n a ry ” to suggest o th e rw ise .40 T e ch n o lo g y was o f course
so cia lly and h is to ric a lly p ro du ced , w h ic h is w h y G eorg L uka cs
term ed i t “ second n a tu re ,” in o rd e r to c ritic iz e the p re s u m p tio n
th a t the w o rld in its g ive n fo rm was “ n a tu ra l” in the o n to lo g ic a l
sense. In the Passagen-Werk, L u k a c s ’ concept o f “ second n a tu re ”
does n o t p la y a role, how ever, a lth o u g h B e n ja m in was fa m ilia r w ith
69__________________________

3 N a tu ral H istory: Fossil

3.4 “ T h e F a m ily G ro up o f the K a ta rrh in e n ,” a rdst unknow n, in E. Heckel, D ie naturliche

Schopfongsgeschickte, 1902.
70
Part I I

the la tte r ’s w ritin g s (an d a lth o u g h A d o rn o used th is te rm , a ckn o w ­

le d g in g Lukacs as his so urce.)41 T h e concept o f “ second n a tu re ,”
a lth o u g h in te n tio n a lly a M a r x is t category, was u nd ersto od by
Lukacs w ith in a s tro n g ly H e g e lia n p h ilo s o p h ic a l fra m e .42 Second
n a tu re was a lienated and re ifie d s u b je c tiv ity , a w o rld created by
hum ans w h o d id n o t recognize i t as th e ir ow n. F o r B e n ja m in , in
co ntrast, m a te ria l n a tu re was “ o th e r” th a n the subject, and th is
rem ain ed tru e no m a tte r h o w m u ch h u m a n la b o r had been invested
in it. Y e t m o d e rn ity m a rke d a ra d ic a l break in its fo rm . T h e p a ra ­
d ox was th a t predicates u s u a lly a ttrib u te d to the o ld , o rg a n ic
n a tu re — p ro d u c tiv ity and tra n sito rin e ss as w e ll as decay and
e x tin c tio n — w hen used to describe the fworganic “ new n a tu re ” th a t
was the p ro d u c t o f in d u s tria lis m , nam ed precisely w h a t was r a d i­
c a lly new a b o u t it.
B e n ja m in d id n o t use the te rm “ new n a tu re ,” w h ic h I have
adopted fo r in te rp re tiv e c la rity , and w h ic h strikes me as m ore accu­
rate th a n , say, the M a r x is t te rm “ p ro d u c tiv e forces,” because B en­
ja m in m e a n t by i t n o t ju s t in d u s tria l technology b u t the e n tire
w o rld o f m a tte r (in c lu d in g h u m a n beings) as it has been tra n s ­
fo rm e d b y th a t te ch n o lo g y.43 T h e re have been, then, tw o epochs o f
n a tu re . T h e firs t evolved s lo w ly over m illio n s o f years; the second,
o u r ow n, began w ith the in d u s tria l re v o lu tio n , and changes its face
d a ily . T h is new n a tu re , its pow ers s till u n kn o w n , can a p p ea r o m i­
nous and te rrify in g to the firs t generations c o n fro n tin g it, g iven
“ 'the ve ry p rim itiv e fo rm o f the ideas o f these g e n e ra tio n s” 44 w ho
have ye t to le a rn to m aster, n o t th is n a tu re itse lf, b u t h u m a n ity ’ s
re la tio n s h ip to it. Such m aste ry dem ands b eing rece ptive to the
expressive p o w e r o f m a tte r, a m im e tic , n o t an in s tru m e n ta l s k ill;
and i t is the ce n tra l in te lle c tu a l task o f the m od ern era.
I n th is s till e a rly stage o f in d u s tria l n a tu re i t is no a c c id e n t th a t
e a rly m o d e rn ity feels an a ffin ity fo r the p rim itiv e and the a rch aic:
C lassical a n tiq u ity was a “ fa sh io n ” in the n in e te e n th c e n tu ry (as
we sh all see45); in B e n ja m in ’s o w n tim e “ p r im itiv is m ” was in
vogue. B u t it m u st also be em phasized th a t B e n ja m in id e n tifie s
o n ly w h a t is new in h is to ry as p re h is to ric . T h e co nce ptio n is d ia le c ­
tic a l. T h e re is no b io lo g ic a l o r o n to lo g ica l “ p rim itiv e n e s s ” th a t
defies h is to ric a l tra n s fo rm a tio n . H e c ritic iz e d e x p lic itly such a con­
te n tio n : “ T h e a rch a ic fo rm o f p re h is to ry w h ic h has been evoked in
every era, and m ost re c e n tly by J u n g , is the one th a t m akes illu s o ry
71_______________________
3 N a tu ra l H isto ry: Fossil

