B r i g i t t e E, Sch atzky

Bedford C o l l e ^

A b s tr a c t of M.A. T h e s is t o be su b m itte d In A p r il 1950

A c r i t i c a l stu d y o f F r i e d r i c h H eb b el's
and Otto^Tudwlg^ 3 d ram atic tHeory w ith
s p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e t o t h e i r dram atic
p ra c tic e

The f a c t th a t F r ie d r ic h Hebbel and Otto Ludwig were c l o s e

c o n tem p o r a rie s a t a v i t a l p e r io d In the l i t e r a t u r e o f t h e i r

co u n try and were b o th accustom ed t o fo rm u la te t h e i r view s on

the n atu re and form o f drama Is one w h ich Is im portan t f o r a
tru e "understanding of the f a c t o r s u n d e r ly in g th e developm ent o f
German drama In th e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y .
The p r e s e n t t h e s i s has a s t r i c t l y com parative b a s i s and Is
not Intend ed t o be a d e t a i l e d ex a m in a tio n of e v e r y a s p e c t of
t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e dram atic t h e o r i e s . I t c o n c e n t r a t e s r a t h e r on
t h o se problems w hich were o f common I n t e r e s t and s p e c i a l co n ce rn
t o b o th p o e ts and w hich have Importance f o r drama In g e n e r a l .

The main p a rt o f th e t h e s i s Is d ev o ted t o a s p e c i a l

c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f th r e e a s p e c t s w hich con cern b o th the c o n t e n t and
the form o f drama; t h e i r th e o ry of tr a g e d y as r e v e a le d In t h e i r
c o n c e p t io n of the t r a g i c h e r o ; t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the th e o r y
of environm ent ; and t h e i r c o n c e p t io n o f d ram atic s t r u c t u r e .
W h ils t ack n ow led ging the c o n s id e r a b le d i f f e r e n c e w hich e x i s t s

b etw een Hebbel* s and Ludv/lg* s i n d i v i d u a l dram atic a c h ie v e m e n ts ,

a stu d y o f the t h e o r i e s of two p r a c t i s i n g d r a m a tis ts must a l s o
 - 2-

take a cc o u n t of c e r t a i n a s p e c t s o f t h e i r p la ys and o f any

e v id e n c e co n c e r n in g t h e i r c r e a t i v e p r o c e s s e s .

On a cc o u n t o f the u n m eth od ical c h a r a c te r of Ludwig*s

w r i t i n g s and the la c k of a d e f i n i t i v e e d i t i o n o f h i s work,
h i s dram atic t h e o r y in g e n e r a l has n ev er b e e n f u l l y e x p lo r e d ,

w h i l s t the s p e c u l a t i v e language o f some o f Hebbel*s im portan t

w r i t i n g s has tended t o render c r i t i c i s m o f h i s t h e o r i e s one­

sid e d . By s i f t i n g a l l the a v a i l a b l e m a t e r i a l and b y exam ining

n ot o n ly t h e i r t h e o r e t i c a l w r i t i n g s and corresp on d en ce and d i a r i e s ,
b u t a l s o th e dramas t h e m s e lv e s , I have hoped t o g a in a more
b a la n c e d view o f t h e i r c o n c e p t io n of the n a tu re of drama and the

methods o f d ram atic c o m p o s itio n . At th e same tim e , i t i s hoped

t h a t t h i s p ro ce d u re , by p r o v id in g a b a s i s f o r the a n a l y s i s o f
t h e i r approach t o drama and i l l u s t r a t i n g the e s s e n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s

b etv/een them, as w e l l as s i m i l a r i t i e s where th e y e x i s t , w i l l

throw l i g h t upon the r e l a t i o n b etw een the c r i t i c a l and the

c r e a tiv e p r o c e ss.
A p r i l 1950 B, E. S c h a t z k y
Bedford C ollege

IT CRITICAL STUDY OF EKIEDKICH HEBBEL *S

AND OTTO LUDWIG *S DüAIvïATIC THEORY WITH

SPECIAL KEEEAENCE TO T H S Iil DBAIIATIC

PKACTICE .
 ProQuest Number: 10097216

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

uest.
ProQuest 10097216

Published by ProQuest LLC(2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
 I N T R O D U C T I O N

The s p e c t a c l e o f th e a u th o r-c ritic is a f a m i l i a r one

in th e co n tem p o rary l i f e of le tte rs. The p o e t o f t o - d a y

appears to cross th e g u l f betw een c r e a t i o n and a n a ly s is

w ith in c re a s in g ease, w h ilst h is own w o r l d o f t h e i m a g i n a t i o n

is estab lish in g ever c lo se r lin k s w ith th e o u ts id e w orld o f

sc ie n tific in v estig atio n . T his cou ld h a rd ly be o th e rw is e ;

stru g g lin g t o make h i s still s m a ll v o ic e h e a r d i n a predom i­

n a n tly m a te r ia lis tic environm ent, th e c re a tiv e a rtist is

h a v in g to ju s tify h is e x i s t e n c e more t h a n e v e r b e f o r e and

to s t a t e h is case to th e w orld w ith th e utm ost c l a r i t y and

co n v ictio n . In o rd e r to do t h i s , he m ust p o s s e s s not o n ly

a very su re sense o f purpose, but a keen and e x a c tin g

c ritic a l judgm ent, co u p led w ith an i n f a l l i b l e know ledge o f

the ru le s ©f h i s wwn a r t .

To a c e r t a i n e x te n t, it m ight be s a i d t h a t t h i s sense

o f p r e c a rio u s n e s s has r a r e l y been w holly a b sen t from t h e

h isto ry o f German l i t e r a t u r e , p a rticu larly in th e case o f

the d ram a, whose d e p e n d e n c e u pon f o r e i g n m o d els i n i t s

in fan cy fo s te re d a se lf-c o n sc io u sn e ss and an a s s e r t i v e

d esire to d ev elo p alo n g i t s own l i n e s w hich h a s h a d a l a s t i n g

e ffect. The a u t h o r i t y o f G r e e c e an d t h e i n f l u e n c e o f

S)hakespeare a re th e two d o m i n a n t f o r c e s in i ts e v o lu tio n ,

w hich i s c h a r a c t e r i s e d by c o n s t a n t tra n sitio n s from one

 — 2 —

a rtistic m e t h o d t© a n o t h e r . Each s u c c e s s iv e d ram atist thus

became s o m e th in g i n t h e n a t u r e of a p a th fin d er, endowed w i t h

th e sense o f h is own m i s s i o n , and i t is not s u rp ris in g th at

many o f Germ any^s d ram atists sh o u ld have f e l t th e u rg e to

fo rm u late t h e i r personal aim s and to e& press i n s y s t e m a t i c

la n g u a g e t h e i r g e n e r a l v iew s on dram a. There a r e , of course,

n o tab le e x cep tio n s, and e ven w here t h i s com bination o f th e

creativ e and t h e c r i t i c a l fac u ltie s is present w ith in th e

work o f one d r a m a t i s t , th e form w hich t h i s com bination to o k

a n d t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e tw o c o n d i t i o n e d o n e a n o t h e r

d iffers n e ce ssa rily from c a s e to case. Thus L e s s i n g , whose

e a r ly p lays d i d much t© s h a p e t h e s u b s e q u e n t course o f the

German d ram a, te n d e d h i m s e l f to p l a c e much o f t h e em phasis

upon h is c ritic a l a c tiv ity ; w h ilst G oethe a llo w e d t h e o r y

and p r a c t i c e t© r u n p a r a l l e l t© o n e a n o t h e r ; or, again ,

S c h ille r, a f t e r th e spontaneous plays o f h is youth, felt

t h e n e ed to w ith d raw and to evolve h i s theory o f tragedy

fu lly before re tu rn in g to creativ e production.

Th e s t u d e n t o f G e r m a n l i t e r a t u r e is th u s n o t unaccustom ed

to form h i s th e o ry o f tra g e d y and dram atic a r t n o t o n ly from

a s c ru tin y o f the p r a c tic a l achievem ent o f su c c e e d in g drama­

tists, but also from t h e i r own t h e o r e t i c a l s t a t e m e n t s u p o n

those fu n d am en tal p r i n c i p l e s w hich th e y th e m s e lv e s professed

to observe or ex h o rted o th ers to observe. I n no o t h e r c a s e s ,

how ever, does su c h a m ethod s u g g e s t i t s e l f m ore n a t u r a l l y

 - 3 -

t h a n i n t h o s e o f F r i e d r i c h H e b b el and O tto Ludw ig, for,

though f i r s t and f o re m o s t c o n c e rn e d w ith d r e a t i v e w ork,

each has l e f t an u n u s u a l l y l a r g e co llec tio n of th e o re tic a l

w r i t i n g s . S in ce b o th , m oreover, were v e r y c l o s e contem ­

p o raries - lik e W ag n er a n d B u / ^ c h n e r t h e y w e r e b o r n i n 1 8 1 3 -

a c o m p a riso n o f t h e i r view s on problem s affectin g the dram a

m ay n o t b e w i t h o u t sig n ifican ce i f th e developm ent o f th e

German drama i n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h cen tu ry is to

be se e n in i t s tru e p ersp ectiv e. Sach, it is tru e, is a

d ram atist in h is own r i g h t , c o n d itio n e d by h is own' p e r s o n a l i '

ty and b a c k g ro u n d , pursuing h is own i n d i v i d u a l in te n tio n s

and h a v in g seem in gly l i t t l e i n common w i t h t h e o t h e r ,

e x c e p t i n so far as t h e y s h a r e d a common l i t e r a r y trad itio n ®

But it is p recisely th ese facto rs w hich r e n d e r a com parison

of th eir conscious aim s and c o n s i d e r e d v i e w s o n dram a p a r ­

tic u la rly im p o rtan t; fo r in th e v ery d iv e r s ity of th eir

th eo ries, e v o lv e d as t h e y w ere a t t h e same s t a g e in th e

h isto ry o f G e rm a n l i t e r a t u r e , t h e i r work g a t h e r e d t o g e t h e r

the stra n d s o f the p a s t, w hich were b o t h v a l u a b l e in them ­

selv es and seem ed to provide a firm fo un d atio n fo r th e

fu tu re o f th e dram a.

