The Stranger

Georg Simmel

If wandering is the liberation from every given point in required for products that originate outside the group.
space, and thus the conceptional opposite to fixation at Insofar as members do not leave the circle in order to
such a point, the sociological form of the "stranger" buy these necessities -- in which case they are the
presents the unity, as it were, of these two "strange" merchants in that outside territory -- the trader
characteristics. This phenomenon too, however, reveals must be a stranger, since nobody else has a chance to
that spatial relations are only the condition, on the one make a living.
hand, and the symbol, on the other, of human relations.
The stranger is thus being discussed here, not in the This position of the stranger stands out more sharply if
sense often touched upon in the past, as the wanderer he settles down in the place of his activity, instead of
who comes today and goes tomorrow, but rather as the leaving it again: in innumerable cases even this is
person who comes today and stays to morrow. He is, so possible only if he can live by intermediate trade. Once
to speak, the potential wanderer: although he has not an economy is somehow closed the land is divided up,
moved on, he has not quite overcome the freedom of and handicrafts are established that satisfy the demand
coming and going. He is fixed within a particular for them, the trader, too, can find his existence. For in
spatial group, or within a group whose boundaries are trade, which alone makes possible unlimited
similar to spatial boundaries. But his position in this combinations, intelligence always finds expansions and
group is determined, essentially, by the fact that he has new territories, an achievement which is very difficult
not belonged to it from the beginning, that he imports to attain for the original producer with his lesser
qualities into it, which do not and cannot stem from the mobility and his dependence upon a circle of customers
group itself. that can be increased only slowly. Trade can always
absorb more people than primary production; it is,
The unity of nearness and remoteness involved in every therefore, the sphere indicated for the stranger, who
human relation is organized, in the phenomenon of the intrudes as a supernumerary, so to speak, into a group
stranger, in a way which may be most briefly in which the economic positions are actually occupied -
formulated by saying that in the relationship to him, - the classical example is the history of European Jews.
distance means that he, who is close by, is far, and The stranger is by nature no "owner of soil" -- soil not
strangeness means that he, who also is far, is actually only in the physical, but also in the figurative sense of a
near. For, to be a stranger is naturally a very positive life-substance which is fixed, if not in a point in space,
relation; it is a specific form of interaction. The at least in an ideal point of the social environment.
inhabitants of Sirius are not really strangers to us, at Although in more intimate relations, he may develop all
least not in any social logically relevant sense: they do kinds of charm and significance, as long as he is
not exist for us at all; they are beyond far and near. The considered a stranger in the eyes of the other, he is not
stranger, like the poor and like sundry "inner enemies," an "owner of soil." Restriction to intermediary trade,
is an element of the group itself. His position as a full- and often (as though sublimated from it) to pure
fledged member involves both being outside it and finance, gives him the specific character of mobility. If
confronting it. The following statements, which are by mobility takes place within a closed group, it embodies
no means intended as exhaustive, indicate how that synthesis of nearness and distance which
elements which increase distance and repel, in the constitutes the formal position of the stranger. For, the
relations of and with the stranger produce a pattern of fundamentally mobile person comes in contact, at one
coordination and consistent interaction. time or another, with every individual, but is not
organically connected, through established ties of
Throughout the history of economics the stranger kinship, locality, and occupation, with any single one.
everywhere appears as the trader, or the trader as
stranger. As long as economy is essentially self- Another expression of this constellation lies in the
sufficient, or products are exchanged within a spatially objectivity of the stranger. He is not radically
narrow group, it needs no middleman: a trader is only committed to the unique ingredients and peculiar
Page 1 of 3 | The Stranger, Simmel
tendencies of the group, and therefore approaches them differences from merely general features. In fact, all
with the specific attitude of "objectivity." But somehow personal relations follow this scheme in
objectivity does not simply involve passivity and various patterns. They are determined not only by the
detachment; it is a particular structure composed of circumstance that certain common features exist among
distance and nearness, indifference and involvement. I the individuals, along with individual differences,
refer to the discussion (in the chapter on which either influence the relationship or remain
"Superordination and Subordination" [8]) of the outside of it. For, the common features themselves are
dominating positions of the person who is a stranger in basically determined in their effect upon the relation by
the group; its most typical instance was the practice of the question whether they exist only between the
those Italian cities to call their judges from the outside, participants in this particular relationship, and thus are
because no native was free from entanglement in family quite general in regard to this relation, but are specific
and party interests. and incomparable in regard to everything outside of it --
or whether the participants feel that these features are
With the objectivity of the stranger is connected, also, common to them because they are common to a group,
the phenomenon touched upon above, [9] although it is a type, or mankind in general. In the case of the second
chiefly (but not exclusively) true of the stranger who alternative, the effectiveness of the common features
moves on. This is the fact that he often receives the becomes diluted in proportion to the size of the group
most surprising openness -- confidences which composed of members who are similar in this sense.
sometimes have the character of a confessional and Although the commonness functions as their unifying
which would be carefully withheld from a more closely basis, it does not make these particular persons
related person. Objectivity is by no means non- interdependent on one another, because it could as
participation (which is altogether outside both easily connect everyone of them with all kinds of
subjective and objective interaction), but a positive and individuals other than the members of his group. This
specific kind of participation -- just as the objectivity of too, evidently, is a way in which a relationship includes
a theoretical observation does not refer to the mind as a both nearness and distance at the same time: to the
passive tabula rasa on which things inscribe their extent to which the common features are general, they
qualities, but on the contrary, to its full activity that add, to the warmth of the relation founded on them, an
operates according to its own laws, and to the element of coolness, a feeling of the contingency of
elimination, thereby, of accidental dislocations and precisely this relation -- the connecting forces have lost
emphases, whose individual and subjective differences their specific and centripetal character.
would produce different pictures of the same object.
In the relation to the stranger, it seems to me, this
Objectivity may also be defined as freedom: the constellation has an extraordinary and basic
objective individual is bound by no commitments preponderance over the individual elements that are
which could prejudice his perception, understanding, exclusive with the particular relationship. The stranger
and evaluation of the given. The freedom, however, is close to us, insofar as we feel between him and
which allows the stranger to experience and treat even ourselves common features of a national, social,
his close relationships as though from a bird's-eye view, occupational, or generally human, nature. He is far
contains many dangerous possibilities. In uprisings of from us, insofar as these common features extend
all sorts, the party attacked has claimed, from the beyond him or us, and connect us only because they
beginning of things, that provocation has come from the connect a great many people.
outside, through emissaries and instigators. Insofar as
this is true, it is an exaggeration of the specific role of A trace of strangeness in this sense easily enters even
the stranger: he is freer practically and theoretically; he the most intimate relationships. In the stage of first
surveys conditions with less prejudice; his criteria for passion, erotic relations strongly reject any thought of
them are more general and more objective ideals; he is generalization: the lovers think that there has never
not tied down in his action by habit, piety, and been a love like theirs; that nothing can be compared
precedent. [10] either to the person loved or to the feelings for that
person. An estrangement -- whether as cause or as
Finally, the proportion of nearness and remoteness consequence it is difficult to decide usually comes at
which gives the stranger the character of objectivity, the moment when this feeling of uniqueness vanishes
also finds practical expression in the more abstract from the relationship. A certain skepticism in regard to
nature of the relation to him. That is, with the stranger its value, in itself and for them, attaches to the very
one has only certain more general qualities in common, thought that in their relation, after all, they carry out
whereas the relation to more organically connected only a generally human destiny; that they experience an
persons is based on the commonness of specific experience that has occurred a thousand times before;

