Arts, Faculty of
Central, Eastern, and Northern European Studies, Department of
DSpace
UBCV
Pathak, Sushant
Master of Arts - MA
University of British Columbia
This thesis explores how the perspectives of human characters in Juli Zehâs Unterleuten (2016) toward particular nonhuman entities can be understood as relationship-building agents rather than purely human-centered perceptions. While such perspectives are traditionally interpreted as human projections shaped by anthropomorphic cognition or cultural frameworks, this study argues that the role of nonhuman entities themselves in shaping and affording these perceptions warrants greater attention. Set in the fictional village of Unterleuten, the novel provides a rich ground for examining how human and nonhuman relationships are materially and affectively intertwined. Building up on the concepts of relationality, phenomenology, and sociomateriality, this thesis demonstrates that the charactersâ motivations are not merely products of personal histories or individual experiences, but are deeply influenced by their entanglements with the village environment, for instance the wind, forests, animals, and especially the village land. Furthermore, it investigates how these relationships are disrupted and transformed with the arrival of a renewable energy corporation, highlighting the dynamic interplay between human and nonhuman agencies within a shared ecological and social space.
MATERIAL-ECOCRITICAL RELATIONALITY IN JULI ZEHâS UNTERLEUTEN by SUSHANT PATHAK A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Germanic Studies) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) November 2025 © Sushant Pathak, 2025 ii The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, the thesis entitled: Material-Ecocritical Relationality in Juli Zehâs Unterleuten submitted by Sushant Pathak in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Germanic Studies Examining Committee: Markus Hallensleben, Associate Professor, German Studies, UBC Supervisor Kyle Frackman, Associate Professor, German Studies, UBC Supervisory Committee Member Thomas Kemple, Professor, German Studies, UBC Supervisory Committee Member iii Abstract This thesis explores how the perspectives of human characters in Juli Zehâs Unterleuten (2016) toward particular nonhuman entities can be understood as relationship-building agents rather than purely human-centered perceptions. While such perspectives are traditionally interpreted as human projections shaped by anthropomorphic cognition or cultural frameworks, this study argues that the role of nonhuman entities themselves in shaping and affording these perceptions warrants greater attention. Set in the fictional village of Unterleuten, the novel provides a rich ground for examining how human and nonhuman relationships are materially and affectively intertwined. Building up on the concepts of relationality, phenomenology, and sociomateriality, this thesis demonstrates that the charactersâ motivations are not merely products of personal histories or individual experiences, but are deeply influenced by their entanglements with the village environment, for instance the wind, forests, animals, and especially the village land. Furthermore, it investigates how these relationships are disrupted and transformed with the arrival of a renewable energy corporation, highlighting the dynamic interplay between human and nonhuman agencies within a shared ecological and social space. iv Lay Summary This thesis looks at how the characters in Juli Zehâs novel Unterleuten (2016) relate to the natural world around themâfor instance land, wind, animals, and forestsâand how these relationships shape their lives. The story takes place in a small fictional village called Unterleuten, where the arrival of a renewable energy company planning to build a wind farm disrupts the everyday lives and relationships of the villagers. By examining how the charactersâ connections to the land and environment influence their decisions and conflicts, the thesis shows that human actions cannot be understood in isolation from the natural and material world around them. It highlights how both human and nonhuman actors participate in shaping the social and emotional life of this fictional village community. v Preface This thesis is original, unpublished, independent work by the author, Sushant Pathak. The use of Generative AI in this thesis was limited to the use of ChatGPT 5 for checking sentences and paragraphs for correctness and clarity. vi Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................. iii Lay Summary ................................................................................................................... iv Preface .................................................................................................................................v Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. vi Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1 â Introduction ...................................................................................................1 1.1. Relationality and its Relevance in Unterleuten .....................................................1 1.2. Thesis Argument: Human and Material-Nonhuman Relational Entanglements in Unterleuten ........................................................................................................5 1.3. Literature Review: Unterleuten from an Ecocritical Point of View ....................10 1.4. Chapter Overview ................................................................................................17 Chapter 2 â Juli Zeh and Unterleuten ............................................................................19 2.1. The Author: Juli Zeh ............................................................................................19 2.2. The Relevance of Zehâs Literature for Ecocritical Analysis ................................21 2.3. Introduction to the Novel Unterleuten .................................................................24 2.3.1. Summary of the Plot ..................................................................................24 2.3.2. Multi-Perspective Narrative Structure: Interpretability of Complex Relationships ..............................................................................................25 vii Chapter 3 â Theoretical Concepts and Methodology ...................................................31 3.1. Overview of the Main Concepts: Materiality, Relationality, and Sociomateriality ...................................................................................................31 3.2. Importance of Matter and Material Things ..........................................................32 3.3. Relationality through Phenomenology ................................................................35 3.4. Sociomateriality as Entanglement of the Human-Social and Nonhuman-Material .........................................................................................â¦38 3.5 Methodology Applied to the Novel ......................................................................40 Chapter 4 â Relational Material-Ecocritical Analysis: Neoliberal, Aesthetic, Utilitarian, and Affective Relationships with the Village Environment ......................43 4.1. Neoliberal Relations to the Village Land and Environment: Meiler, Pilz and Seidel ...................................................................................................................43 4.1.1. Konrad Meilerâs Relationship with the Village Land(scape) ....................43 4.1.2. Mr. Pilzâs Relationship with the Village Land ...........................................51 4.1.3. Arne Seidelâs Relationship with the Village Land .....................................57 4.2. Aesthetic and Utilitarian Relations to the Village Land and Environment: Franzen, Flieà and Gombrowski ..........................................................................61 4.2.1. Linda Franzenâs Relationship with the Village Land(scape) and Environment ...............................................................................................63 4.2.2. Gerhard FlieÃâs Relationship with the Village Land(scape) and Environment ...............................................................................................70 4.2.3. Rudolf Gombrowski Relationship with the Village Land .........................77 viii 4.3. Affective Relations to the Village Land and Environment: Kron and Kron-Hübschke ....................................................................................................82 4.3.1. Kronâs Relationship with the Village Land and Environment ...................83 4.3.2. Katherin Kron-Hübschkeâs Relationship with the Village Land and Environment ...............................................................................................89 Chapter 5 â Conclusion: Interpreting the Charactersâ Fates and the Novelâs Paratextual Framework ..................................................................................................98 5.1. Meiler, Pilz, and Seidel: Village Land as Investment Object and Environment as Resource ..........................................................................................................98 5.2. Franzen, FlieÃ, and Gombrowski: Village Land as Utilitarian Medium and Environment as Aestheticized Object ................................................................101 5.3. Kron and Kron-Hübschke: Village Land and Environment as Companion Beings .............................................................................................103 5.4. Character Fates at the End of the Novel: Gombrowskiâs and Kronâs Death, Seidelâs Liberation, Meilerâs Retreat, Franzenâs Disillusionment, FlieÃâs Collapse, Kron-Hübschkeâs Leadership, and Capitalismâs Victory ...................104 5.5. Final Conclusion: Land as the Ultimate Basis of the Village and its Relevance in the Novelâs Paratextual Framework .............................................107 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 110 ix Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge the many people and places that made the completion of this thesis possible. Firstly, I acknowledge that much of the research and writing for this thesis took place on the Vancouver campus of the University of British Columbia, situated on the traditional, ancestral, and unceded territory of the xÊ·mÉÎ¸kÊ·ÉyÌÉm (Musqueam) people. I am deeply grateful to have had the opportunity to study, research, work, and create lasting memories on this beautiful land. My deepest gratitude goes to my thesis committee members, without whom this project would not have been possible. To Markus Hallensleben, my supervisor â thank you for your guidance, patience, and clarity during times of confusion, and for supporting me throughout this entire process. To Kyle Frackman, whose thoughtful feedback and inspiring teaching have profoundly shaped me as a scholar and educator â I truly value your mentorship. To Thomas Kemple, who kindly stepped in as my third reader and offered invaluable insights and steady support during the most stressful final stages â thank you for your generosity and encouragement. I am sincerely thankful for the time, care, and belief each of my committee members invested in this thesis and in me as a student, researcher, and writer. It would be hypocritical of me â and contrary to the very spirit of my thesis â not to acknowledge the nonhuman entities that have supported, inspired, and comforted me along the way. The Walter C. Koerner Library has been my second home: a place of reading, hanging out, whiling, napping, and reflection. The UBC campus, the Pacific Spirit Regional Park, the North Shore Mountains, and many other more-than-human companions made Vancouver a home away x from home. Their quiet presence and enduring companionship sustained both the writing of this thesis and just existing as a person. I am also deeply thankful to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies and the Department of Central, Eastern, and Northern European Studies at the University of British Columbia. Their financial and institutional support allowed me to dedicate myself fully to my research and writing. In addition, I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to the CENES staff members â Ashley Samsone, Hillary Hurst, and Stephanie Kletas â for their constant support in all matters, big and small. It is because of their warmth, efficiency, and ever-welcoming presence that, as I speak on behalf of all my fellow graduate students in the department, we are able to focus fully on our studies and research. To my dear friends and colleagues, both in Pune and in Vancouver â this thesis exists because of you. I hold a special place in my heart for Braden Russell, John Oâ Hara, Susanna Cassisa, and Steve Commichau, who welcomed me with open arms, made Vancouver feel like home, and eventually became my second family. Your friendship, humor, and solidarity have made me a better writer and a better person. I am forever grateful. I would also like to thank Alexander Suyanto, Tamar Kugelmass, and Hamidreza Bandy, whose warmth, encouragement, and companionship in my later years at UBC helped me through the finish line. To my closest friends â Isabel Telleria, Abhay Kaushik, and Sonja Bialobzyski â thank you for being there for every celebration, breakdown, and long afternoons of working (followed by nights of drinking). To Niraja Patankar and Reva Teotia, my hiking companions and the people who listened to my broken Hindi-Marathi, thank you for walking beside me â literally and metaphorically â and for always creating space for shared reflection and laughter. And to Amit Jagtap, Rohan Patil, and Harsh Barde (Prince) back in Pune, thank you for your constant xi care, messages, and love across the distance. This thesis is as much yours as it is mine. I am endlessly grateful to each one of you. Finally, to my family â my greatest source of strength and grounding. To my Aai and Baba, Sonali, and Sudhir Pathak, your unwavering belief in me made this journey possible. To my brother Swanand Pathak and sister-in-law Tanmaya Atre, my family in Vancouver, thank you for making me feel at home even when home was far away. Your love and support have carried me through every challenge. 1 Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1. Relationality and its Relevance in Unterleuten Jeder glaubt, alles über alles und jeden zu wissen, während es in Wahrheit nur Milliarden von Geschichten sind, die wir uns pausenlos gegenseitig erzählen. Sie werden zu einem undurchdringlichen Netz aus Legenden, Anekdoten und Fiktionen, welches unsere Realität ausmacht. Gibt es überhaupt noch etwas anderes als Virtualität, wenn es doch vor allem der Dorffunk ist, der unser Denken, unsere Entscheidungen und Handlungen bestimmt?1 â Juli Zeh In a recent interview about her novel Unterleuten, Juli Zeh not only poses the explosive question concerning the existence of a single, universal truth, but also considers how an impenetrable network of stories and knowledges shapes human decisions and actions. Zeh emphasizes how her novels illustrate the individuality of a person while at the same time highlighting each personâs interconnectedness with the society they inhabit. In her discussion of Unterleuten, Zeh describes how her novels offer readers a space for reflection on life in the 21st century: GroÃe Erzählungen, die spannende Schicksale erzählen, die psychologisch sehr genau sind und doch immer auch etwas über die ganze Gesellschaft verraten. Das habe ich auch in âUnterleutenâ versucht: Alle Figuren sind ganz stark vom Zeitgeist beeinflusst, von der Epoche, in der wir leben. Ihre Welt ist geprägt vom Verlust echter Beziehungen. An einem Dorf kann man das sehr gut sehen: Es gibt in Wahrheit keine Gemeinschaft mehr, sondern nur noch eine Summe von Einzelwesen, die ihren Interessen nachgehen. Egal, ob sie sich mögen oder hassen â sie finden nicht mehr zueinander. Sie wissen nicht mehr, wie Loyalität funktioniert.2 Her description of the current society as a sum of singular individuals, each having their own interests, ties in very well with Andreas Reckwitzâs argument in Gesellschaft der Singularitäten. Reckwitzâs claim, that in striving for singularity, material gain has become a prominent cultural 1 See: âDer Roman,â Unterleuten, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.unterleuten.de/index.html#derRoman. 2 Juli Zeh, âInterview über ihren Roman âUnterleuten,ââ Penguin Random House, https://rhspecials.randomhouse.de/microsites/julizeh7/author.php, quoted in Heribert Tommek, âModernâepisches Erzählen in JuliâZehs Roman Unterleuten,â in Juli Zeh, Textâ+âKritik Sonderheft, ed. HeinzâPeter PreuÃer (Edition Textâ+âKritik, 2023), 23. 2 orientation for individuals who no longer seek solidarity, community and the common good.3 Anne Fuchs and Mary Cosgrove, in their manifesto for the relational turn in German studies, build on Reckwitzâs claim to propose relational modes of understanding contemporary human social life.4 They argue that relational conceptions of aspects within human life are necessary to understand our condition in the Anthropocene, arguing that modes of relationality should be explored as ethical and aesthetic practices that can steer us out of the impasse of inflated ideas of human agency and the unbridled techno-optimism that is looking for geo-engineered âsolutionsâ to the planetary crises. Our catastrophic times call for methodological receptivity and attention to notions of entanglement, co-dependency and living networks that draw on and produce affective, social and symbolic ties to people, other species and places.5 Their manifesto has been inspirational for my approach to Zehâs novel in this thesis, especially their focus on recovering imaginaries of relationality on the damaged planet in the Anthropocene. Rather than reiterating inflated ideas of human agency, they call attention to notions of entanglement, co-dependency, and ties that bind us to other species and places. Further in their manifesto, Fuchs and Cosgrove provisionally define relationality as an appreciation of and receptivity for the precariousness of life, thereby calling us to focus on the consequences of how we, humans, conceive of social life. Instead of fantasising a stable community, they encourage us to think of different modes of collaboration and ways of living together. The question of scale plays an important role in this notion of relationality, especially in analysing current communities and envisioning a different mode of collaboration. Instead of scaling oneâs perspective upwards towards ever greater expansion, they advocate relational 3 Peter Wagner, âSingularity: A New Key for the Sociological Diagnosis of the Present Time?â review of Die Gesellschaft der Singularitäten. Zum Strukturwandel der Moderne, by Andreas Reckwitz, European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie 59, no. 3 (2018): 524. 4 Anne Fuchs and MaryâCosgrove, âIntroduction: Manifesto for a Relational Turn,â Oxford German Studies 53, no.â1 (2024): 7, https://doi.org/10.1080/00787191.2024.2315909. 5 Fuchs and Cosgrove, âIntroduction: Manifesto for a Relational Turn,â 6. 3 approaches that favour smaller or even non-scalable measures which enable close attention and care.6 Juli Zehâs novel Unterleuten (2016) features detailed descriptions of different stories and perspective in a small German village that lend themselves to a relational approach to entanglements and co-dependencies within human and nonhuman networks.. The literary space that Zeh creates is valuable for analysing relations that can illustrate different ways of living in the world we inhabit today. In her Frankfurt Poetry Lecture, Juli Zeh considers how writers have a god-like ability to create lively literary worlds with language: â[w]er schreibt, schwingt sich auf zu einem Gott, der Welten erschafft, um sie erkennend überdauern zu können.â7 In her essay âAuf den Barrikaden oder hinterm Berg?â Zeh highlights the aim behind her writings as follows: âkeine Meinungen, sondern Ideen vermitteln und den Zugang zu einem nichtjournalistischen und trotzdem politischen Blick auf die Welt eröffnen.â8 Informed by these views, Unterleuten is thus advertised as a great social novel about the important questions of our time, offering readers a literary representation of contemporary society in the epic scope of 635 pages.9 The narrative revolves around a proposed wind park project on the outskirts of a small eastern Brandenburg village that shares its name with the novel. The project sparks contentious disputes among the villagers, particularly over the planned construction of a windmill farm in the area known as the Schiefe Kappe, adjacent to the village. The struggle to gain control of this land reveals not only the villagersâ interconnected histories, stories, and motivations but also their 6 Ibid., 7. 7 Juli Zeh, Treideln: Frankfurter Poetikvorlesungen, 1st ed. (Schöffling & Co., 2013), 102-103. 8 Juli Zeh, âAuf den Barrikaden oder hinter dem Berg: Die jungen Schriftsteller und die Politik,â in Deutschland denken: Beiträge für die reflektierte Republik, ed. Undine Ruge and Daniel Morat (VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2005), 28. 9 âUnterleuten,â Juli Zeh, Penguin Random House, accessed September 8, 2025, https://specials.penguinrandomhouse.de/microsites/julizeh7/details.php?isbn=978-3-630-87487-6. 4 entanglements with nonhuman entities such as the village land, its surrounding landscape and forest. Some scholars have argued that Unterleuten describes and reflects a macrocosm of the world within a smaller village microcosm: âMikrokosmos des Dorfes nicht weniger undurchsichtig ist als der Makrokosmos der sich in globalen Zusammenhängen befindenden Gesellschaften des 21. Jahrhunderts.â10 In this sense, unlike a big city, a small village offers a graspable literary space to show and understand the problems of a global macrocosm. According to Marcus Twellmann, Unterleuten is different than the idyllic image represented by most literature on the countryside. It provides insight into society as a whole, because it deals with counter-images of the idyllic countryside in which experiences of unease are condensed. It is connected to social practices of contemporary western society as a whole and thus sheds light on peopleâs actions as a kind of social commentary.11 The novel proves to be a valuable piece of literature for a relational approach âthat challenges the impoverished imagination of the type of ârealistâ political discourse which jealously guards the inalienable right to transform everything into profit and serves the damaged and damaging status quo.â12 In part two of their manifesto for a relational turn, Fuchs and Cosgrove highlight the need to cultivate âimaginaries of relationality to overcome the impasse of the modern conception of the sovereign and autonomous human as supreme director of life on the planet.â13 Referring to anthropologist Tim Ingold, they acknowledge that a relational approach to art and literature can shed more light on the different connections within human social life, nevertheless, 10 Lars Richter, âJuli Zeh: Literatur und Engagement unter Leuten,â in Protest und Verweigerung / Protest and Refusal, ed. Sonja E. Klocke and Hans Adler (Brill, 2019), 148. 11 Marcus Twellmann, âIdyll aktuell. Was eine Geschichte vom Dorf über die Gesellschaft verrät,â Merkur, no. 805 (June 2016): 72. 12 Fuchs and Cosgrove, âIntroduction: Manifesto for a Relational Turn,â 9. 13 Anne Fuchs and MaryâCosgrove, âIntroduction: For a Relational Turn, Part Two,â Oxford German Studies 53, no.â3 (2024): 265, https://doi.org/10.1080/00787191.2024.2395189. 5 cannot fully account for the domain of politics and sciences.14 Limited within the field of literary studies, this thesis does not aim to make claims outside of this literary space. However, this thesis also poses a number of rather ecological questions such as: how do humans relate to other nonhuman entities? What consequences do these relationships entail? How do these relationships influence human actions? How can we relate differently in this era of environmental catastrophes? The relational turn provides a sharp lens for answering these questions from different thematic angles. 1.2. Thesis Argument: Human and Material-Nonhuman Relational Entanglements in Unterleuten Karen Barad, in her article on âPosthumanist Performativity,â states that â[l]anguage matters. Discourse matters. Culture matters. There is an important sense in which the only thing that does not seem to matter anymore is matter.â15 This statement underscores the role of nonhuman material âthingsâ within human social life. Although Barad conceives of matter not as a fixed substance but as a becoming, a process of congealing agencies, this thesis focuses on the physical materiality of nonhuman entities, that is, their quality or character of being material or composed of matter.16 As Paul Carlile et al., echoing Barardâs ironic comment, assert, insofar as matter does matter, it creates consequences for human social life. In their article, Carlile and colleagues argue for a stronger engagement with the ethical dimensions of material relationships. 14 Ibid., 266. 15 Karen Barad, âPosthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter,â Signs 28, no. 3 (2003): 801. 16 Oxford English Dictionary, âmatter (n.1), sense III.18.a,â September 2025, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/4931869438. 6 One of their central claims is that humans must free themselves from the assumption of being ontologically distinct from ânature,â thereby emphasizing the importance of âstuffâ or matter in shaping human social life.17 This thesis assumes a similar perspective by interpreting the role of nonhuman material entities as closely entangled with the human characters in Juli Zehâs Unterleuten. Answering Fuchsâs and Cosgroveâs call to âengender a correspondence with colleagues and students about relationality as a wide range of open-ended, dialogic poetics that explore shared life on our âhuman disturbed earth,ââ18 this thesis analyses the entanglements of human and nonhuman material entitiesâsuch as land, landscape, and forestâin Unterleuten through a relational perspective. The aim is to illuminate the significance of how human characters relate to nonhuman material entities and how these relations shape the plot of the novel. This approach assumes that nonhuman entities are active insofar as they create affordances for human characters. James Gibson defines affordances as properties of the environment that generate possibilities for actionâwhat the environment âoffersâ to humans (and by extension to nonhumans as well). Affordances thus imply a complementarity between humans and their environment, a perspective this thesis applies to an analysis of the narrative of Unterleuten.19 However, the concept of affordances is not taken up here in the sense of being a precise reversal of the conventional subject-object relationshipâin other words, the idea that objects can act like subjects and that subjects can be acted upon like objects. Instead, consider Tim Ingoldâs 17 Paul R. Carlile, Davide Nicolini, Ann Langley, and Haridimos Tsoukas, âHow Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies: Introducing the Third Volume of Perspectives on Organization Studies,â in How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies, ed. Paul R. Carlile, Davide Nicolini, Ann Langley, and Haridimos Tsoukas (Oxford University Press, 2013), 3. 18 Fuchs and Cosgrove, âIntroduction: For a Relational Turn, Part Two,â 267. 19 James J. Gibson, The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition (Psychology Press, 2015), 119. 7 example of a person flying a kite: flyer and kite should be understood not as interacting entities that alternately play agent to the other as patient, but as trajectories of movement, responding to one another in counterpoint, alternately as melody and refrain.20 The relational approach developed here proves fruitful in helping us understand these affordances, as Ingold has put forth, as responses to one another in counterpoint. Barad refers to this complexity of agency or actions in her monograph Meeting the Universe Halfway. Barad argues that materiality should not be understood as fixed or self-contained, but as fundamentally performative and relational. She replaces the notion of discrete atoms or particles as the foundation of reality with the concept of âintra-actionââthe entangled processes through which entities come into being through their relations. Put differently, Barad suggests that everything in existence is constituted from the same abstract âstuff,â emerging not in isolation but through interconnectedness. She emphasises the aspects of relationality and materiality in formulating her concept of âintra-actionâ: The neologism âintra-actionâ signifies the mutual constitution of entangled agencies. That is, in contrast to the usual âinteractionâ which assumes that there are separate individual agencies that precede their interaction, the notion of intra-action recognizes that distinct agencies do not precede, but rather emerge through, their intra-action. It is important to note that the âdistinctâ agencies are only distinct in a relational, not absolute, sense, that is, agencies are only distinct in relation to their mutual entanglement; they donât exist as individual elements.21 Gibson, in his conceptualisation of affordances, acknowledges that the values and meanings of things in the environment are external to the perceiver and can be directly perceived. Hence, although nonhuman entities play an active role in shaping relationships with humans, it is ultimately through the human perspective that these relationships become interpretable. This is 20 Tim Ingold, âThe Textility of Making,â Cambridge Journal of Economics 34, no. 1 (2010): 96, https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bep042. 21 Karen Barad, Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning (Duke University Press, 2007), 33. 