The Mask of Evil : Moriarty, Fu-Manchu, Mabuse

« Genius of Crime » : Doyle’s Professor Moriarty

Within 19th century psychiatry, the criminal becomes a figure devoid of any individuality. In place of individual responsibility, there is now the promise of crime statistics to be able to determine the types of criminals exactly, so that criminals would become recognizable and controllable even before they break the law. The influential anthropologist Cesare Lombroso claims that exactly 26% of criminals are « born criminals », « almost all epileptics or morally insane ¹ ». Lombroso’s works revolve around the visible signs of criminal nature, on the « forms […] of abnormality ² », which point to the monstrous nature of the criminal as the origin of crime. Lombroso interprets this visibility as atavism, i.e. as a relapse into the « animal prehistory of the human species » that is possible at any time ³. Lombroso assumes that atavisms do not occur individually, but that different ethnic groups are closer to animal nature than others ⁴. He therefore assumes a strict hierarchy of human races, which – unsurprisingly – rates Europeans as more highly developed than non-European people ⁵. One has to conclude from Lombroso’s analysis that evil is no longer an individual phenomenon, but rather has to be defined as statistically measurable deviations from the social norm.

It is due to Arthur Conan Doyle’s genius that he is at the same time consistent and in opposition with Lombroso’s theory of crime. Doyle creates a new genre figure : the ‘genius of crime’. This figure is characterized by the fact that he rarely commits crimes himself, but rather acts as a svengali of evil in order to accumulate power and wealth. Its incarnation in Doyle’s texts is the malevolent Professor Moriarty.

Seen from the perspective of contemporary criminal anthropology, Doyle’s Professor Moriarty presents something of a living paradox : while genius traditionally means nothing less than the peak of individuality, the criminal appears to embody the genetic defect of the abnormal and has no individuality whatsoever. As a criminal genius, Moriarty embodies the unity of this contradiction. Although he acts as the apotheosis of evil – or, rather, precisely because of it –, he is characterized by a number of positive qualities : « He is a genius, a philosopher, an abstract thinker. He has a brain of the first order ⁶ », as Sherlock Holmes says. In compliance with Lombroso’s theory, Holmes states that Moriarty is driven by « hereditary tendencies of the most diabolical kind ⁷ » in his criminal career ; nonetheless, the professor contradicts all physiognomic stereotypes of 19th century criminal anthropology. Indeed, Holmes can see that Moriarty moves « in a curiously reptilian fashion ⁸ », which clearly points to Lombroso’s concept of atavism and alludes to some sort of kinship between the professor and many other semi-human, often ape-faced perpetrators in Doyle’s tales ⁹. However, Moriarty has a highly bourgeois appearance : « He is clean-shaven, pale, and ascetic-looking, retained something of the professor in his facial features ¹⁰ ». Furthermore, he holds against Holmes that he was surprised at the low development of his forehead, whereas his own « forehead domes out in a white curve ¹¹ ». Lombroso names the « receding forehead » as one of the most outstanding characteristics of the « born criminal ¹² », because in his perspective this seems to prove the close relationship of the « criminal » to the « lower races ». By referring to this theory in his dialogue with Holmes, Moriarty not only demonstrates knowledge of criminal anthropology, but briefly reverses the division of roles between criminals and detectives.

This reversibility shows that Holmes and Moriarty are designed as mirror figures : Moriarty is a double of Holmes in his genius ; he points out that Sherlock also has a perverse side that excludes him from ‘ordinary’ society ¹³. In this sense, Holmes characterizes Moriarty as « an antagonist who was my intellectual equal ¹⁴ ». Moriarty explains that the discovery of his machinations by Holmes has been « an intellectual treat ¹⁵ » for him. He also reflects Holmes’s gesture to enjoy outstanding crimes as works of art ¹⁶. Such an aestheticization of crime was pre-formulated in the era of ‘black romanticism’, particularly in Thomas de Quincey's On Murder Considered as one of the Fine Arts (1827). Doyle’s story thus formulates a literary contradiction to the criminal anthropological doctrine of his epoch by allowing his ‘genius of crime’ to appear as an out-of-date rebirth of a romantic figure. Nonetheless, the ‘supervillain’ character is decidedly modern, insofar as it is an essential inspiration for popular culture of the 20th century.