The tim e a t w h ic h H e b b e l a n d L udw ig w ere w r i t i n g w a s ,

in fact, a p erio d o f tran sitio n - a p e r io d i n w hich t h e ^

a rtist fin d s h im self at th e cro ss-ro ad s, fo rc e d to re n d e r

a c le ar a cc o u n t to h i m s e l f and to o th ers o f the purpose

o f h is art, and to tu rn h is face re s o lu te ly in th is er

th at d irectio n » It has been c a l le d a s e c o n d S t u r m m i d Dr an;»:

p erio d , h e ra ld in g a new e r a o f l i t e r a r y as w e l l as s c i e n t i f i c

and p o l i t i c a l r e a l i s m , and b u i l t not upon a r t i s t i c v a lu e s, but

r a t h e r on th e im p a tie n t d esire to b r e a k w ith th e p a s t . The d r a m a

as a pu rely l i t e r a r y form h a d v e r y l a r g e l y b e e n o u s t e d b y t h e

essay, th e no v el and o th e r v e h i c l e s - o f th o u g h t b e t t e r su ited

to express the t e n d e n t i o u s v ie w s o f t h e J u n ^ d e u t s c h i a n d movement -

t h e members o f w h ic h H e b b e l d e s c r i b e d u n c o m p r o m i s i n g l y as "die

g a n z / p o e s i e l o s e n V e rs ta n d e s -K lu /é g le r d e r m odernen Z e i t ” ( l ) .

L u d w i g t o o was a p p a l l e d b y t h e s h a l l o w n e s s o f c o n t e m p o r a r y

lite ra tu re , and becom ing i n c r e a s i n g l y aware o f t h e n e e d f o r a

new s t a r t , ch aracterised the tim es as "Angest e c k t v o n d e r g l a ^ n -

zenden K rankiieit des W e rth e ris m u s , d er S c h a m lo s ig k e it des jung en

D e u ts c h ia n d s , der U nnatur der fra n z o ^ sisc h e n d e v o lu tio n " (2).

It is only n a tu r a l, th erefo re, th at the tru ly creativ e sp irits

o f the tim e s h o u l d h a v e f e l t m ore a k i n t o th e g rea t c u ltu ral

epochs o f the past th a n to t h e l i t e r a r y movem ents o f t h e present

w hich were a l i e n to th eir deepest co n v ictio n s

1 . F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l , S a B m t l i c h e v'/erke. H i s t o r i s c h - k r i t i s c h e A u s -
g a b e , b e s o r g t v o n d . M . W e r n e r , B e r l i n , 191^1 f f . A b t . I I 4 v o l s .
T a;^ebuecher, l OOJ ( h e r e a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o a s T ) ; I V 6 1 4 4 ,
21 May 1 0 6 3 7
2 . V . O t t o L u d w i g , G e s a m m e l t e S c h r i f t e n , e d . A. S t e r n , 6 v o l s . ,
L e i p z i g , 1 8 9 1 ( h e r a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o a s G S jT v o l . I ( c o n t a i n i n g
S t e r n * s B i o g r a p h y o f L u d w i g ) p . 1 5 2 . C f l T l L e t t e r t o C .G . S c h a l l e r
3 M arch 184©; B r i e f c , e d • ^ o g t h e r - im A u f t r a g e d e s G o e t h e »
u n d S c h i l l e r - A m r t V 5 \ — v o l . I (1834 - 1 8 4 7 ) , W eim ar, 1 9 ^ 5 ,
----------------------- p. 17.
 - 5 -

about art. At t h e same t i m e , b o t h H e b b e l and Ludw ig w o u ld h a v e

d e n i e d v e h e m e n tly any c h a r g e o f e s c a p i s m , b e i n g fu lly aw are o f

th e need fo r a form o f drama w h ich w o u ld f u l f i l th e demands o f

the p resen t and p la c e i t on an in d e p e n d e n t f o o tin g w orthÿ o f

th e best i n t h e Germany o f t h e i r day, ’’i t s ^ i g h e s t and t r u e s t

in te re s ts” (l). It w ould in d e e d be a p r e p o s t e r o u s i d e a , Ludwig

d eclared , to t r y to create a new d r a m a o u t e f a m e l t i n g - p o t o f

all tim es, n atio n s and g e n r e s :

” Im G e g e n t e i l e m u ^ s s e n w i r e i n D ram a s u c h e n , w elches u n s e r

sei, w ie das g r i e c h i s c h e fu ^ r d ie G riech en w ar; e i n D ra m a

led ig lic h aus s e i n e n B edingungen e n t w i c k e l t , n i c h t wie d ie s e

irgend w o , i r g e n d e i n s t w aren o d e r e n d lic h zu a l l e r Z eit im

Aj^ther s e i n k o ^ n n e n , s o n d e r n w ie s i e i n der N atur der G at-

tung, u n s r e r Z e it und u n s r e r V o lk stiijém lich k eit gegeben,

w i r k l i c h s e i n k o jb n n e n u n d w i r k l i c h s i n d ; als G attun g e in e r

P o esie, d ie s e l b s t n ich t aus dem f l u ^ c h t i g e n T a g e , s o n d e r n

aus dem G r o s s e n u n d G a n a e n u n s r e s w ir k lic h e n Lebens o rg a n is o h

hervorgegangen i s t ” (2).

H e b b e l h a d an e v en m ore g r a n d i o s e co n cep tio n o f th e d ram atist* s

o b lig atio n tow ards h i s tim e, th e im p o rta n c e o f w hich i n t h e

process o f w orld h i s t o r y no o n e s a w m o r e c l e a r l y th an h e:

"D ie d ra m a tisc h e Kunst s o i l den w e l t h i s t o r i s c h e n P r o c e s s ,

1 . F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l, S a a m t l i c h e W erke#. H is t o r i s c h - k r i t i s che
A u s ^ a b e . b e s o r g t v o n Â.M. W e r n e r . B e r l i n . 1 9 0 1 f f . A b k .""ï
( h e r a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o a s W); v o l . Z X I I p . 32 P r é f a c e
2 . GS V p , 4 2 . • Mû-rt'ix
 d e r i n u n s e r en Tagen v o r s i c h g e h t und d e r die vorhandenen

In stitu tio n en des m e n s c h lic h e n C resch lech ts , d i e p o l i t i s c h e n ,

r e l i g i o ^ s e n und s i t t l i c h e n , n ic h t um stu^rzen, sondern t i e -

f e r begru^nden, sie also v or dem U m s t u r z s i c h e r n w i l l , be-

en d ig en h e lf e n . I n diesem S in n e s o i l s i e , w ie a l l é P o esie,

die s ic h n ic h t a u f Supers n o t a t i o n und A rabeskenw esen b e -

so h ra^n k t, zeitg em a^ss s e i n ” ( l )«

Is one to assum e, th erefo re, th at th is acute co n scio u sn ess

o f the im portant duty o f th e d ram atist, convinced o f h is hightf

sta tio n , was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r m uch o f t h e t h e o r e t i c a l w r i t i n g s

o f b o t h H e b b e l a n d L u d w i g ? On t h e face o f i t , it m ig ht in d e e d

be argued t h a t , h a d t h e y n o t b e e n so aware o f t h e u n f a v o u r a b l e

c o n d itio n s i n which t h e y were w r i t i n g , and o f th e o p p o s i t i o n

or, w orse s t i l l , th e a p a th y w hich t h e i r d r a m a t i c w o r k was

h a v in g to encounter, th e y w ould h a r d l y h a v e a c c o u n te d i t w orth

w h i l e t o s p e n d s o m uch o f t h e i r tim e i n d isc u ssin g p o in ts of

d ra m a tic th e o r y , however im p o rta n t th e s e m ight b e . For th e f a c t

th at certain of th e ir th e o re tic a l w ritin g s are in th e form o f

v in d icatio n s of th eir own d r a m a t i c in te n tio n s in th e face o f a

h o stile p u b lic m ight w e ll s u g g e s t su c h an i n e r p r e t a t i o n . T he

m ost im p o rta n t o f H ebbel*s w r i t in g s of th is k i n d - " M e i n W o rt

\v
uj^ber d as Drama" and th e P r e f a c e to M a ria M agdalena - are eith er

d irec tly or in d ire c tly a d d re sse d to h is c ritic s, w h ilst the

v e r y t i t l e o f L u d w i g *s o n ly s y s t e m a t i c Work o f t h e o r y - "D ie

d r a m a t i s c h e n A u f g a b e n d e r Z e i t - M e i n W i l l e u n d Weg" (2) i s

1 . P r e f a c e t o M a r i a M a g d a l e n e . 1 8 4 4 ; W XI p . 48
2* V. GS V p p . 3 5 - S l . "
 - 7 -

in d ic ativ e of th e a u th o r 's d id ac tic and r e f o r m a tiv e purpose.

