The chemical subject: phenomenology and German encounters with the gas mask in the World War I

Abstract

Employing phenomenological theory, this paper argues that German World War I soldiers’ introduction to the gas mask represents a salient historical moment in the human relationship to modern chemical technology. As a protective device, the gas mask was intended to save soldiers from a horrible death by asphyxiation. In doing so, it forced soldiers to directly confront the new technological landscape of the modern World War I battlefield. While the mask proved genuinely effective in its ability to filter poison gases, it required constant vigilance from gas-weary soldiers. This so-called ‘gas discipline’ would allow men to survive and even thrive in a newly dangerous modern world. However, the physical and mental stress of this existence, often led to breakdowns in soldier discipline and failures in gas protection. Thus, the soldiers’ relationship to the gas mask revealed the limits of technological trust for the earliest ‘chemical subjects’ of the twentieth century.

Keywords:

• Gas mask
• World War I
• soldiers’ experience
• phenomenology
• chemical subjects

Notes

1. Remarque, All Quiet on the Western Front, 44–5.

2. Bevan, The Infernal Diver, 1.

3. Christianson, Fatal Airs, 159. Numerous respirators were designed and produced in the nineteenth century. The models that are most often remembered are those than received formal patents.

4. Miles, “The Velvet-lined Gas Mask of John Stenhouse,” 24–5.

5. Marx, The History of Underwater Exploration, 91–2.

6. Jones, World War 1 Gas Warfare, 6. The estimated number of casualties ranges widely due to the lack of previous knowledge about chemical weapons and their effects on the human body. Medically detecting trace amounts of gas inhalation was difficult during the war and gas exposure went unnoticed at times.

7. Lee, The Gas Attacks, 19–20. The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 stated that European belligerents would avoid the use of “poisoned weapons.” Statesmen were worried about the possible devastation that chemical warfare would bring to the battlefield. Furthermore, gas was not culturally accepted by European militaries; it was considered a breach of their conception of gentlemanly military tactics. The Germans extensively debated the use of poisoned gas, both from a tactical and an ethical standpoint.

8. For a more detailed description of early Entente gas mask development, see Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 6–7.

9. The canister of gas-neutralizing solutions was designs by Richard Willstätter at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute. For a detailed description of the Linienmaske, see Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 16–17.

10. Nevertheless, gas mask models often looked rather different across various armies. These differences primarily stemmed from the fit of the mask and the connecting point to the respirator. For instance, the standard English mask was attached by a long tube to a boxed-shaped respirator that could be worn around the soldier’s neck. French and German respirators were attached directly below the mouth. These physical differences can be attributed to differing views on the definition of portability and reliability, as well as basic patent issues.

11. Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 32. By the end of the war, the Dräger company had produced 4.6 million gas masks.

12. See Freemantle, Gas! Gas! Quick, Boys!; Girard, A Strange and Formidable Weapon; Coleman, A History of Chemical Warfare; Lee, The Gas Attacks.

13. These works place importance on the role of new technology in the development of cultural modernism, See Fritzsche, A Nation of Flyers; Fritzsche, “Machine Dreams”; Fritzsche, Life and Death in the Third Reich; Eksteins, Rites of Spring; Sloterdijk, Terror from the Air.

14. Fritz Haber won the Nobel Prize in 1918 for first synthesizing ammonia, later used for explosives in the war effort. He was the director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, where he developed much of the German technology for chemical warfare. For detailed biographies of Fritz Haber and studies on the German chemical industry. See Haber, The Poisonous Cloud; Haber, The Chemical Industry, 1900–1930; Stoltzenberg, Fritz Haber; Goran, The Story of Fritz Haber; Charles, Mastermind; Charles, Between Genius and Genocide; Lesch, The German Chemical Industry in the Twentieth Century; Hager, The Alchemy of Air; Szöllösi-Janze, Fritz Haber, 1868–1934. Some of the best work is done by L.F. Haber, Fritz Haber’s son. These studies include detailed quantitative data on the production of poisonous gas during the World War I and Haber’s role in this undertaking.

15. I consider trauma studies to be part of historical memory studies. In the context of the World War I, this research looks to recover the individual and collective memory of the World War I battlefield trauma in order to examine its cultural impact in later years. See Hallett, Containing Trauma; Bergen, Before My Helpless Sight; Whalen, Bitter Wounds; Micale and Lerner, Traumatic Pasts; Mayhew, Wounded; Leed, No Man’s Land; Fussell, The Great War and Modern Memory; Ulrich and Ziemann, German Soldiers in the Great War; Roper, The Secret Battle: Emotional survival in the Great War.