Serial Crime and Serial Fiction : Rohmer’s Dr. Fu-Manchu

A descendant of Moriarty appears in Sax Rohmer’s Mystery of Dr. Fu Manchu (1913), which was published in America as The Insidious Dr. Fu-Manchu. The highly successful novel revolves around the Chinese supervillain Fu-Manchu, against whom the two friends Nayland Smith and Petrie (as successors to Holmes and Watson) ultimately fight successfully.

In contrast to Doyle’s Holmes stories, Rohmer’s novel is not a detective story : the focus of the plot is not on solving a riddle – there are a few, but many simply remain unsolved. Instead of detective puzzle work, there is an abundance of action scenes in which assassinations are carried out with exotic insects, in which the villain tries to drive his opponent crazy with a lethal injection, in which floors suddenly turn into trap doors and entire houses burn down completely just as suddenly. This change in the plot focus compared to Doyle’s stories also results in a change in the central figure : the focus of the plot is no longer the investigator (who has only found a brilliant opponent in Moriarty), but the exotic superhuman Fu-Manchu, against whom the two of them positive « heroes » Smith and Petrie remain rather pale. The plot thrives on the fact that a new attack, a new ruse by the villain has to be expected at any time.

In terms of his intellectual capacities, Fu-Manchu’s characterization follows the description of Moriarty from Doyle’s narrative. « This man, whether a fanatic or a duly appointed agent, is, unquestionably, the most malign and formidable personality existing in the known world to-day, » says Smith about Fu-Manchu :

He is a linguist who speaks with almost equal facility in any of the civilized languages, and in most of the barbaric. He is adept in all the arts and sciences which a great university could teach him. He also is an adept in certain obscure arts and sciences which no university of to-day can teach. He has the brains of any three men of genius. Petrie, he is a mental giant  ¹⁷.

As a ‘genius of crime’, Rohmer’s supervillain is a relative of Moriarty’s. However, the description tries to improve on Holmes’ opponent : Fu-Manchu is not just a « genius », but has the intellectual capacities of three geniuses. Only this can explain that he seems to have mastered all the sciences and arts, even those that are not taught in the great universities of Europe. This points to Fu-Manchu’s mastery of technologies of all kinds (he is proficient in exotic killing techniques as well as in sophisticated escape mechanisms) : At the center of the villain thriller, there is a media technology phantasm. No mention of his intellect remains without superlatives : the doctor is nothing less than « the most stupendous genius who in the world’s history had devoted his intellect to crime ¹⁸ ». The Chinese villain’s academic specialization is in applied toxicology, as the first-person narrator Petrie notes : « I knew, now, that Dr. Fu-Manchu was the greatest fungulogist the world had ever known ; was a poisoner to whom the Borgias were as children ¹⁹. »

In contrast to Moriarty, however, Fu-Manchu does not have a bourgeois appearance. « Imagine a person, tall, lean and feline, high-shouldered, with a brow like Shakespeare and a face like Satan, a close-shaven skull, and long, magnetic eyes of the true cat-green ²⁰ », Smith reports. The villain’s outward appearance thus fully corresponds to Lombroso’s racist criminal anthropology : it is as ugly as it is animalistic ; it suggests malice (« Satan ») as well as manipulative power (« magnetic eyes »). Fu-Manchu’s face is that of an « archangel of evil ²¹ », as the narrator later explains again. « The eyes of murderers are cold, glassy, immovable, and bloodshot ²² », Lombroso writes. Accordingly, Rohmer equips his villain with « the most uncanny eyes that ever reflected a human soul ²³ ». This impression arises not only from the evil eye of the criminal, but also from the anatomical peculiarity of a third eyelid, a « membrana nictitans ²⁴ », in other words : a reptilian atavism. This integrates Lombroso’s central theorem into the plot of the thriller.

