Eghigian, Greg.  "From Soma to Polis: Pain and Suffering in
Modern German National Identity."  Paper at the Symposium on Pain
& Suffering in History, UCLA., 13-14 March 1998.


     Greg Eghigian wrote this selection to explore how pain and

suffering have been enlisted for political causes.  While

dissecting his specimen, the German National identity, Eghigian's

focus  attracts attention to a larger issue: the relationship of

the individuals' bodies to the `body politic.'  Following the

lead of Roy Porter, Eghigian researches "the ways in which

political authority has actually treated the human body."1  This

exploration lends evidence to criticism of the yth of a [and]

independent society governed by a minimalist state(1)."  To the

contrary, Modern German National identity (and by extension other

states with liberal foundation myths) requires a closely cultured

reciprocal integration between the nation and the individual

citizen.            Eghgian has an existing body of original work

on the German citizen and his bodily history. When giving

specific data or anecdotes Eghigian refers either to his own

published work or to primary documents directly concerning the

social pensioner administration (10-12).  The section on the

personal interaction between the physicians and the examined

potential pensioner is a good example of his direct access to

Bunderarchiv, governmental records.   Elsewhere where Eghigian

wants to develop more inclusive ideas he draws from a wide

assortment of secondary sources. The bulk of this selection is a

     synthesis of both canonical historiographical works (Foucault's

History of Sexuality, Bakhtin's Rabelais and His World as well as

newer works dealing specifically with the relatively new field of

bodily (corporeal?) history (Canning's Languages of Labor and

Gender from 1996).   In light of his use of his own direct

research and ability to interweave existing historical arguments,

this article might be described as a synthetic survey with his

own original research at the core.

     Eghigian opens up "From Soma to Polis" with a nod to the

older studies of the human body and the politea.  The author

mentions both the divine-right concept of the "body politic" and

"king's two bodies," critical pieces in the transition from

divine right to liberal states.  Eghigian holds that the other

main branch of corporeal history has been "the uses to which

bodies have been put in the service of that polity (1)."  This

last bit is important, as it allows the author to later contrast

his own findings that the binding of citizen to state meant the

state was also beholden to the citizen.  Using modern-scale  war

as a key element, Eghigian notes that national mobilization to a

"massacre" requires a new bond to replace the old bond with the

Divine Right monarch (2).

     Eghigian makes the point that Germany had a particularly

complex enmeshment with its citizens that included "a dizzying

array of economic, household, moral, medical, educational and

religious affairs and practices (3)."  The German peculiarity of

a German "ethnic nationalism" lends itself to a body politic that

has "resurfaced with a vengeance", foreshadowing atrocities to

come (3,4).

     Here Eghigian makes a most original contribution: he

explicitly states that the interwoven relationship between the

state and citizen are not one-way affairs.  The state and its

institutions  "always act within society".  The author blames

over-reliance on bureaucratic and professional documents for an

artificially quiet version of a realistically "polyvocal"

discourse (5).  Eghigian writes that pain is the most apparent

way that individuals use their bodies for political purposes.

Pain acts as in inter- and intra-personal bridge which downplays

the Western (Gnostic?) bifurcated nature of mind and body.  Pain

and suffering acting as a community "cement" give the reader

access to "the relationship between the body and the modern

politics of the nation. (6). This segue allows Eghigian to

address his original research into the German disability

insurance.

     Eghigian begins the next section with a portrait of the

modern European as an impatient patient willing to take an active

role in his treatment.2  Seeing his illness as inextricably

linked to his spiritual life made illness and pain a profoundly

subjective experience for sufferer.    Quickly alluding to the

vacuum left by the disappearance of feudal structure in Germany,

Eghigian introduces the topic of state-sponsored disability

     pensions. The new social insurance law demonstrated the

essentially different approaches to pain and suffering from the

citizens' and state's points of view.  While the citizen still

carried the subjective experience of pain and suffering with him,

the new law required him to somehow translate that subjective

pain into objective disability that fit into the official

taxonomy.  This way the patient could preserve his sense of honor

and position.

