For more than twenty
years I have entertained the design of publishing an English translation
of "Der Einzige und Sein Eigentum."
When I formed this design, the number of English-speaking persons
who had ever heard of the book was very limited. The memory of
Max Stirner had been virtually extinct for an entire generation.
But in the last two decades there has been a remarkable revival
of interest both in the book and in its author. It began in this
country with a discussion in the pages of the Anarchist periodical,
"Liberty," in which Stirner's thought was clearly expounded
and vigorously championed by Dr. James L. Walker, who adopted
for this discussion the pseudonym "Tak Kak." At that
time Dr. Walker was the chief editorial writer for the Galveston
"News." Some years later he became a practicing physician
in Mexico, where he died in 1904. A series of essays which he
began in an Anarchist periodical, "Egoism," and which
he lived to complete, was published after his death in a small
volume, "The Philosophy of Egoism." It is a very able
and convincing exposition of Stirner's teachings, and almost the
only one that exists in the English language. But the chief instrument
in the revival of Stirnerism was and is the German poet, John
Henry Mackay. Very early in his career he met Stirner's name in
Lange's "History of Materialism," and was moved thereby
to read his book. The work made such an impression on him that
he resolved to devote a portion of his life to the rediscovery
and rehabilitation of the lost and forgotten genius. Through years
of toil and correspondence and travel, and triumphing over tremendous
obstacles, he carried his task to completion, and his
biography of Stirner appeared in Berlin in 1898. It is a tribute
to the thoroughness of Mackay's work that since its publication
not one important fact about Stirner has been discovered by anybody.
During his years of investigation Mackay's advertising for information
had created a new interest in Stirner, which was enhanced by the
sudden fame of the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche, an author
whose intellectual kinship with Stirner has been a subject of
much controversy. "Der Einzige,"
previously obtainable only in an expensive
form, was included in Philipp Reclam's Universal-Bibliothek, and
this cheap edition has enjoyed a wide and ever-increasing circulation.
During the last dozen years the book has been translated twice
into French, once into Italian, once into Russian, and possibly
into other languages. The Scandinavian critic, Brandes, has written
on Stirner. A large and appreciative volume, entitled "L'Individualisme
Anarchiste: Max Stirner," from the
pen of Prof Victor Basch, of the University of Rennes, has appeared
in Paris. Another large and sympathetic volume, "Max Stirner,"
written by Dr. Anselm Ruest, has been published very recently
in Berlin. Dr. Paul Eltzbacher, in his work, "Der
Anarchismus," gives a chapter to
Stirner, making him one of the seven typical Anarchists, beginning
with William Godwin and ending with Tolstoi, of whom his book
treats. There is hardly a notable magazine or a review on the
Continent that has not given at least one leading article to the
subject of Stirner. Upon the initiative of Mackay and with the
aid of other admirers a suitable stone has been placed above the
philosopher's previously neglected grave, and a memorial tablet
upon the house in Berlin where he died in 1856; and this spring
another is to be placed upon the house in Bayreuth where he was
born in 1806. As a result of these various efforts, and though
but little has been written about Stirner in the English language,
his name is now known at least to thousands in America and England
where formerly it was known only to hundreds.
Therefore conditions are now more favorable for the reception
of this volume than they were when I formed the design of publishing
it, more than twenty years ago.
The problem of securing a reasonably
good translation (for in the case of a work presenting difficulties
so enormous it was idle to hope for an adequate translation) was
finally solved by entrusting the task to Steven T. Byington, a
scholar of remarkable attainments, whose specialty is philology,
and who is also one of the ablest workers in the propaganda of
Anarchism. But, for further security from error, it was agreed
with Mr. Byington that his translation should have the benefit
of revision by Dr. Walker, the most thorough American student
of Stirner, and by Emma Heller Schumm and George Schumm, who are
not only sympathetic with Stirner, but familiar with the history
of his time, and who enjoy a knowledge of English and German that
makes it difficult to decide which is their native tongue. It
was also agreed that, upon any point of difference between the
translator and his revisers which consultation might fail to solve,
the publisher should decide. This method has been followed, and
in a considerable number of instances it has fallen to me to make
a decision. It is only fair to say, therefore, that the responsibility
for special errors and imperfections properly rests on my shoulders,
whereas, on the other hand, the credit for whatever general excellence
the translation may possess belongs with the same propriety to
Mr. Byington and his coadjutors. One thing is certain: its defects
are due to no lack of loving care and pains. And I think I may
add with confidence, while realizing fully how far short of perfection
it necessarily falls, that it may safely challenge comparison
with the translations that have been made into other languages.