16. Carr, 2–3. Carr sets up three overarching types of historical reflection: representation, memory, and experience. Representation is primarily concerned with the role of language in history and epistemology. Memory studies seek to capture collective memory and to examine that which we choose to remember or forget, and the ways in which we choose to remember it. Carr argues that both types leave a gap between the present and the past. Experience (or phenomenological theory) can fill this rift by bridging lived experience across time. In this way, phenomenological studies look to fill in the gaps and complement other historical studies.

17. I am using the Husserlian sense of experience, or Erlebnis, here. This is the immediately given form of human experience. It comes before all mental mediation and reflection. For a more detailed explanation, see Carr, Experience and History, 18–23.

18. I am aware of the potential antagonism between phenomenology’s stress on the experience of the present and history’s constant searching for the past. Scholars such as Ankersmit, Runia, and Carr have attempted to show the ways in which we experience history in the present, thereby creating value for studies of the past as parts of our experiential background. See Carr, Experience and History. I am also aware of the potential conflicts between immediate experience and historical causation. For a detailed philosophical argument for the historical causation within Husserl’s phenomenology. See Kaufmann, “The Phenomenological Approach to History.”

19. Bennet and Joyce, Material Powers, 10.

20. Schivelbusch, The Railway Journey, XV. Jonathan Crary’s well-known 1990 monograph Techniques of the Observer performed a similar task with optical apparatuses in the nineteenth century and Chris Otter has expanded this visual focus into new forms of Victorian urban construction and infrastructure. Otter, The Victorian Eye, 6.

21. Hanslian, Der chemische Krieg, 201.

22. Brown, A Sense of Things, 5; Otter, “Locating Matter: The Place of Materiality in Urban History,” in Material Powers: Cultural Studies, History and the Material Turn, 45.

23. This man is represented most vividly in Ernst Jünger’s Der Arbeiter. Much like in the theoretical works of Deleuze and Guattari, the mechanical devices that allow the modern man to live in a gas-filled world have become part of his body. Der Arbeiter does not fear this transformation or the increasingly dangerous world, but rather embraces it as an evolution of human discipline and spirit.

24. Sulzbach, With the German Guns, 67.

25. Boyd, With a Field Ambulance at Ypres, 67.

26. Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 13–14. While the British took the town of Loos, they lost about twice as many soldiers as the Germans in the attack.

27. Ibid., 13–15.

28. For more on changes in the conception of warfare during the World War I, see Philpott, War of Attrition, 4.

29. Die Gasmaske. Vol 20 Beilage 2, 1917.

30. Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 16. This was part of the continued cooperation between the German chemical industry and the German military from 1915 until the end of the war. This close partnership led to the development of many successful chemical warfare technologies (like the Linienmaske) that often outperformed Allied technology until late in the war. For information on the cooperation between the German chemical industry and the German military in the World War I, see Lesch, The German Chemical Industry in the Twentieth Century; Haber, The Chemical Industry, 1900–1930. The roles of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute and the chemist, Fritz Haber, were particularly important in the development of chemical warfare. Haber was instrumental in convincing the German military to first use poisonous gas as well as recruiting leading German scientists for subsequent military research.

31. Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 17.

32. Rahmenmaske translates roughly to the “frame mask,” indicating the attempt to create a gas-tight frame around the user’s face. Both the Linienmaske and the Rahmenmaske were collectively known as Gummimasken due to their rubber outer material.

33. Phosgene was developed in 1915 as a more deadly alternative to chlorine. It was a colorless gas that was difficult to detect, and it was often mixed with chlorine to facilitate its spread. Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 20.

34. Ibid., 29–30.

35. Ibid., 30.

36. Ibid., 22.

37. Lee, The Gas Attacks, 147.

38. Historians have debated why poisonous gas was used and what the belligerents were attempting to achieve with it, considering its relative ineffectiveness in tactical efforts. For such studies and arguments, see Trumpener, “The Road to Ypres.”; Haber, The Poisonous Cloud.

39. Sulzbach, 96–7.

40. By the end of the World War I, Germany had suffered 200,000 casualties from chemical weapons. Nine thousand of those casualties were fatal. All belligerent nations suffered a total of 1,297,000 casualties from gas, 91,000 of which were fatal. These estimates are also hindered by the lack of extensive medical knowledge pertaining to poisonous gas mentioned in footnote 5. See Coleman, A History of Chemical Warfare, 34. For firsthand accounts on the destruction of the landscape and the killing of soldiers, see Sulzbach, With the German Guns, 191, 212, 213, 215.