8 especially true, and indeed necessary, in the literary realm, where the narrative space is itself a human creation. Unterleuten, with its multi-perspective narrative structure, proves to be an excellent example for applying this approach. In order to interpret these perceptions as relationships, this thesis will consider the contributions of relational phenomenology and the concept of Lebenswelt. It is important to note that while an approach based on the concept of affordances highlights the entangled nature of material things and human social life, it is nevertheless rooted in a capitalist framework while reducing material things to their utility for humans. Acknowledging the role of material things in building these perspectives frees us from assuming their characteristic passivity as conventional understood within a capitalistic perspective. Hence, the concept of affordances remains a useful concept for supporting the thesis argument. In the novel, for example, the clean energy firm Vento Direct proposes establishing a wind farm on the Schiefe Kappe (the land under consideration). The ensuing competition among the villagers to gain control of this land reveals interconnected histories, stories, and motivations, as well as entanglements with nonhuman entities as the land, as landscape, and as forest surrounding the village. Although three of the protagonists are most directly involved in the contest over the land, the novelâs multi-perspectival narrative structure emphasizes the broader interconnectedness of all residents. These three competing antagonists have distinct motivations: Gombrowski, a long-established landowner and manager of the villageâs former collective farm, whose family has deep roots in Unterleuten; Linda Franzen, a newcomer from western Germany seeking to establish a horse farm; and Konrad Meiler, a real estate investor from Ingolstadt who once purchased local land at low prices and has since driven up leasing costs. Each relates differently to the land, landscape, forest, wind, and other nonhuman entities. 9 Building on these contrasting perspectives, the novel Unterleuten has often been described as ambivalent: narratively, in its lack of a clear protagonist, and politically, in its refusal to directly engage questions of wind energy, countryside versus city, and other contemporary debates, instead presenting them as a backdrop. This thesis argues, however, that the novelâs plot is more accurately understood as being driven by the relationships between human characters and nonhuman entities. In considering the novelâs political relevance, this thesis argues that by depicting characters whose relationships to the environment are not reducible to capitalist modes of commodification or utilitarianism, the novel illustrates the possibility of more relational ways of living within a more-than-human world. The central aim of this thesis is to explore how the perspectives of the human characters in Unterleuten toward particular nonhuman entities can be understood as relationship-building agents rather than as purely human-centered perceptions. Traditionally, such perspectives are interpreted as human projections, shaped by anthropomorphic cognition or cultural frameworks. This thesis, however, argues that the role of nonhuman entities themselves in shaping and affording such perceptions should not be overlooked. The charactersâ motivations are not simply the result of their personal histories or experiences; instead, they are deeply influenced by their interactions with the material environment of the village and by how these relationships shift with the arrival of Vento Direct. Within these interactions, the material elements hold significant weight, as they actively afford possibilities that enable the characters to form and sustain particular relationships and outlooks. While many of these relationships are framed within a capitalist logic that reduces nonhuman entities to monetary or utilitarian value, the novelâs narrative structure simultaneously demonstrates how materiality itself plays a crucial role in shaping such perspectives. Characters 10 who embody this utilitarian mode of relatingâMeiler, Gombrowski, Franzen, and FlieÃâare ultimately met with misfortune in the form of death, financial ruin, or injury. By contrast, the two figures âKron and Kathrin Kron-Hübschkeâ who represent alternative, non-utilitarian ways of relating to the environment manage to escape such destructive consequences. Against the backdrop of a relational approach to literature, this thesis seeks to address three central questions: 1) How are the charactersâ relationships with nonhuman entities narratively structured in the novel? 2) How do these relationships drive the plot shaping or influencing the actions of the human characters? 3) How does the novel depict alternative ways of relating to the environment beyond a capitalist perspective? 1.3. Literature Review: Unterleuten from an Ecocritical Point of View Unterleuten has attracted extensive scholarly attention, with critics examining a wide range of themes: the village-city divide, gender and spatial dichotomies, the novel as a literary seismograph of German reality, its narrative structure and style, the representation of democracy, as well as the role of conflict and violence in shaping communal life. Other studies have highlighted its sociopolitical commentary, its engagement with questions of memory and identity, and its function as a mirror of contemporary debates about rural transformation and globalization.22 22 See Natalie Moser, âDorfroman oder urban Legend? Zur Funktion der Stadt-Dorf-Differenz in Juli Zehs Unterleuten,â in Ãber Land: Aktuelle literatur- und kulturwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf Dorf und Ländlichkeit, ed. Magdalena MarszaÅek, Werner Nell, and Marc Weiland (transcript Verlag, 2018), 127-140; Natalie Moser, âChoose any fighter! Das Spiel mit Geschlechter- und Raumdichotomien in Juli Zehs Dorfromanen,â in Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, ed. Erik Schilling (J.B. Metzler, 2024), 169-185; Lisa-Marie Strehle, âDas Dorf als literarischer Seismograph der Gegenwart? Juli Zehs Unterleuten (2016) und Lukas Rietzschels Mit der Faust in die Welt schlagen (2018),â in Tendenzen der Gegenwartsliteratur. Literaturwissenschaftliche und literaturdidaktische Perspektiven, ed. Marijana JeleÄ (Peter Lang, 2019), 33-49; Carolin Kull, ââDenken heiÃtâ¦â. Demokratiereflexionen in Juli Zehs Romanen Spieltrieb und Unterleuten,â in Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, ed. 11 While the sheer volume of scholarship reflects the novelâs popularity and its rich potential for literary analysis, a comprehensive review of all contributions would not be productive here and lies beyond the scope of this study. Instead, because this work responds to a very specific absence in the scholarship, the following section will concentrate on the limited research that has engaged with Unterleuten from an ecocritical perspective. This review concentrates on one article and six book chapters that engage with Unterleuten from an ecocritical perspective and are particularly relevant for positioning this thesis within the novelâs potential contribution to the environmental-studies discourse. The following works are presented in the order of their relevance to this thesis, reflecting the degree to which each contributes to its conceptual and analytical framework: 1. Evi Zemanek â âIm Angesicht des Klimawandels: Ãkologisches Engagement oder Zeitgeist-Literatur? Juli Zehs Kinderbücher Das Land der Menschen und Alle Jahre wieder im Vergleich zu den Bestsellern Unterleuten und Zwischen Welten.â 2. Shreya Gaikwad â âHuman-Animal Conflict for Habitat in Juli Zehâs Unterleuten.â 3. Anke Biendarra â âDie Welt als Dorf: Neue Heimatromane von Dörte Hansen und Juli Zeh aus ecocritical Perspektive.â 4. Maria Stehle â âLandscapes: Infrastructures, Power Topographies, and Feral Gardens in Juli Zehâs Unterleuten (2016), Valeska Grisebachâs Western (2017), and Anna Sofie Hartmannâs Giraffe (2019).â 5. Necia Chronister â âHome in the East as Corporate Overlord: Juli Zehâs Unterleuten (2016).â Erik Schilling (J.B. Metzler, 2024), 207-220. Magdalena Specht, âPerspektivierung von Gewalt. Ein Vergleich von Juli Zehs Unterleuten und Ãber Menschen,â in Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, ed. Erik Schilling (J.B. Metzler, 2024), 187-205. 12 6. Julia Stetter â âPolyvalente Perspektiven auf das Land in Juli Zehs Roman Unterleuten und dessen ZDF-Adaption.â 7. Necia Chronister â âJuli Zehâs Landscapes of the Capitalocene.â Evi Zemanekâs volume chapter âIm Angesicht des Klimawandels,â featured in Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement (2024), explores how Juli Zehâs works engage with ecological themes, asking whether they embody genuine environmental commitment or simply reflect the cultural Zeitgeist. While Zehâs widely read novels Unterleuten and Zwischen Welten address debates on climate change and energy transition, they are not generally received as ecological literature. In contrast, her childrenâs books Das Land der Menschen and Alle Jahre wieder symbolically reframe traditional genres such as the winter tale and Christmas story in light of global warming and renewable energy. Zemanek argues that ecological transformation permeates the lived experiences of characters across all four works, even when not explicitly foregrounded. Zemanek thereby asks the question whether these works foster ecological consciousness or simply mirror cultural anxieties? By comparing adult and childrenâs literature, Zemanek shows how climate change seeps into storytelling in both overt and subtle ways, situating Zehâs works within ongoing debates about the place of eco-literature between activism and cultural reflection.23 Shreya Gaikwadâs volume chapter âHuman-Animal Conflict for Habitat in Juli Zeh's Unterleutenâ featured in Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion (2024) investigates how Zehâs novel dramatizes not only interpersonal tensions within a Brandenburg village but also the entangled relationships between humans and nonhuman species, especially endangered birds 23 Evi Zemanek, âIm Angesicht des Klimawandels: Ãkologisches Engagement oder Zeitgeist-Literatur? Juli Zehs Kinderbücher Das Land der Menschen und Alle Jahre wieder im Vergleich zu den Bestsellern Unterleuten und Zwischen Welten,â in Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, ed. Erik Schilling (J.B. Metzler, 2024), 143â167. 13 âKampfläuferâ whose habitats are threatened by the construction of wind turbines. The chapter draws on concepts from ecocriticism, which examines how literature represents environmental concerns, and literary animal studies, which interrogate the cultural and ethical positioning of animals in human narratives. Gaikwad highlights how Unterleuten reflects the anthropocentric bias of rural development policies, where land is framed primarily as a human resource, relegating animals to the role of either obstacles to progress or passive victims. By foregrounding the notion of shared habitat, the chapter engages with theoretical discussions about multispecies coexistence and the ethics of more-than-human communities. The chapter links Zehâs narrative to thinkers such as Donna Haraway and Bruno Latour, who emphasize entanglements between humans, animals, and environments. This theoretical lens allows Gaikwad to show how Unterleuten complicates simplistic narratives of human-centered progress, transforming it into a microcosm of broader ecological and ethical conflicts. Her analysis thus deepens Zeh scholarship by demonstrating that the novelâs conflicts extend beyond social and economic disputes to include fundamental questions of ecological justice and interspecies relations.24 Anke S. Biendarraâs article âDie Welt als Dorf: Neue Heimatromane von Dörte Hansen und Juli Zeh aus ecocritical Perspektiveâ (2022) compares Hansenâs Mittagsstunde and Zehâs Unterleuten as examples of a new kind of Heimatroman that no longer idealizes the countryside but instead highlights its role in the Anthropocene. Biendarra shows how natural forces such as weather, landscapes, renewable energy, and environmental protection not only drive the plots but also reveal the charactersâ deep entanglement with their surroundings. Drawing on concepts like solastalgia, the unease caused by environmental change, Biendarra argues that these novels 24 Shreya Gaikwad, âHuman-Animal Conflict for Habitat in Juli Zeh's Unterleuten,â in Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion, ed. Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter (De Gruyter, 2024), 101â120. 14 confront the ecological crises brought about by human exploitation of nature while also offering aesthetic reflections that could help reframe our thinking about climate change. In doing so, she positions contemporary Heimat literature as a site where ecological and cultural transformations converge, turning familiar rural settings into spaces of crisis and negotiation rather than nostalgia.25 Maria Stehleâs chapter âLandscapes: Infrastructures, Power Topographies, and Feral Gardensâ (2023) (Plants, Places, and Power. Toward Social and Ecological Justice in German Literature and Film 2023) situates Juli Zehâs Unterleuten alongside Valeska Grisebachâs Western and Anna Sofie Hartmannâs Giraffe to show how rural landscapes are reshaped by economic, ecological, and political pressures. In Stehleâs reading of Unterleuten, the village terrain is not a neutral backdrop, but a contested field structured by competing infrastructures such as wind farms, roads, and property boundaries, which expose what she calls ââpower topographiesââ: layers of inequality and control inscribed into the land itself. Stehle pays close attention to how Zeh narrates conflicts around wind energy, bird habitats, and land ownership, demonstrating that these disputes map directly onto deeper questions of globalization, neoliberal governance, and environmental degradation in the 21st century. At the same time, she contrasts these âwounded landscapesâ with moments where nature reclaims abandoned gardens and fields, reading them as âferal gardensâ that gesture toward resilience and alternative modes of inhabiting space. This dual lens allows her to show how the novel embodies both the destructive impact of capitalist infrastructures and the possibility of ecological renewal, situating Unterleuten as a text that visualizes the entanglement of ecology, economy, and politics in contemporary rural Europe. 25 Anke S. Biendarra, âDie Welt als Dorf: Neue Heimatromane von Dörte Hansen und Juli Zeh aus ecocritical Perspektive,â Monatshefte 114, no. 4 (2022): 574â597. 15 Stehleâs contribution underscores that in Unterleuten, the landscape itself is a central character, embodying conflict, memory, and the potential for change.26 Necia Chronisterâs book chapter âHome in the East as Corporate Overlord: Juli Zehâs Unterleuten (2016)â (Domestic Disputes: Examining Discourses of Home and Property in the Former East Germany 2021) examines how Zehâs novel links questions of belonging, property, and power in post-Wende rural Brandenburg. She shows that the idea of âhomeâ in Unterleuten is deeply unsettled: what appears at first as a tight-knit village community is in fact shaped by neoliberal forces such as real estate markets, corporate development projects, and transnational capital. Chronister employs the concept of sociomateriality to highlight how home is not just a symbolic or emotional construct but is always bound up with material infrastructuresâhouses, land, wind farms, and business venturesâthat structure social life and power dynamics. In Unterleuten, the intrusion of a corporate wind farm project makes visible this entanglement of the social and the material, revealing how property disputes and questions of ownership are inseparable from the lived experience of community and identity. By focusing on these sociomaterial entanglements, Chronister demonstrates how Zeh critiques the collision between intimate attachments to place and the corporate logics that dominate them, situating the novel within wider debates about Heimat, neoliberalism, and the reconfiguration of âhomeâ in the former East.27 Julia Stetterâs volume chapter âPolyvalente Perspektiven auf das Land in Juli Zehs Roman Unterleuten und dessen ZDF-Adaptionâ featured in Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, 2024), 26 Maria Stehle, Plants, Places, and Power: Toward Social and Ecological Justice in German Literature and Film (Camden House, 2023), 26â57. 27 Necia Chronister, Domestic Disputes: Examining Discourses of Home and Property in the Former East Germany (De Gruyter, 2021), 181â199, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110673975-009. 16 examines how both the novel and its TV adaptation construct competing images of the countryside. She argues that Zehâs multi-perspectival narrative voice and the filmâs use of typified characters, sharp contrasts, and added dialogue scenes work together to dismantle the idea of a single, coherent view of rural life. Instead, Unterleuten and its ZDF adaptation stage three competing perspectives: a neoliberal vision tied to profit and development, a post-material academic perspective shaped by ecological and cultural values, and a Heimat-centered view rooted in tradition and local attachment. Across both versions, she identifies a fundamental deconstruction of any singular, âauthenticâ rural viewpoint; the land emerges as a contested space where competing ideologies and lifestyles collide. Stetterâs analysis thus underscores how Unterleuten in both literary and televisual form becomes a cultural text about the countryside as a site of negotiationâbetween economic exploitation, ecological ethics, and nostalgic attachments to Heimat.28 Lastly, Necia Chronisterâs volume chapter, âJuli Zehâs Landscapes of the Capitalocene,â featured in Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion (2024), offers a nuanced exploration of how Zehâs novels engage with environmental and capitalist themes. Chronister examines Zehâs portrayal of landscapes as active agents that shape and are shaped by human actions, particularly in the context of the Capitaloceneâa term that underscores the epoch defined by capitalist exploitation of the environment. Through this lens, Chronister analyzes how Zehâs characters interact with their surroundings, often attempting to escape or resist the encroachment of capitalist forces, yet finding themselves invariably entangled in them. This interplay reflects a critical commentary on the limitations of individual agency within larger systemic structures. Chronisterâs work 28 Julia Stetter, âPolyvalente Perspektiven auf das Land in Juli Zehs Roman Unterleuten und dessen ZDF-Adaption,â in Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, ed. Erik Schilling (J.B. Metzler, 2024), 263â276. 17 contributes to a deeper understanding of Zehâs literary engagement with contemporary ecological and socio-economic issues, positioning her novels as significant reflections on the challenges of the Capitalocene.29 Within the overall broad and diverse body of research on Zehâs work, however, relatively little attention has been devoted to an ecocritical perspective, and no study to date has investigated the novel through a relational-ecocritical lens. This thesis seeks to address that particular gap by focusing on the complexity of how the novel depicts relationships between characters and their environment. 1.4. Chapter overview The chapter that follows focuses on Juli Zeh within the context of twenty-first-century German-language literature, highlighting her relevance and the significance of her work for this study. It examines her positioning as both a novelist and chronicler of contemporary German society. The chapter also summarizes the narrative of Unterleuten, including its multi-perspective storytelling, and discusses how the novel simulates a realist portrayal of village life. In doing so, it emphasizes the uniqueness, relevance, and significance of the novel for the ecocritical-relational analysis conducted in this thesis. The third chapter provides a detailed elaboration of the methodological concepts and analytical steps guiding the study. It begins by emphasizing the importance of examining the role of âmaterial things and matterâ within human social contexts, challenging the modern notion of 29 Necia Chronister, âJuli Zehâs Landscapes of the Capitalocene,â in Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion, ed. Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter (De Gruyter, 2024), 113â131. 18 the autonomous, sovereign human as the supreme director of life on the planet. The chapter then makes a case for a relational analysis of interactions between human and nonhuman material entities. Building on this perspective, it explores phenomenology and (inter)subjectivity, concretely situating these concepts within the plot of Unterleuten. Finally, to illuminate the implications of a socio-material relational approach, the chapter discusses sociomateriality and contextualizes it within the novelâs narrative of land contention, demonstrating how material and social elements are entangled in shaping human actions and relationships. The fourth chapter comprises the main analytical section and is organized into three subsections, each representing a distinct type of human/nonhuman relationship portrayed in the novel: 1) Neoliberal relations with land: Konrad Meiler, Mr. Pilz, and Arne Seidel. 2) Aesthetic and utilitarian relations with land: Linda Franzen, Gerhard FlieÃ, and Rudolf Gombrowski. 3) Affective relations with land: Kron and Katherin Kron-Hübschke. The fifth and final chapter concludes the thesis, summarizing its main findings and synthesizing the analyses from the three subsections. It highlights the consequences experienced by the characters under study, demonstrating how their relationships with nonhuman entities influence the outcomes of their narratives. Finally, the chapter engages with extra-textual elements, connecting them to the analytical results to suggest possible interpretations of the novel beyond the literary realm. 19 Chapter 2 - Juli Zeh and Unterleuten 2.1. The Author: Juli Zeh To speak of Juli Zehâs significance within contemporary German-language literature, it is illustrative to note that four scholarly volumes dedicated exclusively to her work have already been published, each approaching her writing from diverse critical perspectives.30 This degree of attention alone signals her relevance, which extends well beyond the discipline of German studies, not least because of her controversial role as a politically engaged writer. Juli Zeh, born Julia Barbara Finck on June 30, 1974, in Bonn, is both a prominent author and an outspoken public intellectual. Trained as a lawyer with a focus on international law, she studied in Passau, Krakow, New York, and Leipzig, completing her first state examination in 1998. She also graduated from the German Literature Institute in Leipzig in 2000, before ultimately earning a doctorate in law from Saarbrücken University. In 2019, she was sworn in as an honorary judge at the Constitutional Court of the State of Brandenburg. Since 2007, Zeh has lived in Barnewitz, Brandenburg, with her husband and two children. Her literary career is marked by impressive productivity, including ten novels, two essay collections, and several plays, alongside guest professorships at the Universities of Tübingen, Lüneburg, and Kassel. As a public intellectual, she rose to heightened prominence during the Covid-19 pandemic, when she repeatedly voiced opposition to government mitigation measures. Zehâs literature frequently intersects with her public positions, blurring the line between novelist 30 At the time of writing, there are the following published critical volumes: Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter, eds., Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion (De Gruyter, 2024); Klaus Schenk and Christina Rossi, eds., Juli Zeh: Divergenzen des Schreibens (Edition Text + Kritik, 2021); Erik Schilling, ed., Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement (J.B. Metzler, 2024); Heinz-Peter PreuÃer, ed., Juli Zeh (Edition Text + Kritik, 2023). 20 and commentator. Her more recent novels, Ãber Menschen and Zwischen Welten, grapple with questions of empathy toward right-wing extremism, while Corpus Delicti gained renewed relevance during the pandemic.31 Zehâs accessible prose style ensures her works appeal to both casual readers and scholars, offering an unusual combination of popular fiction and philosophical inquiry. Her narratives often mirror, as Heinz-Peter PreuÃer has noted, the âmicrocosm and macrocosmâ of contemporary social, economic, and political dynamics.32 Similarly, Necia Chronister emphasizes in her introduction to the German Quarterly forum on Zeh that her particular importance lies in her positioning within the German tradition of the author as a public intellectual. These dimensions collectively define Juli Zeh as a writer whose role as author and public intellectual are inseparable and whose works remain central to debates on the literary and political present. However, Zehâs recent controversial statements on vaccination, governmental control, and her libertarian public personaâespecially during the Covid-19 pandemicâhave complicated how readers and scholars engage with her work. In Unterleuten, her characteristic mistrust of governmental authority and critique of capitalist superstructures and neoliberalism are evident. Yet, her increasingly outspoken opinions in recent years have led many scholars to interpret a broader ideological shiftâfrom a far-left to a more conservative, even populist, stance. This shift, they argue, manifests in her literature as a privileging of narrowly defined 31 Sunhild Galter, âJuli Zehs Roman Unterleuten als Spiegel bundesdeutscher Wirklichkeit,â Kronstädter Beiträge zur Germanistischen Forschung, no. 20 (2020): 157-158 and âJuli Zeh,â Institute of Languages, Culture and Societies, accessed September 25, 2025, https://ilcs.sas.ac.uk/research-centres/centre-study-contemporary-womens-writing-ccww/ccww-author-pages/german/juli-zeh. 32 German âMikrokosmos und Makrokosmos.â See Heinz-Peter PreuÃer, âJuli Zeh,â in Kritisches Lexikon zur deutschsprachigen Gegenwartsliteratur, ed. Heinz Ludwig Arnold (Text + Kritik), accessed June 2, 2025, http://www.nachschlage.net/search/document?index=mol-16&id=16000000737. 21 communities grounded in privacy, individualism, and, at times, spaces where white supremacy or neo-Nazism appear disturbingly normalized (as seen in Ãber Menschen).33 Although Zehâs later novels claim to stage dialogues across political and ideological spectrums, as Chronister points out, she selectively includes, omits, and represents voices from each side in a distinctly biased manner. Traces of these strategies are already present in Unterleuten, particularly in the exclusion, marginalization, and eventual irrelevance of the character Karlâreferred to as âKarl der Indianer.â In line with Chronisterâs argument that any contemporary engagement with Zehâs work must remain critically aware of her white privilege and the fragility of her positionality, this thesis approaches Unterleuten by examining the aspects of her writing that retain analytical and interpretive value, while also acknowledging her privileged authorial perspective.34 2.2. The Relevance of Zehâs Literature for Ecocritical Analysis Zehâs work is especially pertinent today, as it brings into focus the tensions that define our contemporary moment, both through her fictional narratives and her interventions as a public intellectual. Her writing consistently portrays a world in which individuals are deeply entangled in complex social and material structures, structures from which disengagement or escape appears nearly impossible. In his work The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Jean-François Lyotard introduces the concept of what he calls âgrand narratives.â Lyotard criticizes grand narrativesâthose overarching stories, a universal perspective, that claim to 33 Necia Chronister, âIntroduction: What Do We Do with Juli Zeh?â The German Quarterly 96, no. 4 (2023): 535. 34 Ibid., 537-538. 22 explain all others. He argues that such universal frameworks overlook the diversity and incompatibility multiplicity of events and perspectives through which social life is held together.35 In the introduction to their co-edited critical volume on Zeh, Necia Chronister, Lars Richter, and Sonja Klocke characterise Zehâs works as a contemporary form of a turn away from and a resistance to these grand narratives: Zeh is not only a âchronicler of the present,â a keen observer of our social milieu (at least from a specific standpoint), but also a chronicler of the sensibilities of the present. Zeh demonstrates in different ways her generation's Lyotardian turn away from âgrand narrativesâ to the âpetit récitsâ (little narratives) characteristic of a post-ideological society.36 Thus, Zehâs âlittle narrativesâ recognize the diversity of processes and perspectives that cannot be reduced to one story. Stephen Brockmann emphasizes this point by characterizing Zeh as the âquintessential literary chronicler of the German present,â37 with her literature serving as both reflection and documentation of social, political, and individual life in twenty-first-century Germany. To better understand the contemporary relevance of Zehâs literature, Kevin Drewâs contribution to the same volume interrogates what it means to regard Juli Zeh as a âchroniclerâ and her work as a âchronicleâ of the present. Rather than narrating history through large, overarching narratives, Zehâs texts are firmly situated in the immediacy of the present, where traces of the past emerge in unexpected ways. These remnants may take the form of material objects within the storyâsuch as an old doorknob or a treeâthat provoke characters to contemplate their position in relation to both history and the present moment. By foregrounding 35 Gary K. Browning, Lyotard and the End of Grand Narratives (University of Wales Press, 2000), 1-3. 36 Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter, âIntroduction,â in Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion, ed. Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter (De Gruyter, 2024), 13, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111352244-003. 37 Stephen Brockmann, âJuli Zeh as Chronicler of the German Present,â in Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion, ed. Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter (De Gruyter, 2024), 27-47. 23 diverse voices and perspectives, Zehâs writing highlights the subjective experience of time, resisting the notion of a singular, authoritative interpretation of history. Instead, her literature fosters a fragmented and plural conception of time and space. In this way, Zehâs work demonstrates how storytelling mediates our understanding of past and present alike, rendering visible how small, personal narratives can illuminate broader social transformations.38 Adding to these assessments of the relevance of Zehâs fictional works, Erik Schilling emphasizes their experimental function insofar as they âbieten vielfach ein Experiment oder eine Versuchsanordnung, mittels dererâwie in einem Labor oder auf einem Spielfeldâbestimmte Konstellationen, deren Potential und Folgen erprobt werden.