the phrase 'an astounding display of erudition' comes to mind when reading this book. it's a contribution to the discourse over judge daniel paul schreber, of freudian fame, and the literary moods leading up to the world wars (crucially, the second). the book sets out a really high bar for itself in the beginning, spanning literature, philosophy, history, psychoanalysis. ultimately this is a book of psychoanalysis, however. the main thesis of the book, that schreber attributed to modernity a 'crisis of investiture' in which the symbolic rites of society no longer really address the conditions in which we live, is really interesting and wonderful to follow. as a political thesis, it could be wonderfully explanatory of the conditions of proto-fascism. but santner doesn't really deliver on that front. the early mentions of deleuze and guattari, zizek, and those in the league of libidinal politics (in the general vein of analyzing fascism from a psychoanalytic perspective) set my expectations astronomically high. but santner isn't super interested in contributing to this discourse, over whether schreber diagnosed (or exhibited) proto-fascist tendencies. in general, santner declines comment on any sort of political theory going on. i wanted to hear more about the history, the politics, and social conditions, perhaps an attempt to extrapolate from schreber to germany. or vice versa, to go from germany to schreber. there are even some vague gestures to kantorowicz's 'the king's two bodies', with claims about the father's 'two bodies'. rather than make a claim, santner only gestures. we really only get a highly personal interrogation of schreber's life, his father's physiotherapy/child-abuse, and some interesting readings of wagner and kafka, as well as a brief glimpse into the travelling fugues of the late 1800s (hi reading group! hi ian hacking!). the biographical style plus the focus on readings of literature place this firmly as a work of 'Germanistik' in terms of genre. my primary disappointment with the book was that it 'wasn't longer', which as far as disappointments go, is not a bad one to have. it's 150 pages, super short, really densely argued, and pulls on an immense body of literature to keep you chewing for a while. i just wonder if anyone used this book for political theory, because if no one has, i will.