     Eghigian notes that pensioners did not accept this

arrangement without protest.  Mercy, it seems, may have been

available under feudal society but under a bureaucracy the only

work-around was an appeal if the judgement when unfavorably. The

applicants appealed actively, in 10-20% of cases (12); these

appeals could drag on for years.  The rationalization of the

application process paradoxically enhanced a subjective awareness

of the pensioner's suffering (14).

     In the next section Eghigian addresses "the sanctification

of collective suffering (14)."  The World War I pro-sacrifice

propaganda of the German government elicited, in effect, a favor

from the citizenry, a favor which could be redeemed at a later

date.  To illustrate the complication in the matter, the author

demonstrates that the German Opfer, for example, implies

"sacrifice", "victim", and "casualty (15)."  This double-meaning

would have a major influence on how the Germans reacted to post-

World War I hardship.  As Eghigian demonstrates, the nation-state

fell into a trap of its own making "since it had been in the name

of the Reich that Germans had been called on to make their

sacrifices in the first place (15)."  Economic instability added

to an already unmaintainable national position.  Suffering became

the new national currency, replacing the hyperinflated Weimar

currency.

     Next Eghigian addresses a backlash against this welfare

state, which was thought to be draining Germans of their natural

heroism.  "Pension neurosis" implicates the social welfare system

as a self-perpetuating problem (inherently "unsozial") rather

than a solution (18).   There was much concern that the

altruistically-intended program had gone horribly wrong and "was

having a corrupting influence on society in general (19)."  A

moral/cultural argument rather than a pragmatic one, this point

of view sought to return self-sufficiency to the individual and

family.

     Here that Eghigian re-frames eugenics as a product of the

"Weltanshauungskampf" discourse (17).  Nazi doctrine was

sympathetic to the sufferning, racially poor Teutons which shared

a common fate (21).  Much of this suffering, of course, was due

to parasites whose presence meant greater burder for the pure.

In addition, the doctrine glorified combat veterans over support

veterans and civilians.  Eghigian notes this is a transition from

"conventional principles of compensation" based on past earnings

over to "militarized values of courage, heroism, and sacrifice.

(22).  He then adds a short section on eugenics and the Final

Solution.

     In the last sections the Author refers to a post-World War

II shift in civil currency away from the memory of martial

suffering over to "the consumerist ideals of entitlement,

satisfaction and prosperity (24)".  He believes this new

worldview represents not only an amnesiac reaction to World War

II-era beliefs and actions but also a "distanciation from the

pain and suffering of previous decades (24)."  It is as if the

Weltanshauungskampf were re-decided again, this time leaning

toward a liberal, socialized state.

     Still, Eghigian closes with the suggestion that "morally

valorized attitudes about pain and suffering" figure importantly

in German society (25).  He highlights tensions between former

Eastern Germans and Western Germans, the latter of which wish to

see heroic triumph on the part of their recently-reunited

brethren.

     Eghigian seems to be stepping into the same river Roy Porter

describes in his "History of the Body" article.  Since our author

lists that work of Porter's as a reference, I believe Eghigian

was inspired to hang some theortetical flesh on the research he

had uncovered in the field of German Pensioners.  The result is

an interesting and useful model of how a modern nation-state and

its constituents are reciprocally-bound together.  I will admit I

had not thought explicitly about the nature of the demands

citizens can make on a state, particularly when the state finds

itself endebted to the citizenry after sacrifice on the latter's

part.  In addition, I find Eghigian brave to illustrate the

development of eugenic systems in pre-World War 2 Germany.3

I believe he has proved his thesis that pain and suffering can be

a useful indicator with which to study the citizen-state

relationship.

                                                       

     













     

1





               















                                                       jason carr

_______________________________
     1Porter, Roy.  "History of the Body," in Peter Burke, ed.
New Perspectives on Historical Writing.  Pennsylvania State
University Press, 1991.  p 225.

     2Perhaps this foreshadows the pensioners willingness and
ability to appeal their cases in front of a functionary.

     3Scientific research into genetics, particulary that of
identical twins, is seriously tainted by past association with
Nazis such as Mengele

1Explain the sources

http://www.mousetrap.net/~mouse/uta/