â In Zehâs social novels: Gesellschaftsromane lassen sich als Experimente im Kleinen verstehen: Was geschieht, wenn eine etablierte soziale Konstellation (eine Freundschaft, eine Liebesbeziehung, eine Familie, ein Dorf) plötzlich einer einschneidenden Veränderung ausgesetzt ist? Welche Akteure beharren auf etablierten Verhaltensweisen, welche passen sich an geänderte Umstände an? Welche Allianzen bleiben bestehen, welche bilden sich neu, welche zerbrechen? Wie Figuren in einem Gesellschaftsspiel nehmen Zehs Protagonist:innen bestimmte Züge vor, aus denen sich spezifische Konstellationen, Probleme und Chancen ergeben.39 Alongside this experimental dimension, another defining feature of Zehâs workâwhat Schilling calls its emphasis on âPluralitätââmarks her literature as particularly relevant in the context of the 21st century. Plurality is central to Zehâs narrative style, especially in novels like Nullzeit and Unterleuten. Her narratives bring together a wide range of social perspectives, interests, and viewpoints, leaving it to readers to assess their validity. At times, an external figure, such as the journalist in Unterleuten, is introduced in an attempt to unify these divergent positions, yet such efforts at synthesis consistently fail. By staging this plurality so deliberately, Zehâs social novels 38 Kevin Drews, âThe âAge of the Chroniclerâ? Literary Contemporary History in Juli Zehâs Novels Unterleuten, Ãber Menschen, and Zwischen Welten,â in Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion, ed. Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter (De Gruyter, 2024), 49â74, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111352244-003. 39 Erik Schilling, âDas literarische Werk Juli Zehs,â in Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, ed. Erik Schilling (Metzler, 2024), xi. 24 resist taking a definitive stance, instead highlighting the conflicts and contradictions among individual perspectives.40 Schillingâs observation about plurality thus provides a productive starting point for analyzing how particular eventsâsuch as the construction of the wind turbines in Unterleutenâand human actions are interpreted in radically different ways, and how fragile, unreliable, or uncertain the grounds for such interpretations often are. 2.3. Introduction to the Novel: Unterleuten 2.3.1. Summary of the Plot Contemporary German-language literature has seen a renewed interest in compelling provincial settings, and Juli Zehâs Unterleuten, situated in a small village on the outskirts of Berlin, stands as a central contribution to this trend. The novel is structured around a multi-perspective narrative that resists a straightforward chronological order. Set in 2010, it first introduces newer residents such as Gerhard FlieÃ, his wife Jule, and Linda Franzen. As the story unfolds, however, flashbacks gradually reveal deeper layers of the charactersâ pasts. In this sense, Kevin Drewsâ observation (cited above) about how Zehâs narratives foregrounds the present while allowing traces of the past to surface in unanticipated ways proves especially relevant. The shape of the plot begins to take form when the mayor, Arne Seidel, calls a meeting without revealing its purpose. At the heart of Unterleuten lies a conflict sparked by a proposal from the renewable energy company Vento Direct, which seeks to build a wind farm that promises to revive the local 40 Schilling, âDas literarische Werk Juli Zehs,â xii. 25 economy. The project, however, comes with a catch: the land required for construction, the Schiefe Kappe, is parceled out among multiple owners, and the company insists on negotiating with only one. This triggers a scramble among villagers, each maneuvering to consolidate plots and secure the lucrative lease. What initially appears as an economic opportunity quickly devolves into rivalry and mistrust, as personal ambitions clash, alliances shift, and old resentments resurface, unraveling the fabric of village life. 2.3.2. Multi-Perspective Narrative Structure: Interpretability of Complex Relationships In Unterleuten, Juli Zeh avoids the use of an authorial, omniscient narrator. The novel is divided into six titled sections, comprising a total of sixty-two chapters. A defining feature of Zehâs technique here is her use of multi-perspectivity: each chapter is told from the viewpoint of one or more villagers, foregrounding their individual experiences and interpretations. This narrative strategy gives readers a wider interpretive range, allowing them to piece together a more complex picture of the village and its residents than a conventional, single-voiced narration could provide. As a result, readers are drawn into the text almost like participants, moving through the chapters in search of fresh insights into the villagersâ lives and the dynamics of their coexistence. The cast of Unterleuten encompasses around twenty-four individuals, among them two toddlers who shape key events, a dog, and Bergamotte, Lisa Franzenâs breeding stallion. Alongside these figures appear former members of the villageâs collective farm (a Landwirtschaftliche Produktionsgenossenschaft), police officers, and relatives or friends visiting from Berlin. What defines the community is its striking heterogeneity: long-time residents with roots in the former GDR coexist with recent arrivals seeking to establish an idyllic new life in the 26 countryside. The population is multigenerational, extending across adults, children, and even nonhuman residents. Zeh reinforces this expanded sense of community through extra-textualities, such as the novelâs dedicated website, which presents a map of the village and a full register of its inhabitants, complete with biographical details, relationships, and distinctive traits. Here, it is notable that even the contested plot of land, âthe Schiefe Kappeâ, as well as the surrounding forest, are personalized and presented as characters.41 In this way, the novel is presented as a densely interwoven network of human and nonhuman relationships, dependencies, and conflicts. In an interview reflecting on Unterleuten, Juli Zeh further describes her own literary work as guided by the construction of multiple positions: GroÃe Erzählungen, die spannende Schicksale erzählen, die psychologisch sehr genau sind und doch immer auch etwas über die ganze Gesellschaft verraten. Das habe ich auch in âUnterleutenâ versucht: Alle Figuren sind ganz stark vom Zeitgeist beeinflusst, von der Epoche, in der wir leben. Ihre Welt ist geprägt vom Verlust echter Beziehungen. An einem Dorf kann man das sehr gut sehen: Es gibt in Wahrheit keine Gemeinschaft mehr, sondern nur noch eine Summe von Einzelwesen, die ihren Interessen nachgehen. Egal, ob sie sich mögen oder hassenâsie finden nicht mehr zueinander. Sie wissen nicht mehr, wie Loyalität funktioniert.42 Zeh underscores that her narratives are crafted with psychological precision, revealing broader insights about society as a whole. More specifically, she emphasizes how deeply her stories and characters are shaped by the Zeitgeist and the contemporary epoch. In his article on Zehâs narrative style, Klaus Schenk refers to Unterleuten as a â[n]arrative Kaleidoskopie [am] alltägliche[n] und wirklichekitsnahe[n] Geschehen.â43 This image of the kaleidoscope surfaces explicitly in the epilogue, when the revealed narrator, journalist Lucky Finkbeiner, recalls a memory from her childhood: Je mehr ich erfuhr, desto stärker erinnerte mich die Geschichte an mein Lieblingsspielzeug aus Kindertagen, ein rotes Kaleidoskop, in dem man Muster aus winzigen bunten Perlen betrachten 41 âDas Dorf,â Juli Zeh Unterleuten, accessed July 22, 2025, https://www.unterleuten.de/unterleuten.html. 42 Juli Zeh, âInterview über ihren Roman âUnterleuten.ââ 43 Klaus Schenk, âNarrative Kaleidoskopie: Zur Virtualisierung des Erzählens bei JuliâZeh,â in JuliâZeh: Divergenzen des Schreibens, ed.âKlaus Schenk and ChristinaâRossi (Edition Textâ+âKritik, 2021), 102. 27 konnte. Man drehte ein wenig, und alles sah anders aus. Ich konnte stundenlang hineinsehen. Eine Geschichte wird nicht klarer dadurch, dass viele Leute sie erzählen.44 Taken together, these critical perspectives on the novel underscore the kaleidoscopic quality of Zehâs narrative design. As in a kaleidoscope, the novel does not simply reflect social reality but also diffracts itârevealing, in Karen Baradâs terms, patterns of difference that make a difference and producing shifting constellations of perspectives and meanings. Barad uses the concept of âdiffractionâ in physics as a metaphor that attends to the relational nature of difference. For Barad, diffraction is not the site where differences merely appear, but where the effects of differences become visible.45 Unterleuten stages precisely such diffraction patterns, as relationships among characters produce tangible consequences that are dispersed across the village. Zehâs claim that contemporary life has dissolved into isolated individuals pursuing self-interest is thus complicated by the novel itself. What emerges instead is a picture of entanglement: peopleâs lives are inescapably woven together, not only with one another but also with nonhuman entities such as animals, land, and technology. Even if these connections are not necessarily harmonious or âloving,â they remain constitutive. The title Unterleuten itselfâin one reading unter Leuten, âamong peopleââreinforces the connections among the characters. Thus, the true protagonist of the novel is not any single individual but the community as a whole, in all its fractured yet interdependent complexity.46 The structure of Unterleuten follows a principle of seriality, or what may be called a serial plot, composed of episodes centered on different family names and their unfolding fates. These episodes, however, are not isolated; they overlap, intersect, and remain dependent on one 44 Juli Zeh, Unterleuten (Luchterhand, 2016), 629. Further cited as UL along with page number. 45 Barad, Meeting the Universe Halfway, 72. 46 Chronister, Domestic Disputes, 184. 28 another. Heribert Tommek characterizes this narrative structure as âmodern-episches Erzählen,â and notes: Schaut man sich die Bauform genauer an, so ist weniger die Rahmen-Binnengeschichten-Struktur prägend, als vielmehr eine kurzkapitelweise, gleichsam perlenförmig am Erzählfaden aufgefädelte Form der wechselnden personalen Perspektiven, dieâeinmal in ihrem Setting eingeführtâdie Grundlage einer unabgeschlossen-kombinatorischen, gleichsam seriell-kaleidoskopischen Erzählstruktur bildet.47 This mode of narration, as Klaus Schenk further observes, emerges from âeiner Kombination von sich variierenden, relativierenden oder sich ergänzenden Sichtweisen [und] ist charakteristisch für die multiperspektivische Erzählweise des Romans, was sich [â¦] in den sich ergebenden Verbindungen, die sich für andere Figuren hintergründig vernetzen.â48 His emphasis on the connective potential of such seriality is especially significant for a relational reading. Within what Schenk calls a kind of âDorfserie,â where events are linked across familial, social, and generational lines and spaces, nonhuman elements are equally woven into the fabric of narration. He draws particular attention to the âTrinkwasseranlage, an die alle Dorfbewohner angeschlossen sind, als Netzwerkmetapher für die soziale Struktur des fingierten Dorfes, aber auch für die narrative Organisation des Romans.â49 This observation underscores the novelâs capacity to foreground the interdependence of human and nonhuman agents alike. It is precisely this potential for human/nonhuman relational analysis that this thesis seeks to develop. Furthermore, Tommekâs article alsoâalbeit not explicitlyâunderscores the importance of nonhuman entities, with particular emphasis on the role of land within the plot, which Unterleutenâs narrative structure highlights: Die Bodenmotivik durchzieht den gesamten Romanaufbau: angefangen von den Konflikten der ökonomischen Verwertung der âSchiefen Kappe,â welche die Dorfgemeinschaft endgültig 47 Heribert Tommek, âModernâepisches Erzählen,â 27. 48 Schenk, âNarrative Kaleidoskopie,â 105. 49 Ibid. 29 zerstört, bis hin zum Gedächtnisträger des Bodens, der das mythologische Prinzip der Ãberlagerung der Zeitebenenâder von Gewalt geprägten Vorgeschichten, die bis in die Gegenwart hineinwirkenâübernimmt.50 This attention to âBodenmotivikâ highlights how the land is never merely a backdrop but an active force that structures both the novelâs plot and its symbolic register. Building on this motif, Tommek further notes that the narrative âzieht einerseits in die âTiefe des Bodengedächtnisses,â andererseits in die Breite der sozialen Kommunikation.â51 Tommek argues that the basic situations of human existence in Unterleuten are dissected to such an extent that they can be rendered almost as elemental patterns. This dissection brings the âBodenmotivikâ52 into focus, while also reinforcing how the village land functions simultaneously as material ground, historical archive, and a relational node connecting past violence, present conflicts, and future possibilities. Lastly, in her article on the concept of âZusammenlebenâ or community living in Unterleuten, Garbiñe Iztueta-Goizueta identifies another central aspect of the novelâs narrative structure: Die multiperspektivische Erzählung ermöglicht [â¦] eine mehrdimensionale Annäherung an das Thema Zusammenleben und stellt eine Einladung zum Umdenken dar. Dabei ist Multiperspektivismus das narratologische Hauptmerkmal des Romans und die wichtigste Strategie für die psychologische Modellierung und ständige Neubewertung der Figuren, die Schilderung der vielfältigen Wahrnehmungen über ein und dasselbe Ereignis oder eine und dieselbe Person sowie für die Literarisierung des Motivs des Zusammenlebens.53 Iztueta-Goizueta emphasizes how multiperspectivism functions not only as a structural feature of the novel, but also as the primary narrative device for modeling psychological depth, revisiting 50 Tommek, âModernâepisches Erzählen,â 27. 51 Ibid., 28. 52 Tommekâs article mentions the term âBodenmotivikâ within the context of Unterleuten as the motif created around the commercial âVerwertungâ (utilisation, to some extent exploitation) of the area of contention, that is the telluric land, for the construction of the wind turbines. 53 Garbiñe IztuetaâGoizueta, âZusammenleben und Zukunftsethik in Unterleuten (2016) von Juli Zeh,â Convivium. Germanistisches Jahrbuch Polen, Sonderbandâ2 (2025): 104. 30 and revising character judgments, and capturing the diversity of perceptions that shape community life. This reading convincingly highlights the novelâs portrayal of relational complexity among the human inhabitants of Unterleuten. Yet, the analysis leaves aside another dimension of âZusammenlebenâ that the novel foregrounds: the role of nonhuman entities.54 Entities such as the âSchiefe Kappe,â âObjekt 108â (Linda Franzenâs villa), or the surrounding forestâeach presented on the novelâs companion website as having distinct relationships with different charactersâalso participate in and shape the dynamics of community. Their omission points to a productive gap, one that calls for expanding the notion of âZusammenlebenâ beyond the human, toward a more socio-materialist reading of the novel.55 54 Garbiñe Iztueta-Goizueta states that her articleâs aim is to analyse inter-human relationships and acknowledges that a convivialist analysis of natural entitles is undoubtedly an interesting topic for future analyses of the novel. See Ibid., 100. 55 âDas Dorf.â 31 Chapter 3 - Theoretical concepts and Methodology 3.1. Overview of the Main Concepts: Materiality, Relationality, and Sociomateriality Building on the recent relational turn in German studies, this thesis seeks to expand that perspective by integrating phenomenology and sociomateriality studies while reading Unterleuten through an ecocritical lens. Hubert Zapf, in his monograph Literature as Cultural Ecology, observes: a contemporary ecocritic would have to be conversant with the most recent state of knowledge in such diverse areas as scientific ecology, evolutionary biology, historical anthropology, social systems theory, environmental history, geography, geology, as well as phenomenology, history of philosophy, art history, media theory, gender studies, postcolonialism, globalization studies, and, of course, cultural and literary studies.56 Taking this as a point of departure, my approach is not confined to literary and cultural studies alone but is deliberately transdisciplinary. It draws on insights from anthropology, organizational studies, geography, and philosophy to situate literary analysis within a wider field of knowledge. The methodology is structured around three interrelated aspects: 1) Relationality- examining how humans interact with their environments, including both human and nonhuman entities. 2) Phenomenological relationality- highlighting relationality as central to shaping human perception, embodied experience, and subjective attitudes. 3) Sociomaterialtyâ foregrounding how social life unfolds through assemblages of human and nonhuman elements, underscoring the formative role of material things in social interaction. This chapter elaborates these methodological concepts and outlines the steps of analysis. It first explains why attention to âmaterial things and matterâ is crucial for understanding human 56 Hubert Zapf, Literature as Cultural Ecology: Sustainable Texts (Bloomsbury Academic, 2016), 5. 32 social contexts, challenging the modern conception of the autonomous human as the sole agent of life on the planet. From there, it develops the case for a relational reading of human interactions with nonhuman and inanimate entities. Building on this argument, the discussion turns to phenomenology with its emphasis on (inter)subjectivity, concretising these concepts through their application to the plot of Unterleuten. Finally, the concept of sociomateriality will be contextualised within the novelâs central conflicts around/about land, showing how material entitiesâespecially landâmediate, shape, and even destabilise human social and political relations. In this way, the thesis underscores, in dialogue with other scholars, how the materiality of the nonhuman transpires within and through the human narratives in Unterleuten.57 3.2. Importance of Matter and Material Things In her chapter on landscapes and power topographies in Unterleuten, Maria Stehle argues that Zehâs novel constructs an outsiderâs perspective, offering a detached and distanced observation of the events unfolding within the fictional community.58 This narrative stance, when considered alongside the other stylistic traits discussed in the previous chapter, opens up productive avenues for examining how âmaterial thingsâ interact with humans, institutions, interpretations, ideas, and ideals. In Unterleuten, it is above all the landâunderstood both as landscape and as contested material area of village landâthat emerges as the focal point of these entanglements between the human and the inanimate. Within discourses of materiality, such material things are 57 Chronister, Domestic Disputes, 197-199. 58 Stehle, Plants, Places, and Power, 27. 33 not reduced to passive backdrops but are understood as the very substance of the inanimate world, carrying physical presence and exerting an active role within human social contexts. Consequently, while the call to attend to matter is valuable, it remains insufficient without a more relational perspectiveâone that foregrounds affordances. Matter creates affordances, understood as the properties that enable or constrain actorsâ capacities for action. This insight shifts attention toward the inseparability of actors from their environments and highlights the role of matter in shaping human perception and engagement with the world.59 A similar emphasis on relationality is advanced by Abrahamsson and colleagues in their response to Jane Bennettâs political ecological concept of the liveliness of matter. While Bennett attributes a form of agency or âthing-powerâ60 to matter, Abrahamsson et al. critique this approach for overlooking the specificities of relationships between beingsâhuman and nonhuman alikeâand for overstating the autonomy of matter itself. Instead, they argue for a perspective that privileges matter-in-relation rather than matter-in-itself, thereby underscoring that agency emerges through relational entanglements rather than through isolated material vitality.61 Referring to Abrahamsson and colleagues, Thomas Lemkeâs article similarly supports a relational mode of analysis of human-nonhuman connections. Lembke argues that rejecting abstract conceptions of actors and their fixed capacities in favor of examining how agency emerges within specific networks of forces marks a productive theoretical move. However, he critiques Bennettâs agential model, noting that merely expanding the category of the âactorâ to include nonhuman entities remains insufficient. Such an approach still relies on a liberal 59 Carlile et al., âHow Matter Matters,â 4. 60 Jane Bennett, Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things (Duke University Press, 2010), 2. 61 Sebastian Abrahamsson, Filippo Bertoni, and Annemarie Mol, âLiving with Omegaâ3: New Materialism and Enduring Concerns,â Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 33, no. 1 (2015): 12, https://doi.org/10.1068/d14086p. 34 conception of agency as an attribute possessed by individual beingsâanchored in notions of will, freedom, and choiceârather than understanding agency as fundamentally relational and situational. Lembke thus highlights a critical limitation of this perspective and calls instead for a relational understanding of materialities: While this extension empirically broadens the range of those included in the collective of (political) actants, this proposition leaves intact the liberal imaginary and the conceptual divide between causality and agency, external forces and inner will. It would be more pertinent to abandon the notion of âagencyâ altogether and to put the emphasis on âmodes of doing,â which better brings out the relationality of how materialities work in concert.62 Relationality, as both Abrahamsson et al. and Lemke argue, thus entails not only epistemological and ontological consequences but also political and social ones. With reference to Unterleuten, Necia Chronister underscores precisely such implications of material entities: While it is clear that capitalism is an invisible force that infuses the townâs dealings within and through nature, it is more difficult to conceive of the agency that nature invokes within capitalism, [â¦] However, Zeh authors into her landscapes a degree of agency in the town's decision-making processes.63 As a case study of these diverse consequences, Unterleuten proves especially fruitful. The novel stages concrete negotiations around human-social-land(scape)-material relations, foregrounding how entanglements between various modes of doing shape community life and conflict, particularly in the context of renewable energy politics. Following Matthew Jones, who underscores the significance of sociomateriality in shaping diverse human-nonhuman relations and calls for closer attention to its implications, the next sections will therefore turn first to relationality and then to sociomateriality, in order to highlight the stakes of a relational approach in the twenty-first century.64 62 Thomas Lemke, âAn Alternative Model of Politics? Prospects and Problems of Jane Bennettâs Vital Materialism,â Theory, Culture & Society 35, no.â6 (November 2018): 41â42, https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276418757316. 63 Chronister, âJuli Zehâs Landscapes of the Capitalocene,â 118. 64 Matthew Jones, âUntangling Sociomateriality,â in How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies, ed. Paul R. Carlile et al. (Oxford University Press, 2013), 219. 35 3.3. Relationality through Phenomenology As mentioned in the first chapter, the recently published special issue of Oxford German Studies, entitled âRelationality in Contemporary German Literature and Culture,â has been a valuable source of inspiration and insight, particularly the editorsâ manifesto by Anne Fuchs and Mary Cosgrove. In their introduction to relational theory in German studies, Fuchs and Cosgrove provisionally define relationality as âan appreciation of and receptivity for the precariousness of life in the Anthropocene.â65 Within literary studies, they present their objective for this relational approach as fostering âa correspondence with colleagues and students about relationality as a wide range of open-ended, dialogic poetics that explore shared life on our âhuman disturbed earth.ââ66 They elaborate on what it means to be human in the twenty-first century and the Anthropocene by calling for an examination of different modes of relationality. Responding to this callâwhich directs attention to human ties that are affective and social not only to other humans but also to other species, material things, and places, and that encourages methodological receptivity to entanglementsâthis thesis situates itself within the framework of relationality. As previously mentioned, the concept of affordancesâhow certain attributes of one actor enable or constrain the capacities of othersâis crucial for thinking about relations, particularly between human and nonhuman actors, even if often framed in terms of utility within a capitalist perspective. At the very least, such relations must be interpreted from a human standpoint. To grasp these interpretative processes, a phenomenological lens becomes essential in allowing for 65 Fuchs and Cosgrove, âIntroduction: For a Relational Turn, Part Two,â 267. 66 Ibid. 36 an analysis of how human characters perceive their world as networks of relationships. Central to this approach is the phenomenological concept of âLebenswelt.â67 In his chapter on literature and Lebenswelt, Stefan Matuschek, drawing on Edmund Husserl, defines and contextualises the notion within literature and literary studies: âLebensweltâ steht in diesem Zusammenhang für die menschliche Perspektive, aus der heraus die Welt keine objektive Gegebenheit ist, sondern sich aus subjektiven Erfahrungen, Bewertungen und Erwartungen zusammensetzt. Als Kunst der Perspektive, insbesondere durch die personale Perspektivierung hat sich die Literatur zu einem vorzüglichen Medium entwickelt, Welt als Lebenswelt zu zeigen.68 Thus, complementing the more objective scientific understanding of human and nonhuman relations, a phenomenological Lebenswelt-perspective situates itself in the space âzwischen dem, was Menschen erleben, und dem, was die Wissenschaften erklären.â Literature plays a crucial role in exploring this realm, as Matuschek notes: Man kann dies die strukturelle Wahrheit der fiktiven Erzählwelten nennen: wahr insofern, als sie die Welt der Menschen nicht als objektive Gegebenheit darstellt, sondern als das, was einem Subjekt jeweils als seine Welt vorkommt. Diese subjektive Einstellung bleibt strukturell wahr, auch wenn das Subjekt fiktiv ist. Daraus gewinnt die Literatur ihren Reiz und ihre Ãberzeugungskraft. Daraus nährt sich die Erwartung, zu einem groÃen Ereignis [â¦] auch einen groÃen Roman lesen zu können: die Erwartung, dass der Roman durch seine Perspektivierung mehr verstehen lässt als die fachlich zuständigen Experten durch ihre Begriffe.69 In Unterleuten, this dimension of Lebenswelt becomes visible through the novelâs multi-perspective narrative structure. Shifting focalization from chapter to chapter illustrates the residentsâ interconnectedness, while free indirect speech grants the reader access to their inner lives. This narrative strategy opens a window into the charactersâ subjective experiences, 67 My focus here in phenomenology is in relation to or similar to Edmund Husserlâs conception as: Wissenschaft, Lehre, die von der geistigen Anschauung des Wesens der Gegenstände oder Sachverhalte ausgeht, die die geistig-intuitive Wesensschau (anstelle rationaler Erkenntnis) vertritt; See https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Phaenomenologie. 68 Stefan Matuschek, âLebenswelt als literaturtheoretischer Begriff: Im Anschluss an Hans Blumenbergs Theorie der Lebenswelt,â in Literatur und Lebenswelt, ed. Anja Löck and Dirk Oschmann (Böhlau, 2012), 58. 69 Ibid. 37 judgments, and expectations, presenting their world as Lebenswelt. This perceived world includes the village environment, which encompasses a wide range of nonhuman elements, most notably the land(scape). While each character interprets and relates to this environment differently, the village environment itself serves as the framework through which their Lebenswelten are formed. In this way, the village environmentâtogether with its nonhuman entitiesânot only connects these different Lebenswelten but also actively shapes them. The three protagonists contending for the land embody distinct motivations and expectations which guide their actions and gradually polarize the community. Their differing perceptions of the landâwhether as an economic resource, a site of identity and belonging, or a matter of ecological concernâdrive the formation of two opposing groups: one advocating for the wind farm project, the other resisting it. Julia Stetter, in her article on polyvalent perspectives in Unterleuten, analyses the various projections of and about the countryside articulated by different characters in the novel. While these projections are insightful, they remain inherently unidirectional, insofar as they do not account for the active role of the charactersâ relations with their environment in shaping such perceptions. This thesis, by contrast, seeks to foreground the role of nonhuman elements in enabling and co-constituting these perspectives. In doing so, it proposes to interpret these relations as multi-directional, thereby emphasizing the active participation of nonhuman entities in the formation of human attitudes and perceptions. Contrary to Stetterâs primarily human-centered focus, this thesis aims to conceptualize the âsubjektive Einstellungenâ (subjective attitudes) toward the land not as isolated projections, but as relationally constituted modes of perception and actionâwhat might be understood as modes of doing. In this framework, the contested land is approached not as âmatter itself,â but as matter related. 38 The following section turns to the concept of sociomateriality, which highlights the interconnection of material, nonhuman entities with human social life and demonstrates how these interrelations yield concrete and interpretable consequences. 