"D ie S c h w i e r i g k e j t t , das zu l 6 s e n , was i c h a l s A u f g ah e f a n d " ,

Ludw ig w ro te i n t h i s co m p arativ ely l a t e w ork, " h a t m ich o f t an

meinem T a l e n t z w e i f e l n g e m a c h t. Doch h a t der dedanke, a n d e r n zu

nÜ tzen, d ie ih re K ra ft im n i n g e n m i t dem I r r t u m noch n i c h t v e r -

z e h r e n m u s s t e n , m ich b e h a r r e n l a s s e n . Der j e t z i g e h t a n d d e r Drar

m a tik r e c h t f e r t i g t m eine o t u d ie n " (l).

But th e m o tiv e o f s e l f - j u s t i f i c a t i o n and t h e in c u l t e a ti o n o f

new v a l u e s in to t h e m inds o f t h e i r g e n e r a t i o n are only p a r t l y

resp o n sib le for th e e x iste n ce o f s o m uch d r a m a t i c t h e o r y i n t h e

w o r k o f t h e two d r a m a t i s t s . In the c a s e o f L udw ig, for exam ple,

th ey f a i l to account fo r th e rh a p so d ic , w holly u n m eth o d ic a l

c h a ra c te r o f th e Shakespeare stu d ie n (2), w h ilst the n ev er-en d - '

in g p re o c c u p a tio n w ith th e p roblem s o f dram a i n H e b b e l 's d ia- j

ries p o in ts to a need beyond th a t o f m ere s e l f - d e f e n c e . In o r- |

der to o b tain a co m p reh en siv e p ictu re of th e ir approach to the j

t h e o r y o f dram a, it is in d eed n e c e s s a r y t o c o v e r a v e r y w ide I

field c o m p r i s i n g many d i f f e r e n t form s o f e x p r e s s i o n and extend-j

ing over a lif e tim e o f th o u g h t and e x p e r i e n c e . L u d w ig 's S h a k e -

s p e a r e s t u d i e n alo n e c o n ta in innum erable a llu s i o n s to e v e ry as­

p ect o f th e dram a, w h ilst t h e m an y o t h e r w r i t i n g s p u b lis h e d by |

S te rn in th e fifth and s i x t h volum e o f h i s e d itio n provide an |

alm o st i n e x h a u s tib le fund o f I

I* i* S â ^ p . 5 1 .- 2 .In th e absence o f a c r i t i c a l e d itio n o f th e I
S h a k e s p e a r e s t u d i e n . th e p r e s e n t s t u d y i s b a s e d on th e c o l l e c t - '
i o n p u b l i s h e d by A . S t e r n . G esam m elte S c h r i f t e n v o l . V . I t s c h i e f !
d i s a d v a n t a g e i s t h e d e l i b e r a t e l a c k o f any a tt e m p t a t c h ro n o lo i
g i c a l o r d e r , a n d I have t h e r e f o r e as f a r as p o s s i b l e a d o p te d
t h e d a te s s u p p l i e d by M o ritz H e y d ric h i n N a c h la s s s e h r i f t e n O t-i
t o L u d w i g s , L e i p z i g , 1 8 7 4 , v o l . I I (S h a k e s p e a r e - h t u d i e n l . j
 - 8 -

argum ents, aphorim s and a p e rç u s , o f o b serv atio n s on th e dram a

and c r i t i c i s m s of in d iv id u al d ram a tists. T ogether th e y ran g e

over th e space of about tw en ty -fiv e y e a rs, form ing b u t a frag­

ment o f a v a s t and c h a o t i c mass o f v e r y l a r g e l y i l l e g i b l e manu-

s or ip im m aterial s / t i l l w a itin g t o b e d e c i p h e r e d a n d m ad e g e n e ­

rally a v ailab le (l). P a tie n tly a n d i n d e f a t i g a b l y , e v e n when

r a c k e d by i l l n e s s as h e so c o n s t a n t l y w a s , L udw ig r e c o r d e d

every id e a , e v ery th o u g h t and i m p r e s s i o n , leav in g in a d d itio n

a h ith e rto alm o st u n e x p lo r e d s e a o f d i a r i e s and l e t t e r s , as

w ell as s k e t c h e s and p la n s fo r h is own p l a y s in te r s p e r s e d w ith

references o f a w ider ap p lica tio n (2).

In gebbel*s case th e prospect is s l i g h t l y m ore l i m i t e d and,

th an k s to h i s m ore o r d e r l y t u r n o f m in d , somewhat l e s s over­

w helm ing. N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e sum t o t a l of h is letters, a ll of

w h ic h , w h e th e r t h e y be o f an i n f o r m a l o r a ” p r a f e s s i o n a l ”

n a tu re , to u ch upon p o in ts affectin g the dram a, e x ten d s over

n i n e volum es (5), w h ilst h is d iaries, eq u ally in d isp e n sa b le

for a r ig h t u n d erstan d in g o f h is d ram atic th eo ry , are th e

1. A ll th e m a n u s c rip t m a t e r i a l is assem bled a t th e G p eth e-u n d -

S c h i l l e r - A r c h i v i n W e i m a r . L é o n M i s h a s made a f a i j r y e x t e n s i v e
s t u d y o f i t a n d i n c l u d e s n u m e r o u s e x t r a c t s i n h i s "work e n t i t l e d
"L es o e u v r e s D r a m a t i q u e s d * O tto L udw ig*', 3 v o l . , L i l l e , 1 9 2 2 .
è . A p a r t from t h e works a l r e a d y m e n tio n e d , e x t r a c t s from Lud­
w igs m a n u s c r i p t s c a n be fo u n d i n num erous d i s s e r t a t i o n s on
O t t o L u d w i g ’s p l a y s a s w e l l a s i n t h e m o s t r e c e n t , b u t i n c o m ­
p l e t e e d i t i o n o f h i s w o r k s , e n t i t l e l . " S â é m t l i c h e W e r k e " . e jL
P a u l M e r k e r , 6 v o l . M û ç n c h e n Clnd L e i p z i g , 1 9 1 2 f f l e s p . v o l . V I :
" Der E r b f o f r s t e r u n d s e i n e V o r s t u d i e n ) .
3. F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l, S & # m tlich e W erke. H i s t o r i s c h - t o i t i s c h e ^
Aus^(&be. b e s o r g t v o n ii.M. B e r n e r , A bt. I l l Bd. I - V Ï Ï 1 ,
( h e r e a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o a s B r . )o ... '
 - 9 -

in tim a te re c o rd o f every phase o f h is developm ent th ro u g h o u t

tv ;en ty -cig h t y e a rs . B u t H e b b e l *s a c u t e c r i t i c a l sense fo u n d ex­

p ressio n also in a v e ry c o n s id e r a b le body o f e s s a y s , articles

and r e v ie w s , t h e m ost im p o rta n t o f w hich, b o th on g e n e r a l and

sp ecific to p ic s, are co ncerned w ith th e problem s o f dram a. Some

o f th ese p u b lic atio n s, it is tru e, to u c h c l o s e l y upon H ebbel*s

own p l a y s and p ro v id e a means o f d e f e n d i n g h i s personal b e lie fs

and p re ju d ic e s to h i s c ritic s, w h ilst a larg e n u m b e r w e r e no

doubt w r i t t e n w ith a view to t h e m uch n e e d e d m a t e r i a l b e n e f i t

t h e y w ould b r i n g ”um s e i n e m d ram atisch en P ro d u k tio n en e in e M ilch -

ku h zu e r z i e h e n ” , as Ludw ig s a i d o f h i s own e f f o r t s at novel

w ritin g (l). But th e s i n c e r i t y and o u tsp o k e n n e s s as w e l l as th e

deep i n s i g h t in to t h e n a t u r e o f t h e dram a w hich c h a r a c t e r i s e a ll

H ebbel*s c ritic a l work a p p e a r t o p o in t n o t o n ly to an o u tw a rd

c o m p u lsio n to ex ercise the d u ties o f d ram atic c r i t i c , b u t to a

n a tu ra l in c lin a tio n tow ards t h e o r i s i n g .