Fu-Manchu thus appears as a paradoxical cross between absolute genius and super-brain on the one hand and beast and moral monstrosity on the other. The criminal doctor even seems to have powers that can hardly be explained by ‘genius’ alone : ​​The narrator explains that Fu-Manchu alone is a « menace to Europe and to America greater than that of the plague ²⁵ ». But above all, he seems to be physically immortal. Insofar as he can miraculously escape traps like burning houses, he appears to have « unearthly powers ²⁶ ». Materially invisible over long stretches of the plot, his power nonetheless spans over the entire globe and, through his almost magical methods (killing by insects or by lethal injections which cause madness), causes a comprehensive destabilization of reality. In this sense, Fu-Manchu is, so to speak, the first supervillain in literary history – and an important inspiration for later villains of British popular culture, such as Dr. No from Ian Fleming’s James Bond stories ²⁷.

Fu-Manchu’s supernatural powers may be explained by the fact that he in no way has to be understood as an individual figure. Rohmer’s text suggests repeatedly that the crook, so to speak, represents the Chinese people as a whole – or, in Rohmer’s diction : « the yellow race ²⁸ ». In this sense, the narrator describes Fu-Manchu as « the yellow peril incarnate in one man ²⁹ » taking up the catchphrase of the « yellow peril » coined by Matthew Phipps Shiel in 1898 ³⁰. According to a racist scheme, the character of the supervillain is again and again shown as representative of the psyche of China ³¹ : « Dr. Fu-Manchu […] was the ultimate expression of Chinese cunning ³² », as Rohmer’s investigator Smith explains. Correspondingly, Fu-Manchu’s reptilian eyes always refer to the dragon as the traditional symbol of the Chinese emperor (and thus : his state power). Fu-Manchu’s « genius » does not lead, as with Moriarty, to a partial (albeit paradoxical) re-individualization of the criminal : The real genius of the Chinese supervillain lies in embodying the entire danger and power of the Orient.

Obviously, this cannot be achieved in one novel alone. In fact, Fu-Manchu is a « serial perpetrator » in every sense of the word : Not only did the novel Mystery of Dr. Fu Manchu appear first from 1912 as a series in the magazine The Story-Teller, but Rohmer has written a total of 12 further novels in view of the commercial success of the first novel. The last novel, Emperor Fu Manchu, appeared shortly before his death in 1959. Serial action also determines the plot of Mystery of Dr. Fu Manchu : Again and again, Fu-Manchu invents new methods of murder, again and again he finds new escape routes from apparently hopeless situations. The plot of Rohmer’s Mystery of Dr. Fu Manchu is structured in this way through mutations and permutations within a set of characters and actions. Fu-Manchu is primarily a player with possibilities and options, in the diction of the novel an experimenter. Accordingly, his headquarters are equipped with « tubes and retorts, [...] jars of unfamiliar organisms, [...] books of unfamiliar lore, [...] impedimenta of the occult student and man of science ³³ ». As a playful villain, Fu-Manchu is always on the verge of self-parody : He cannot die any more than he can ever achieve a real victory, because both would end the game of serial storytelling. Its potentially infinite continuity is inscribed in the text through the narrator’s ironic admission that the end of the novel cannot be an end, since the superhuman is apparently still alive :

I come to the close of my chronicle, and feel that I betray a trust – the trust of my reader. For having limned in the colors at my command the fiendish chinese doctor, I am unable to conclude my task as I should desire, unable to with any consciousness of finality, to write Finis to the end of my narrative  ³⁴.

The Villain and his Mask : Jacques’ Dr. Mabuse

Norbert Jacques’ novel Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler (Dr. Mabuse, the gambler) appeared between September 25, 1921 and January 29, 1922 in the Berliner Illustrierte Zeitung and was a great success with the public both as a literary text and in the film of the same name, directed by Fritz Lang (1922). The plot revolves around the supervillain Dr. Mabuse, who builds an empire of criminals to amass money and power by cheating, hypnotic manipulation and smuggling. His opponent, the public prosecutor Wenk, hunts down and pursues the criminal and his assistants, with spectacular car and ship chases as well as a showdown in an airplane. The places of action are diverse and change constantly : playhouses, caves of vice, but also numerous villas, as well as border areas between Germany and Switzerland. All in all, the novel thus offers numerous structural elements of the colportage novel ³⁵.