3.4. Sociomateriality as Entanglement of the Human-Social and Nonhuman-Material In the context of the Anthropocene, the concept of sociomateriality provides a compelling framework for interpreting human-nonhuman relationships and their consequences. Developed within organizational studies, Wanda Orlikowski and Susan Scott introduce this concept to emphasize how technologies (or material entities more broadly) and human actions are co-constitutive. Rather than conceiving technologies as external tools that simply influence human activity, their approach highlights how materiality is intrinsic to everyday practices and relations.70 To illustrate this, they propose a simple thought experiment: As a thought experiment, consider doing anything in the world (whether at home, on the road, or in organizations) that does not in some way or another entail material means (e.g., bodies, clothes, food, spectacles, buildings, classrooms, devices, water pipes, paper, telephones, email, etc.). Furthermore, these material means are not so much tools to be used to accomplish some tasks, but they are constitutive of both activities and identities.71 This perspective underscores that neither human nor material entities possess inherent properties in isolation. Rather, they acquire form, attributes, and capabilities through their dynamic relationships and mutual entanglements with other entities. Accordingly, sociomateriality denotes 70 Wanda J. Orlikowski and Susan V. Scott, âSociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization,â Academy of Management Annals 2, no. 1 (2008): 455, https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520802211644. 71 Ibid. 39 an ontological convergence of the âsocialâ and the âmaterial.â The distinction between these two spheres is retained only for analytical clarity, but in practice they are inseparable.72 In making the case to foreground the inherently sociomaterial nature of human life, Carlile et al. acknowledge the pioneering work of scholars who have established the validity of materialism, but they also call for a stronger engagement with the ethical questions that sociomateriality raises. In this sense, they highlight that human practices are not merely intersubjective but also interobjective. Building on this, Fredrik Fahlander draws attention to the role of everyday nonhuman entitiesâsuch as landscapes, buildings, trees, animals, wind, rain, and snowâemphasizing their ontological inseparability from the social fabric of human life.73 Thus, while sociomateriality studies, particularly in organizational contexts, often conceptualize âmaterialityâ in terms of technologies and instruments within industrial or urban sectors, its scope extends well beyond that, encompassing the natural environment and nonhuman agents that co-constitute social existence. Departing from these claims, my thesis argues that conceptualizations of human-matter relations in Unterleuten can be seen most clearly in the relationships between the human characters and the village land(scape). Maria Stehle briefly emphasizes this when she notes that: âone can read this novel as not character or narrative driven but as driven by the changing social and political relationships to landscapes that the large-scale infrastructure project triggers.â74 Necia Chronister, in turn, points out that: âZehâs greatest achievement with this novel is that she reveals different material-discursive practices that operate according to the prevailing political 72 Ibid., 456. 73 Ibid., 8. 74 Stehle, Plants, Places, and Power, 31. 40 and economic paradigm.â75 To further contextualize the novel within the framework of sociomateriality, Chronister argues that it would be a mistake to view the competition for land ownership as merely the effect of some abstract, external force of finance capitalism. Instead, the struggle is rooted in the materialities that shape and constrain village life, with the land(scapes) themselves playing a decisive role in the unfolding of social and political conflicts.76 Drawing on these concepts, the next section elaborates on the concrete methodology of the analysis. 3.5. Methodology Applied to the Novel This analysis illustrates a multi-directional relational understanding of how the selected characters of the novel interact with the land in Unterleuten. The goal of this approach is not to downplay the role of the charactersâ capitalistic ideologies in the novel. On the contrary, it underscores the vital roleâand the agencyâof nonhuman material entities in enabling these ideologies to function. Necia Chronister has similarly argued that in Unterleuten capitalist ideologies operate through nature, since humans are inherently part of it. Drawing on the concept of the Capitalocene, she points to the difficulty of conceiving natureâs agency within capitalism.77 75 Chronister, Domestic Disputes, 190. 76 Ibid., 197. 77 Necia Chronister applies Jason W. Mooreâs concept of the Capitalocene to her analysis of the novel. This concept provides a framework for understanding the entanglements of nature, society, and individuals in the context of contemporary neoliberalism. While derived from the Anthropocene, the Capitalocene modifies it in two key approaches. First, it shifts responsibility onto the capitalist mechanisms created and sustained by certain groups of humans. Second, it situates climate change within the deeper historical roots of capitalism itself, beginning with the rise of Atlantic-centered trade industries between 1450 and 1750. See Chronister, âJuli Zehâs Landscapes of the Capitalocene,â 112-131. 41 This analysis addresses this challenge by showing how ânatureâ can be understood as active in the novel, made visible through the charactersâ relationships with nonhuman elements in the village. This provides an alternative interpretation that highlights how land, forest, and other material entities enable the dominant capitalist ideologies of the village characters to work: driving them to exploit village land and environment for personal monetary gain. For the purposes of this discussion, this this analysis treats these nonhuman entitiesâland, forest, and related material aspectsâ not as matter in itself, but as matter in relation. The following chapter will primarily focus on three groups of characters in Unterleuten. To structure the analysis and formulate a coherent conclusion, it will draw, though with modification, on Julia Stetterâs classification of polyvalent perspectives on and about the countryside in Unterleuten. Rather than adopting her framework of perspectives, however, reconceptualize them as relations. While Stetterâs classification usefully delineates the dominant viewpoints and motivations of the three groups of characters, this thesis argues that these positions are not fixed but ambiguous, emerging from polyvalent and shifting relations with the village land and landscape. The three groups are as follows: 1) Neoliberal relations with land: Konrad Meiler, Mr. Pilz, and Arne Seidel; 2) Aesthetic and utilitarian relations with land: Gerhard FlieÃ, Linda Franzen, and Rudolf Gombrowski; and 3) Affective relations with land: Kron and Kathrin Kron-Hübschke. These categories do not imply mutual exclusivity but highlight interpenetrating and interconnected modes of relating. Within each group, individual charactersâ relations to the landâand, where relevant, to other animals and material entities such as birds, the forest, or the windâwill be analysed within the 42 framework indicated by the relations as described above. Textual evidence, including quotations from dialogues, descriptions of events, and narrative accounts of episodes, will be examined to trace the charactersâ subjective experiences, assessments, judgements, and expectations (affordances) toward their Lebenswelt in general and toward land in particular. These relations will be interpreted as multidirectional relation markers, foregrounding the active role of nonhuman elements in shaping the humanâland entanglement. Finally, the analysis will contextualize these findings within the novelâs broader plot and, drawing on the concept of sociomateriality, assess their implications within the wider discourse of the village politics around renewable energy. Such a relational interpretation is important because it avoids the traditional subject-object dichotomy. Analysing the charactersâ perspectives as relationships requires engaging with the concept of relational phenomenology, which emphasizes a model of perception in which every moment of understanding is shaped by relationality.78 The concepts of Lebenswelt and relational phenomenology will help reveal how the relationships between human and nonhuman material entities function, even when they may initially appear self-evident. Furthermore, by incorporating the sociomateriality of a particular place, the role of nonhuman materiality in shaping relationships within capitalism can be more fully understood. 78 Jeanne Riou, âVoicing Relationality â Phenomenological Directions,â Oxford German Studies 53, no. 1 (2024): 13-29. 43 Chapter 4 â Relational Material-Ecocritical Analysis: Neoliberal, Aesthetic, Utilitarian, and Affective Relationships with the Village Environment 4.1. Neoliberal Relations to the Village Land and Environment: Meiler, Pilz, and Seidel Arne Seidel, Konrad Meiler, and Mr. Pilz represent a neoliberal view of the countryside and the village land. Unlike Seidel, who has spent most of his life in Unterleuten, Meiler and Pilz are outsiders to the village. Yet all three share the motivation to treat land as a commodity, albeit for different reasons. Each uses the land to serve personal aims: Meiler and Pilz pursue profit without regard for the villageâs poor economic conditions, while Seidel seeks to improve the local economy by promoting the construction of wind turbines. They all pursue their goals unscrupulouslyâMeiler and Pilz in the name of individual economic success, and Seidel in the hope of sparking an economic transformation of Unterleuten. As analyzed here, however, Seidelâs ambitions are also deeply shaped by his personal history. 4.1.1. Konrad Meilerâs Relationship with the Village Land(scape) Firstly, Meilerâs general perspective on the landscape can help us understand these perspectives as relationships. The investor is portrayed as a representative of the wealthy and is an arrogant management consultant. His perspective on the eastern Brandenburg landscape is presented right at the start of the novel. As he travels toward Unterleuten, he observes the Brandenburg scenery through the window of his car: Während der letzten Etappe seiner Fahrt sah Konrad Meiler dabei zu, wie die Landschaft sich selbst abschaffte. Wälder zogen sich zurück, Hügel ebneten sich ein, Flüsse versandeten, Farben 44 bleichten aus. Er hasste PreuÃen. In Bayern gab es Berge und Täler, Wälder und Felder, Flüsse und Ufer. Der Himmel war der Himmel, und die Erde war die Erde.79 Although Meiler is not directly engaging with the contested land in Unterleuten, his perspective and description of the landscape reveal two key aspects. First, they show that the novelâs characters perceive and further relate with the land(scape) in very different ways. Meilerâs perception of the Brandenburg landscape, as seen in the passage above, goes beyond a purely objective description of his surroundings. He highlights various nonhuman entitiesâforests, rivers, and hillsâthat actively shape his perception of the environment. This perception is characterized by a strong aversion, as Meiler harbours a negative sentiment towards the landscape: forests recede, hills flatten, and rivers silted up. In this portrayal, the nonhuman entities appear as active forces rather than passive objects. To some extent, Meiler even anthropomorphizes the environment he perceives. He views this landscape as something that âsich selbst abschaffte,â that is, something that literally slaves away, or works itself to exhaustion. 80 This unusual personification reveals how he attributes the nonhuman entities as active in forming a landscape, albeit framed within an aesthetic sense of aversion. Thus, Meilerâs perception is not simply an imposed viewpoint but emerges as a relationship co-constituted with the landscape. From a relational phenomenological perspective, his description can therefore be read as the outcome of a mutually created relationship between human and environment. Secondly, Meilerâs description highlights how nonhuman material entities play an important role in his Lebenswelt. The concept of Lebenswelt, as mentioned earlier, refers to an individualâs perspective that conceives the world as more than a collection of objective facts. As the 79 UL, 47. 80 Oxford Dictionaries, âabschaffen,â Oxford University Press, accessed September 25, 2025, https://premium.oxforddictionaries.com/translate/german-english/abschaffen. 45 following passage highlights, when being interpreted, that the sand plays an active role in creating Meilerâs subjective perception of landscape in this particular area of Germany: In PreuÃen machte der Sand jede Landschaft unmöglich. Der Sand lieà Anhöhen und Senken ineinanderrutschen. Der Sand verwischte die Horizonte. Der Sand entzog dem Himmel das Blau und den Bäumen das Grün. Er lieà Mauern einsinken und schluckte halbe Dörfer. Der Sand machte die Seen trübe und die Menschen blass. Den Rest erledigten gelbes Steppengras und Kiefern.81 The sand shapes Meilerâs perception, because it acts not only on humans but also on other material entities, such as âMauern und Dörfer.â For him, the Prussian sand prevents the possibility of envisioning an ideal, fixed vision of a landscape like that of his home state, Bavaria. His description is therefore interpretable not as an objective portrayal of the external world, but as a subjective evaluation. In this context, the role of sand can also be read through the phrase âauf Sand gebaut,â which originates in a New Testament parable and is commonly used to describe something unreliable or doomed to fail: âäuÃerst unsicher, zum Scheitern verurteilt; falsch, nicht langfristig geplant.â82 Meilerâs perspective, then, can be understood as his evaluative judgment of the sand and its symbolic (and even Biblical) meaning, which contributes to his negative sentiment toward the Brandenburg landscape. In this case, the concept of Lebenswelt offers further insights into Meiler's relationship with nonhuman entities. Meilerâs Lebenswelt can be defined as the world as it appears to him, composed of his experiences, judgments, and expectations. Stephan Matuschek argues that literature, as the art of perspective, provides access to a characterâs Lebenswelt. Consequently, if Meilerâs perception of the landscape is relationally shaped by nonhuman entities, then these entities are also intertwined with his Lebensweltâthat is, they become part of his experiences, 81 UL, 47. 82 Auf Sand gebaut, DWDS (Digitales Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache), accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.dwds.de/wb/auf%20Sand%20gebaut. 46 judgments, and expectations. Concretely, the nonhuman entities foster Meilerâs strong negative sentiment toward the aesthetic of the landscape near Unterleuten. Thus, his relationship with the landscape is described as not rooted in aesthetic pleasure. As will be analyzed later, this aversion significantly informs his judgments and expectations toward the area. The role of physical elements in shaping landscapes and in producing feelings of either aversion or affection toward them is addressed by Simone Ines Linke in Die Ãsthetik medialer Landschaftskonstrukte. Within the context of landscape construction, Linke identifies a category she terms the âstereotypical landscape.â83 Such landscapes are characterized by familiar features that enable viewers to measure their immediate surroundings against a pre-existing image of what a landscape should look like. In most cases, these stereotypical landscapes are judged positively. By contrast, the perception of the actual landscape one encounters is often less straightforward. Depending on the specific physical elements presentâor the attributes ascribed to themâthis perception may also be evaluated negatively. Yet, this evaluative process is not determined solely by physical elements; it is equally shaped by social and individual ideas. Linke concludes that the more a physical space departs from stereotypical features and instead contains elements perceived as disruptive, the less likely it is to be regarded as aesthetically beautiful. This tendency is compounded by the fact that spaces or objects described as âuglyâ often continue to be perceived in this way over time. Thus, if landscapes are labeled ugly, either they lack the stereotypical traits expected of them, or they are burdened with elements considered disturbing.84 83 Simone Ines Linke, Die Ãsthetik medialer Landschaftskonstrukte: Theoretischer Reflexionen und empirische Befunde, RaumFragen: Stadt-Region-Landschaft (Springer Fachmedien VS, 2019) 78. 84 Ibid., 79- 80. 47 This framework can be applied to Meilerâs case. For him, the Bavarian landscape functions as the stereotypical image of a landscape. However, the eastern Brandenburg setting in which he finds himselfâwith its dominance of sand and a lack of features he associates with Bavariaâstands in sharp contrast to this ideal. The result is his dissatisfaction with the space, which he refuses to accept as a beautiful landscape. This contrast highlights how his perception of landscapes varies across different federal states and how it is mediated by not only social or individual ideas but mainly by the physical material elements. Meiler is the proprietor of 250 hectares of land in the vicinity of Unterleuten. He procured this substantial area of land at an auction. Meiler found himself unable to refrain from engaging in a bidding competition with another individual, ultimately resulting in his expenditure of 2.5 million euros on a parcel of land that did not align with his initial interests.85 As the following passage illustrates, he has no particular ties with this land: Mit seinem Stück Ex-DDR musste Meiler nichts wollen. Er konnte es sich leisten zu warten. Auf Bebauungspläne, die neue Flächen als Bauland auswiesen. Auf eine Supermarktkette, die Land brauchte, um in der Nähe von Unterleuten eine Filiale zu eröffnen. Auf die Ausdehnung des Berliner Speckgürtels. Auf UmgehungsstraÃen, Outlet-Center oder die groÃe Energiekrise, die den Anbau von nachwachsenden Rohstoffen unverzichtbar machen würde. Und solange er wartete, war Konrad Meiler sein eigenes Spekulationsgeschäft.86 Meilerâs relationship with the land near Unterleuten is limited to its financial value, as he acquired it without any deeper personal motivations. As previously noted, his perspective reflects a clear aversion to the surrounding landscape as anything other than an investment. This attitude shapes his assessments and expectations regarding his property. The absence of striking nonhuman features, such as mountains, valleys, and rivers, reinforces his negative sentiment regarding its natural charms. Additionally, as discussed earlier, the sand further prevents the 85 UL, 48. 86 UL, 54. 48 possibility of an aesthetically pleasing landscape. Nevertheless, the resulting terrain is well-suited for various commercial developments, including supermarkets, bypasses, and shopping centers. This dynamic frames Meilerâs relationship with his recently acquired land primarily as an investment asset. Analyzing Meilerâs relationship with land through the lens of sociomateriality provides deeper insight into the active role of nonhuman entities in shaping human relationships. The concept of interpenetration within sociomateriality is particularly significant. According to Matthew Jones, interpenetration is a performative or representational process: neither human nor nonhuman entities possess predetermined properties. Rather, they acquire form, attributes, and capabilities through their mutual interactions. In other words, it is through this process of interpenetrationâor mutual positioningâthat entities gain the properties attributed to them by humans.87 The positioning and interpenetration of entities plays a crucial role in shaping their perceived meaning. The following description illustrates Meilerâs utilitarian relationship with his newly acquired land in Unterleuten: Sein neuerworbener Besitz, erklärte er, umfasse eine Fläche von 250 Hektar. Diese hingen nicht zusammen, sondern verteilten sich in unregelmäÃigen Parzellen über den halben Landkreis. Es handele sich um Felder, Wiesen und Wälder; es gebe die unterschiedlichsten Nutzungsarten von Ackerbau bis Streichelzoo, und das bei meist unklaren Grenzverläufen. [â¦] Das Land habe er aus einem einzigen Grund erworben. Weil er es konnte.88 This passage illustrates that Meilerâs newly acquired land is divided into multiple smaller areas. These areas include other nonhuman entities such as fields, meadows, and forests. The physical positioning of these nonhuman entities and their interpenetration plays a crucial role in shaping Meilerâs perceived utilitarian value of the land. For example, a relatively larger area of 87 Jones, âUntangling Sociomateriality,â 204. 88 UL, 48f. 49 land positioned alongside an open field is interpreted by Meiler as suitable for agriculture. Conversely, a smaller area positioned next to meadows is seen as appropriate for a petting zoo. While these arrangements may appear obvious, they reflect multidirectional relationships between humans and nonhuman entities. The âin-placenessâ of these entitiesâtheir specific physical positionsâis essential for enabling the social and economic uses that humans attribute to them.89 More concretely, the positioning of open fields and grass meadows on Meilerâs land affords him opportunities to establish multiple utilitarian relationships with it. The phrase of the âmeist unklaren Grenzverläufenâ underscores his perception of the land as offering unbounded utilitarian potential, reflecting a capitalist logic of pushing boundaries in varied utilisation of the nonhuman environment as a resource. These diverse uses, in turn, generate the landâs monetary value. In this way, the nonhuman material elements themselves play an active role in enabling Meilerâs relationship with the land primarily as an investment object. The capitalist relationship between Meiler and the land becomes particularly evident when Vento Direct announces the construction of the wind park project. Meiler recognizes that his property lies within the area designated for the project, Schiefe Kappe. The sole owner of this land has the exclusive right to lease it to Vento Direct, a transaction with the potential for substantial financial gain. Consequently, Meiler negotiates with Linda Franzen to acquire her land and secure control over the greater part of the area under consideration. Furthermore, for Meiler, ownership of a particular area of land evokes a complex, unclear feeling. His capitalistic relationship with the land generates a perceived power associated with ownership, as the plot goes on to suggest: âAlles, was Meiler jetzt sehen konnte, gehörte ihm. Nachdenklich ging sein Blick über den Landstrich hin. Man sah ihm an, dass er etwas fühlte, 89 Carlile et. al, âHow Matter Matters,â 5â6. 50 auch wenn unklar blieb, was das war.â90 In other words, Meiler derives a sense of power from owning a substantial portion of land in Unterleuten. This perceived power emerges through the interaction and interpenetration of the land and other nonhuman material entities within the capitalist framework, that is, as an assignment of monetary value. Alongside his relationship with the land, another material entity of central importance in village and the novel Unterleuten is the wind. Wind shapes not only Meilerâs actions but also those of the other characters: Wenn Meiler selbst nichts mehr tun konnte, um zu Mizzies Glück beizutragen, dann sollte eben der Unterleutner Wind ihr den gröÃten Wunsch erfüllen. SchlieÃlich hatte er die Ländereien genau für solche Fälle ersteigert â UmgehungsstraÃe, Supermarkt, Outletcenter oder eben Windkraft. So machte man Geld [â¦].91 Meiler views the wind as a capitalistic resource that can serve his and his wife Mizzieâs personal interest in financial gain. Verbs such as âerfüllenâ (to grant or fulfil) underscore Meilerâs neoliberal relationship with the wind and âersteigernâ (to buy at an auction) emphasize Meilerâs desire for ownership of âLandereinâ (estates)âthe physical, material space provided by land that enables access to other materialities such as wind for wind parks or for construction projects, such as supermarkets. Motivated by the opportunity to capitalize on both land and wind, Meiler seeks to gain ownership of the specific plot on which the wind turbines will be built. Throughout the novel, he attempts to acquire neighbouring parcels adjacent to his many disjointed areas. Ironically, at the beginning of the story, Linda Franzen tries to negotiate a deal with Meiler for that very piece of land, which he initially hesitates to accept. It is only after Vento Direct announces its plan to construct wind turbines on Franzenâs land that Meiler becomes determined to do everything in his power to gain ownership. His neoliberal relationships primarily with the 90 UL, 121. 91 UL, 208. 51 land around the village and the village environment serve as a key motivator of his actions and thus drives the plot of the novel. 4.1.2. Mr. Pilzâs Relationship with the Village Land Pilz is portrayed as a one-dimensional and shallow secondary character. The novel provides no dedicated chapter or perspective from Pilz, making it difficult to interpret his personal history or subjective experiences with previous projects. Nevertheless, his relationship with land as an employee of the Vento Direct corporation is crucial to the novelâs plot. Experienced in overcoming local resistance, Pilz employs manipulative strategies to achieve his companyâs goal of constructing the wind farm. Like Meiler, Pilz demonstrates no affective connection to the land. While Meiler represents the upper-class individual, Pilz embodies the profit-driven interests of large corporations within capitalism. Just as Meiler identifies himself as a âSpekulationsgeschäft,â Pilz treats land purely as an investment object, disregarding the desires and well-being of the residents. Pilz presents the proposal for the wind farm in Unterleuten during a village meeting convened by the mayor, Arne Seidel. The proposal is framed under the pretext of the European Unionâs renewable energy policies: âDas Bundeswirtschaftsministerium will den Anteil erneuerbarer Energien in den nächsten Jahren auf 33 Prozent des Gesamtverbrauchs steigern. Brandenburg beansprucht eine Vorreiterrolle auf dem Gebiet der erneuerbaren Energien.â92 However, it becomes clear that the primary aim of the Vento Direct corporation in this proposal is to construct large wind turbines, capitalizing on the land in these remote areas. By presenting 92 UL, 106. 52 an idyllic vision of the landscape, within which wind turbines are seamlessly integrated, the narrative illustrates one of Pilzâs and Vento Directâs strategies to persuade the local population and counter their resistance: Nach wenigen Sekunden, in denen Pilz sein Markenzeichen wirken lieÃ, erschien die Panorama-Aufnahme einer Brandenburger Landschaft, Weizenfelder im Sonnenuntergang. Am Horizont die imposanten Silhouetten von sieben Windkraftanlagen, die Rotorblätter ausgebreitet wie steife Schwingen.93 In this context, Simone Ines Linke, in her discussion of aesthetics and landscapes, emphasizes that aesthetic attributions of physical spacesâwhat we call landscapesâare closely tied to how such constructs are judged and whether they are accepted. She further notes that the aesthetic of beauty is commonly associated with harmony, order, and pleasantness.94 Pilz instrumentalizes the aesthetic by portraying an idyllic image of the village landscape after the construction of the wind park. In doing so, he cleverly illustrates the windmill (on the presentation slide) as part of a future vision of beauty, using this image to psychologically manipulate the villagers into supporting the project. This reveals his perspective on the land(scape) as something only to be capitalized upon. According to Pilz, the wind farm project, is âin Städten beschlossen und auf dem Land gebaut.â95 However, an important counterpoint to this externally imposed plan must be considered. Dietmar Jacobsen, in his article on Unterleuten, argues: Dass auch bei jenen, die die Energiewende prinzipiell begrüÃen, das Ende des Wohlwollens spätestens dann erreicht ist, wenn eine oder mehrere der sperrigen Anlagen sich in ihrer Wohnnähe zu drehen beginnen, hat jeder, der mit dem Phänomen in den vergangenen Jahren konfrontiert wurde, schon einmal erlebt. Aus ökologisch denkenden Grünen werden urplötzlich 93 UL, 107. 94 Linke, Die Ãsthetik medialer Landschaftskonstrukte, 32, 82. 95 UL, 117. 53 Konservative. Und was vorher unvermeidlich war, wird, wenn es unversehens näher rückt, zunächst einmal mit Argumenten zu bekämpfen versucht.96 Jacobsenâs argues that support for wind energy generally holds only as long as the turbines are not built directly in front of oneâs home. He employs this critique in reference to the village newcomers, Flieà and Franzen, whose aspirations for a fresh start in Unterleuten are disrupted by the proposed wind park. A key element of Jacobsenâs argument lies in the role of physical proximity and distance: closeness to the turbines often prompts those who in principle endorse renewable energy to shift their stance once their own surroundings are affected. At the same time, affective ties to oneâs environment are equallyâindeed, quite literallyârooted, and must be considered alongside empirical and scientific factors when planning large-scale projects. Pilz serves as a counterexample to Jacobsenâs position. Although he occasionally pretends to be committed to the villageâs common good, he demonstrates neither affective bonds with the community nor attachment to its environment. Instead, he sustains both a physical and mental distance from Unterleuten, treating the land strictly as a capitalizable resource for constructing the wind park. Pilz asserts that âBelange wie Anwohnerschutz, Landschaftsschutz und die Flugsicherheit der Luftwaffeâ97 are being taken into account in the wind park proposal. Yet, this is part of his strategy to manipulate the village community. By emphasizing these formal considerations, he downplays or attempts to eliminate the villagersâ affective connections to the land, privileging the perspective of land as a source of capital. 