Any e f f e c t w h i c h t h e p r e v a i l i n g u n c o n g e n i a l c o n d i t i o n s m ay h a v e

had upon th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f H e b b e l *s a n d L u d w i g *s c r i t i c a l fa­

c u ltie s was o f a m o r e i n d i r e c t n a t u r e . B oth o f them , b e in g c o n -

fiem ned b y f o r c e o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s , during th e fo rm ativ e y ears of

th eir liv e s, to le a d a l o n e l y e x i s t e n c e , -#^ey. w e r e driv en back

e v e n m ore u p o n t h e m s e lv e s by a h o s t i l e w o rld and f o r c e d to w ork

in s p iritu a l so litu d e . The d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e m was t h a t ,

w h e r e a s Ludwig w elcom ed t h i s so litu d e a n d was o n l y h a p p y i n th e

1. L e tte r to E duard L e v r ie n t ? ï ç t l y 1 8 5 3 , GS V I p. 576.

 - 10 -

quiet s e c l u s i o n o f h i s home i n E i s f e l d , am ongtt a sm all and

in tim ate c irc le o f lo v in g f r ie n d s , Hebbel needed th e stim u lu s

o f th e o u ts id e w orld, even w here t h i s in v o lv ed f r i c t i o n , and

during th e e arlie r p art of h is life was c o n t i n u a l l y y e a r n i n g

for the c o n t a c t w i t h o t h e r men a n d f o r w h a t h e c a l l e d "im­

p ressio n s of a ll k in d s" (l). L u d w i g was o f a n e s s e n t i a l l y r e ­

tirin g and s e l f - e f f a c i n g d isp o sitio n and d e s i r e d n o t h i n g m ore

t h a n to be l e f t i n u n d i s t u r b e d peace to s tu d y and d e v e lo p h i s

ta le n t first as m u s i c i a n a n d t h e n , w ith th e grow ing need f o r a

m o r e c o n c r e t e m edium o f e x p r e s s i o n , as a d ram atist. Thus he

liv e d an u n e v e n t f u l l i f e , in d a i l y communion w i t h h i m s e l f a n d

the g reat s p i r i t s o f th e p ast, receiv in g th e on ly o u ts id e s t i ­

m ulus from h i s e n th u sia stic co n n ectio n w ith th e lo c a l play ers

and r a r e v i s i t s to th e th e a tr e , w hich n e v e r failed t o make a

p ro fo u n d and i n v i g a r a t i n g i m p r e s s i o n u p o n him (2 ). H is n o te s

and d i a r i e s in a ll t h e i r u n e n d i n g p r o f u s i o n a r e n o t s o m uch

th e record o f h is every thought as f a x o f t h e v e r y p r o c e s s o f

th in k in g , reV em ling t h e i n n e r s t r u g g l e o f a m ind whose one

d e s i r e was t o learn and e v e n t u a l l y to come t o te r m s w i t h him ­

se lf and w ith h i s a r t . No o n e was m o r e c o n s t a n t l y and m ore p i t i -

p a in fu lly aw are o f h i s own f a u l t s

and sh o rtc o m in g s i n r e s p e c t
e
1 . L e t t e r t o E l i s e L e n s i n g , 13 S e p ÿ B b e r 1 8 3 7 ; ^ r . I p 2 2 4 .
C f . a l s o L e t t e r t o E l i s e L e n s i n g , 10 Eeb 1 8 3 9 ; i b i d n . 3 8 8 .
2. A f t e r s e e i n g E m i l i a G a l o t t i he w ro te to h i s f i a n c e e : "so h a t
m ich noch k e i n S tû ^ c k m it f o r t g e r i s s e n . A il e s a n d e re is t- L u m p e -
r e i d a g e g e n . Es h a t m i c h s o zum A r b e i t e n g e s t i m m t , d a s s i c h
h e u t * m i t f r ü ^ s t e r a û ^ b e r d e n B e r n d t h e r z o g , a u s dem s c h o n j n o c h
was w e r d e n w i r d " . B r i e f e . e d . c i t . p . 2 o 4 .
 - 11 -

of h is d rsm atic talen t, b u t no o n e a t t h e s a m e t i m e m o r e

an x io u s to come t o a f u lle r u n d erstan d in g . To h i s frien d ^ ^ad ­

v i s e r B duard D e v rie n t h e / w ro te : ”I s t * s doch d i e W a h r h e it, d ie

i c h w i l l ' f ' u n d i s t ’s e i n I r r w e g , dèn ic h g e h e , so b i n ic h n u r

aus zu grossem E i f e r d i e W a h rh e it zu s u c h e n a u f i h n g e r a t h e n .

U n d i c h m o ^ c h t e um A l l é s n ich t, dass e i n e von m e in e n S chw S /-

chen Ihnen unbekannt b lie b e . Ich b in aber n ic h t etw a s t o l z auf

d ie Schwa^chen, nur darauf, dass ich zu s t o l z b in , ein e zu

v ersteck en , wenn i c h s i e n i c h t b e w S ^ ltig e n kann" (l). W ith

c h arac teristic m o d e s t y h e was a l w a y s i n v i t i n g , even im p lo rin g

the c ritic is m o f men s u c h a s D ev rien t a n d J u l i a n S c ^ im i d t w h o s e

judgm ent he r e s p e c t e d , n o t o n l y when t h e drama i n q u e s t i o n was

com pleted, but during i t s v ario u s stag es o f developm ent ; and

h e s p a r e d no effort to com ply w i t h t h e i r s u g g e s t i o n s by con­

stan t a lte ra tio n s and r e - s h a p i n g o f h i s m a t e r i a l . For n o rm ally

th ese su g g estio n s o n ly s e r v e d to confirm h is own d o u b t s and

m is g iv in g s w hich, though i n d i c a t i v e o f his own g o o d j u d g m e n t ,

d id l i t t l e to in crease h is s e n s e o f c o n f i d e n c e . L u d w i g ’s s t e r n ­

est c ritic , in d eed , was L u d w i g h i m s e l f ; h e t o r m e n t e d h i m s e l f

c o n tin u a lly w ith p a in s ta k in g an aly ses o f t h e weak p o i n t s in

h is d ra m a tic w ork; and h i s th e o re tic a l w ritin g s, in clu d in g

h i s S h a k e s p e a re -S tu d ie n . are p u n c tu a te d th ro u g h o u t w ith s e l f -

critic ism s and exirio rtatio n s to new e f f o r t .

1. L e tte r to E duard D e v rie n t, 1 4 A u g . 1 8 4 9 ; GS V I , p. 362.

 — 13 ■“

gaps (l). -But a t t h e s a m e t i m e h e n e v e r h a d a n y d o u b t as to h i s

a esth e tic judgm ent and n e v e r a c c e p t e d any id e a s f o r w h i c h h e was

n o t by n a tu r e and th ro u g h h i s own p e r s o n a l c o n v i c t i o n a n d e x p e ­

rien ce prepared*

^ u c h s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e w asyto re m a in p e r p e t u a l l y o u t o f Lud­

w i g ’s r e a c h . "Nun a b e r w i l l ’s m e i n S c h i c k s a l " ^ h e w r o t e i n 184© ;

"ich sehe re c h t gut ein , dass i c h ’s n i e a u f e i n e n g r u ^ n e n Zweig

b r i n g en w erd e. H a ^ t t ’ i c h n u r e i n b i s s c h e n mehr S i t e l k e i t , ein e

M e s s e r s p i t z e mehr - E ig e n li e b e (d ie A rz n e i a u f diesem h e z e p t h e i s s t

S elb stv ertrau en ), so w a^re m i r g e h o l f e n " (2). These a ie t h e words

o f a man w h o , th o ug h g e n u in e ly c o n v in c e d o f h i s v o catio n , had

a lre ad y found th e first-fru its of h is dram atic talen t sad ly

w an tin g . The e a r l y p l a y s o n t h e Agnes B e r n a u e r t h e m e , as H e ytdrich

has p o in ted out (3), d iffered l i t t l e from t h e v i o l e n t in trig u es

o f t h e S t u r m a n d Ibrang d r a m a a n d s h o w e d L u d w i g s t i l l co m p letely

u n d er th e in f lu e n c e o f a by-gone p e rio d in l i t e r a t u r e . T h eir

o n ly saving g rac e, in fa c t, was t h e s p o n t a n e i t y and im m ediacy

of p resen ta tio n c h a ra c te ris tic o f an e a r l y work - w hich, how ever,

1 . "Wie l u j ^ c k e n h a f t , unzusam m enhà'jfenge nd, u n b e d e u t e n d s i n d m e i n e