Like Professor Moriarty and Dr. Fu-Manchu, Jacques’ Dr. Mabuse is also characterized as a ‘genius of crime’. This again results in a paradoxical structure : although – or precisely because – he acts as the culmination of evil, bad and wicked, Mabuse is consistently described by a series of maximally positive attributes that not only make him « one of the great numbers in criminal history the last decades ³⁶ », but also as a « force, full of mystery ³⁷ », or as a « master ³⁸ », in short : a « genius ³⁹ ». However, in contrast to his predecessors, Mabuse has chosen a different academic discipline. While Moriarty is a mathematician – completely devoted to the game of calculation –, and Fu-Manchu specializes in mushrooms and toxins, Mabuse is a very contemporary psychoanalyst : His ingenuity enables him not only to look inside the psyche of others, but also to exercise control over them by using his hypnotic gaze and the power of his voice.

There are parallels to the two literary precursors. Like Moriarty, Mabuse also suffers from a Napoleonic complex that fills him with megalomaniac plans. It is not without meaning that he is perceived by other figures as a « dethroned prince » due to his « lordly » appearance ⁴⁰. The criminal genius dreams of leaving the « vicious little Europe » : He would like to found his own state in the Brazilian jungle, « his empire, the empire of Eitopomar ⁴¹ ». The core of this phantasm is the traditional center of monarchical sovereignty, the « power over the life and death of people ⁴² ». Time and again Mabuse surrenders to phantasms of absolute power, in which his « will » « splatters » people, in which « a word from his mouth » causes « a thousand women […] their ribs to bleed, and five hundred men [...] no longer [can] testify ⁴³ », where in short he can exercise « all power over the life and death of animals, forests and people ⁴⁴ ». In contrast to Fu-Manchu, Mabuse does not work on behalf of a foreign government, but plans to found a new political organization whose laws would be written by him alone.

In his essay « Critique of Violence », published in 1921, the same year as Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler, Walter Benjamin describes « the great criminal » as a figure who, « however repellent his ends may have been, has aroused the secret admiration of the public ⁴⁵ ». As a reason for this admiration, Benjamin specifies that the « great criminal » always threatens to declare « a new law », thereby renewing mythical times before the emergence of the state and horrifying the public ⁴⁶. Thus, the « great criminal » proves to be a relative of the Leviathan, the law-making power of the state. Insofar as Doctor Mabuse’s Napoleonic self-coronation fantasies aim at the establishment of a « counter-order », he becomes recognizable as a literary incarnation of the « great criminal ». His discourse about the seizure of power is always enriched with contemporary Nietzschean metaphysics of the will : His fantasies revolve around « doing his will ⁴⁷ ».

There is a passage in Jacques’ novel that can be understood as an intertextual reference to Rohmer’s Mystery of Dr. Fu Manchu. During his forays into the « secret playhouses » of Munich in search of the criminal genius, the investigator Wenk notices an « old man » who allows himself to be addressed as a professor and – as the reader quickly suspects – is Doctor Mabuse in disguise. Then Wenk notices that the old man is wearing « Chinese glasses ⁴⁸ ». He asks the « professor » about the exotic glasses, whereupon the latter explains : « They are from Tsi nan fu! » By repeating these words several times in a « hard voice », Wenk is seized with « sleepiness » and feels transported to the « mouth of the Yangtze River ⁴⁹ ». The Chinese words function in this way as a magical hypnosis formula, but at the same time as an intertextual hint, or even a sign of collegial recognition among the leading supervillains.