96 Dietmar Jacobsen, âDie Idylle trügt: Mit âUnterleutenâ gelingt Juli Zeh ein groÃer Gesellschaftsroman,â literaturkritik.de, May 2016, accessed July 22, 2025, https://literaturkritik.de/id/21873. 97 UL, 135. Here the term âAnwohnerschutzâ is different than establishing affective ties and relationships a community might have to its environment and the concept of Lebenswelt, all of which highlight or refer to the subjective experiences. According to Pons dictionary, Anwohnerschutz means âMaÃnahmen zum Schutz der Anwohner von stark befahrenen StraÃen, Flughäfen oder Industriewerken vor Lärm oder schädlichen Emissionen,â which refers to empirical objective scientific facts than the more subjective experiences. See Pons Dictionary: https://de.pons.com/übersetzung-2/deutsche-rechtschreibung/Anwohnerschutz (accessed on 22nd July, 2025) 54 In Unterleuten, the villagers encounter this manipulative approach for the first time during the village meeting. While presenting the proposed wind farm project, Pilz underscores the limitations of his position within the broader hierarchy of corporate capitalism and politics: âRegenerative Energiegewinnung. [â¦] Das entspricht dem Willen der Landesregierung. Das kommt von ganz oben. [â¦] Sie begreifen nicht, dass die Windenergie auf jeden Fall kommt, ob Sie wollen oder nicht. [â¦] Ich bin hier, um gemeinsam mit Ihnen den besten Weg zu finden.â98 Here, Pilz explicitly highlights the villagersâ lack of power in deciding on the proposed project. He cleverly positions himself as subordinate in the corporate hierarchy, portraying himself as one of them, someone who ostensibly wants the best for the village community. In addition to being skilled at advancing the corporationâs objectives, Pilz is depicted as strikingly inhumane, and to some extent as the embodiment of capitalism: Einem wie Pilz ging es nicht mehr ums gute Leben, es ging nicht einmal um Geld. Was diese Generation antrieb, war der unbedingte Wunsch, alles richtig zu machen. Keine Fehler zu begehen und dadurch unangreifbar zu werden. Das kapitalistische System pflanzte einen Angstkern in die Seelen seiner Kinder, die sich im Lauf ihres Lebens mit immer neuen Schichten aus Leistungsbereitschaft panzerten. Heraus kamen Arbeitszombies, die keine Angst davor hatten, von einem Dorfmob aufgemischt zu werden.99 Contributing to Pilzâs portrayal as inhumane, he is represented as both a product of capitalism and a kind of zombie laboring in its service. Particularly significant is the recurring emphasis on his need to maintain distance from the village. In the cited passage, this distance is metaphorically expressed as a lack of fear of being stirred into life by prolonged proximity to the community. More concretely, Pilz is shown as immune to any human traitsâsuch as forming affective ties beyond a purely capitalist perspectiveâthereby underscoring the contrast to Jacobsenâs argument in the previous paragraph. 98 UL, 133. 99 UL, 139. 55 Necia Chronister has aptly noted that Vento Direct âdoes not yet have a material infrastructure in Unterleutenâ and âis depending upon the people of Unterleuten to provide the material conditions for the wind farm.â100 Therefore, the perceived value of the land as an investment object by Pilz and Vento Direct is not determined by them or even by the people of Unterleuten. During his presentation, Pilz emphasizes the inevitability of the wind farm project. Nevertheless, the exact location of the wind park remains uncertain: âBauen würde die Vento Direct auf jeden Fall. Die Frage war nur, wo.â101 The ideal site for the wind farm is ultimately not controlled by any human character; rather, it is determined by nonhuman material entities such as the land, forest, and especially the wind. This becomes evident when Pilz elaborates on the specific area under consideration for the construction of the wind farm: Entlang des Waldrands sehen Sie einen Streifen, der nicht zu den Sperrgebieten zählt. Es handelt sich also um ein sogenanntes Eignungsgebiet. Aber der Wind kommt bei Ihnen meistens aus Südost. Deshalb sind die erwarteten Erträge an dieser Position nicht besonders hoch.102 As noted here, the land under consideration lies along the edge of the forest. This feature underscores the need for an open space, free of trees, making the absence of forest vegetation a crucial factor in the selection process. Additionally, wind plays a vital role, as it powers the turbines. The intensity and effectiveness of the turbines depend on the direction and strength of the wind in a given area, making wind an essential material factor for the project. Consequently, the wind-flow direction ultimately determines which land is most suitable for the wind farm. Pilz emphasizes this condition, noting that the wind flows from the south toward Unterleuten, making the Schiefe Kappe the optimal site for the construction of the wind farm, as he asserts: âBesser 100 Chronister, Domestic Disputes, 188-189. 101 UL, 148. 102 UL, 137,138. 56 geeignet ist das Gebiet westlich der Unterleutner LandstraÃe. Hier befindet sich ein Eignungsgebiet von etwa achtzehn Hektar. Der Flurabschnitt heiÃt Schiefe Kappe.â103 Furthermore, the construction of large physical structures, such as wind turbines, requires a solid, sufficiently large baseânamely, the land. It provides the most essential prerequisite for humanmade constructionsâthe availability of space. In this sense, the Schiefe Kappe underscores its active role in enabling, first and foremost, the very planning of the wind park. Recognizing the roles of different nonhuman material entities in shaping the relationship between the Schiefe Kappe and Pilz (and by extension Vento Direct) is therefore essential. This analysis challenges both the neglect of the villagersâ perspectives and the scholarly tendency to overlook the active role of the village land in Unterleuten, a neglect rooted in the common assumption that land is a passive object. Instead, the land can be interpreted as highly active, albeit perhaps not in the conventional sense. Its capacity to enable and trigger a neoliberal relationship with Pilz and Vento Direct drives their actions within the plot. Along the same veins, Chronister praises Juli Zeh for illustrating different material-discursive practices in this novel. In other words, she asserts that Zeh demonstrates how matter actively contributes to the creation of meaning within contemporary political and economic models, while leaving detailed interpretation to the reader, as the relationships analyzed above reveal. Zehâs narrative attributes a degree of agency and decision-making capacity to the landscape, but as matter in relation to the human characters rather than as an isolated entity.104 103 UL, 138. 104 Chronister, âJuli Zeh Landscape,â 118. 57 4.1.3. Arne Seidelâs Relationship with the Village Land Although he is the mayor of Unterleuten, Arne Seidel was never truly interested in politics. His connection to the village is deeply rooted in his personal history. Seidel became an established resident of Unterleuten when he secured a position at the LPG Gute Hoffnung as a âVeterinäringenieurâ (veterinary engineer) in the GDR. From that point on, â[e]r mochte Unterleuten, und er mochte seinen Job. Weil er sich wie die meisten Menschen im Dorf nicht für Politik interessierte, gab es wenig Berührungspunkte mit dem System. Man schimpfte auf die Bonzen aus Berlin und hielt im richtigen Moment den Mund.â105 Over the years, Seidel developed a profound attachment to Unterleuten: âDer Dienst am Dorf hatte ihm das Leben gerettet, also widmete er sein Leben dem Dorf. Was nicht immer einfach war.â106 Unlike Meiler and Pilz, whose motivations are purely profit-driven, Seidelâs support for the wind farm stems not only from the desire to capitalize on the land but also from his long-standing affective bond with the village. In this sense, his relationship to Unterleuten differs significantly from theirs. While Pilz and Meiler embody the interests of external capital and speculative investment, Seidel, though not at the beginning of the plot, however, later represents the village communityâs concerns as they become entangled within the broader mechanisms of capitalism. Seidel has no personal stance for or against regenerative energy, however, his account delineates the dire economic condition of Unterleuten: Zu regenerativen Energien vertrat Arne keine persönliche Meinung, aber eins wusste er mit Sicherheit: Die Gemeindekassen waren leer. Den Kindergarten bedrohte die SchlieÃung, Groà Väter und Beutel brauchten neue Bürgersteige, und die Feuerwehr war seit Langem von Spenden 105 UL, 142. 106 UL, 146. 58 abhängig. In der letzten Gemeinderatssitzung hatten sie darüber diskutiert, die StraÃenbeleuchtung aus Kostengründen nach Mitternacht abzuschalten.107 The municipalityâs financial resources are depleted, the local school is on the verge of closure, and essential emergency services, such as fire protection, survive only through donations. These precarious circumstances lead Seidel to express support for the wind park project. Its completion promises a significant influx of revenue, which could provide the village with the means to revitalize its institutions and overcome long-standing economic hardships. In the following passage, Seidel outlines the potential financial benefits of the wind park for Unterleuten: Pilz hatte eine einfache Kalkulation im Gepäck. Ein Windpark brachte pro Megawatt bis zu 13000 Euro Gewerbesteuer im Jahr. In Unterleuten waren zehn Kraftwerke mit insgesamt fünfzehn Megawatt denkbar. Das Ergebnis lieà sich im Kopf ausrechnen. Sicherheitshalber hatte Arne einen Taschenrechner benutzt. Die Einkünfte würden die bescheidenen Mittel des Dorfs fast verdoppeln.108 Desperate to revive the failing village economy, Seidel weighs two options in his head, and with the help of a calculator tries to lift the baggage of whether one should continue grappling with the endless problems that are plaguing Unterleuten, or capitalize on the village land to generate the revenue necessary for economic rehabilitation. He chooses the latter, thereby ensuring the municipalityâs support for the wind farm project. Yet this decision also exposes the limits of his agency. As Pilz makes clear in his proposal for regenerative energy, ânicht zuständig sind die Gemeinden. Auch nicht Ihr netter Bürgermeister, Herr Arne Seidel.â On the contrary, the construction of wind turbines is declared ânach Bundesgesetz [â¦] im AuÃenbereich privilegiert zulässig.â109 107 UL, 141. 108 UL, 142. 109 UL, 146-147. 59 However, as discussed in the previous section, Seidelâlike most of the villagersâfails to recognize the leverage he holds as mayor in relation to Pilz and Vento Direct. This becomes particularly clear when Pilz elaborates on their plan during the village meeting, as the following illustrates: Trotz des hohen umweltpolitischen Nutzens der Windenergie bedarf es allerdings einer räumlichen Steuerung, um Konflikte mit anderen Nutzungen und Belangen, insbesondere dem Schutz von Natur und Landschaft, zu minimieren. Die überörtliche Steuerung von Windenergieanlagen erfolgt durch die Ausweisung von Eignungsgebieten in den Regionalplänen.110 As Pilz points out, planning and managing the physical spaces (räumliche Steuerung) in the village is essential for Vento Direct to construct the wind farm while avoiding conflicts with other interests, such as nature and landscape preservation. Seidel, however, fails to recognize his agency in this aspect of âräumliche Steuerung.â As mayor, he holds authority over decisions concerning the villageâs spatial organization. Yet, instead of addressing the anticipated backlash from the majority of the community against the wind farm, Seidel focuses solely on potential financial gains, given the villageâs struggling economy, as mentioned earlier. This limited perspective stems from his personal history in the village, marked by a mental breakdown after his wifeâs death and Gombrowskiâs support during his recovery, which leaves him both devoted to Unterleuten and permanently indebted to Gombrowski. As seen multiple times throughout the narrative, Seidel often acts in Gombrowskiâs interests. After the village meeting, Gombrowski comes to meet Seidel. Because Gombrowski helped him during his difficult times, Seidel follows many of his wishes. His motivations are thus deeply shaped by this connection. Consequently, his interactions with the material world in Unterleuten, especially the land, are also influenced by Gombrowski and his connection to the contested area. 110 UL, 147. Italics my emphasis. 60 After the proposal to construct the wind farm, it becomes particularly evident how Seidelâs ties to village, the village land, and Gombrowski are integrally connected: Langsam begannen ihm Gombrowskis Tiraden auf die Nerven zu gehen. Warum Arne ihm nicht rechtzeitig von der Windkraftoption erzählt habe. Dass sie gemeinsam ein besseres Eignungsgebiet ausgesucht hätten. Auf der Schiefen Kappe besitze er, Gombrowski, nur acht Hektar, für den Windpark brauche er aber mindestens zehn, und zwar zusammenhängend. Wie Arne ganz genau wisse, gehe es der Ãkologica nicht besonders gut, sie sei aber immerhin der gröÃte Arbeitgeber in der Region, und die Propeller könnten sie retten.111 Here, Gombrowski highlights Seidelâs earlier-mentioned failure to recognize his agency in the villageâs âräumliche Steuerung.â By not informing Gombrowski in advance about the wind park proposal, Seidel fails to support him and, by extension, Ãkologica GmbH. In doing so, he breaks from his long-standing allegiance to Gombrowski. Gombrowskiâs anger arises from his lack of ownership over most of the land designated for the wind park. Despite having the authority as mayor, Seidel does not intervene by proposing an alternative parcel owned by Gombrowski. As a result, Seidelâs relationship with the village land is mediated through Gombrowski and his deep connection to it. Thus, the Schiefe Kappe, the actual area under consideration, becomes central in shaping the connections between Seidel, Gombrowski, and Unterleuten. As mayor and longtime resident, Seidelâs affection for the village is evident. While his bond with the land is not affective, the village economy is heavily dependent on the resource development, making land a key factor in Seidelâs motivations. His relationship with Gombrowski is equally significant, as both ties intersect with Ãkologica GmbH, the regionâs largest employer. For decades, the village and the company have relied on the land for their economic well-being, yet both now face financial constraints stemming from this dependence. The village and Seidel must look at the wind turbines as a solution, which, in turn, depend on the Schiefe Kappe. Land, therefore, emerges as a unifying element for Seidel, the village, Gombrowski, and Ãkologica. 111 UL, 216-217. 61 Following the wind park proposal, attention once again centers on the land. The Schiefe Kappe acts as a crucial link, serving as a catalyst for economic revitalization and highlighting its integral role in these intertwined connections. Similar to Pilzâs and Meilerâs engagement with land, this dynamic is multidirectional and interdependent. Consequently, Seidel does not oppose the construction of the wind park for most of the plot. Rather, as it turns out, it is his inaction in the face of the villagersâ violence against one another that allows other characters to drive the narrative forward. 4.2. Aesthetic and Utilitarian Relations to the Village Land and Environment: Franzen, Flieà and Gombrowski Linda Franzenâs relationship with Unterleuten and its land could be considered within the previous context of a neoliberal perspective. However, her concrete goals are different than the scrupulously capitalisation of the land as an investment object. As further analysed below, Franzenâs motivations are rooted primarily in the aesthetic qualities of the land. She associates the landâs beauty as ideally suited for realizing her vision of establishing her horse farm. Moreover, beyond Franzenâs ties to the Schiefe Kappe, her relationship with her recently purchased house and the land surrounding it (Villa Kunterbunt and Objekt 108), also play a significant role in the novel. Together, these two relationships highlight how nonhuman material entities shape and motivate Franzenâs actions in the novel. Her antagonist is Gerhard Flieà who is a habilitated sociologist and had taught at the Berlin Institute for Social Sciences at Humboldt University before relocating to Unterleuten. Now he takes up the position as an officer at Seelenheil, Plausitz Nature Conservation Authority, Bird 62 Protection Subdivision, Unterleutner Heide Branch. He represents himself as an environmental activist, yet as the narrative unfolds, it becomes clear that his relationships with nonhuman entities in the village are shaped less by ecological principles than by a profound aestheticization of the rural landscape. His commitment to protecting the endangered bird species found near Unterleuten, the Kampfläufer, is less about biodiversity in itself and more about safeguarding the beauty and atmosphere of the countryside. Together with his wife Jule and recently settled in the village, both embody the type of urban migrants seeking refuge from city life. Hence, FlieÃâs relationship to the land and other nonhuman entities around the village contrast sharply with the capital-oriented attitudes of the characters discussed in the pervious section. What ultimately motivates his actions is not economic gain, but the desire to preserve the rural aesthetic surrounding his home. This can be considered as aestheticized-utilitarian as other charactersâ relationships with the land that are driven by caring for it, albeit in completely different ways, such as in the case of Gombrowski. Rudolf Gombrowski, the leader of the LPG Gute Hoffnung (agricultural co-operative Good Hope), descends from a family of landowners. His father, who once owned a large tract of land around Unterleuten, had his property burned down in the immediate post-war period amid disputes surrounding the founding of the LPG. After his fatherâs death, Gombrowski assumed his role as leader of the village farmers by establishing the collective farm Ãkologica GmbH, continuing to base his livelihood on the village land. Though regarded by many as the selfish villain of Unterleuten, Gombrowski maintains that he has been misunderstood and that his actions have always been guided by concern for the villageâs welfare. His relationship with the landâas both a farmer and a long-time residentâis thus characterized by mutual respect and care. However, with the rising land-leasing prices and the proposal of the wind park, this 63 relationship becomes increasingly strained, shifting toward a more utilitarian and economically driven one. 4.2.1. Linda Franzenâs Relationship with the Village Land(scape) and Environment Throughout the novel, Franzen engages in various machinations. She promises Meiler the sale of her land, which he needs for the construction of a wind farm on his property, while at the same time assuring Gombrowski that she intends to sell the very same plot to him. By playing both sides, she hopes to secure financial compensation from Meiler as well as the area of land behind her house. In addition, she seeks to exploit Gombrowskiâs influence within the village to obtain a building permit for her horse stable. Franzenâs original motivation to move to Unterleuten lies in her desire to establish a horse stable and farm for her beloved horse, Bergamotte. Her deep attachment to Bergamotte is quite evident in her daily life and repeatedly emphasised in the narrative: Wenn sie doch einmal schwächelte, wenn sie verzweifelt meinte, dass der Berg von Arbeit immer gröÃer statt kleiner werde, musste sie nur die Augen schlieÃen und an Bergamotte denken, wie er in vorschriftsmäÃiger Haltung stand, den Hals aufgewölbt, die Ohren gespitzt, das rechte Hinterbein einen halben Schritt zurückgestellt. Das cremefarbene Fell glänzte wie Lack. Der Gedanke an Bergamotte heilte Muskelkater und Frustration.112 Because Berlin offered no suitable environment to raise a horse, Franzen was forced to live apart from Bergamotte. Her longing to be close to her beloved horse ultimately inspired her to pursue a business idea as a solution to this problem: Die Reitställe in Berliner Stadtnähe stellten für einen künftigen Zuchthengst keine angemessene Umgebung dar. Unter einer Bedingung hatte sich Linda bereit erklärt, in die Hauptstadt zu ziehen und Bergamotte auf dem Oldenburger Gestüt zurückzulassen: Sie würden so bald wie möglich eine Gelegenheit finden, das Pferd nachzuholen, und Frederik würde sie dabei unterstützen. Da 112 Ul, 39-40. 64 Linda in Berlin nicht auf Anhieb einen Job als Bereiterin fand, bekämpfte sie Langeweile und die Sehnsucht nach Bergamotte mit einer Geschäftsidee.113 Franzen discovers the property Objekt 108 through an online listing and quickly realises it is an ideal location for her envisioned horse farm. Beyond the desire to be reunited with Bergamotte, she is also motivated by the wish to display the horseâs beauty for others to admire. For Franzen, it is therefore mainly important to cultivate an aesthetically pleasing environment for her house, garden and the surrounding pastures. She envisions the horse farm literally as Lebenswelt, as âein Stück Weltâ114 and elaborates on this vision: Bergamotte brauchte nicht nur einen Platz zum Leben, sondern auch die Möglichkeit, seine Schönheit an möglichst viele Nachkommen weiterzugeben. Ãberhaupt ging es um das Herstellen von Schönheit, im Haus, im Garten, auf den Weiden. Pferde unter Obstbäumen, Pferde im hohen Gras, Pferde im Licht der untergehenden Sonne. Dieser Traum war Lindas Zukunft, und nur weil er einer Postkartensammlung glich, hieà das noch lange nicht, dass er sich nicht realisieren lieÃ.115 This idyllic description of her envisioned horse farm, with horses grazing under fruit trees, wandering through tall grass, and basking in the light of the setting sun, reveals Franzenâs aestheticized and idyllic imagination of the farm. As she explores the area around her villa, she recognises its potential to bring this vision to life. Her villa is somewhat run-down, but for her, it evokes the charm of an old, winding, enchanted dream house. She finds the surrounding land equally beautiful. Franzenâs aestheticized vision aligns closely with the concept of a stereotypical landscape discussed earlier. As Linke explains, a stereotypical landscape is the imagined imageâshaped by strongly idealized elementsâthat comes to mind when one is asked to describe a landscape. This imagined landscape, influenced not only by individual preferences but also by the physical features present before the viewer, plays a crucial role in determining 113 UL, 34. 114 UL, 39. 115 Ibid. 65 whether a particular space is perceived positively as a landscape.116 Franzen embodies this very tendency: she is aware that her dream of an idyllic horse farm resembles the postcard-like sceneries that constitute her own stereotypical image of a landscape. Nonetheless, she remains determined to bring this vision to life. Motivated to manifest her dream, together, the villa and its surrounding land provide Franzen with the physical means to realize her aestheticized vision. Considering the above excerpt as an example, Franzen is, to some extent, portrayed as an exaggerated representation of the archetype constantly striving for self-optimization and seizing every opportunity afforded by personal freedom. Her move to Unterleuten and the accompanying land acquisition amplify her desire for recognition. Continuously citing Manfred Gortzâa fictional self-help author created by Zeh herself, who writes about how to achieve success in life and whose book serves as Franzenâs guiding philosophyâand driven by her desire to realize an aestheticized vision of her horse farm and rural life, Franzen embodies Zehâs deliberate critique of the contemporary social discourse on self-realization.117 The following quote illustrates how Franzen describes her vision for her horse farm around her villa: Nach dem Blick durchs Fenster hatten sie noch einen Spaziergang über das Grundstück unternommen. Es gab einige Nebengebäude, die sie ausgiebig besichtigten. Getreidespeicher, Hühner- und Schweinestall, Geräteschuppen. Sie freuten sich über verrostete Eggen, Futterkrippen, Teile eines ausgeschlachteten DDR-Traktors. Linda redete ununterbrochen. Den Getreidespeicher konnte man ausbauen, hier die Box von Bergamotte, da die Sattelkammer, dort der Laufstall für die Fohlen. Dahinten der Stutentrakt. Hinter der Gartengrenze einfach nur Land, Land, Land bis zum Horizont.118 The repeated use of the word âlandâ underscores its central role as the ultimate affording nonhuman entity in Franzenâs goal of establishing a horse farm. Other nonhuman elements around her villaâsuch as the granary, barns, and the old tractorâalso contribute to the aesthetic 116 Linke, Die Ãsthetik medialer Landschaftskonstrukte, 79, 81. 117 Stetter, âPolyvalente Perspektiven auf das Land,â 268. 118 UL, 36. 66 appeal of the property that is the focus of her perception. This beauty fosters a distinct relationship between Franzen and her surroundings, where her aesthetic vision of the land can be interpreted as being transformed into a more practical, utilitarian purpose. The perception of the aesthetic beauty of her land property enables Franzen to realize her idyllic vision of the horse farm. This parcel of land turns into a landscape with perceived aesthetic qualities that enables Franzen to bring her idyllic horse farm to life, regardless of whether this plan fits into any other conception of the environment, coming either from the village peopleâs own traditions, or from the land itself. Similarly, other characters, like Gerhard FlieÃ, are influenced by their aesthetic relationship to the village land(scape). However, FlieÃâs vision of a picturesque rural village ultimately conflicts with Franzenâs plans for her horse farm. Later in the plot, Franzen receives a letter from Gerhard Flieà of the Unterleuten âVogelschutzbund,â in which Flieà stresses that the untouched aesthetic of the landscape, particularly the area around her villa that is part of the âUnterleutner Heide,â that needs to be preserved. In the letter, Flieà states the following: Zaunanlagen im Landschaftsschutzgebiet Unterleutner Heide [sind] genehmigungspflichtig. Die Unversehrtheit der Landschaft ist zu wahren. Zudem besteht die Gefahr, dass sich Singvögel in oder an den Zaunanlagen tödlich verletzen. Wir bringen auch dieses Vorhaben zur Anzeige und weisen Sie heute schon darauf hin, dass wir der Naturschutzbehörde Plausitz anraten werden, ihre obligatorische Einwilligung im betreffenden Genehmigungsverfahren nicht zu erteilen.119 FlieÃâs refusal to grant consent in the approval procedures for Franzenâs horse farm is motivated by his desire to preserve the landscape and protect wildlife, although it is partly masked by his personal intentions. In this context, he can be interpreted as advocating for the village landscape and resisting its alteration. Initially, it might appear that he is trying to embody the landscape itself, allowing it to influence decision-making in the village. However, as the plot unfolds, this 119 UL, 45. 67 interpretation seems more like a façade than a true reflection of his intentions. Nevertheless, Franzen is unable to secure the necessary permits directly and must seek alternative routes to obtain the Baugenehmigung for her horse farm. The clash between her aestheticized vision of the land and FlieÃâs perspective makes this process anything but straightforward. This complexity drives Franzen to resort to scheming, especially after she discovers that Schiefe Kappe âthe contested land for the wind farmâ includes a significant portion of land she owns. Franzenâs idyllic vision of the village land shapes her utilitarian relationship with it. Such a relationship should not be seen as a simple one-way imposition but as a multidirectional and mutually established dynamic. More concretely, it is Franzenâs perception of her property that transforms it into a landscape with aesthetic value. Yet her role in this perception is limited to the act of unifying the elementsâsuch as the tractor or the open fieldâinto a coherent whole. In this regard, Georg Simmel theorises that a landscape only comes into being when human consciousness gathers the many separate elements into a unified vision. A true landscape, then, is not merely a collection of trees, fields, or houses standing side by side, but a higher sense of unity that transcends their individual details. For Simmel, landscape always implies a boundary, a frame within a temporary or lasting field of vision. The material elements within this frame may still be thought of as ânature,â but once perceived as a landscape, they acquire a new status.120 If we take Simmelâs conceptualisation as valid, then the act of mentally conceiving a piece of land as a landscape depends fundamentally on the material foundation presented within 120 Georg Simmel, âThe Philosophy of Landscape,â Theory, Culture & Society 24, no. 7â8 (2007): 20â22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276407084465. It is important to note that Simmel rejects the idea that the âfeeling for natureâ only arose in modernity, noting that early religions already embodied it. He rather states that What came later was the recognition of landscape, which required separating parts of nature from its original unity. This new way of seeing reflected modernityâs broader drive to break wholes into distinct, self-contained entities. In this sense, Simmel argues that landscape painting capitalized on and confirmed the late emergence of landscape as a cultural object. 