K e n n tn is s e î I n a e s t h e t i s c h e n B ingen w eiss ic h f r e i l i c h E in i g e s
u nd e rk e n n e M anches, a b er m ir g e h t d ie F a ÿ h ig k e it ab, m eine
I d e e n k S é r n e r zu z e r s e t z e n , m ein K o r n .z u m ah len u n d zu v e r b a c k e n "
T i l 2 6 0 7 , 2 0 O c t . 1 8 4 2 . - O f . a l s o # 3 5 6 , 22 May 1 8 4 2 .
2 . L e t t e r t o C .G . S c h a l l e r , 2 M a r c n 1 8 4 o : B r i e f e . e d . c i t . p . 1 7 .
3 . o p . c i t . v o l . I ( S k i z z e n u n d F r a g m e n t e ) . H e y d r i c h h a s made a
d e t a i l e d s t u d y o f t h e s e e a r l i e s t f ra g m e n ts w hich a r e n o t e x t a n t .
>F
 — 14
w ere p r e c i s e l y th o s e q u a litie s which t h e a u th o r h i m s e l f con­

d emned* "In w ild e r H ast n ie d e rg e s c h rie b e n , w aren m eine E r s t -

lin g s d ra m e n w i ld la u f e n d e K in d e r des I n s t i n k t s , d ie m ir die

N o th w en d ig k eit e in e r Schule l e h r t e n . " ( l ) . Thus, w h ilst con­

tin u in g to w r e s t l e w i t h t h e Agnes B e r n a u e r them e as w e l l as

w i t h a c o n s i d e r a b l e number o f o t h e r d ram atic p r o je c ts (2),

Ludw ig f e l t in cre asin g ly the need fo r c o n c e n tra te d stu d y o f

o th er d ram atists and o f th e p rin cip le s govern in g h is own a r t *

Borne way t o h e l p h i m o u t o f t h e w e l t e r o f i d e a s , p lo ts and

ch aracters i n w h i c h h e was i n d a n g e r o f becom ing m ore and m ore

e n ta n g le d h a d to be fo u n d , and to acq u ain t h im s e lf w ith th e

ru les o f dram a seem ed t h e m ost n a t u r a l procedure. It is in -

te re s tin g to l e a r n th at as e a r l y as 184o M e n d e l s s o h n , u n d e r

whom L u d w i g was t o s t u d y m u s i c , h a d a d v i s e d h i s new p u p i l t o

g iv e up th e o r y (3), but a lth o u g h he soon a fte rw a rd s tu rn ed

h is b a c k on m u s ic , h e - n e v e r l o s t h i s n a tu ra l bent for th eo ri­

sing* I n O c t o b e r 1 8 4 o we f i n d h i m b u s y r e v i s i n g h i s own

a esth e tic s and an x io u s to s te e p h im s e lf i n co ntem p orary p h i­

losophy (4), b u t as far as t h e d r a m a was c o n c e r n e d , th e f i r s t

ev id en ce i n the av ailab le records to be fo u n d i n a letter

d a t e d 24 F e b r u a r y 1 8 4 7 , i n w h ich Ludw ig w r i t e s o f h i s in ­

t e n t i o n to d isco n tin u e h is own d r a m a t i c w o r k f o r t h e t i m e

being a n d t o devote h im s e lf e x c lu s iv e ly to the an aly sis of

1 . C i t e d b y M, H e y d r i c h . ± k ± A S k i z z e n u n d Fra,^<ment e * p* 1 2 4
2 . P e r G e t r e u e E c k a r t * P ie W ilds c h k ie 'tze n / H a n n s % e r Tcom edy)
D i e T o r .a:au e r H e i d e . P farzjio se * D ie f e l d b u r ^ * P i e R e c h t e des
H e r z e n s I f o r a d e t a i l e d s t u d y "of a l l t h e s e p l a y s v . L é o n M i s ,
OP* c i t . l a s w e l l a s GG I V e d . E r i c h S c h m i d t , f o r e x t r a c t s q f r o h
 - 15 -

play s w hich he h a d s e e n and r e a d . " Ic h p ril^fe s i e a n dem ," h e ex­

p l a i n e d to D ev rien t, "w a s S i e m i r b e i G e l e g e n i i e i t m e i n e r S a c h e n

v o n d e n -Er f o r d e m i s s e n e i n e r g e d i e g e n e n A r b e i t g e s c h r i e b e n , und

w e r d e d a b e i im m e r m e t e v o n d e r Z w e c k m a ^ s s i g k e i t d ieser V o rsc teif-

t e n u ^ b e r z e u g t . Und j e m eh r i c h d u r ch d i e s e B e s c h a ç f t i g u n g l e r n e ,

w o r a u f es ankommt, m i t d e s to g ro ^ s s e re m V e r tr a u e n g e h ’ i c h dem

Sommer e n t g e g e n , m i t dem i c h um d i e V / e t t e r p r o d u z i e r e n w i l l " ( l )» ■

It was p r i m a r i l y t h e t e c h n i c a l s i d e o f dram atic art w hich i n t e r ­

e s t e d h im as a p rac tisin g d ram atist, and i n a l e t t e r w ritte n a

m onth l a t e r he t o l d h is f i a n c e e how t h e c o m b i n e d s t u d y o f t h e

K q n V e r s a t i 0n s 1 e x i k m n a n d t h e l i v i n g s t a g e h a d t a u g h t h i m nume­

rous "tric k s o f th e tra d e " , so t h a t h i s experience, as he h i m s e l f

put i t , was a b l e t o m a k e t r e m e n d o u s p r o g r e s s (2 ). But p r e s e n t l y

t h e o r y was o n c e m o r e t o go h a n d - i n - h a n d w i t h p ractice, f o r by

1 8 5 5 D u d w i g was n o t o n l y e n g a g e d o n s e v e r a l u n f i n i s h e d p l a y s , such

as P e r Ja k o b s s t a b (3) and P e r E u ^ e l v o n A u^sburf: (4), but had

com pleted th e th ree plays f o r w hich he i s b e s t known, P e r E ^b -

fè > y rs te r. Pas F r ^ é u l e i n von S k u d e ri and P ie M akkabW r .

-
The y e a r s b e tw e e n 1847 and 1851 saw t h e b e g i n n i n g s o f Lud­

w i g ’s l i f e - l o n g p reo p c u p atio n w ith S h ak esp eare, o f whose a t o n c e

« tim u latin g and d i s t u r b i n g e f f e c t h e was,' h i m s e l f o n l y t o o w e l l

aw are. For w h i l s t th e l a c k o f f a i t h in h is own n a t i v e p o w e r s m ade

him s e e k g u i d a n c e and c o u n s e l i n th e n ever-w earying c o n te m p la tio n

1 . L e t t e r to E duard D e v rie n t, p. 196. '

2o L e t t e r t o E . W i n k l e r , 6 M a r c h 1 3 4 7 , B r i e f e . e d . c i t ♦ p . 211
3 . Begun i n 185® . ^ c t I o n l y p u b l i s h e d b y E r i c h S c t e i d t , GE IV
pp. 79-122.
4* L u d w i g ’s f if th v ersio n of th is su b ject. A cts I and I I p u b lish ed
by H ey d rich , o p .c it . v o l. I .
 ■
“ 16 —

o f S h a k e s p e a r e a n drama ( l ) , and th e r e b y in c r e a s e h is artistic

judgm ent and i n t e n s i f y h i s c ritic a l se n sib ility , the effect

upon h is own p r a c t i c a l effo rts was n o t b y a n y m e a n s p o s i t i v e .

”E i n n e u e s S t u d i u m S h a k e s p e a r o s , L e s s i n g s u n d d e r A l t e n ” , h e

w rote in 1853, "gab m ir neue A u f s c h l u f s s e u f b c r t r a g i s c h e

Stim nung, t r a g i s c h e N o t h w e n d i g k e i t u nd e r h o f h t e m e in e Ansprügf-

ch e an m ich s e l b s t b i s zum S c h w i n d e l n . Das B e d u ^ r f n i s , selb st

zu w is s e n , was i c h wo1 1 e n s o i l u n d d i e s i n H arm onie zu s e t z e n

m it dem, was i c h k o ^ n n e n m u s s , b rach te en d lich ein e g ro sse

K risis m ein er ganzen N atur zu w eg e,# . . " (2). L essin g and th e

G reek s w ere n o t alw ays in f a v o u r w ith Ludw ig, b u t S h a k e sp e a : e

rem ain ed th e id o l of h is life , who a c c o m p a n i e d h i m t h r o u g h

a ll the v ic is s itu d e s of h is dram atic career a n d f r o m whom h e

alw ays s o u g h t t h e fin al answ er®

The d i s o r d e r l y m ass o f m a n u s c r i p t s c o n t a i n i n g t h e m ost

m in u te an aly ses o f S h a k e s p e a r e ’s a r t w e r e , h o w e v e r , never in ­

tended fo r p u b lic a tio n , and i t w ould be e rr o n e o u s to expect

them to form a p u r e l y o b j e c t i v e c ritic a l stu d y . N o t e d down

s im u lta n e o u s ly w ith h is d ram atic p ro jec ts, t h e y w ere to coun­

te ra c t th e d e fic ie n cie s o f w hich he becam e i n c r e a s i n g l y aw are

in h is own p l a y s , and th e y th u s cam e t o b e t h e m o s t s u b j e c t i v e

co n fessio n s o f a d r a m a t i s t who w a s , a t t h e same t i m e t h e

stern est of critic s* In re p ly to a q u e s t i o n as to

1 . The p l a y s d i s c u s s e d a r e H a m le t, L e a r , O t h e l l o , M a c b e t h , ^
Romeo a n d J u l i e t , J u l i u s C a e s a r , M e r c h a n t o f V e n i c e , C o r i o l a n ,
E i ^ ; “ I T X . - l T e n i y IV* ■
-----------
 - 17 -

t h e p o s s i b l è p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e S h a k e s p e s j r e s t u d i e n , Ludwig i s

s t a t e d to have s a i d : " I c h habe das j a gar n ic h t m it dem G e d a n -

k e n £in d i e O ^ f f e n t l i c h k e i t zusam m engetragen, so n d e rn n u r f u ^ r

m ich a l l e in . '^ 3 ist das Tagebuch m ein er eig n en d ram atis chen E r-

zie h u n g . I c h w o l l t e m ir dem it e i n e n Weg b a h n e n " (l).