In particular, I am responsible
for the admittedly erroneous rendering of the title. "The
Ego and His Own " is not an exact English equivalent of "Der
Einzige und Sein Eigentum." But then, there is no exact
English equivalent. Perhaps the nearest is "The Unique One
and His Property." But the unique one is
not strictly the Einzige, for uniqueness connotes not
only singleness but an admirable singleness, while Stirner's Einzigkeit
is admirable in his eyes only as such, it being no part of
the purpose of his book to distinguish a particular Einzigkeit
as more excellent than another. Moreover, "The Unique
One and His Property " has no graces to compel our forgiveness
of its slight inaccuracy. It is clumsy and unattractive. And the
same objections may be urged with still greater force against
all the other renderings that have been suggested, -- "The
Single One and His Property," "The Only One and His
Property," "The Lone One and His Property," "The
Unit and His Property," and, last and least and worst, "The
Individual and His Prerogative." " The Ego and His Own,"
on the other hand, if not a precise rendering, is at least an
excellent title in itself; excellent by its euphony, its monosyllabic
incisiveness, and its telling -- Einzigkeit. Another
strong argument in its favor is the emphatic correspondence of
the phrase "his own" with Mr. Byington's renderings
of the kindred words, Eigenheit and Eigner. Moreover,
no reader will be led astray who bears in mind Stirner's distinction:
"I am not an ego along with other egos, but the sole ego;
I am unique." And, to help the reader to bear this in mind,
the various renderings of the word Einzige that occur
through the volume are often accompanied by foot-notes showing
that, in the German, one and the same word does duty for all.
If the reader finds the first quarter
of this book somewhat forbidding and obscure, he is advised nevertheless
not to falter. Close attention will master almost every difficulty,
and, if he will but give it, he will find abundant reward in what
follows. For his guidance I may specify one defect in the author's
style. When controverting a view opposite to his own, he seldom
distinguishes with sufficient clearness his statement of his own
view from his re-statement of the antagonistic view. As a result,
the reader is plunged into deeper and deeper mystification, until
something suddenly reveals the cause of his misunderstanding,
after which he must go back and read again. I
therefore put him on his guard. The other difficulties lie, as
a rule, in the structure of the work. As to these I can hardly
do better than translate the following passage from Prof. Basch's
book, alluded to above: "There is nothing more disconcerting
than the first approach to this strange work. Stirner does not
condescend to inform us as to the architecture of his edifice,
or furnish us the slightest guiding thread. The apparent divisions
of the book are few and misleading. From the first page to the
last a unique thought circulates, but it divides itself among
an infinity of vessels and arteries in each of which runs a blood
so rich in ferments that one is tempted to describe them all.
There is no progress in the development, and the repetitions are
innumerable....The reader who is not deterred by this oddity,
or rather absence, of composition gives proof of genuine intellectual
courage. At first one seems to be confronted with a collection
of essays strung together, with a throng of aphorisms....But,
if you read this book several times; if, after having penetrated
the intimacy of each of its parts, you then traverse it as a whole,
-- gradually the fragments weld themselves together, and Stirner's
thought is revealed in all its unity, in all its force, and in
all its depth."
A word about the dedication. Mackay's
investigations have brought to light that Marie Dähnhardt had
nothing whatever in common with Stirner, and so was unworthy of
the honor conferred upon her. She was no Eigene. I therefore
reproduce the dedication merely in the interest of historical
accuracy.
Happy as I am in the appearance
of this book, my joy is not unmixed with sorrow. The cherished
project was as dear to the heart of Dr. Walker as to mine, and
I deeply grieve that he is no longer with us to share our delight
in the fruition. Nothing, however, can rob us of the masterly
introduction that he wrote for this volume (in 1903, or perhaps
earlier), from which I will not longer keep the reader. This introduction,
no more than the book itself, shall that Einzige, Death,
make his Eigentum.
February,
1907.
B.
R. T.