68 a framed of vision. Without these elements, the mental process cannot occur. In other words, natural entities when becoming materialâtrees, tractors, granaries, the telluric land itselfâafford the perceiver the possibility of conceiving land as landscape. In this sense, although Franzenâs motivation to establish a horse farm drives her actions in the novel, it is ultimately the landâthe ground itselfâand the physical presence of other material entities that, by simply being in place, manifest as familiar to her as a landscape. In other words, what emerges is an âexistential affordance,â as Bjørnar Olsen describes in the context of socioculturally constituted qualities of material things, which creates the actual environment that enables Franzenâs mental process of conceiving a landscape. Had the environment around the village been characterised by different attributes related to other forms of nature, such as swamps or deserts, it would not have been possible for Franzen to perceive it within the same idyllic frame that supports her utilitarian goal of building a horse farm. Another aspect Olsen highlights, which is also relevant in Franzenâs case, is the trusted durability conveyed by the in-placeness of nonhuman material entitiesâfor instance, the open field behind Franzenâs garden has a âholding-in-readinessâ for the future of this utilitarian relationship. That means, having this open area of land physically present at its current location for the near future serves to be a trustworthy factor for Franzen to hold on to her vison of an aesthetic landscape. Thus, while Franzenâs anthropocentric perspective motivates her vision of the land as landscape, on a deeper analytical level, it is the specific traits of nonhuman entities that, even within a utilitarian framework, make her idyllic vision possible.121 121 Bjørnar Olsen, âReclaiming Things: An Archaeology of Matter,â in How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies, ed. Paul R. Carlile, Davide Nicolini, Ann Langley, and Haridimos Tsoukas (Oxford University Press, 2013), 184. 69 Franzenâs case differs from that of Meiler and Pilz, whose relationship with the village land is bound up with asserting power and control. Her engagement with the land is instead shaped first through its aestheticization into a landscape, which then shifts toward a utilitarian dimension as she pursues the establishment of her horse farm. As Carlile et al. note in their discussion of sociomateriality, relationships with nonhuman entitiesâwhether landscapes, building layouts, trees, or vegetationâare not external to humans but ontologically inseparable from them.122 Franzenâs vision of her villa and the surrounding fields, imagined as an ideal setting for a horse farm, demonstrates how such nonhuman entities acquire meaning within human life. In this sense, her utilitarian relationship with the land and built environment does not merely reflect her goals; it actively shapes her motivations and drives her actions in the novelâs unfolding plot. Another point that differentiates Franzenâs relationship from Meiler is that, for her, the land is more than just a âGrundstückâ or an investment object. She illustrates this perspective: Für einen wie Meiler waren ein paar Windräder doch nur Spielerei, ein neues Hobby, das darin bestand, sich als Grundstücksspekulant in Ostdeutschland zu versuchen. Für ihn stand nichts Existenzielles auf dem Spiel, kein Objekt 108, das saniert werden musste, kein Bergamotte, der ein Zuhause brauchte.123 Her actions are shaped by her motivationally and emotionally driven relationships with her villa, the surrounding land, and her horse, Bergamotte. In addition, Franzen owns one of the three parcels of land that make up Schiefe Kappe. Once Schiefe Kappe is identified as the most suitable site for a wind farm, Franzen leverages her ownership of this portion of land over Meiler and Gombrowski. This ownership allows her to realize her vision for the horse farm. Lastly, as the plot unfolds, Franzen comes to recognise and emphasises the physical materiality of the land and its importance in human social life: 122 Carlile et al., âHow Matter Matters,â 8. 123 UL, 531. 70 Das Land, auf dem das Haus stand, wollte bewirtschaftet und verteidigt werden. Land verlangte nach Expansion. Land brachte Menschen zusammen und verheiratete Nachbarn zu vielköpfigen Zwangsehen. Inzwischen glaubte Linda, dass das menschliche Schicksal nicht an Gott, sondern am Grundbesitz hing.124 Here, Franzen underscores the active role of land in fostering and shaping interpersonal relationships in Unterleuten. Her words can be read as an implicit claim that the fate of the villageâs human characters is inseparably bound to their ties with the land. By anthropomorphizing the village terrain, she presents it as a valuable assetâsomething that simultaneously demands to be capitalized on and expanded, while also acting as an active force in structuring human society. In this sense, the land not only anchors physical dwellings together but also, in her striking metaphor of âmarrying neighbors,â compels social and spatial bonds among the villagers. FlieÃâs and Franzenâs complementary aesthetic, yet divergent utilitarian relationships with the village environment often clash with those of other characters, creating tension and driving their actions in the plot of the novel. 4.2.2. Gerhard FlieÃâs Relationship with the Village Land(scape) and Environment Flieà and his wife Jule serve as a representative of those who have become repulsed by urban existence and the conveniences of modernity, turning to a life in the rural villages to escape from the city. In this sense, Flieà views rural life as an alternative to the recent social changes in city life, prompting a search for renewal in a village setting. His perspective aligns with that of other newcomers, offering an outsiderâs gaze shaded by expectations of what village life ought to provide. His motivations to leave the city are driven by a rose-coloured gaze of the village, but 124 UL, 418. 71 even more by the possibility of manifesting an alternative to the city reality which he started to reject: Ihr gemeinsamer Plan, die Stadt zu verlassen, war relativ spontan entstanden und hatte sich doch schon vor Jahren abgezeichnet. Für Gerhard hatte der Umzug aufs Land eine Kündigungserklärung dargestellt. Er kündigte nicht nur seinen Job, sondern auch die Mitgliedschaft in einer Gesellschaft, in der es nur noch darum ging, beim groÃen Ausverkauf der Werte die eigenen Schäfchen ins Trockene zu bringen.125 Beyond his attraction to a socially vibrant and value rich village life, it is clear that his perception of this kind of life is strongly shaped by the villageâs physical location, being removed from the city. The materiality of the land, such as the variety of trees and plants in the village landscape, also plays a key role in his idyllic vision of land as nature. When describing his and his wifeâs life in Unterleuten two years after moving there, his detailed portrayal of their garden as a âParadiesâ and his reflections on the village land underscore his aestheticized perception of the environment: Zwei Jahre später hatten die neuen Himbeersträucher im Garten bereits reichlich getragen. An allen vier Hausecken blühten Glyzinien, und Gerhard hatte ein Gemüsebeet angelegt, in dem ein paar Reihen Bohnen, Zwiebeln und Möhren gegen die gärtnerische Ahnungslosigkeit ihrer Besitzer kämpften. Als der Garten begann, einer Ecke des Paradieses zu gleichen, wurde Jule schwanger.126 The passage above highlights a contrasting vision of the city landscape. In FlieÃâs garden, a wide variety of plantsâsuch as raspberry and wisteria shrubsâthrive alongside vegetable plants that continue to bloom despite minimal care. Particularly striking, in the context of humanânonhuman relationships, is the anthropomorphic description of these plants. They are portrayed as resisting or countering the will of their âowner,â namely Flieà and his aesthetic vision for the garden without having the experience and knowledge to properly cultivate it, his âgärtnerische Ahnungslosigkeitâ. This depiction highlights a tension: while Flieà imagines his relationship 125 UL, 19-20. 126 UL, 23. 72 with the plants in terms of an object driven ownership dynamic, the plants themselves are represented as active agents pushing back against this framework. Flieà and his wife cherish their new home and consider the idea of expanding their garden. In the following description, they express their satisfaction with their newfound home and idyllic garden, while also sharing their potential plans to enlarge it: Wenn sie abends vor dem Haus saÃen, sprachen sie manchmal über die Idee, auch noch das angrenzende Grundstück zu erwerben. Es wurde nur durch einen wackeligen Drahtzaun von ihrem eigenen Garten getrennt und beherbergte einen kleinen, seit langer Zeit leer stehenden Hof, ein würfelförmiges Wohnhaus mit halb verfallenen Nebengebäuden. Das Grundstück besaà wenig Charme, aber Jule mochte den Gedanken, die Gebäude abzureiÃen und auf diese Weise den Garten zu erweitern. Ein Mensch konnte niemals genug Land besitzen â so viel hatte sie ihre neue Existenz im provinziellen Paralleluniversum bereits gelehrt. Gerhard hatte nichts dagegen. Erst das Baby, dann expandieren, sagte er, und sie lachten.127 Jule associates the plot of land with a lack of aesthetic qualityânamely, charm. Because of this absence, she struggles to perceive it as a landscape. For her and the Flieà family, the idea of demolishing the small surrounding structures offers a way to compensate for this perceived deficiency and to cultivate the charm she links to a proper landscape. Linkeâs concept of the stereotypical landscape is useful in interpreting Juleâs perspective, particularly her notion of what Linke calls âstörend bezeichnete Elementeââphysical features commonly judged as disturbing in the process of landscape construction. As Linke explains, objects described as ugly or disturbing tend to remain negatively evaluated. When spaces designated as landscapes are perceived as ugly, it results either from the absence of stereotypical landscape elements or from the presence of elements deemed disturbing.128 In this sense, eliminating the âHof,â the âWohnhaus,â and its âNebengebäudeââall considered disturbing elementsâtogether with their 127 Ibid. 128 Linke, Die Ãsthetik medialer Landschaftskonstrukte, 33. 73 possession of a surplus of land, allows Jule and the Flieà family to reimagine and reshape the site into a landscape infused with charm. This view of the countryside clearly highlights the important role of land ownership in the life of Flieà and his wife. After living in the village for two years, Flieà achieves his envisioned rural lifestyle. His village life is largely shaped by nonhuman elements such as forests, plants, birds, and expansive areas of land. With fewer buildings and infrastructure, the village offers an abundance of open land, which Flieà associates with the potential to expand his idyllic vision of home. In this way, the village land enables Flieà to realize his aestheticized and to some extent also an (a)political ideal of a rural life. In an interview about Unterleuten, Zeh describes the character of Flieà as representing the purest form of apoliticism: [â¦] er steht für eine groÃe Mentalitätsverschiebung: eine Haltung, die sagt, dass mich Staat und Gemeinschaft, die für mich sorgen, den Müll holen, die StraÃen asphaltieren, dass mich das als Ganzes nicht mehr interessiert. Wer so denkt, verweigert im Grunde alles, was mit mehr Welt als dem Dorf zu tun hat. Das ist in der reinsten Form apolitisch. Gegen die Polis, gegen das Gemeinwesen.129 In this excerpt, Zehâs focus on the escape from the city to the countryside lies at the center of a transformationâfrom FlieÃâs former political engagement to a position of political resentment, a shift made possible by the affordances of Unterleutenâs rural material environment. Another way to interpret FlieÃâs apoliticism is through his self-proclaimed commitment to conserving the village environment in response to the proposed construction of the wind farm. While this initially appears to reflect upon a genuine concern for environmental preservation, it soon becomes clearâas discussed later in this sectionâthat his motivations are primarily self-interested. This self-serving stance undermines the political dimension of his supposed environmentalism. Although this environmentalism relies heavily on the nonhuman ânature,â his 129 Juli Zeh, âDas zeozwei-Gespräch mit Juli Zeh,â interview by Hanna Gersmann, taz, April 5, 2016. https://taz.de/Das-zeozwei-Gespraech-mit-Juli-Zeh/!162122/. 74 position becomes apolitical precisely because, it ultimately reduces ânatureâ to the status of an object in need of preservation rather than recognizing its inherent rights or agency. Hence, FlieÃâs relationship with the land in Unterleuten is characterized by codependence. When his idealized vision of the landscape is threatened, he intervenes to protect it. As seen when Franzen attempts to build her horse farm, he denies her the construction permit under the pretext of âLandschaftsschutz.â Though outwardly fulfilling his role as the âVogelschützer,â his actions are driven less by regulation than by his own aesthetic, yet ultimately utilitarian, relationship to the village landscape. His vision of Unterleuten as a paradise depends on both aestheticization and preservation, but this process is not independent of material conditions. Just as Franzenâs landscape is afforded by the tangible environment around her, FlieÃâs imagined landscape rests on the physical presence of his garden, the Unterleutner Heide, and the bird species such as the Kampfläufer that inhabit it. Hence, when this vision of this landscape is threatened by Vento Directâs proposed construction of the wind farm, it is FlieÃâs relationship with the village land and environment that drives his actions. Even the mere idea of the proposal evokes a sense of unease within him: âAllein die Vorstellung, am Rand dieser Idylle einen Windpark zu errichten, löste bei Gerhard einen Lachreiz aus, der in Grauen überging, wenn er sich klarmachte, dass es sich nicht um einen Witz handelte.â130 He realises that the city life and the land(scape) which he escaped in moving to Unterleuten has followed him to his new paradise-like home: Er war nicht aufs Land gezogen, um zu erleben, wie der urbane Wahnsinn die Provinz erreichte. Er verzichtete nicht auf Theater, Kino, Kneipe, Bäcker, Zeitungskiosk und Arzt, um durchs Schlafzimmerfenster auf einen Maschinenpark zu schauen, dessen Rotoren die ländliche Idylle zu einer beliebigen strukturschwachen Region verquirlten.131 130 UL, 186. 131 UL, 184. 75 In this sense, portraying the archetype that Jacobsen critiques, Flieà embodies a contradictory image to that of Pilz, who prefers to sustain both a physical and mental distance from the village. Seeking refuge in the village as an escape from urban lifeâmarked by theaters, cinemas, and barsâhe now confronts a disturbance that threatens to reintroduce precisely those aspects of city life he wished to leave behind. As a result, now he and his family are left with only two options: either to fight against the wind farm or to escape again to another place: Wenn auf der Anhöhe im Westen ein Windpark stünde, wäre Gerhards Haus, für dessen Sanierung er sich bis an sein Lebensende verschuldet hatte, keinen Pfifferling mehr wert. Das würde bedeuten, dass sie nicht wegziehen konnten, selbst wenn sie es wollten. Und Jule wäre bestimmt niemals in der Lage, sich mit dem Anblick der drehenden Rotoren zu arrangieren.132 Reluctant to leave his newly established home, Flieà chooses to fight against the wind farm and the capitalism represented by Vento Direct. His resistance can be understood as a defense of the land(scape) of Unterleuten. While speaking with Gombrowski, the leader of the village group supporting the wind farm, Flieà emphasises that his opposition is not only to the wind park but also to capitalism itself. He positions himself as the protector of the village community, standing against this force. In doing so, Flieà declares a war with Gombrowski, creating a clear a rift between them: âDer Widerstand richtet sich nicht nur gegen Windkraftanlagen in Unterleutenâ, fuhr Gerhard fort, âsondern gegen ein Grundübel des Kapitalismus: Der Einzelne bereichert sich auf Kosten der Gemeinschaft.â [â¦] âLeute wie Sie sehen nur ihren eigenen Nutzen, und das System gibt ihnen recht. Wir leben in einer Welt, in der Ãrzte das Gesundheitswesen zerstören. Universitäten zerstören das Wissen, Regierungen die Freiheit und Banken die Wirtschaft. Und Bauern die Natur. Aber die Menschen werden sich diese Ungerechtigkeit nicht länger gefallen lassen.â [â¦] âDer Kampf hat begonnen.â133 As this conversation illustrates, Flieà attributes the hardships of the common people to flaws in the capitalistic system, presenting his opinions on its failures as if they were facts. These 132 UL, 185. 133 UL, 304. 76 views are portrayed as the primary motivations behind his resistance to the wind park, though as the plot unfolds, they are revealed to be somewhat superficial. Flieà frames his concern for the village landscape under the guise of environmental conservation. He positions himself as the sole environmental advocate among the villagers, while others focus on their own selfish interests. However, by performing his duties as the protector of birdlife, he also reinforces his self-image. In this role, as the following description of his objections to the project highlights, Flieà further justifies his opposition to the wind park by invoking scientific arguments: Windkraftanlagen zerstörten nicht nur die Landschaft, töteten Vögel und beeinträchtigten die Gesundheit der Anwohner. Sie waren auch unwirtschaftlich und ergaben in ökologischer Hinsicht überhaupt keinen Sinn. Da sich Strom nicht effizient speichern lieÃ, führte die Unzuverlässigkeit des Windes zu einer miserablen Energiebilanz. AuÃerdem war der CO2-Ausstoà bei Herstellung der Anlagen enorm. Offensichtlich dienten die Propeller weniger dem Erzeugen von umweltfreundlicher Energie als dem Abgreifen von Steuergeldern.134 Flieà assumes the role of an enlightened outsider from the city, offering factual and scientific arguments against the construction of the wind park. His character embodies the archetype of those who leave the city due to political disillusionment and a lack of meaningful participation.135 Consequently, the above quote can be interpreted as a facade of his true intentions. This interpretation aligns with Maria Stehleâs analysis: â[FlieÃ] lobbies against the wind turbines, presumably to protect the rare birdsâ nesting grounds but more likely because the turbines would obscure his view, decrease his property values, and thwart his image of pristine country life, the idyllic chronotope he tries to project but fails to live.â136 FlieÃâs vision of pristine country life is deeply tied to physical material environment, prompting him to protect it 134 UL, 187. 135 Stetter, âPolyvalente Perspektiven auf das Land,â 272. 136 Stehle, Plants, Places, and Power, 34. 77 by lobbying against the wind turbines. It is this particular âin-placenessâ of the landâs nonhuman material entitiesâsuch as ground, fences, houses, plants, trees, wind, and birdsâthat allow Flieà to manifest his idyllic image of the village in the first place and further cultivate his aesthetic relationship with the village environment. Lastly, as the thesis has argued, FlieÃâs longing for an idyllic, peaceful village life and his consequent violent expressions against other characters, including dehumanisation of his neighbour Schaller, are driven by his relationship with two nonhuman entities: to some extent the Kampfläufer and, the village environment itself, especially the land(scape). However, as his fate unfolds, the novel suggests that this kind of aestheticized relationship with land must be critically reevaluated, as he attacks his neighbour Schaller who threatens his paradise-like home, which leads to his imprisonment. 4.2.3. Rudolf Gombrowski Relationship with the Village Land Although Gombrowski takes on the leadership position of the collective farm Ãkologica GmbH later in life, he has for long understood the importance of land for a farmer, a respect instilled in him since his fatherâs time. As the following illustrates, Gombrowski has maintained a long-standing relationship with the village land, characterized by mutual respect: [â¦] die Natur zeigte sich wenig empfänglich für kommunistische Weltbilder. Sie bestand auf ihren eigenen Gesetzen. Ãber Generationen hinweg hatten die Bauern gelernt, dem sandigen Boden seine Früchte abzuringen. Sie lebten auf dem Land, mit dem Land und für das Land.137 Gombrowskiâs perspective underscores the active quality of ânature,â governed by its own laws. In particular, he reflects on the relationship between himself, the other farmers, and the 137 UL, 88-89. 78 village land, whose sandy soil they have learned to cultivate. In doing so, he emphasizes how his and the other farmersâ lives have always revolved around the telluric land of the village. During the difficult period of the 1960s, with the onset of the forced imposition of agricultural cooperatives, people who became refugees during Germanyâs capitulation after World War II and took over the farms of experienced farmers who had left the country. Many of these newcomers were not farmers themselves and were unfamiliar with local conditions. As a result, Unterleuten and particularly the Gombrowski family, were deeply affected. While many chose to leave Unterleuten, the Gombrowski family remained. On his fatherâs deathbed, Gombrowski made a promise to him: âdass er Agrarwissenschaften studieren, in die LPG eintreten und sich eine Führungsposition erarbeiten werde.â He was also determined to reclaim the land his family had lost during the capitulation for the sake of the family and the entire village: âzum Wohl der Familie und des ganzen Dorfs.â138 Like Seidel, Gombrowski maintains a deep connection to Unterleuten, particularly to the village land. Both exemplify a group of characters who differ from the newly arrived villagers who lack an emotional attachment to the community. Furthermore, after the reunification, Gombrowski saves the previous LPG âGute Hoffnungâ and establishes the Ãkologica GmbH. As the following description of his perspective highlights, his motivations for saving the LPG are for the good of the village: Wenn es gelang, den Betrieb zu retten, behielt Unterleuten seine Vergangenheit und gewann eine neue Zukunft hinzu. Demgegenüber trat die Frage nach Gombrowskis Familienbesitz völlig in den Hintergrund. Es ging nicht um Recht oder Unrecht, sondern darum, die Unterleutner Heimat vor dem Zerfall zu bewahren.139 138 UL, 171. 139 UL, 176. 79 The good deeds Gombrowski performed for the village in the past, as the manager and owner of Ãkologica, are no longer recognized by the community. Lately, he has been the target of blame from the villagers due to the poor economic conditions: Die Milchpreise waren im Keller, die Agrarsubventionen sollten gekürzt werden, und weil der Staat seit der Schuldenkrise Geld brauchte, sorgte das Finanzministerium mithilfe der Treuhand-Nachfolgeorganisation dafür, dass die Preise für landwirtschaftliche Flächen sukzessive erhöht wurden. Bald würde sich die Ãkologica die Pacht ihrer Felder nicht mehr leisten können.140 The governmentâs decision to raise the price of agricultural land created new challenges for Gombrowski. These difficulties concern him not only because they affect his own life, but also because they have an impact on the villagers. Ãkologica is the primary source of income for Gombrowski and for many others in the village. As a collective farm, it relied entirely on the village land. Gombrowskiâs family history, along with his current relationship with Ãkologica, establishes a deep and enduring connection to the land. While considering the LPGâs future, he recognises that his secretary, Betty, would be the ideal candidate to take over, as he has no direct heir. Yet, reflecting on his life in Unterleuten and his relationship with Ãkologica, he comes to understand that it is the telluric village land that has afforded him the occupation of a farmer and hence played the most significant role in shaping his life: Das ist dann das letzte Kapitel meiner Familiengeschichte, dachte Gombrowski: Eine junge Frau, mit der ich nicht einmal verwandt bin, führt einen EU-subventionierten Betrieb. Dafür hatte er ein Leben lang gekämpft, erst gegen die Kommunisten, dann gegen die Kapitalisten. Dabei hatte es immer nur einen wahren Diktator gegeben: das Land. Es wollte gepflegt, bewirtschaftet und beschützt werden, vor dem Wetter, vor gierigen Vogelschwärmen, Ungeziefer und Spekulanten. Vielleicht, dachte Gombrowski, war es meine gröÃte Schwäche, dass ich es nicht geschafft habe, mich aus dieser Sklaverei zu lösen.141 In retrospect, Gombrowski personifies the village land as the âtrue dictatorâ that made him a slave. He anthropomorphizes it as a demanding entity that must be cared for, cultivated, and 140 UL, 91. 141 UL, 495. 80 protectedâfrom the weather, flocks of birds, vermin, and even investor-speculators. Though capable of resisting larger forces such as communists and capitalists, Gombrowski admits that his greatest weakness lies in being unable to free himself from what he calls the âslaveryâ of the land. His relationship with the village land thus stands apart from the other characters âone in which the land itself holds an active position, fostering a relationship of mutual respect between them. Unlike Meiler or Pilz, Gombrowski sees land as more than just an investment. Rather than assigning it a monetary value, he approaches it from a farmerâs perspective. His relationship with the land he owns is grounded in a mutual exchange of nurturing and provision. He expresses discontent toward the new inhabitants of Unterleuten, viewing them as an alien presence that disrupts his long-established connection with the village and its land. Gombrowski carefully observes the newcomers and rightly questions their intentions and motivations: Dazu kamen noch die Spinner aus dem Westen. Die einen spielten Superkapitalisten, ersteigerten Hunderte Hektar zu Phantasiepreisen, weil sie gerade Lust dazu verspürten, und hoben dadurch die Bodenrichtwerte weiter an. Die anderen gehörten zur Kategorie âWeltenretter,â zogen nach Unterleuten, um im Auftrag des Naturschutzes ein paar dämliche Vögel gegen die örtliche Landwirtschaft zu verteidigen, und verwandelten jedes neue Silo und jede geplante Flächenumnutzung in eine Staatsaffäre mit Genehmigungspflichten, reihenweisen Aktenordnern und nervtötenden Behördenverfahren.142 Seeing the influx of newcomers, combined with the governmentâs increase in land prices, Gombrowski realizes that maintaining his long-established relationship with the land in Unterleuten is becoming nearly impossible: ââDie Gemeinde ist pleite, und auch die Kräfte der Ãkologica sind erschöpft.ââ143 Gombrowski is unable to maintain his established relationship with the land, one built on a reciprocal exchange of nurturing and provision. Consequently, his 142 UL, 91-92. 143 UL, 294. 81 relationship with the land begins to change. Prioritizing the welfare and well-being of Unterleuten, he must reveal the dire economic situation of Ãkologica and the village. He also identifies what he sees as the only way to overcome this crisis: âWenn Unterleuten überleben soll, braucht es einen Weg in die neue Zeit. Daher die Idee mit der Windkraft. Wissen Sie, schön finde ich die Propeller auch nicht. Aber wenn es heiÃt: Kinderbetreuung oder Zugvögel, dann werde ich mich für die Kinderbetreuung entscheiden.â144 As the quote above illustrates, Gombrowski stands in opposition to FlieÃ. He prioritizes local social issues, such as education for children, over protecting a migratory bird. Moreover, the welfare of Gombrowskiâs family is closely tied to the income generated from leasing his land for the wind turbines. When it becomes clear that the most suitable site for the wind park includes a portion of his property, the land transforms into not only a source of personal financial security but also a means to support the survival of the village. In this way, as the following passage shows, it is the land itself that enables the construction of the wind park and, by extension, would afford Gombrowski the opportunity to secure an alternative source of income while contributing to the economic well-being of the village community: Er mühte sich ab, um Hildes Tochter eines Tages eine gesunde Wirtschaft hinterlassen zu können. In letzter Zeit hatte dieses Vorhaben angesichts der ökonomischen Lage immer unrealistischer gewirkt. Aber seit gestern Abend wusste er, wie es funktionieren konnte: mit zehn Windrädern, die Jahr für Jahr eine anständige Rendite abwarfen.145 The prospect of securing a stable income from the land fundamentally transforms Gombrowskiâs earlier relationship with it. What was once grounded in mutual respect and care shifts toward a utilitarian, capitalistic approach, similar to the attitudes of Meiler or Pilz. This transformation, combined with his interactions with other characters, drives Gombrowskiâs actions further throughout the plot. He negotiates a deal with Franzen, pressures Flieà to grant 144 Ibid. 145 UL, 182. 82 Franzen a permit for the horse farm and consolidates his position in the broader rivalry with Kron, as elaborated on below. These developments demonstrate how each characterâs relationship with the land not only shapes their individual decisions but also intersects with those of others, intensifying conflicts within the village community. 4.3. Affective Relations to the Village Land and Environment: Kron and Kron-Hübschke Katherinâs relationship to the land is different from those that are purely pragmatic or utilitarian. In such relationships, the land is valued mainly for its material affordances, even if there is a sense of co-dependence. By contrast, Katherinâs connection, and to some extent her father Kronâs too, are shaped by intimate and precise local knowledge. Being long-time residents of Unterleuten, this knowledge has over time created an emotional connection to the area, and thus to the telluric land, forest, and other nonhuman entities. As long-time residents of Unterleuten, they have developed an emotional connection to the area over time, extending to the land, the forest, and other nonhuman entities. Their relationships are shaped by these enduring ties to the village itself, rather than by external expectations imposed from outside. It is notable that these are the only two main characters who do not meet a tragic end at the conclusion of the novel, such as untimely death, serious injury, or extreme financial loss. This suggests that the novel proposes an alternative: when the land and other nonhuman entities are approached in a more affective and respectful way, they can open a path toward more sustainable forms of life that embrace both the so-called ânaturalâ environment and human sociality. 83 4.3.1. Kronâs Relationship with the Village Land and Environment Kron is from a family of small farmers who had scraped an impoverished livelihood from the barren earth for generations. Kron, along with Gombrowski, is one of the few people who were born in Unterleuten and live there to this day. After the Second World War and capitulation of Germany, Kron and Gombrowski clashed over different political and ideological orientations. This was mainly a direct result of the land and labor politics implemented in the German Democratic Republic and again after unification. Kronâs main source of conflict with Gombrowski stems from Gombrowskiâs ownership over the agricultural capital Ãkologica and thus with the large area of land he owns. Driven by this motive, Kron keeps the rumor alive that Gombrowski is responsible for a murder and other violence in the town and creates a fake image of â[d]er böse Gombrowski.