To p a v e a way f o r h i s dram atic c a r e e r b y means o f t h e o r e t i c a l

p reo ccu p atio n s was n e v e r c o n s c i o u s l y H e b b e l * s in te n tio n , but

th e f o r m a t i v e v a l u e o f s u c h work upon h i s early developm ent can

n ev erth eless not be ig n o re d . I n d e e d - u n l i k e L udw ig, who d i d

n o t tu r n to S h ak esp eare u n t i l he had t r i e d h is own h a n d a t th e

w ritin g o f p l a y s , H e b b e l was d e t e r m i n e d t o b e c o m p l e t e l y s u r e

o f h is ground b e fo re ex ercisin g th at dram atic talen t w hich he

felt stirrin g w ith in h im self. It is tru e th at at th e early age

o f s e v e n t e e n he h a d t r i e d to w r i t e a p lay - M iran d o la (2) -

but apart from t h e fact th at it re m a in e d fra g m e n ta ry and g iv e s

little p r o m i s e o f w h a t H e b b e l was/ l a t e r to produce, it d ates

f r o m a t i m e w he n t h e a u t h o r h i m s e l f was u n a w a r e o f h i s d ram atic

g en iu s and i t appears t o h a v e h a d no i n f l u e n c e u p o n h i s sub­

sequent developm ent. H is i n t e r e s t ih a e sth e tic s, on th e o th e r

hand, f o r w hich h i s own w r i t i n g o f p e e t r y and s h o r t s t o r i e s

p ro v id e d a good f o u n d a tio n , developed a t a su rp risin g ly early

age, w h ilst it was n o t u n t i l 1 8 3 5 t h a t h e cam e t o o c c u p y h i m ­

s e lf serio u sly , though s t i l l o nly sp a sm o d ica lly , w ith th e

1 . " G e sp ra ^ c h e O t t o Ludw igs m it J o s e f L ew insky", 2o J u l y 1 8 6 4 ,

GS VI p. 3 2 5 .
^ Z ' E ' ^ PP *5 f f . , 1 8 3 o .
 — 18 —

p o ssib le d ram atic tr e a tm e n t o f id e a s and c h a r a c t e r s (l)* But at

th e s a m e t i m e h e was e n g a g i n g i n a l l m anner o f p a t i e n t sp a d e

work, conscious o f t h e l o n g way h e h a d t o t r a v e l before reach­

in g h is goal and a f r a i d o f p lu c k in g the f r u it before it was

fu lly rip e (2), "A u c h z u e i n e m T r a u e r s p i e l d r a ^ n g t s i c h W u n d er­

lic h es 2eu g i n m ir zusammen” , he w r o te i n 1 8 3 6 , " do c h b e v o r i c h

d en K o t h u r n a n z u s c h n a l l e n w age, muss e s h e l l um m i c h h e r s e i n ”

(3)* A g lim p se a t H ebbel*s d iary at th a t t i m e s h o w s how w e r i o u s

l y he to o k h is task , how h e s t e e p e d h i m s e l f i n s u c h t h e o r e t i c a l

works a s L e s s i n g *s "H a m b u r g i s c h e D r a m a t u r g i e . S c h l e g e l *s V o r -

lesu n g en ueber d ra m a tis c h e Kgnst und T i e c k 's D ram atu rg isch e

S c h r if te n * w h ilst alread y e x e rc is in g h is own s u r e a esth e tic

sense. E v e n m o r e a t t e n t i o n was d e v o t e d t o the d iscu ssio n o f

play s and d r a m a t i s t s , b o t h m a jo r and m in o r , and h e r e t h e c h i e f

ch aracteristic lie s in the p r e d ile c tio n for the deducing o f

g en eral, u n iv ersally v a lid dram atic p r i n c i p l e s . At t h e same

tim e, h o w e v e r , H e b b e l was n o t b l i n d t o t h e n e e d f o r s c h o o l i n g

h i m s e l f i n t h e m ore t e c h n i c a l asp ects o f dram a, b u t n o t e d

down, m ore f r e q u e n t l y t h a n was t o be h i s wont d u r i n g h i s cre­

a tiv e p erio d , observ atio n s on su ch s u b j e c t s as m o t i v a t i o n and

th e re p re s e n ta tio n o f c h a ra c te r (5)* O c c a s i o n a l l y , such sp e-

1 . F o r d e t a i l s o f H e b b e l * s e a r l y d r a m a t i c p r o j e c t s v . W V pp,
31ff.
2 . ” Wie f e s t h ' à ^ l t d e r Baum e i n e u n r e i f e F r u c h t u n d d e r G e i s t
e i n u n r e i f e s G e b i l d e ! Wie loffcsen s i c h b e i d e w enn s i e g e r e i f t
s i n d v o n s e l b s t a b ! ” T I I 2 8 5 1 , 1 1 . Nov. 1 8 5 3 .
3. L e t t e r t o F l i s e L e n s i n g , 29 N o v .1 8 3 6 , B r . I p . 119.
4. V . T I l o 3 ^ o M arch 1838.
5 . î^or a. d e t a i l e d s t u d y o f H e b b e l *s t h e o r e t i c a l p r e o c c u p a t i o n s
d u r i i ^ . t h i s e a r l y p e r i o d v . _Ag^nes B a ^ e n b j i s c h : D i e T a g e b i i i ^ c h e r
F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l s . Weimar 1 9 3 3 ; p p . 27 f f ------------^----------------
 - 19 -

c ific d iscu ssio n s as h i s c ritic ism o f M aler M u e lle r* s Genoveva

(l), a i ’ç a l r e a d y a f o r e s h a d o w i n g o f h i s own d r a m a t i c w o r k , for

n o t h i n g was m o r e s t i m u l a t i n g t o H e b b e l *s m i n d t h a n t h e co n stant

ex ercise o f h is acute c r i t i c a l fac u ltie s. T hese were a l r e a d y

d e v e lo p e d to a rem arkable d e g re e when, at the end^of 1839,

H e b b e l f ee g an t o w r i t e h i s first m a jo r dram a J u d i t h *

As f a r as h i s letters and d i a r i e s a re c o n c e rn e d , H ebbel*s

th eo re tic al th in k in g , l i k e Ludw ig*s p o n d e r i n g o f t h e s e c r e t s

o f Shakespearean dram a, c o n tin u e d to accompany h i s d ram atic

w ork, resp o n d in g to every k in d o f s tim u lu s , b o t h from o u t s i d e

and from h i s own c r e a t i v e process, and r a n g i n g from s p e c u l a t i o n

upon t h ^ l t i m a t e n a t u r e o f drama t o c o n sid eratio n s of d e ta il.

It is from t h e p o i n t o f v ie w o f t h e l a t t e r th a t th ese records

are p a rtic u la rly v alu ab le, th e form er b e in g c o n ta in e d v e ry

larg e ly i n H e b b e l *s s y s t e m a t i c w r i t i n g s , e s p e c ia lly th o se o f

h is e a rlie r p erio d . The d i f f e r e n c e b e tw e e n t h e two i s expressed

l y Hebbel h im s e lf a f t e r the c o m p l e t i o n o f M e i n W prt u d b e r d a s

D i 'a m a : ”B e i m e i n e r H r w i d e r u n g a n H e i b e r g h a b e i c h d ie F ak to ren

m eines G e is te s ein m al i n ihrem G e sc h a ^ ft b e l a u s c h t . Hs s i n d ;

d e re n zwei w irksam ; i c h h a b e im m er d a s g r o ^ s s t e V e r t r a u e n , so

w eit es d ie Sache und i h r e H i c h t i g k e i t im A i l g e m e i n e n b e t r i f f f , '

aber z u g le ic h a u c h d a s g r o ^ s s t e M i s s t r a u e n im E i n z e l n e n . ” ( 2 ) ,

M oreover, th e d iaries and l e t t e r s accom panied e v e r y s t a g e o f

1. V . T I 1475, 2 Feb. 1839.

2 . T IT 2741, J 1 J u l y 1843
 — 2o •“

Hebbel process of s e l f - c l a r i f i c a t i o n as a r l r a m a t i s t , and th u s

s u p p l i e d an e x c l u s e i v e l y s u b j e c t i v e n e e d : "Ich r a is o n n ie r e

wo h i u ^ b e r d ie K unst", he once w ro te , " V /eil i c h m i r d iese Pro­

be des T a l e n t s nich t ersparen d a rf, aber ic h habe dabei k e in e n

an d e r en Zweck, als den d er sub j e c t i v e n B eru h ig un g und b i n dazu

e ig e n tlich nur m u^ndlich g e s c h ic k t, wo e i n s p r u n g - u n d s t u ^ c k -

w e i s e s V e r f a k ir e n am O r t ist" ( l ). The e s s a y s and re v ie w s , on

th e o th er hand, em body t h e r e s u l t o f h is m ed itatio n s and p r a c ­

tic a l experience and w ere, in d eed , o ften f e lt by H e b b el t o h av e

a h am pering in flu e n c e upon th e a c tu a l process o f w ritin g p la y s.

