Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Musil Editions Used, with Abbreviations
- Introduction
- 1 Experimental Psychology: Musil's Academic Apprenticeship
- 2 Figure and Gestalt
- 3 Indeterminacy, Chance, and Singularity
- 4 Multiple Subjects: The Construction of a Hypothetical Narrative
- 5 Moosbrugger, Frauenzimmer, and the Law
- Conclusion
- Works Consulted
- Index
5 - Moosbrugger, Frauenzimmer, and the Law
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2013
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Musil Editions Used, with Abbreviations
- Introduction
- 1 Experimental Psychology: Musil's Academic Apprenticeship
- 2 Figure and Gestalt
- 3 Indeterminacy, Chance, and Singularity
- 4 Multiple Subjects: The Construction of a Hypothetical Narrative
- 5 Moosbrugger, Frauenzimmer, and the Law
- Conclusion
- Works Consulted
- Index
Summary
THE USUALLY STEADFAST DIOTIMA becomes quite irritated when her impertinent cousin Ulrich evokes the Frauenmörder Moosbrugger in her presence: “Why are you always talking about criminals? Crime seems to hold a special fascination for you. What do you suppose that means?”
Moosbrugger — the allegorical impersonation of Kakania — is introduced as someone who has captured Ulrich's attention despite the primitive voyeurism underlying the publicity of his case. It is shortly before the arrival of the first of three letters from Ulrich's father that we initially hear about the sex murderer. The letter reminds Ulrich of his social position as son of an established family. It therefore stands in immediate contrast to what was related about Ulrich's interest in Moosbrugger in the previous chapter. Ulrich pays heed to the father's admonition, but uses his visit to Count Stallburg to ask for clemency on Moosbrugger's behalf. It is worth noting that in the second letter, the father deals directly with Ulrich's fascination with the criminal by arguing for a very restrictive application of the insanity clause. Ulrich does not believe in the notion of guilt and personal accountability. He repeatedly states that the jurist's arcane debate about free will is incomprehensible, and he comes across as an ardent defender of social engineering:
Who could still be captivated by the thousand years of chatter about the meaning of good and evil when it turns out that they are not constants at all but functional values, so that the goodness of works depends on the psychotechnical skills with which people's qualities are exploited?
(MWQ 33)- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Boydell & BrewerPrint publication year: 2005