Social Critique in "The Vegetational Fatherhood"

Mynona (aka Salomo Friedlaender) wrote in early 20th century Germany during the Dadaist and Expressionist movements. I think "The Vegetational Fatherhood" can be read as containing certain social critiques consistent with these two movements. A certain kind of ironic tone seems to come through the narrator's voice in the story, which could be Friedlaender's method of adding social critique to this tale. For example, at the end the narrator notes, "Dr. Rosenberger is an anatomist. Could he have been so cruel as to have conducted bestial experiments on her before he threw her from the balcony? Will the truth ever be known?" (587). This commentary seems to point out the absurdity of explaining the abnormalities in the daughter's body by blaming Dr. Rosenberger. However, another explanation, that she really was part-rosebush, seems just as absurd. By using a fairy tale form, Friedlaender can use characters whose features cannot be explained away by science and by using such examples, he can highlight the subjective side of life that cannot always to be easily explained.

Generally speaking, both Dadaism and Expressionism were a response to rule of Kaiser Wilhem II.. Many authors at this time focused not only on the subjective, but also on the importance of thinking for one's self. A major problem many intellectuals saw during the Kaiserzeit was the inability of subjects to think for themselves and instead blindly followed whatever the Kaiser prescribed. I think "The Vegetational Fatherhood" can be interpreted as having a similar goal in creating a fairy tale that makes the reader question the relationship between nature and the human world. The tale challenges the reader to see nature in a different light than most people do in order to stimulate the reader's imagination. Additionally, the end of the tale seems to challenge the reader to question the explanation society offers for the incident between Dr. Rosenberger and his wife. Friedlaender seems to be urging people to think critically for themselves while also recognizing that the answer might not always be clear-cut.