For, a l t h o u g h i n s u b s t a n c e t h e y c o n t a i n m an y o f t h e p r o b l e m s

w i t h w h i c h H e b b e l was m o s t d e e p l y c o n c e r n e d , the form i n which

th eu a p p e a r e d was f u n d a m e n t a l l y u n c o n g e n i a l to him . T h eo risin g ,

he d e c l a r e d a g a in and a g a in , accords ill w ith c r e a t i v e w ork

a n d demands s a c r i f i c e s from t h e d r a m a t i s t w hich h e s h o u l d n o t

b e a s k e d t o make (2). "Je mehr d i e L e i o h t i g k e i t des P r o d u e l e -

rens b e i m ir s t e i g t " , he w ro te to th e p h b l i s h e r F e l i x Bamberg

i n 1847, " j e m a n n i g f a l t i g e r und h u n t e r m eine d i o h t e r i s c h e W elt

sich auseinander b r e i t e t , j e g r o ^ s s e r w ird m eine U n f a ÿ h i g k e i t ,

m ic h lib b er d i e P r i n c i p i e n , denen m eine N a tu r d a b e i f o l g t , aus-

z u lassen . F i n A u fs a tz k o s t e t m ir mehr a l s e in e T rago^die" (3)*

1 . L e t t e r t o F e l i x B a m b e r g , 27 May 1 8 4 7 ; IV p . 3 2 .
2. "Nach m e i n e r F r f a h r u n g v e r t r â ^ g t s i c h das T h e o r e t i s i e r e n ,
geschSjJhe es auch n u r z u f a ^ l l i g , b e i G e le g e n k ie it e i n e r K r i t i k ,
a b s o lu t n i c h t m it der P ro d u c tio n , und dagegen habe ic h g e ra d e
d i e s en W in t e r v i e l f a c h v e r s t o s s e n . . . P e n n das K u n s t w e r k w i l l
*wi l l ' di^e g a n z e u n g e t h e i l t e H i n g a b e u n d i c h b e s o n d e r s b e d a r f d e r
a ^ u s s e r p e n K o n c e n t r a t i o n a l l e r m e i n e r K r & ^ f t e , wenn i c h d e n j e -
n i g e n G r a d d e r' L e i o h t i g k e i t e r r e i c h e n w i l l , d e r n a c h m e i n e r M e i -
nung u n b e d in g t noth w en d ig i s t , den a b er f r e i l i c h d ie M e is te n
M i x
27 May 1 8 4 7 ; B r . I V p . ~ ^ l
 — 21 —

B ut, alth o u g h Hebbel d id not fin d i t easy to render s t r i c t

and m e th o d ic a l account of the p rin cip le s governing h is work a t

a g iv e n tim e during th e p ro cess o f c r e a tio n and b e l i e v e d t h a t

th e tru e work o f a r t is of n ecessity conceived in th e uncon­

scio u s, he d id n o t co n sid er th is in a n y way i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h

a sure a n d u n s h aimable k n o w l e d g e o f t h e law s o f dram a i n g e n e r a l

as w e ll as i n a ll p articu lars* "So we n i g e s e i n e n Core;?:;^io g e -

ben kann", he w rote in 1852, "der das H o ^ c h s t e l e i s t e t , ohne

selb st etw as dav o n zu w i s s e n , e b e n so w enig s c h w a ^ c h t , wie

S c h ille rs und G oethes B e i s p i e l b e w e i s t , d ie K en n tn is d er Kunst

und i h r e r G esetze das d i c h t e r i s c h e V e rm oV g en " (l). F o r h e knew

from h i s own e x p e r i e n c e t h a t once th e actu al ex ecu tio n o f a

d r a m a was u n d e r w a y , the d ram atist w o r k e d no l o n g e r i n b l i n d

o b ed ien ce to h is in stin c t, b u t was f u l l y conscious o f h is own

a c tiv ity and th e demands o f h i s m e d i u m (2). T his does n o t mean

th at he d e l i b e r a t e l y r e f l e c t e d upon m a tte r s o f dram atic th eo ry

w h ile engaged in th e w ritin g of a play; on t h e co n trary , h is

w ritin g s prove t h a t m ost o f h i s t h e o r e t i c a l work and o b s e r v a *

tio n s - w ith th e e x c e p tio n o f s p e c i f i c p o in ts r e l a ti n g to h is

1. L e tte r t o A r n o l d H u e g e , 1 5 S e o . 1 8 5 2 , B r , V»f>pA8 f
2 . C f. T I I I 4 2 7 2 , 17 S e p . 1 8 4 7 : "W orin b e s t e h t d i e N a i v i t a ^ t
d e r K u n s t? 1 s t e s w i r k l i c h e i n Z u s t a n d v o llk o im n e n e r Bum pfhieit
i n dem d e r K u ^ n s t l e r N i c h t s v o n s i c h 3 e l b s t w e i s s , N i c h t s v o n
s e i n e r e i g e n e n T a ^ t i g k e i t ? Das i s t u n m o ÿ g l i c h , d e n n w e n n e r
n i c h t e r k e n n t o d e r f u ^ h l t : d i e s e r Zug i s t t i e f , d i e s e r G e d a n k e
i s t s c h S ^ n , warum z e i c h n e t e r d e n e i n e n h i n , wanum h f t j ^ l t e r d e n
a n d e r e n f e s t ? D i e F r s g e w i r d w o h l am e i n f a c h s t e n s o b e a n t w o r t e t :
U n b e w u s s t e r W e i s e e r z e u g t s i c h im K ü j ^ n s t l e r a i l e s S t o f f l i c h e ,
b e i m d r a m a t i s c h e n D l c h t e r ZoB, d i e G e s t a l t e n , d i e S i t u a t i o n , z u —
w e ile n s o g a r d ie ganze H andlung, i h r e r a n e k d o tis c h e n S e i t e n a ch ,
denn das t r i t t p l o ^ f t z l i c h u n d ohne A n k u /n d ig u n g aus d e r P h a n t a -
s i e h e r v o r # A l l é s U e b r i g e a b e r f ^ j ^ l l t no t h w e n d i g i n d e n K r e i s
des B ew usstseyns *
 — 22 —

own d r a m a s - was d o n e b e f o r e o r m o r e f r e q u e n t l y a fter, but

rarely d u r i n g what h e c a l l e d t h e " in to x ic a tio n ” o f the a c tu a l

creativ e process. But t h e fact th a t he po ssessed c e r ta in w e ll-

d e f in e d view s a n d was i n t h e h a b i t of ren d erin g frequent

a c c o u n t o f them a t e v e r y s t a g e i n h i s career, did p rovide a

firm b a s is on w hich he c o u ld dep en d and a m e a s u r i n g - s t i c k t o

w h i c h h e was a b l e to r e f e r . M oreover, by c l a r i f y i n g f o r him

th e p rin c ip le s u n d erly in g th e ru le s he fo llo w e d i n h i s dram as,

h is d r a m a t i c t h e o r y may n o t h a v e b e e n w h o l l y i r r e l e v a n t for

h is developm ent, b u t have in f lu e n c e d i n d i r e c t l y the course

w hich he a d o p te d .

B u t H e b b e l was a l v ; ^ s e x c e e d i n g l y w a r y o f a c c o r d i n g t o o

much s i g n i f i c a n c e to h is d ram atic th e o ry , and m ore t h a n once

com plained t h a t ever sin c e h is P r e f a c e to M a ria M agdalena he

had been accused o f la c k in g s p o n ta n e ity , sim ply b ecau se t h i s

proof o f h is ab ility to t a k e an o b j e c t i v e v iew o f h i s own

p lay s had been tak en fo r a sig n of h is "refle ctiv e " approach

to the di'a m a . L u d w i g , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , w ith c h a r a c t e r i s t i c

d iffid en ce, was â w a y s p r e p a r e d t o acknov^ledge h i s fu ll and

/

e v e r grow ing dependence upon h i s t h e o r e t i c a l w ork, esp ecially

i n so far as h i s s t u d y o f S h a k e s p e a r e was c o n c e r n e d . At t h e

sa m e t i m e , h e was f a r m o r e r e a d y e v e n t h a n H e b b e l t o adm it

th a t h is creativ e process, w ith th e ex cep tio n o f th e f i r s t

flash of in sp iratio n , cam e w h o l l y w i t h i n t h e s c o p e o f w h a t h e

 — 2 3 —

c alle d ’’c o n s c i o u s purpose and c a l c u l a t i o n ” ( l ) , g iv in g fre e

rein to h is c ritic a l fa c u ltie s even d u rin g th e c o m p o sitio n o f

a p l a y . He h a d a t first hoped t h a t h is p re o c c u p a tio n w ith dra­

m atic t h e o r y m ig h t siim ply be t h e n e c e s s a r y p r e p a r a t i o n fo r h is

own c r e a t i v e w ork, and t h a t , h av in g re a c h e d th e s ta g e o f ma­

tu rity , h e w ould e v e n t u a l l y be a b l e to wean h i m s e l f fro m i t .