The parallels between the plot structure of Jacques’s and Rohmer’s novels can hardly be overlooked. Both texts are no longer structured – like Doyle’s Holmes stories – by a riddle to be solved by the investigator, but by the action of a central criminal figure who repeatedly appears surprisingly or eludes the investigator figures. Similar to Mystery of Dr. Fu Manchu, in Dr. Mabuse, « crime is no longer the exception to the rule – as in the riddle novel, but can appear anywhere and at any time ⁵⁰ ». Since no less than the entire society is threatened by super-criminals, there is an atmosphere of general threat and paranoia. The basic structure of Dr. Mabuse creates a cinematographically inspired narration in which it is little about the thoughts and feelings of the protagonists ⁵¹. Instead, there are chases on the streets and lakes, shootings, fistfights, in short : a restless series of action sequences. Like Rohmer’s Fu-Manchu novels, Jacques’s Dr. Mabuse is also designed as a serial narration. Although Mabuse falls from a plane at the end of the first novel and therefore has to be dead in all probability, Jacques wrote a follow-up novel in 1932, Dr. Mabuses letztes Spiel (Dr. Mabuse’s last game), which Fritz Lang picturized in 1933 as The Testament of Dr. Mabuse. Here, Mabuse plays an idiosyncratic role between life and death. After he was found with a « shattered brain case » and only barely survived, he is hiding in a private clinic, where he writes an « Encyclopedia of Crime », a guide to organized crime : a symbol for the continued effect of his power beyond his physical existence (and therefore for practically unlimited seriality). By 1990, a total of thirteen Mabuse films were made.

In Jacques’s first novel, there is an explicit connection between the narrative of the criminal genius and his existence as a « gambler », since Mabuse here is nicknamed « the player ⁵² ». Mabuse acts as a gambler in several ways, as is highlighted by the academic literature ⁵³. First of all, the criminal psychoanalyst acts as a gambler at the gaming tables – in order to collect money through cheating to found his state in the jungle. Furthermore, Mabuse is also an actor in that he always slips into new disguises, masks and roles in order to advance his machinations.

In an interview with Count Told, Mabuse explains the « psychology of gambling », which is at the same time nothing less than a sketchy philosophy of the game : « Gambling is the oldest form, the strongest and most general form in which a person who is not given the gift of being an artist is able to feel himself an artist ⁵⁴ », Mabuse proclaims. In gambling, « every human being can enforce the enforcement of at least one creative act », insofar as the « successful game » and the creative act represent a synthesis between « will and chance ». Here as there, it is about « making a work of one’s own creation out of chance ⁵⁵ ». One could argue against the criminal psychoanalyst that his way of gambling – namely through hypnotic manipulation of his fellow players – consistently eliminates the element of chance and is therefore precisely not a game of chance neither, strictly speaking, a game at all. Nonetheless, the passage can be understood as a programmatic description of Mabuse’s strategy : « Chance » is the lucky opportunity that arises for him to act as a villain – cheating, smuggling, kidnappings, murders – and he uses this opportunity to turn it into a « work of his own creation ». Mabuse, in other words, does not only gamble, but also treats his criminal business as a game. Insofar as he defines his crime as a creative creation, as a « work of art », Mabuse acts – more explicitly and consistently than his forerunners Moriarty and Fu-Manchu – as a literary antithesis to Lombroso’s criminal anthropology, for which the ‘born criminal’ is nothing but the work of biological nature (but never his own work).

The fact that Mabuse succeeds in making his criminality and his own person his « own work », in a playful way, is particularly evident in his external appearance. Mabuse’s appearance bears a resemblance to the repulsive, always recognizable exterior Fu-Manchus only in parts of the face : The eyes of the criminal psychoanalyst are described as « evil eyes ⁵⁶ », and as « inflexible eyes ⁵⁷ », which send out a « violent and demanding but cold ray ⁵⁸ », as well as a « cold fire ⁵⁹ », and have the color of « stone gray ⁶⁰ ». In this way, on the one hand, the literary tradition of the hypnotic gaze – for example in the stories E.T.A. Hoffmann’s – is continued ⁶¹. On the other hand, in Jacques’s novel – as in Rohmer’s Fu-Manchu story – Lombroso’s axiom that murderers have a glassy and ​​icy gaze is confirmed ⁶².