appearance in h is to ry a ll the m ore b lin d in g by assigning to i t

n a tu re as a h o m e .” 46

In the m id -th irtie s , B e n ja m in decided to in c lu d e a ctu a l images in

the Passagen-Werk. H e w ro te to G re te l K a rp lu s : ‘ ‘T h is is in fa ct new:
As a p a rt o f m y stu d y I am ta k in g notes on im p o rta n t and rare
im age m a te ria l. T h e book— th is m u ch I have kn o w n fo r some
tim e — can be fu rn ish e d w ith the m ost im p o rta n t illu s tra tiv e d o cu ­
m ents [ . . . ] . ” 47 F ro m M a y to S eptem ber 1935, and again in J a n u ­
a ry 1936, he w o rke d in the archives o f the Cabinet des estampes in the
B ib lio th e q u e N a tio n a le .—IfL su ch research in ic o n o g ra p h ic d o cu ­
m e n ta tio n was “ s till ra re ” am ong h is to ria n s ,48 i t was unh ea rd o f
a m ong p hiloso ph ers. B e n ja m in had copies m ade o f releva n t illu s ­
tra tio n s w h ic h he fo u n d there, keeping th e m in his Paris a p a rtm e n t
as “ a k in d o f a lb u m .” 49
T h e a lb u m appears to have been lo s t.50 I t makes little difference,
how ever, fo r B e n ja m in ’s p h ilo s o p h ic a l co nce ptio n w h e th e r the
“ im ages” o f the n in etee nth c e n tu ry w h ic h he fo un d fo r the p ro je c t
w ere p ic to r ia lly o r v e rb a lly represented. W h ic h e v e r fo rm th ey took,
such im ages w ere the concrete, “ sm a ll, p a rtic u la r m om en ts” in
w h ic h the “ to ta l h is to ric a l e ven t” was to be discovered,51 the “ per­
c e p tib le u r-p h e n o m e n o n [ Urphanomen] 52 in w h ic h the o rig in s o f the
present co u ld be fo un d. B e n ja m in has b orro w e d the te rm u r-
phe no m e no n fro m G oethe’ s w ritin g s on the m o rp h o lo g y o f n atu re .
G oethe observed th a t whereas in the science o f physics o r c h e m is try
the o b je ct o f know ledge was a co g n itive a b stra ctio n co n s titu te d b y
the subject, in b io lo g ic a l science i t was perceived im m e d ia te ly , in
the a ct o f “ irre d u c ib le o b se rv a tio n .” 53 T h e objective law s and
re g u la ritie s o f liv in g organism s w ere g ra p h ic a lly v is ib le in th e ir
s tru c tu ra l fo rm s. G oethe believed the a rc h e ty p a l u r-fo rm s o f these
stru c tu re s revealed the essence o f b io lo g ic a l life , and m oreover, th a t
th e y existed e m p iric a lly , as one p la n t o r a n im a l am ong others, p ro ­
v id in g concrete m a te ria liz a tio n s o f the P la to n ic ideas. I n 1918,
B e n ja m in w ro te th a t w h a t G oethe called u r-p h e n o m o n a w ere n o t
sym bols in the sense o f p oe tic analogies, b u t, ra th e r, “ ide al sym ­
bols” in w h ic h the ide al essences o f w h ic h P la to spoke appeared in
sensual fo rm s .54 G eorg S im m e l in his 1913 s tu d y o f G oethe de­
scribed the concept in d e ta il: