Reality and the Two Realisms: Mimesis in Auerbach, Lukács, and Handke

Two seemingly contradictory theories dominate literary debates on "realism": Lukács' (and Auerbach's) mode derives from 19th century models, whereas Brecht's (and Handke's) is closer to 20th century formalism. Whereas the former theory grounds itself in Hegel's argument that classical Homeric narration embodied an elevated portrayal of daily events-anchoring of a "konkretes Ideal" in an "äußerliche Realitat" (aesthetically equivalent to Goethe's symbol, "das Allgemeine im Besonderen," or in Lukacs' abbreviation, simply "Besonderheit" )-Handke's "realism" is analogous to Roman Jakobson's "metonymic" realism, a "defamiliarization" of 19th century models which stresses an anti-classical proliferation of "das Besondere" at the expense of any "Allgemeines." This emphasis in Handke on a host of "inessential" (metonymic, allegorical) details lies at the heart of the Beschreibungsrealismus of his Wunschlloses Unglück (1972), along with the book's outright parody of Lukácsian Erzählungsrealismus. Through the parody and other factors, however, we realize that neither "realism" can stand by itself: each, by implicitly repressing the other, implies the other, and the two are irrevocably bound together in a dialectic both historical (diachronic) and aesthetic (synchronic).