41. Sulzbach, With the German Guns, 146.

42. “The storm trooper was geared to stay flexible: steel helmet, trousers with leather parts, mountain boots with puttees, haversack with an iron ration, two field bottles, wirecutter, gas mask in a box.” Ulrich and Ziemann, German Soldiers in the Great War, 87. This description is from a doctoral dissertation on German weaponry during the war.

43. Jünger, Kriegstagebuch 1914–1918, 135. After being wounded, Ernst Jünger wrote in his diary that all of his gear had been taken except for his steel helmet and canteen. He especially noted that he was perturbed by the fact that he no longer had his gas mask. This stress on the body has been examined by a number of historians. These memory studies particularly focus on the disfigurement of the soldier’s body and its meanings for postwar culture and society. This realization of the importance of corporeal experience points at the value for a phenomenological reading of this historical situation. The lived body as a site for immediate experience is the focus of much phenomenological theory, especially that done by Maurice Merleau-Ponty. In this way, memory studies and phenomenological history call for one another. For one example of these historical studies on the soldier’s body, see Panchasi, “Reconstructions.” For Merleau Ponty’s phenomenological work on the lived body, see Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception.

44. Zuckmayer, Second Wind, 45.

45. Sulzbach, With the German Guns, 150.

46. The German army maintained gas attack protection officers, who would move between trenches signaling gas drills at any time. The soldiers would need to immediately pull on their gas masks and stand at the ready. For a literary passage detailing the anxiety involved in these drills, see Jünger, Storms of Steel, 49.

47. Burr, Das Württemburgische Infatrie-Regiment Nr. 475 im Weltkrieg, 25.

48. Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 46.

49. “Pflege und Wartung der Degea-Gasmasken” from Degea A.G. Bestand III.2 06969. Deutsches Technik Museum. Soldiers were instructed to clean their masks with Formaldehyde to prevent this build up.

50. For a first-hand description of the discomfort involved in wearing a gas mask recorded by an American, see “Gas Attack, 1916,” Eyewitness to History, accessed March 24, 2015, http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/gas.htm. While the author, Empey, was an American fighting for the British army, his descriptions of the smell of the smoke helmet and his desire for fresh air mirror similar descriptions from German soldiers.

51. This seems to also be true for the metal helmet, especially the Stahlhelm. The Stahlhelm, which replaced the Pickelhaube in 1916, serves as another material symbol of the potential danger of modern technologies, such as machine guns and explosives. However, these technologies were not newly implemented in the World War I. The gas mask was unique in this respect.

52. Watson, Enduring the Great War, 206.

53. “Literatur, Kriegserfahrungen, Auslandsnachrichten.” RH/12/4. BA/MA.

54. Jünger, Kriegstagebuch 1914–1918, 135. Translated by the author from the original German: >Nun bekam ich auch den ersten Mund voll Gas. Aha! Chlor! Ein Atemzug genügte, um Erinnerungen an die Physikstunden ehemaliger Zeiten zu erwecken. Also Maske vor!

Kaum hatte ich die Maske einen Augenblick vorm Gesicht gehabt, da riß ich sie auch schon wieder herunter. Ich war so stark gelaufen, dass die Luftzufuhr durch die Gasmaske nicht genügte, ausserdem schwitzte ich dermassen, dass die Augengläser im Nu beschlugen and vollkommen undurchsichtig wurden, Ich riß die Maske also herunter, trotzdem ich gleich darauf heftiges Stechen in der Brust verspuerte.<<

55. Mustard gas attacked the skin and the eyes, creating a threat to the external body.

56. Bourke, Fear, 188–9.

57. Phosgene and various tear gases were difficult to visually detect. Furthermore, many gas attacks occurred at night to make gas detection difficult.

58. Once mustard gas was developed in 1917 then gas could kill or maim from both outside or inside of the body. This created even greater feelings of susceptibility for soldiers.

59. “Erinnerung aus dem Weltkrieg 1914–1915.” 1562, 1847. DTA.

60. UAT 669/30128. Medical case history involving exposure to gas in which the patient woke screaming in the night and claiming to smell gas.