However, only his eyes refer to something that could be described as Mabuse’s natural body. He is « a player with many identities, who masters them perfectly and changes them constantly ⁶³ ». He « plays many roles, he’s the man with a thousand masks ⁶⁴ ». In the novel, Mabuse appears in various masks, both at the gaming tables and on the run from prosecutor Wenk. « Wenk would now have recognized him [Mabuse] under all disguises ⁶⁵, » one can read in the novel. In any case, this does not apply to large parts of the novel : Only afterwards does the public prosecutor realize that he is not dealing with different people, but with ever new disguises of Mabuse : « Well, the one who arrived first, the soldier and the lady were one and the same person. And yesterday and the day before yesterday, Wenk noticed, the chimney sweep, the tabetic, the man with the package […] all the same person and all – Mabuse! ⁶⁶ ». The criminal genius can switch between masks and disguises so skillfully that he literally becomes that person. In other words, Doctor Mabuse has perfected his masquerade game to such an extent that every personal identity he displays is his « own work ». Mabuse holds true to what is said in Diderot’s Paradox of Acting about the perfect actor : « Perhaps it is just because he is nothing that he is before all everything. His own special shape never interferes with the shapes he assumes^67_. » Therefore, it can be said that Mabuse « is nothing » : He is free from all fixations of a personal identity, and therefore without a face.

More explicitly than the figure of Professor Moriarty or Doctor Fu-Manchu, Doctor Mabuse is characterized as a gambler. Thus, the representation of the gambling super-criminal formulates a literary contradiction to the dominant theory of crime in the first half of the 20th century, which is based on the idea that crimes are determined by nature (as in Lombroso’s theory of the « born criminal »). This contradiction rises out of the spirit of serial literature : at its core, serial crime is at the same time a playful one.