â146 Hence, as Vento Direct proposes the construction of the wind farm in Unterleuten, it is this conflict and rivalry that is rooted in the joint history of Kron and Gombrowski, which is based on the power structures created around agriculture, village economy and hence, inherent in these tense relationships, around land. Furthermore, Kron worked for the LPG, but was bought out when Gombrowski founded Ãkologica. As part of the deal, Kron received large portions of the forest, which gained significance as a potential site for the wind turbine projects, alongside the Schiefe Kappe, parts of which are owned by Gombrowski, Meiler, and Franzen. Yet, because of his deep ties to both the people and the land of Unterleuten, as well as his resistance to neoliberal capitalism, Kron refuses to allow his land to be used for the project. He places the well-being of the village community above his own personal gain. He articulates his perspective in the 146 UL, 451. 84 following remark: âim Spätkapitalismus [gab] es keine Gesellschaft mehr, sondern nur noch ein Gesellschaftsspiel, dessen Ziel darin bestand, die kläglichen Ãberreste von Politik möglichst gekonnt in Unterhaltungswert umzusetzen.â147 With this remark, he underscores the dangers of late-capitalist competition over land ownership, in which Unterleuten risks ceasing to function as a society and instead becoming a mere social game, where those without power are reduced to entertainment value. By refusing to lease his land and surrender to personal financial profit, Kronâunlike Seidel or other villagersâdemonstrates an awareness of his agency rooted in the ownership of material land, a leverage that enables him to counter Vento Direct. Furthermore, his strong commitment to supporting the local economy and his understanding of âentfesselte[r] Raubtierkapitalismusâ drive his resistance to the proposed wind farm, which Vento Direct and the government have imposed on Unterleuten under the pretext of addressing climate change: Er wusste, wie man mit Schweinegrippe Pharmaprodukte verkaufte, mit Terrorismus Wirtschaftskriege legitimierte und mit Klimakonferenzen den heimischen Markt gegen Billigimporte schützte.148 As the plot progresses, it becomes evident that Kronâs opposition to Gombrowski and the wind park is motivated by his relationship with the land in Unterleuten as a whole, rather than just the parcels suitable for wind turbine construction. In criticizing Gombrowski, whom he presents as the local embodiment of capitalism, Kron highlights how personal connections to the land shape social and economic valuations as well as power dynamics. This is illustrated through Gombrowskiâs example: âEs gibt hier einen alten Hund, der sich gern auf Kosten anderer mästet,â fuhr Kron fort. âDer hat irgendwo ein wertloses Stück Land, auf das er sich jetzt mithilfe des Bürgermeisters einen 147 UL, 105. 148 UL, 105. 85 Windpark stellt. Die Propeller blasen ihm Kohle in die Taschen, während unsere Häuser das letzte bisschen Wert verlieren. Dafür gibt es ein Wort: Enteignung.â149 By stressing the âEnteignungâ or expropriation, demanding that Gombrowski be stripped of the ownership of this land in Unterleuten, Kron makes it evident that ownership over the land is central to the conflicts and power structures present in the village. With these points in mind, it is proposed here that the title of the novel, which is often interpreted as âunter Leutenâ as in âamong people,â could have an additional reading. This interpretation highlights only the societal aspect of the novelâs narrative: the intertwined connections âamongâ the human characters. Based on the passage above and the analyses in previous sections, it can be argued that the title can also be read as something that is literally under [unter] and underneath the people [Leuten], referring to the land on which the village community dwells as the very basis of their existence. This interpretation emphasizes the important role of land as nonhuman and one of the main characters in the novel. Kron is represented as someone who is detached from the modern conventional human existence in cities and villages. His affective relations with nonhuman entities, especially the forest, is quite notable and stands out from how other characters relate to them. Recognizing a âWesenâ in the trees he is tasked with cutting down, Kron reveals his discontent with his work as a lumberjack: Bäume konnten weder weglaufen noch kämpfen. Sie waren dazu verurteilt, zu wachsen und zu sterben, wie es dem Menschen gefiel. Im Grunde widerstrebte es Kron, sein Geld als Waldbesitzer zu verdienen. Der Holzernte wohnte etwas Unfaires inne. Er tötete Wesen, die älter waren als er selbst. Wenn er einen Saumschlag durchführen lieà und die mit Stämmen beladenen Forwarder aus dem Wald kommen sah, befiel ihn stets eine unbestimmte Traurigkeit. Nichts von dem, was er heute in seinen Wäldern pflanzte, würde er aufwachsen sehen.150 149 UL, 158. 150 UL, 438. 86 Kron exemplifies an affective and empathetic relationship with the trees he is compelled to cut down. Although his work operates within a capitalist frameworkâtreating trees as resources that generate financial gainâhe nevertheless feels a deep sense of sadness in it. He perceives trees not as mere objects but as entities older than himself, worthy of recognition and respect. His remark about never being able to witness the full growth of the trees he planted suggests a parental bond with them, a relationship grounded in care and continuity across generations. By holding such non-conventional views on and relationships with nonhuman entities, Kron is depicted as being profoundly attuned to ânature,â someone who aligns himself with what he sees as the laws of the universe: Eigentlich kannte Kron keine Angst vor dem Tod. Er hatte genug Zeit im Wald verbracht, um von den Bedingungen biologischer Existenz zu wissen. Die Sonne war ein Dauerbefehl zum Leben. Unter ihrer Einwirkung drehte sich ein Reigen aus wachsenden, blühenden, fliegenden, schwimmenden und laufenden Gebilden, von denen Kron eines darstellte. Die Formen lösten einander ab, während sich die Substanz gleich blieb. Es war kein Grund ersichtlich, warum ausgerechnet der Kron-Form Ewigkeit zukommen sollte. Er spazierte pfeifend über Friedhöfe, aà Fleisch mit Appetit und streichelte die sonnenbleichen Schädel von Wildschweinen, die er im Unterholz fand.151 Kronâs story underscores the central role the forest plays in his life. Having spent considerable time simply being in the forest and observing its many elements, he believes he has come to understand how biological existence functions. Rather than seeing order as imposed by human institutions, he recognizes the sun as the true âDauerbefehlâ or governing force of life on Earth. His outlook also reveals a rejection of linear notions of time and life; instead, he conceives of existence as a âReigenââa circular dance of growing, blossoming, flying, swimming, and running, all different forms of the same underlying substance. Seeing himself as merely one of these many forms, Kron rejects the anthropocentric separation of humans from nonhuman 151 UL, 250. 87 entities. In this sense, rather than fearing death or attempting to transcend it, he accepts that his human form will one day end and transform into another manifestation of life. In addition to his close relationship with natural entities, Kron plays an important role in voicing their vital roles and agency in the novel and in the narrative of the construction of the wind park. By correctly identifying the important role of nonhuman entities like wind in the functioning of the wind park, Kron expresses his discontent toward Gombrowski, through his perceived representation of capitalism: ââUnd Arne sitzt natürlich mit im Boot. Gehtâs der Ãkologica so schlecht, dass der fette alte Hund auch noch [in addition to the land] den Wind bestehlen muss?ââ152 Moreover, this portrayal of his unconventional and intimate relationship with nonhuman material entities can be interpreted as a representation of their resistance to the wind park project: âHinter seiner ständig auf kleiner Flamme brodelnden Wut wohnte ein heimliches Einverständnis mit den Dingen.â153 Kronâs relationship with creatures of the land critically brings up the question of possession and ownership. His relationship shows an alternative way of relating to nonhuman material entities that contrasts with the other charactersâ ways. In particular, Kronâs relationship with these entities entails having an active part in creating them: Er empfand besondere Sympathie für Käfer und Ameisen, die auf seinem Grund herumkrabbelten. Er liebte die unzähligen Vögel, Hasen, Rehe, Füchse und Hirsche, die alle seine Untermieter waren. Selbstverständlich hätte der Wald über die Idee, im Eigentum eines anderen zu stehen, nur gelacht.154 Though living in a society that is largely defined by the absence of genuine affection for nonhuman life and the capitalist exploitation of nonhuman elements as a resource, Kron stands 152 UL, 196. 153 UL, 439. 154 Ibid. 88 out for his deep sense of remorse toward these practices. He expresses sympathy even for the smallest creaturesâbeetles, ants, and insectsâdemonstrating a sensitivity rare among the other characters in village. Unlike characters such as FlieÃ, whose commitment to preserving species like the Kampfläufer stems primarily from professional obligation or a desire to maintain the villageâs idyllic aesthetic, Kronâs care for nonhuman beings emerges from a genuine emotional and ethical connection. He regards animals such as rabbits, deer, and foxes as âUntermieterââsubtenantsâsharing the land with him. Although he is, in human institutional terms, the legal owner of the land surrounding the forest, Kron rejects this anthropocentric notion of ownership. He believes that all creatures living there, âsubleaseâ the forest alongside him, existing as co-inhabitants rather than possessions. His reflections even extend to a critique of property itself: the forest that stands on the parcel he âowns,â he insists, would laugh at the very idea that it could belong to someoneâparticularly to a single human being. In this way, land and forest occupy a central role in shaping Kronâs unconventional worldview, one that explicitly acknowledges the agency of nonhuman entities and the relational web that binds all forms of life together. Lastly, he reveals that his main driving force behind denying the lease of his land and resisting the wind park is his hatred of Gombrowski and people in general. He prefers to live alone in his small, paradise-like hunting house near the forest than to live near Gombrowski. He criticizes and identifies âVergangenheit,â or the ability to perceive the concept of the past as something that distinguishes humans from nonhumans. He views nonhuman beings as teachers who have shaped his outlook and philosophy of life. He argues that it is humanityâs preoccupation with the past and the future that leads to torment. The example described below 89 underscores his perspective, revealing how nonhuman entities model the importance of existing fully in the present: Bäume besaÃen keine Vergangenheit. Auch Käfer und Ameisen, Vögel, Hasen oder Rehe hielten sich nicht mit dem auf, was hinter ihnen lag, sondern folgten den Befehlen des jeweiligen Augenblicks. Nur der Mensch wollte das Leben partout als StraÃe und nicht als Zustand verstanden wissen, weshalb er sich selbst und andere mit Ereignissen quälte, die schon stattgefunden hatten oder noch kommen sollten. Wenn nichts und niemand auÃer dem Menschen so etwas wie Vergangenheit kannte, lag die Vermutung nahe, dass es sich um eine menschliche Erfindung handelte.155 Kron learns that, unlike humans, animals and trees exist purely in the present, unburdened by memory or anticipation. Humanity alone views life as a continuous journey, causing suffering through its obsession with what has been and what will be. For Kron, the very concept of the past appears to be a uniquely human creation. Thus, Kronâs observation of the value of being in the moment, which he has learned from the nonhuman beings and entities around him, shapes his relationship of mutual respect with them. This relationship, together with his role as their embodiment within the narrative, becomes a driving force behind his actions in the novel. 4.3.2. Katherin Kron-Hübschkeâs Relationship with the Village Land and Environment Unlike the neoliberal perspective, which reduces land to its material value, Kathrine has a deeply personal relationship with Unterleuten. Unlike most other characters, she has known the village since childhood. The novel reveals that she was raised there by her father, Kron, after her mother left when she was young. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, she moved to Düsseldorf but soon returned to the East German countryside, drawn back by a profound longing for home. Above all, she feels inseparable from her fatherâs house in the forest and the forest itself. 155 UL, 440. 90 Kathrin, like her father, maintains a close relationship with nonhuman entities around the village. Yet, when Vento Direct proposes the wind park project, her stance becomes difficult to discern, and she is depicted more as a passive observer than an active participant. Still, her relationship with Unterleuten, with the land and especially with the surrounding forest, resembles Kronâs in that it is affective and grounded in mutual respect for nonhuman entities. This description exemplifies the differing perspectives she has from most villagers viewing the forest through a lens of utility and fear.: Niemand ging zum Spaà in den Wald. Für die Unterleutner war der Wald kein Naherholungsgebiet, sondern ein Arbeitsplatz, und zwar ein gefährlicher. Kein Mensch konnte sich die steigenden Gas- und Ãlpreise leisten. Deshalb kaufte man bei Kathrins Vater ein paar Bäume, schlug sie selbst, sägte sie klein und schob sie im Lauf eines langen Winters in den Ofen.156 Rather than viewing it as a place for spiritual or physical relaxation, they regarded it as a site for resource extractionâa dangerous place of labor rather than leisure. Most of the villagers regard the forest as a dangerous place and keep their distance from it. Kathrin, on the other hand, has a different relationship with it: Kathrin stellte eine Ausnahme dar. Wann immer sie konnte, unternahm sie einen Spaziergang in den Wald. Aus ihrer Sicht war der Wald etwas Magisches: ein Lebewesen, in dem man herumlaufen konnte. Er brachte alle Fragen zum Schweigen. Um etwas über den Sinn des Lebens, die Bedeutung des Todes oder die Ursache des Seins zu erfahren, genügte es, in die Hocke zu gehen und den Waldboden in Augenschein zu nehmen.157 For Kathrin, the forest holds more than pragmatic value; it offers a deeper understanding of life and of existence beyond the narrow, constructed world in which the other characters (except Kron) are confined. She perceives the forest as a fellow living beingâone greater than herself, not only in physical scale but also in what can best be described as a form of sublime beyond aesthetics. Particularly striking is Kathrinâs relationship with the forest as a source of knowledge 156 UL, 232. 157 UL, 232. 91 rather than a resource for capital gain. The forest offers her wisdom about life and death and allows her to experience the true essence of her existence. Kathrinâs relationships with the various nonhuman beings that inhabit the forest highlight her understanding of and receptivity towards her environment. This receptivity is understood as an exchange of matter: Wer einen Ameisenstaat bei der Besiedelung eines Baumstumpfs beobachtete; wer sah, wie Grashalme auf einem Felsblock wuchsen; wer Pilze kannte, die in Grüppchen beisammenstanden wie dünnbeinige Partygäste und gemeinsam einen fauligen Ast verdauten â der wusste, dass die Antwort auf alle Fragen âStoffwechselâ lautete. Kathrin empfand dieses Wissen als beruhigend. Ihr gefiel die Vorstellung, dass die Stoffe, aus denen sie bestand, eines Tages in die Blüte einer Blume oder das glänzende Gefieder eines Vogels eingehen würden.158 The above quote emphasizes the importance of âStoff,â or matter, and the close link between humans and matter. The term âStoffwechsel,â commonly translated as âmetabolism,â designates the continuous processes by which material substances are transformed, broken down, reconstituted, digested, and repurposed across biological systems. These processes unfold within a web of entangled organisms and environments, where the waste products of some become the resources or fuel for others. Respiring animals, for instance, depend on the byproducts of photosynthesizing plantsâmost notably oxygenâfor their survival. Humans, likewise, are inseparably bound to this cycle. For instance, the fermentation of indigestible fibers by microbes in the human gut produces short-chain fatty acids that human cells can absorb.159 This example underscores the inherent entanglement of humans with other living organisms. Similar to Kron, who understands all beings on Earth as composed of the same material in different forms, Kathrin believes in the concept of âStoffwechsel.â She emphasizes the inherent and omnipresent entanglement, relationality, and interdependence of all living organismsâincluding humansâ 158 Ibid. 159 Adam Dickinson, âWaste/Toxicity/Precarity,â in The Routledge Companion to Ecopoetics, ed. Julia Fiedorczuk, Mary Newell, Bernard Quetchenbach, and Orchid Tierney (Routledge, 2024), 185. 92 upon one another. Her relationship with nonhuman entities can thus be understood as grounded in mutuality and respect, rather than in the pursuit of personal or capital gain. Thus, as Kathrin highlights, the relationships between the novelâs characters and different material entities should be recognized. These relationships become more evident after the introduction of the wind farm project into the plot. As Necia Chronister points out, âthe horror [in Unterleuten] does not emerge from within, but rather, results from a capitalism that invades from far away. In that respect, Unterleuten is like an alien invasion story inflected with Heimat aesthetics.â160 Though capitalism invades the village as an alien force, my reading suggests that the novel is not simply a story inflected by Heimat aesthetics characterized by the romanticization of landscapes and nationalism. Rather, my analysis of the characters Kron and Kathrin reveals their relationships with the various species and materialities that surround human life. This goes beyond the mere Heimat narrative. They highlight how nonhuman entities affect human social life and demonstrate alternative ways of relating to them that differ from the extractive or romantic attitudes of other characters. In this regard, Kathrin, more so than Kron, through her perspective, represents a holistic embodiment of all natural entities, including humans. This is especially evident when, due to the competition over land, people start to disagree with one another. Kathrin reflects on her idyllic version of Unterleuten before and then again after the invasion of capitalism: Für Kathrin war Unterleuten nicht nur ein beliebiger Punkt auf der Erdoberfläche, an dem sich zweihundert Individuen zufällig zum gemeinsamen Leben versammelt hatten. Unterleuten war ein Lebensraum, eine Herkunft, ja, sogar eine Weltanschauung. Lebensräume konnten vergiftet, eine Herkunft zerstört und Weltanschauungen in ihr Gegenteil verkehrt werden.161 160 Chronister, Domestic Disputes, 184. 161 UL, 408. 93 Understanding Unterleuten as more than just a point on the mapâas a shared space for the existence of all living beingsâKathrin interprets the perceived kidnapping of her daughter Krönchen, one of the violent incidents following the announcement of the wind park project, as a symbolic loss of her vision of Unterleuten. It marks, for her, the collapse of her sense of identity within it and the poisoning of the beloved living space she once cherished. Rather than aligning with the Heimat discourse, however, her vision of and relationship with earlier Unterleuten is shaped by conviviality and mutual understanding, even in the face of hardship. After her daughter goes missing, Kathrin voices her fear and reflects on how Gombrowskiâs decision to close and lease the land to Vento Direct has transformed Unterleuten. She also expresses her concern that the wind park project could make the entire district uninhabitable. Through her perspective, the village seems to have two defining traits: its cohesion as a community and its independence from the outside world: [â¦] die Grausamkeit einer solchen Tat konnte den gesamten Landkreis in unbewohnbares Gebiet zu verwandeln. Kathrin hatte nichts dagegen, dass Unterleuten seine Probleme selbst löste, auch wenn es dabei gelegentlich etwas rauer zuging; daran war sie von kleinauf gewöhnt. Aber Unterleuten, Kathrins Unterleuten, vergriff sich nicht an Unschuldigen. Schon gar nicht an Kindern. Es fügte seinen Bewohnern keine bleibenden Schäden zu, weder in körperlicher noch in seelischer Hinsicht. Kathrins Unterleuten las keine Zeitungen, sah kaum fern, benutzte das Internet nicht, interessierte sich nicht für Berlin, rief niemals die Polizei und vermied überhaupt jeden Kontakt mit der AuÃenwelt â aus einem schlichten Grund: weil es die Freiheit liebte.162 For Kathrin, Unterleutenâthough often harsh when it came to making decisions about village mattersâstill represented a sense of togetherness that thrived on the communityâs freedom and self-determination. Her perspective highlights a village that values its autonomy over external influence. Drawing on her lived experience, Kathrin tries to make sense of the villageâs current condition and the changes it faces. 162 UL, 408-409. 94 Rather than expressing an idyllic longing for a romanticized past or future, her view reflects the reality of the village, encompassing both its harmonious and conflicting aspects. The following further illustrates her relationship with Unterleuten, one that is rooted in the rejection of abstract ideologies such as past socialism and in her aversion to the encroachment of cannibalistic capitalism embodied in the wind park project: In den Jahrzehnten der sozialistischen Diktatur hatten die Menschen erfahren, dass Macht im Abstrakten und Irrealen waltete. Deshalb hielten sie sich lieber an das Reale und Konkrete. Der globalen Einschüchterung, die den ganzen Planeten im Griff hielt, boten sie keine Angriffsfläche. Wer nichts las, schaute, klickte oder hörte, wurde auch nicht regiert, weder von Politikern noch von Informationen und Ãngsten, und schon gar nicht von einer Kombination aus alledem. Unter der ruppigen Oberfläche von Kathrins Unterleuten wohnte vielleicht keine Menschenliebe, aber doch eine Art Menschenfreundschaft. Mochte es auch mal poltern â ein Unterleuten, das Kinder entführte, gab es nicht. Krönchens Verschwinden drohte Unterleuten auszulöschen.163 By highlighting the disjointedness of Unterleuten from the outside world, Kathrinâs Unterleuten focuses on the locality, physicality, and immediate environment of the place. Diverging from the power structures created by systems such as socialism or capitalism that prevail in abstractions, her relationship with earlier Unterleuten is characterized by âdas Reale und Konkrete,â164 aspects that matter. Yet, beneath their rough pragmatism existed a fragile communal bondâone shattered by Krönchenâs disappearance, which threatened the very fabric of their shared existence. Thus, Kathrinâs character represents and, to some extent, promotes an alternative way of relating to other entities, both human and nonhuman, in contemporary capitalistic societies. Although she may initially appear to be a passive observer, Kathrin, as suggested above, embodies the hope for a convivialist vision of an Unterleuten in which humans and nonhumans can coexist. 163 UL, 408-409. 164 UL, 409. 95 With reference to the conviviality of small-town life, Garbiñe Iztueta-Goizueta emphasizes interdependent cooperation that encompasses both harmony and conflict in relationships among humans as well as between humans and nonhuman entities.165 Notably, her article contributes to an understanding of how conviviality can serve as a response to the capitalistic perspectives also depicted in the novel. Conviviality, in this sense, as Iztueta-Goizueta puts forth, articulates the principles of common naturality, common humanity, common sociality, legitimate individualization, and creative conflict. It emphasizes the understanding of living together with other humans and nonhumans, and of accepting both the harmonious and at times conflicting nature of these relationships as a response to the dominant neoliberalism of the twenty-first century. Her article further emphasises that Kathrin, who assumes the new role of mayor of Unterleuten at the end of the novel, recognises that political engagement and active work on village memory will be a legacy for ensuring a convivialist future for the village.166 The analysis presented here contributes to this convivialist discourse by highlighting how Kathrinâs perspective can be interpreted as promoting interdependent cooperation between humans and nonhumans in the novel. As mentioned above, by the end of the novel, the Kron family has taken over village politics, and Kathrin has become mayor. After Gombrowskiâs death, Seidel asks Kathrin to convince Kron to lease his land for wind turbines. On this note, Stehle aptly states that It is trueâthe planned infrastructure project has still not been started. Superficially, the village and the landscape remain unchanged, yet their power dynamics have shifted. The novel leaves the reader with the eerie feeling that it is not clear who actually has power over decisions that threaten to significantly alter the social and material fabric of the village.167 165 Iztueta-Goizueta, âZusammenleben und Zukunftsethik,â 99. 166 Ibid., 108, 112. 167 Stehle, Plants, Places, and Power, 36. 96 Similar to Kron, though manifesting her resistance to the changing physical landscape and environment of Unterleuten differently, Kathrinâs character functions as a feminine representation of natureâyet one initially portrayed as a passive observer. She embodies the historically persistent entanglement of the âfeminineâ and ânature,â thereby reinforcing the image of female characters as passive.168 However, by the end of the novel, when Kathrin assumes the role of mayoress, her close relationships with the nonhuman world, including the village land, come to represent a conception of nonhuman ânatureâ as possessing agency, activity, and the capacity to communicate with human life in the village. Although the wind park is destined to be built, Kronâs victory over Gombrowski and Kathrinâs leadership in Unterleuten suggest the possibility of a better future. This shift to female leadershipâone that hopefully serves a convivialist future with more-than-human beingsâthus also gestures toward the transformation of what Stacy Alaimo contends are âthe gendered conceptsânature, culture, body, mind, object, subject, resource, agent, and othersâthat have been cultivated to denigrate and silence certain groups of humans as well as nonhuman life.â169 Seidel emphasises this need from transformation in the following passage: âIch erzähle es dir, weil es dich betrifft,â sagte Arne. âWenn Kron Windräder baut, dann für dich und Krönchen. Ihr werdet bald reich sein. Du kannst weniger arbeiten. Oder etwas anderes machen.â âWie kommst du darauf, dass ich etwas anderes machen will?â âDer Posten des Bürgermeisters wird bald frei. Magst du nicht kandidieren?â âJetzt drehst du völlig durch, Arne.â âWieso? Unterleuten wurde lang genug von alten Männern regiert. Die Zeit der alten Männer ist vorbei.â170 Though this shift from the villageâs leadership age of old men to leadership by a young woman could offer hope for change, Chronister highlights the ambiguity that whether âthe town 168 Stacy Alaimo, Undomesticated Ground: Recasting Nature as Feminist Space (Cornell University Press, 2000), 2. 169 Ibid., 13. 170 UL, 543. 97 relations have shifted enough to create real liberation for either the people or the land; the ongoing capitalist interventions (the fact the wind farm is going to be built) are most likely to perpetuate old tensions in updated form.â171 Nevertheless, unlike the other characters, Kron and Kathrin represent an inclination toward an alternative way of relating to humans and, especially, nonhumans. They are rewarded for this with a non-catastrophic fate. 171 Chronister, âJuli Zehâs Landscapes of Capitalocene,â 119. 98 Chapter 5 â Conclusion: Interpreting the Charactersâ Fates and the Novelâs Paratextual Framework As analysed in the previous analytical chapter, the three groups of characters illustrate different ways of relating to nonhuman material entities. Their perspectives delineate the active role the nonhuman elements have in creating these relationships. In particular, their relationships with the village landâmost notably the Schiefe Kappeâand the broader landscape play a crucial role in shaping and driving their actions. The first two groups, one grounded in neoliberal thinking and the other in utilitarian approaches to land and landscape, both fall within a capitalist perspective that views nonhuman and inanimate material things as resources or objects for use. In contrast, the third group, which embodies an affective way of relating not only to the land and landscape but also to other elements of the forest and the forest as a whole, illustrates the possibility of a more holistic worldview: one that envisions a sustainable way of living in a more-than-human world, characterised by mutual respect for all nonhuman entities. Thus, this analysis offers answers to all three questions: 1) How are the charactersâ relationships with nonhuman entities illustrated in the novel? 2) How do these relationships drive the narrative, shaping or influencing the actions of the human characters? 3) How does the novel depict alternative ways of relating to the environment beyond a capitalist perspective? 5.1. Meiler, Pilz, and Seidel: Village Land as Investment Object and Environment as Resource Arne Seidel, Konrad Meiler, and Mr. Pilz exemplify a neoliberal view of the countryside and its land. While Seidel has spent most of his life in Unterleuten, Meiler and Pilz arrive as outsiders. 