61. Watson, Enduring the Great War, 33. The opening four months of the war were the deadliest. An estimated 677,440 German soldiers were killed, wounded, or taken prisoner. This is often ascribed to a lack of modern military tactics to counter new technology like the machine gun.

62. Gasschutz und Luftschutz, Jahrgang 1 Augustheft, 1931.

63. Hanslian, Der chemische Krieg, 214–5. Hanslian was a leading expert on gas warfare in 1920s and 1930s Germany, co-editing and writing the Gasschutz und Luftschutz journal.

64. BA-MA Freiburg, MSg 1/1383: F.O. Nawrath, letter to Anne, 18 July 1916.

65. Watson, Enduring the Great War, 33.

66. Ulrich and Ziemann, German Soldiers in the Great War, 83. Birzer believed that he had swallowed poisonous gas, and he complained that his commanding officers would not let him go see a doctor. They claimed that he was lying in order to leave the trenches. A military investigation followed and it was confirmed that Birzer had swallowed gas. He was subsequently sent to a military hospital.

67. Dehmel, Zwischen Volk und Menschheit, 426.

68. Gasschutz und Luftschutz, Jahrgang 3 Heft 12, 1933.

69. Bourke, Fear, 210.

70. While gas shells had been tested since the beginning of the war, the Germans began firing phosgene shells in March of 1916. Prior to that, gas was carried by the wind after being released from cylinders. See Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 5, 22.

71. There were also gas attacks on the Eastern Front and German soldiers were equipped with gas masks. However, the more mobile nature of the Eastern Front prevented long periods of gas exposure. Troops who were redeployed from East to West often struggled with gas discipline.

72. BA-MA Freiburg, PH 14/230 LSFN 4875F.

73. MPI Archiv, Fritz Haber Letters, Va 5 856.

74. Gummimaske refers to previous gas mask designs that used rubber as the main component.

75. Ibid., 46–7.

76. Ibid., 55.

77. This demand for personal and collective gas discipline would remain in post-World War I Germany, as fears over aerial attack persisted. Peter Fritzsche’s work has detailed this level of bodily discipline to a certain extent and made clear its implications for modern German urban life. See Fritzsche, Life and Death in the Third Reich, 55. And Fritzsche, “Machine Dreams.”

78. Hanslian, Der chemische Krieg, 202.

79. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud, 226.

80. The German scientists Wilhelm Lommel and Wilhelm Steinkopf of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute had developed mustard gas for large-scale military deployment in 1916. Jones, World War I Gas Warfare, 41.

81. Sulzbach, With the German Guns, 191.

82. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud, 213. The Germans began to frequently mix various poison gases and fire them in tactical progression. They began firing tear gas followed by phosgene. The tear gas would encourage enemy soldiers to remove their masks, which could not always filter such light irritants. The phosgene would then arrive undetected, poisoning the soldiers who had removed their masks.

83. Ibid., 265. Haber argues that the Germans would not have been able to continue the war past 1918 due to advances in chemical warfare. Their lack of rubber and cloth would have prevented them from creating adequate masks and the new uniforms that the use of mustard gas now required.

84. For Haber’s argument about the humanity of chemical weapons, see Stoltzenberg, Fritz Haber, 161. For a quote that revealed this belief among others, see Bernd and Ziemann, German Soldiers in the Great War, 82.

85. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud, 261.

86. Coleman, A History of Chemical Warfare, 34.

87. Rawling, Surviving Trench Warfare, 223.

88. Carr, Experience and History, 42–3.

89. Die Gasmaske. Vol 20 Beilage 2, 1917.

90. Hanslian, Der chemische Krieg, 200.

91. This process of mental/bodily discipline in a newly threatening modern world is treated in Peter Fritzsche’s “Machine Dreams.” Here, he reveals how the threat of air raids encouraged interwar Germans to enact protective measures that many accepted as part of daily modern life.

92. Contemporaries remarked that “gas shock” or “gas neurosis” was as common as traditional “shell shock”. Winter, Death’s Men, 121.

93. Jünger, Kriegstagebuch 1914–1918, 2171. Translated by the author from the original German: >> … ein fahler Kopf sah mich im Dunkeln mit aufgestützten Händen gespenstig an. Ich nahm einem die Gasmaske ab, sie war von der Verwesungswärme ganz warm, aber das schadete nichts, da es eine der älteren Karbolgetränkten englischen Masken war.<<

94. Winter, 142–4.

95. Leed, No Man’s Lands, 74.

96. Magliola, Phenomenology and Literature, 16.