Page 2 of 3 | The Stranger, Simmel

that, had they not accidentally met their particular This form is the basis of such a special case, for
partner, they would have found the same significance in instance, as the tax levied in Frankfort and elsewhere
another person. upon medieval Jews. Whereas the Beede [tax] paid by
the Christian citizen changed with the changes of his
Something of this feeling is probably not absent in any fortune, it was fixed once for all for every single Jew.
relation, however close, because what is common to This fixity rested on the fact that the Jew had his social
two is never common to them alone, but is subsumed position as a Jew, not as the individual bearer of certain
under a general idea which includes much else besides, objective contents. Every other citizen was the owner of
many possibilities of commonness. No matter how little a particular amount of property, and his tax followed its
these possibilities become real and how often we forget fluctuations. But the Jew as a taxpayer was, in the first
them, here and there, nevertheless, they thrust place, a Jew, and thus his tax situation had an invariable
themselves between us like shadows, like a mist which element. This same position appears most strongly, of
escapes every word noted, but which must coagulate course, once even these individual characterizations
into a solid bodily form before it can be called jealousy. (limited though they were by rigid invariance) are
In some cases, perhaps the more general, at least the omitted, and all strangers pay an altogether equal head-
more unsurmountable, strangeness is not due to tax.
different and ununderstandable matters. It is rather
caused by the fact that similarity, harmony, and In spite of being inorganically appended to it, the
nearness are accompanied by the feeling that they are stranger is yet an organic member of the group. Its
not really the unique property of this particular uniform life includes the specific conditions of this
relationship: they are something more general, element. Only we do not know how to designate the
something which potentially prevails between the peculiar unity of this position other than by saying that
partners and an indeterminate number of others, and it is composed of certain measures of nearness and
therefore gives the relation, which alone was realized, distance. Although some quantities of them characterize
no inner and exclusive necessity. all relationships, a special proportion and reciprocal
tension produce the particular, formal relation to the
On the other hand, there is a kind of "strangeness" that "stranger."
rejects the very commonness based on something more
general which embraces the parties. The relation of the ENDNOTES
Greeks to the Barbarians is perhaps typical here, as are
all cases in which it is precisely general attributes, felt 8. Pp. 216-221 above. -- Tr.
to be specifically and purely human, that are disallowed
to the other. But "stranger," here, has no positive 9. On pp. 500-502 of the same chapter from which the
meaning; the relation to him is a non-relation; he is not present "Exhurs" is taken (IX, "Der Raum und die
what is relevant here, a member of the group itself. raumlichen Ordnungen der Gesellschaft," (Space and
the Spatial Organization of Society). The chapter itself
As a group member, rather, he is near and far at the is not included in this volume. -- Tr.
same time, as is characteristic of relations founded only
on generally human commonness. But between 10. But where the attacked make the assertion falsely,
nearness and distance, there arises a specific tension they do so from the tendency of those in higher position
when the consciousness that only the quite general is to exculpate inferiors, who, up to the rebellion, have
common, stresses that which is not common. In the case been in a consistently close relation with them. For, by
of the person who is a stranger to the country, the city, creating the fiction that the rebels were not really guilty,
the race, etc., however, this non-common element is but only instigated, and that the rebellion did not really
once more nothing individual, but merely the start with them, they exonerate themselves, inasmuch as
strangeness of origin, which is or could be common to they altogether deny all real grounds for the uprising.
many strangers. For this reason, strangers are not really
conceived as individuals, but as strangers of a particular
type: the element of distance is no less general in regard From Kurt Wolff (Trans.) The Sociology of Georg
to them than the element of nearness. Simmel. New York: Free Press, 1950, pp. 402 - 408.

Page 3 of 3 | The Stranger, Simmel