1. Cesare Lombroso, Neue Verbrecherstudien, Ernst Jentsch (trans.), Halle a. d. S., Carl Marhold Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1907, p. 26.
2. Michel Foucault, Abnormal: Lectures at the Collège du France, 1974–1975, Graham Burchell (trans.), London and New York, Verso, 2003, p. 56.
3. Cf. Jutta Person, « Cesare Lombroso und die ‘organischen Bedingungen des Verbrechens’: Die Kriminalanthropologie des 19. Jahrhunderts zwischen Physiognomik, Atavismustheorien und Zoologie », p. 125-35, in Roger Fayet (ed.), Die Anatomie des Bösen. Ein Schnitt durch Körper, Moral und Geschichte, Schaffhausen, Verlag hier + jetzt, 2008, p. 129.
4. Cf. Gina Lombroso Ferrero, Criminal Man: According to the Classification of Cesare Lombroso, New York and London, Putnam’s Sons, 1911, p. 140.
5. Cf. Daniel Pick, « The Faces of Anarchy: Lombroso and the Politics of Criminal Science in Post-Unification Italy », p. 60-86, History Workshop, n° 21, 1986, p. 66.
6. Arthur Conan Doyle, « The Final Problem », p. 239-59 in Arthur Conan Doyle, Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes, New York, Burt Company, 1893, p. 243.
7. Id., p. 242.
8. Id., p. 244.
9. Cf. Rosemary Jann, « Sherlock Holmes Codes the Social Body », p. 685-708 English Literary History, n° 57, 1990, p. 700.
10. Doyle, « The Final Problem », op. cit., p. 244.
11. Id., p. 244.
12. Cf. Gina Lombroso Ferrero, Criminal Man, op. cit., p. 60.
13. Cf. Daniel Cottom, « Sherlock Holmes meets Dracula », p. 537-567, ELH, n° 79, 2012, p. 558.
14. Doyle, « The Final Problem », op. cit., p. 243.
15. Id., p. 245.
16. Cf. Paul Barolsky, « The Case of the Domesticated Aesthete », p. 438-452 The Virginia Quarterly Review, n° 60, 1984, p 440.
17. Sax Rohmer, The Insidious Dr. Fu-Manchu, O. O., McBride, Nast & Company, 1913, p. 24.
18. Id., p. 174.
19. Id., p. 330.
20. Id., p. 25-26.
21. Id., p. 72.
22. Gina Lombroso Ferrero, Criminal Man, op. cit., p. 244.
23. Sax Rohmer, The Insidious Dr. Fu-Manchu, op. cit., p. 72.
24. Id., p. 72.
25. Id., p. 174.
26. Cf. Urmila Seshagiri, « Modernity’s (Yellow) Perils: Dr. Fu-Manchu and English Race Paranoia », p. 162-194 Cultural Critique, n° 62, 2006, p. 166.
27. Cf. Christopher Frayling, « ‘No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die’. The villains of 007 have always reflected the anxieties of their age. In a time such as ours, who will the baddies be ? », p. 74-77 New Statesman, July 31, 2015, p. 74.
28. Sax Rohmer, The Insidious Dr. Fu-Manchu, op. cit., p. 242.
29. Id., p. 26.
30. Cf. Robert E. Briney, « Todesstrahlen, Dämonen und elende Würmer, die der Wissenschaft unbekannt sind. Das fantastische Element in der Kriminalliteratur », p. 171-209 in John Ball (ed.), Morde, Meister und Mysterien. Die Geschichte des Kriminalromans, Frankfurt a. M. and Berlin, Ullstein, 1988, p. 177-78.
31. Cf. David Shih, « The Color of Fu-Manchu: Orientalist Method in the Novels of Sax Rohmer », p. 304-317, The Journal of Popular Culture, n° 12, 2009, p. 314.
32. Sax Rohmer, The Insidious Dr. Fu-Manchu, op. cit., p. 347.
33. Id., p. 316.
34. Id., p. 379-80.
35. Cf. Hans Richard Brittnacher, « Spieler, Schwindler und Hochstapler. Über Norbert Jacques’ Dr. Mabuse », p. 203-218 in Louis Gerrekens and Achim Küpper (ed.), Hasard. Der Spieler in der deutschsprachigen Literaturgeschichte, Würzburg, Königshausen & Neumann, 2012, p. 203.
36. Norbert Jacques, Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler, Hamburg, Rowohlt, 1952, p. 72.
37. Id., p. 77.
38. Id., p. 27.
39. Id., p. 87.
40. Id., p. 17.
41. Id., p. 32.
42. Id., p. 32.
43. Id., p. 39.
44. Id., p. 41.
45. Walter Benjamin, « Critique of Violence », p. 277-300 in Walter Benjamin, Selected Writings, vol. 1, Cambridge, Belknap/Harvard University Press 1999, p. 281.
46. Id., p. 283.
47. Norbert Jacques, Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler, op. cit., p. 111.
48. Id., p. 22.
49. Id., p. 23.
50. Gabriele Holzmann, Schaulust und Verbrechen: Eine Geschichte des Krimis als Mediengeschichte, Stuttgart and Weimar, Metzler, 2001, p. 285.
51. Id., p. 288-89.
52. Norbert Jacques, Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler, op. cit., p. 143.
53. Cf. Hania Siebenpfeiffer, « Böse Lust » : Gewaltverbrechen in Diskursen der Weimarer Republik, Köln, Weimar and Wien, Böhlau, 2005, p. 65 ; Hans Richard Brittnacher, « Spieler, Schwindler und Hochstapler », op. cit., p. 211.
54. Norbert Jacques, Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler, op. cit., p. 85.
55. Id., p. 86.
56. Id., p. 17.
57. Id., p. 23.
58. Id., p. 84.
59. Id., p. 155.
60. Id., p. 85.
61. Brittnacher, « Spieler, Schwindler und Hochstapler », op. cit., p. 212-13.
62. Cf. Gina Lombroso Ferrero, Criminal Man, op. cit., p. 244.
63. Hania Siebenpfeiffer, « Böse Lust », op. cit., p. 65.
64. Hans Richard Brittnacher, « Spieler, Schwindler und Hochstapler », op. cit., p. 211.
65. Norbert Jacques, Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler, op. cit., p. 155.
66. Id., p. 125.
67. Denis Diderot, The Paradox of Acting, Walter Herries Pollock (trans.), London, Chatto & Windus, 1883, p. 53.