99 Despite their different backgrounds, all three approach the land as a commodity, though their motivations diverge. For Meiler and Pilz, the land is primarily a vehicle for personal profit, with little concern for the villageâs struggling economy. Seidel, by contrast, supports the construction of wind turbines to revitalize the local economy. Yet, whether for individual gain or communal advancement, all three pursue their objectives with little regard for ethical or ecological considerationsâMeiler and Pilz in pursuit of private wealth, and Seidel in the hope of driving economic renewal in Unterleuten. Meilerâs view of the Brandenburg landscape shows how nonhuman entitiesâforests, rivers, sand, and, above all, the windâimplicitly shape his relationship with the environment, which reads through a lens of aversion and utility. Instead of forming an affective bond, he perceives these elements as obstacles to beauty yet useful within a capitalist logic. This becomes clear in the case of the Schiefe Kappe: Land ownership and the force of the wind together give him leverage in the wind farm project. His attempts to expand his property holdings underline how material conditions both enable and sustain his sense of power. In this way, Meilerâs relation to the land is never neutralâit is structured by the very entities he seeks to commodify, while at the same time reducing them to an investment object. This relationship drives his actions in the narrative as he strives to gain complete ownership of the Schiefe Kappe in order to be the only one to reap the massive monetary gains. Pilz is drawn as a flat character with little depth, yet his presence as Vento Directâs man on the ground is crucial to the unfolding of the wind farm project. He pushes the scheme not from any attachment to Unterleuten, but as an agent of corporate profit. While Meiler embodies the drive of the individual capitalist, Pilz stands for the machinery of big business. His sales pitch, cloaked in EU energy policy, barely conceals the companyâs interest in exploiting the land. But 100 the project itself depends less on corporate will than on the material conditions of place. The Schiefe Kappeâs position at the forest edge, its solid ground capable of bearing heavy turbines, and the steady wind from the south make it the only viable site. Pilz presents this as inevitable, using it to blunt local opposition. What emerges is that the nonhuman worldâland, forest, windâshapes the project as much as human ambition does. Far from being passive, the material environment creates the very conditions that shape Pilzâs actions and thus, drive the plot forward. Although mayor of Unterleuten, Arne Seidel was never truly interested in politics; his bond with the village stems from his years at the LPG Gute Hoffnung and his long personal history there. Unlike Meiler and Pilz, whose motives are purely profit-driven, Seidelâs support for the wind farm reflects both his attachment to Unterleuten and his hope to revive its failing economy. Yet this choice exposes the limits of his agency, as he fails to recognize the leverage he holds as mayor over Pilz and Vento Direct. This inability is tied to his personal indebtedness to Gombrowski, who supported him during his breakdown after his wifeâs death. Seidelâs decisions are therefore shaped less by independent strategy than by loyalty to Gombrowski. The contested land, the Schiefe Kappe, becomes the point where these ties converge. It connects Seidelâs decisions with Gombrowskiâs influence, the villageâs survival, and even the fortunes of Ãkologica GmbH. For decades, the land sustained both village and company; now its potential for wind energy makes it the centrepiece of Unterleutenâs future. The village land thus serves as a point of connection, shaping and binding the actions of human characters. In the end, Seidel does not oppose the project but remains passive, his inaction allowing others to push the narrative forward. 101 5.2. Franzen, FlieÃ, and Gombrowski: Village Land as Utilitarian Medium and Environment as Aestheticized Object Franzenâs relationship with Unterleuten and its land highlights how aesthetic and utilitarian perspectives intertwine. Unlike Meiler and Pilz, who approach land as a vehicle for profit and power, Franzenâs vision is rooted in aestheticization, later shifting toward utility in her horse farm project. Her villa, the surrounding fields, and her horse Bergamotte anchor this vision, with nonhuman entitiesâbarns, tractors, and open pasturesâproviding the material foundation for her imagined landscape. Drawing on Simmel, this analysis considered how the landscape emerges not merely from perception but through the presence of these material elements, which enable her idyllic imagination. Olsenâs notion of âexistential affordanceâ further shows how the durability and in-placeness of land foster her confidence in this vision. Yet Franzenâs ownership of part of Schiefe Kappe complicates her relationship, allowing her to leverage land politically against Meiler and Gombrowski. Her case demonstrates how land functions not only as property but as a site of negotiation, meaning, and power. Ultimately, Franzenâs case illustrates that the human charactersâ motivations in Unterleuten are inseparable from their entanglements with the village environment. Gerhard FlieÃâs case illustrates how an aestheticized relationship to land can become both enabling and destructive. Unlike profit-driven actors such as Meiler or Pilz, Flieà is motivated not by capital but by his vision of the countryside as paradise. His life in Unterleuten is sustained by nonhuman entitiesâthe garden, the Unterleutner Heide, and bird species like the Kampfläuferâwhich afford him the possibility of imagining and cultivating this landscape. When threatened by Franzenâs horse farm or the proposed wind park, Flieà acts to preserve his 102 vision, framing his stance as environmental protection while concealing his aesthetic and personal motives. His opposition to Vento Direct merges into a broader critique of capitalism, positioning him as both protector and outsider. Yet his environmental rhetoric, as Stehle observes, masks concerns about property values, modern views, and lifestyle. The materiality of land and its âin-placenessâ not only enables his idyllic image but also anchors his identity as an activist. Ultimately, FlieÃâs aestheticized relationship with the village environment fuels his escalating conflict with the village, culminating in violence against a neighbour. His downfall reveals the dangers of an uncritical idealization and aestheticization of the âruralâ landscape, showing how even ecological rhetoric can become entangled with power, possession, and property under capitalism. Gombrowskiâs story reveals how land defines both his identity and his conflicts in Unterleuten. Unlike newcomers, his attachment to the village stems from family history, survival during socialism, and his leadership of the LPG turned Ãkologica. For him, the village land was never a commodity but the foundation of life and mutual exchange, sustaining both his family and the wider community. However, with reunification, rising land prices, and the influx of outsiders, this relationship begins to erode. What once symbolized continuity and care becomes tied to survival, forcing him to adapt to economic pressures. Leasing land for the wind park secures financial stability and supports the village, but also shifts his relationship toward a utilitarian, profit-driven approach. This change blurs the distinction between him and figures like Meiler or Pilz, even as his motives remain rooted in community welfare. His negotiation with Franzen and rivalry with Kron demonstrate how individual ties to the village land shape broader social dynamics in Unterleuten. Ultimately, Gombrowski embodies the tension between tradition 103 and transformation, showing how the village land nurtures identity while also demanding compromise. 5.3. Kron and Kron-Hübschke: Village Land and Environment as Companion Beings Kronâs and Kathrinâs relationship to the land differs from those driven purely by pragmatism or profit. Rooted in local knowledge, emotional ties, and family history, his bond with Unterleutenâs land and forest is inseparable from his identity. His long-standing rivalry with Gombrowski, rooted in agricultural politics and ownership after reunification, reflects how land structures power and conflict. Though offered economic gain through the wind park, Kron resists, placing community well-being and his critique of âRaubtierkapitalismusâ above personal profit. His opposition reflects not just a feud with Gombrowski, but an alternative way of relating to nonhuman entities as active participants in shaping life. By recognizing a âWesenâ in trees and acknowledging the agency of wind, Kron embodies a perspective that challenges conventional human-centered values based on a capitalistic and utilitarian perspectives. His refusal to lease land, however, also stems from his hatred of Gombrowski and people in general, preferring isolation in the forest. In viewing nonhuman beings as teachers, he highlights their role in shaping his philosophy of life. Ultimately, Kronâs resistance shows how the village land and nonhuman entities are not just backdrops but central actors in the novel. This perspective reframes Unterleuten as being not only âamong peopleâ but also something âunder(neath) people,â emphasizing the foundational role of land itself. Kathrinâs relationship to Unterleuten differs from the neoliberal view that reduces land to material value. Rooted in childhood memories and deep ties to the forest, her perspective is 104 shaped by mutual respect for nonhuman entities. Unlike most villagers, she interprets the forest not as threatening but as a source of understanding, highlighting the exchange between humans and matter. Though often depicted as a passive observer, her vision emphasizes community, togetherness, and rejection of both socialismâs abstractions and capitalismâs encroachments. The episode of her missing (possibly kidnapped) daughter symbolizes the loss of her earlier vision of Unterleuten, yet she continues to value the villageâs unity and autonomy. As the newly appointed mayor at the end of the novel, sheâand thus symbolically the landâ gains agency and embodies a convivialist vision where humans and nonhumans coexist. Kathrinâs stance contrasts with Gombrowskiâs and Franzenâs utilitarian approaches, offering instead a holistic, affective connection to the land. Alongside Kron, she represents the only viable resistance to the destructive forces of neoliberal capitalism. Her character, constructed and read as a female embodiment of nature, suggests hope for an alternative future. Even though the wind farm is built, her leadership points toward a hope for a more balanced coexistence between human and nonhuman in the village. 5.4. Character Fates at the End of the Novel: Gombrowskiâs and Kronâs Death, Seidelâs Liberation, Meilerâs Retreat, Franzenâs Disillusionment, FlieÃâs Collapse, Kron-Hübschkeâs Leadership, and Capitalismâs Victory. The novelâs ending and the fate of its characters are crucial in drawing out this thesisâs relevance. Much like Zehâs ambivalent engagement with questions of climate change and renewable energy throughout the narrative, the novelâs conclusion resists offering a clear resolution or a definitive message for the reader. Social relations in the village remain largely intact, while the imminent 105 construction of the wind park signals the triumph of capitalism masked under the sustainability discourse of renewable energy. The most direct reading of this outcome suggests that individuals are left with little more than the challenge of coping within a society shaped by competition and individualism. Nevertheless, the specific trajectories and outcomes of the characters examined here provide the most meaningful insights, offering concrete ways to interpret the novelâs significance for broader discourse about environmental change. The novelâs most tragic ending is reserved for Gombrowski. Cut out of the deal with Franzen that would have secured his contract with Vento Direct, and with Ãkologica GmbH collapsing, he can no longer sustain his role as provider for the village. Facing both professional and personal ruin, he sees no alternative but suicide, drowning himself in the villageâs drinking water well. Gombrowskiâs death can be interpreted as a (violent) manifestation of the concept of âStoffwechsel.â His decomposing body becomes both toxin and instrument of revenge, circulating through the townâs metaphorical bloodstreamâits water, mouths, stomachs, and veinsâentangling his material decay with the bodies of all the villagers.172 Seidel, long indebted to him, interprets this as liberation and attempts to correct his own past compromises: he rejects Meilerâs proposal to lease land to Vento Direct and urges Kathrin to persuade Kron to do so instead, while also encouraging her to take over as mayor. Konrad Meiler, despite securing Franzenâs land, fails to negotiate a lease with Vento Direct. Disappointed by this outcome, he retreats to Ingolstadt to live with his wife Mizzie, ready to pursue new ventures that might help him manage his sonâs drug addiction. Linda Franzen inherits Meilerâs land behind her house, along with â¬50,000, to support her plan of building a 172 Necia Chronister, âBeyond the Simulation: Reading, Trans-Corporeality, and Juli Zeh,â German Studies Review 46, No, 2 (2023): 234, https://doi.org/10.1353/gsr.2023.0039. 106 horse farm. Yet her vision quickly falls apart. Frederik, rushing back to Unterleuten to shield her from the backlash over selling her land to Meiler, is nearly killed in what appears to be a targeted car crash. Shaken and hospitalized, he is forced to watch as Franzen abandons Unterleuten altogether, leaving her dream of the horse farm unrealized. Gerhard Flieà does not fare any better. Haunted by his neighbour Schallerâs constant disruptions, which destroy the garden paradise he had so carefully built, and unable to prevent the construction of the wind park, he finally loses control and attacks Schaller. He is arrested and held in pretrial detention but soon released. His dream of a peaceful rural life is shattered beyond repair. Not long after, Kron dies of natural causes, ending the loudest opposition to the hegemonic control of the village land by Vento Direct. His daughter Kathrin, who had largely stayed neutral in her fatherâs long feud with Gombrowski and Vento Direct, now finds herself in a position of authority. With Seidelâs encouragement, she takes over as mayor, marking not only a generational change but also a shift away from the villageâs traditionally male-dominated power structures. Pilz and Vento Direct ultimately achieve their goal: ten wind turbines rise on the land leased to them by Kron and Kathrin. In the end, capitalism prevails. Yet beneath this outcome, the novel shows how differently the villagers relate to ânatureâ and the nonhuman environment around them. Some turn to the land as a refuge from social pressures, while others hold on to long-standing ties that begin to shift once Vento Direct arrives. Though these relationships are afforded and actively shaped by nonhuman entities, still, these relationships remain marked by the same utilitarian logic of Western capitalist societies that the characters either try to resist or openly resent. For Meiler, Gombrowski, Franzen, and FlieÃ, this utilitarian approach proves 107 destructive: each meets an unhappy fate, whether through death, financial ruin, injury, or imprisonment. By contrast, only two figures seem to stand apart. Kron, who dies of old age, and Kathrin, who emerges as one of the few beneficiaries of the upheaval, are shown to relate to the nonhuman environment differently. Their bond with the land is not driven by exploitation or utility but grounded instead in a sense of mutual respect and care for the surrounding world. Nevertheless, Vento Direct and capitalism emerge as the ultimate winners, as the wind turbines are built despite the alternative ways of relating to the land that the novel seems to favour. In the end, the more-than-human world is subsumed under a capitalistic logic. Yet the novelâs call for a deeper shift in relationshipsâboth socially and with the landâis highly significant. It encourages a worldview in which humans understand themselves as relationally embedded within the more-than-human world, a perspective that is especially relevant in the context of the current environmental crisis. The story demonstrates the interconnectedness of humans and nonhuman entities; the village land, forest, and even the wind itself are not external to social life but are active, constitutive elements of it. By highlighting these relationships, the novel invites contemporary readers to reconsider how they engage with the nonhuman world around them. 5.4. Final Conclusion: Land as the Ultimate Basis of the Village and its Relevance in the Novelâs Paratextual Framework This analysis aligns with what the novel and the novelâs extra-textual creations subtly hint at, namely, the connections and relations between all the characters which are not only the human but also the nonhuman. First, consider the novelâs website, which illustrates a 108 geographical map of the village as âDas Dorf.â This map provides a visual aid to demonstrate the physical connectivity of the residents of the village.173 More importantly, it underscores the importance of the village land as place, as it is observable in a two-dimensional way. The village land is thus presented as blueprint and main connector of the village. It makes the village a village, a self-contained community. Bjørnar Olsen highlights this attribute of nonhuman material entities as follows: âthings are overwhelmingly there; they are in place and they manifest themselves to us as familiar, as known. In short, they are the real Dasein. Being in place, of course, does not imply or necessitate their immobility. To the contrary, being in place suggests that they appear where we expect them to be.â174 As it has been argued in this thesis, this perspective provides an additional interpretation of the novelâs title Unterleuten, as land that is behind and under the people, the village land as ultimate basis. Second, let us have a look at âDie Bewohnerâ section on the novelâs website. Necia Chronister interprets the novelâs title in relation to capitalism, whereby the promise of investment of capital through the wind park project is characterised as a force invading the village from outside. Chronisterâs reading claims that though capitalism can be interpreted as an outside force, that is, how the village people practice capitalism, that is, by letting Vento Directâs investment of capital, it is still a process determined by humans, or as suggested by the title of the novel âunter Leuten,â it is decided among the people.175 However, Chronisterâs reading can be extended beyond what constitutes the village residents. The section on âDie Bewohnerâ on the novelâs website expands on what a reader of the novel might understand to be the inhabitants of the village, in that it includes nonhuman entities such as âDas Dorf,â âBergamotteâ (Franzenâs 173 âDas Dorf.â 174 Olsen, âReclaiming Things,â 184. 175 Chronister, Domestic Disputes, 184. 109 horse), âDorffunk,â âObjekt 108,â âÃkologica GmbH,â âWaldâ (the forest surrounding the village) and âSchiefe Kappeâ as residents or agents of the village. All these residents are provided with profiles in which their relationships with the other residents of the village, including their occupations, special traits, and so on are mentioned. These extra-textual elements are created to supplement the readerâs interpretation or, as many scholars have argued, to create a virtual world or to blur the boundaries between text and reality in ways that support the relational analysis provide in this thesis.176 This material-ecocritical reading of Unterleuten holds significant didactic potential, particularly in envisioning more sustainable ways of relating to the more-than-human world. The novel invites readers to reflect on their values through its distinctive literary and media-aesthetic form. By portraying nonhuman entities as charactersâalbeit through anthropomorphismâit highlights the deep interconnectedness of village life. Furthermore, its metafictional expansion into the virtual spaces of the internet blurs the boundary between reality and fiction. In doing so, readers are encouraged to interpret these relationships as multi-directional and then apply the implied convivial reading to the real world as well. 176 See Lisa-Marie Strehle, âDas Dorf als literarischer Seismograph der Gegenwart? Juli Zehs Unterleuten (2016) und Lukas Rietzschels Mit der Faust in die Welt schlagen (2018),â in Tendenzen der Gegegnwartsliteraur. Literaturwissenschaftliche und literaturdidaktische Perspektiven, ed. Marijana JeleÄ (Peter Lang, 2019), 33-49; Klaus Schenk, âNarrative Kaleidoskopie Zur Virtualisierung des Erzählens bei Juli Zeh,â in Juli Zeh: Divergenzen des Schreibens, ed. Klaus Schenk and Christina Rossi (Edition Text + Kritik, 2021), 89-119. Carlo Brune und Ina Henke, âWertereflexion zwischen Realität und Fiktion am Beispiel von Juli Zehs Unterleuten im Literaturunterricht,â in Er-lesene Zukunft. Fragen der Werteerziehung mit Literatur (Editon Ruprecht, 2019), 259-278. 110 Bibliography Abrahamsson, Sebastian, Filippo Bertoni, and Annemarie Mol. âLiving with Omega-3: New Materialism and Enduring Concerns.â Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 33, no. 1 (2015): 12â29. https://doi.org/10.1068/d14086p. Alaimo, Stacy. Undomesticated Ground: Recasting Nature as Feminist Space. Cornell University Press, 2000. Barad, Karen. âPosthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter.â Signs 28, no. 3 (2003): 801â31. https://doi.org/10.1086/345321. Barad, Karen. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press, 2007. Bennett, Jane. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Duke University Press, 2010. Biendarra, Anke S. âDie Welt als Dorf: Neue Heimatromane von Dörte Hansen und Juli Zeh aus ecocritical Perspektive.â Monatshefte 114, no. 4 (2022): 574â97. Browning, Gary K. Lyotard and the End of Grand Narratives (University of Wales Press, 2000). Brune, Carlo and Henke, Ina. âWertereflexion zwischen Realität und Fiktion am Beispiel von Juli Zehs Unterleuten im Literaturunterricht.â In Er-lesene Zukunft. Fragen der Werteerziehung 111 mit Literatur, edited by Anselm, Sabine, Grimm, Sieglinde, and Wanning, Berbeli, Editon Ruprecht, 2019. Carlile, Paul R., Davide Nicolini, Ann Langley, and Haridimos Tsoukas, eds. How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies. Oxford University Press, 2013. Chronister, Necia. Domestic Disputes: Examining Discourses of Home and Property in the Former East Germany. De Gruyter, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110673975-009. Chronister, Necia. âBeyond the Simulation: Reading, Trans-Corporeality, and Juli Zeh.â German Studies Review 46, No, 2 (2023): 227-45, https://doi.org/10.1353/gsr.2023.0039. Chronister, Necia. âIntroduction: What Do We Do with Juli Zeh?â The German Quarterly 96, no. 4 (2023): 533â39. Chronister, Necia, Klocke, Sonja E., and Richter, Lars, eds Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion. De Gruyter, 2024. Chronister, Necia. âJuli Zehâs Landscapes of the Capitalocene.â In Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion, edited by Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter. De Gruyter, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111352244-003. 112 Dickinson, Adam. âWaste/Toxicity/Precarity,â in The Routledge Companion to Ecopoetics, edited by Julia Fiedorczuk, Mary Newell, Bernard Quetchenbach, and Orchid Tierney. Routledge, 2024. Drews, Kevin. âThe âAge of the Chroniclerâ? Literary Contemporary History in Juli Zehâs Novels Unterleuten, Ãber Menschen, and Zwischen Welten.â In Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion, edited by Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter. De Gruyter, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111352244-003. Fuchs, Anne, and Mary Cosgrove. âIntroduction: Manifesto for a Relational Turn.â Oxford German Studies 53, no. 1 (2024): 1â12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00787191.2024.2315909. Fuchs, Anne, and Mary Cosgrove. âIntroduction: For a Relational Turn, Part Two.â Oxford German Studies 53, no. 3 (2024): 265â271. Gaikwad, Shreya. âHuman-Animal Conflict for Habitat in Juli Zeh's Unterleuten.â In Juli Zeh: A Critical Companion, edited by Necia Chronister, Sonja E. Klocke, and Lars Richter. De Gruyter, 2024. Galter, Sunhild. âJuli Zehs Roman Unterleuten als Spiegel bundesdeutscher Wirklichkeit,â KRONSTÃDTER BEITRÃGE ZUR GERMANISTISCHEN FORSCHUNG, no. 20 (2020): 157-169. 113 Gibson, James J. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition. Psychology Press, 2015. Ingold, Tim. âThe Textility of Making.â Cambridge Journal of Economics 34, no. 1 (2010): 91â102. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bep042. Jacobsen, Dietmar. âDie Idylle trügt: Mit âUnterleutenâ gelingt Juli Zeh ein groÃer Gesellschaftsroman.â literaturkritik.de, May 2016. Accessed July 22, 2025. https://literaturkritik.de/id/21873. Jones, Matthew. âUntangling Sociomateriality.â In How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies, edited by Paul R. Carlile, Davide Nicolini, Ann Langley, and Haridimos Tsoukas, 197-226. Oxford University Press, 2013. Lemke, Thomas. âAn Alternative Model of Politics? Prospects and Problems of Jane Bennettâs Vital Materialism.â Theory, Culture & Society 35, no. 6 (2018): 41â42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276418757316. Linke, Simone Ines. Die Ãsthetik medialer Landschaftskonstrukte: Theoretischer Reflexionen und empirische Befunde, RaumFragen: Stadt-Region-Landschaft. Springer Fachmedien VS, 2019. 114 Matuschek, Stefan. âLebenswelt als literaturtheoretischer Begriff: Im Anschluss an Hans Blumenbergs Theorie der Lebenswelt.â In Literatur und Lebenswelt, edited by Anja Löck and Dirk Oschmann. Böhlau, 2012. Olsen, Bjørnar. âReclaiming Things: An Archaeology of Matter.â In How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies, edited by Paul R. Carlile, Davide Nicolini, Ann Langley, and Haridimos Tsoukas. Oxford University Press, 2013. Orlikowski, Wanda J., and Susan V. Scott. âSociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization.â Academy of Management Annals 2, no. 1 (2008): 455â502. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520802211644. PreuÃer, Heinz- Peter, ed., Juli Zeh. Edition Text + Kritik, 2023. PreuÃer, Heinz-Peter. âJuli Zeh.â In Kritisches Lexikon zur deutschsprachigen Gegenwartsliteratur, edited by Heinz Ludwig Arnold. Munich: Text + Kritik. Accessed June 2, 2025. http://www.nachschlage.net/search/document?index=mol-16&id=16000000737. Reckwitz, Andreas. Die Gesellschaft der Singularitäten: Zum Strukturwandel der Moderne. Suhrkamp, 2017. Richter, Lars. âJuli Zeh: Literatur und Engagement unter Leuten.â In Protest und Verweigerung / Protest and Refusal, edited by Sonja E. Klocke and Hans Adler. Brill, 2019. 115 Riou, Jeanne. âVoicing Relationality â Phenomenological Directions.â Oxford German Studies 53, no. 1 (2024): 13â29. Schenk, Klaus and Rossi, Christina, eds., Juli Zeh: Divergenzen des Schreibens. Edition Text + Kritik, 2021. Schenk, Klaus. âNarrative Kaleidoskopie: Zur Virtualisierung des Erzählens bei Juli Zeh.â In Juli Zeh: Divergenzen des Schreibens, edited by Klaus Schenk and Christina Rossi. Edition Text + Kritik, 2021. Schilling, Erik, ed., Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement. J.B. Metzler, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68051-3 Schilling, Erik. âDas literarische Werk Juli Zehs.â In Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, edited by Erik Schilling. J.B. Metzler, 2024. Simmel, Georg. âThe Philosophy of Landscape.â Theory, Culture & Society 24, no. 7â8 (2007): 20â29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276407084465 Stehle, Maria. Plants, Places, and Power: Toward Social and Ecological Justice in German Literature and Film. Camden House, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781800108707-003. 116 Stetter, Julia. âPolyvalente Perspektiven auf das Land in Juli Zehs Roman Unterleuten und dessen ZDF-Adaption.â In Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, edited by Erik Schilling. J.B. Metzler, 2024. Strehle, Lisa-Marie. âDas Dorf als literarischer Seismograph der Gegenwart? Juli Zehs Unterleuten (2016) und Lukas Rietzschels Mit der Faust in die Welt schlagen (2018).â In Tendenzen der Gegegnwartsliteraur. Literaturwissenschaftliche unde literaturdidaktische Perspektiven, edited by Marijana JeleÄ. Peter Lang, 2019. Twellmann, Marcus. âIdyll aktuell. Was eine Geschichte vom Dorf über die Gesellschaft verrät.â Merkur, no. 805 (June 2016): 71-77. Wagner, Peter. âSingularity: A New Key for the Sociological Diagnosis of the Present Time?â Review of Die Gesellschaft der Singularitäten. Zum Strukturwandel der Moderne, by Andreas Reckwitz, European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie 59, no. 3 (2018): 524. Zapf, Hubert. Literature as Cultural Ecology: Sustainable Texts. Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. Zeh, Juli. âAuf den Barrikaden oder hinter dem Berg: Die jungen Schriftsteller und die Politik.â In Deutschland denken: Beiträge für die reflektierte Republik, edited by Undine Ruge and Daniel Morat. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2005. 117 Zeh, Juli. Treideln: Frankfurter Poetikvorlesungen. 1st ed. Schöffling & Co., 2013. Zeh, Juli. âJuli Zeh im Interview über ihren Roman »Unterleuten«.â Juli Zeh | Random House Specials. Accessed July 15, 2025. https://rhspecials.randomhouse.de/microsites/julizeh7/author.php. Zeh, Juli. Unterleuten. Munich: Luchterhand, 2016. Zeh, Juli. Unterleuten. Penguin Random House Specials. Accessed September 8, 2025. https://specials.penguinrandomhouse.de/microsites/julizeh7/details.php?isbn=978-3-630-87487-6. Zemanek, Evi. âIm Angesicht des Klimawandels: Ãkologisches Engagement oder Zeitgeist-Literatur? Juli Zehs Kinderbücher Das Land der Menschen und Alle Jahre wieder im Vergleich zu den Bestsellern Unterleuten und Zwischen Welten.â In Juli Zeh: Text und Engagement, edited by Erik Schilling. J.B. Metzler, 2024.
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Germanic Studies
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Graduate
Hallensleben, Markus
Material-ecocritical relationality in Juli Zeh's Unterleuten
Text