Y et t h e m ore i n s i g h t h e seem ed to g a i n i n t o th e n a tu re o f th e

dram a, t h e more he d e s p a i r e d o f r e a c h i n g t h a t s t a g e , u n til he

cam e t o r e g a r d t h e d elib erate p r e o c c u p a tio n w ith th e problem s

o f h is art a s t h e o n l y way t o a tru ly creativ e and, indeed,

spontaneous dram a, n o t only fo r h im s e lf, but also for fu tu re

p lay w rig h ts. ” Der I n s t i n k t ” , h e w r o t e t o w a r d s t h e end o f h i s

career, ”h a t s e i n e U n b e f a n g e n h e i t v e r l o r e n . Doch a u s der % rre,

in d ie w ir durch K ef1 e x io n g e r a t e n , k a n n / uns nur die K e fle -

x ion b e fre ie n , w ir m u^ssen uns d u r c h § ± e voo n

i h r b efreien . U nd s o l l t e es m ein S c h i c k s a l s e i n , dass ic h

an d i e F in d u n g e i n e s Weges m e i n e l e t z t e K raft z u s e tz te und ih n

n ich t s e l b s t begehen k o ^n n te, so w ir d e r v i e l l e i c h t andern

z u g u t e komraen” ( 2 ) .

T h is a s s e r t i o n o f Ludw ig i s t h e more s u r p r i s i n g as h e a lw a y s

had a h o rro r o f an y th in g sav o u rin g rem o tely o f r e f l e c t i o n ,

h o ld in g i t resp o n sib le f o r t h e u n d o i n g o f many d r a m a t i s t s of

1 . ”M e i n V e r f a k i r e n b e i m p o e t i s c h e n S c h a f f e n ” , ^ V I p . 2 1 6 .
2 . - ’’L i e d r a m a t i s c h e n A u f g a b e n d e r Z e i t - M e i n W i l l e u n d Weg” ,
G5 V p . 5 1 .
3.
 - 24 -

r e c e n t tim es. T his is p articu larly the case in h is frequent c ri­

ticism s o f t h e work o f S c h i l l e r , whom h e b r a n d s as an i n c o r r i ­

g ib le id e a list who a l l o w e d h i s own r e f l e c t i o n s to o b t r u d e them­

selv es in to h is dramas (l). In c o n tra s t to t h e l a t t e r *s m e t h o d ,

how ever, th ere was t h a t o f the tru e d ram atist, the "rea list",

who may i n d e e d d e l i b e r a t e u p o n h i s m a t e r i a l and i t s ex ecu tio n ,

b u t who d o e s s o w e l l b e f o r e h e s e t s to work (2 ). M oreover, during

h is p e r i o d o f r e f l e c t i o n he i s c a r e f u l not to lo se h im self in

sp ecu latio n s and b a s e h i s th eo ries e x c lu s iv e ly upon " a e s t h e ti c

p h ilo so p h ies", b u t to t a k e h i s stan d f i r m l y on t h e s i d e o f t a n g ­

ib le re a lity . The u n c l o u d e d v i s i o n o f t h e d ra m a tis t, not "the

len s o f a b s t r a c t i o n " m ust be h i s gu id e, for h is approach i s p ri­

m arily th a t o f th e p r a c t is in g artist (g). Thus L udw ig n e v e r t i r e d

o f em phasising th e em inently c o n c re te n a tu re o f th e S h ak esp eare-

3 t u d i e n , whose aim w a s, by means o f t e c h n i c a l and w h o lly o b je c ­

tiv e an aly ses, "to e v o lv e t h e n a t u r e o f dram a o u t of its own

co n d itio n s" ( 4 ). H is d e f i n i t i o n co m e s c u r i o u s l y n e a r t o H e b b e l * s

d e s c r i p t i o n o f a s i m / i l a r work w h ich t h e l a t t e r en v isag ed in

1841: "H in a u s f u ^ h r 1 i c h e s k r i t i s c h e s Werk u f b e r S h a k e s p e a r e

ko ÿ n n t e G e l e g e n h e i t geben. L i n g e ü ÿ b e r d a s Lr ama u n d d i e d arin

herrschende d ich terisch e L arstellu n g s-W eise zu s a g e n , d ie noch

n i e g e s a g t s i n d . Man m u f s s t e , urn s i c h d i e A r b e i t zu e r l e i c h t e r n ,

1 . C f . GS V p p . 2 6 7 , 2 7 5 , 2 8 2 e t c .
2.Cf . i b l d . p 2 5 8
5 . d . i a i d . p . 35 f
4 . i b i d p . 281. H e re Ludw ig e v en c o n s i d e r s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f
c o u c h in g h i s d e l i b e r a t i o n s i n l e t t e r :^ 6 m :" in B r i e f en an e in e n
i u n g e n M ann g e r i c h t e t , d e r d e n A u t o r um s e i n e H i l f e g e b e t e n . A u f
G e r v i n u s , G o e t h e u s w . z u v e r w e i s e n i n H i n b l i c k a u f d a s , lAas n i c h t
d e r e i g e n t l i c h p o e t i s oh d r a m a t i s c h e n T e c h n i k a n g e h o f r t ^ *
 — 25 —
n i c h t voM A l l g c T i i e i n e n u ÿ b c r g c h e n u n d d a s G a n z e e t w a i n Form

e i n e s r h a p s o d i s c h e n T ag e b u ch e s g e b e n ” ( l ). But w h e re a s to p r o c e e d

from t h e p a r t i c u l a r to th e g en eral c o n s titu te d f o r Ludwig t h e

o n l y p o s s i b l e m eth o d o f com ing to a c le a r un d erstand in g o f th e

n atu re and form o f t h e d r a m a , t o H ç b b e l ’s m i n d i t a p p e a re d m ere­

ly a s a n e x p e d i e n t . S i n c e h e was i n fact n a tu ra lly i n c l i n e d to

fo rm u late the r e s u l t s of h is th in k in g as w e l l as o f h i s dram atic

p rac tic e by means o f f u n d a m e n ta l p r i n c i p l e s , his th eo re tic al

work t e n d s o n t h e w h o l e t o b e eif a m o r e g e n e r a l n a t u r e than th a t

o f Ludw ig and i m p l i e s a d isreg ard f o r t h e m ore p a r t i c u l a r pro-b

b l e m s o f m e t h o d a n d t e c h n i q u e w h i c h c om m o n ly c o n f r o n t t h e dram a­

tist. Such w r itin g s as " M e i n Wort u ^ b e r d a s Lrama" o r t h e P r e ­

face to M a r i a M a;^dalena, w h ic h , though b a se d on p r a c t i c a l ex­

p erien ce, are couched in h ig h ly a b s tr a c t and s p e c u l a t i v e lan ­

guage, appear to c o n firm s u c h an i m p r e s s io n . But s i n c e th ese not

o n ly b e lo n g to a c o m p a r a t i v e l y e a r l y p e r i o d i n H e b b e l ’s c a r e e r ^

but c o n stitu te the le a s t sp ontaneous part of h is th eo re tic al de­

lib e ratio n s, it w ould c l e a r l y be f a l s e t o ju /d g e h i s view s on j

I

dram a w ith o u t tak in g account o f o th er asp ects of h is d ram atic

theory.

W hilst i n H e b b e l's case th e re is thus a danger o f ta k in g an

a ll-to o o n e - s i d e d view o f h i s theo ry and o f i g n o r in g i t s great

v a rie ty o f a p p lica tio n , the stu d e n t o f Ludw ig*s w r i t i n g s is

fa c e d r a t h e r w ith th e o p p o s ite dilem m a. C onfronted by th e im ­

mense p r o f u s i o n o f th e Shakes n e a r e s t u d i e n a lo n e and b a f f l e d by

1. T II 2414, 3o D e c . 1 8 4 1
 — 26 —

th e m u ltitu d e of to p ics d i s c u s s e d i n them , he f i n d s it o n ly too

e a s y to be s i d e - t r a c k e d by f i r s t one and t h e n a n o th e r c o n s i d e ­

ratio n - stim u latin g as t h e s e o f t e n are - and to l o s e s i g h t of

th e u n d e rly in g u n ity o f purpose. The r e a s o n f o r b o t h a t t i t u d e s ,

how ever, i n d u c e d t h o u g h t h e y n e c e s s a i ’i l y a re to a certain ex ten t

by t h e p a r t i c i t l a x m ethod a d o p te d by each d r a m a t i s t , is very

larg e ly t h e same and c o n s i s t s in an undue d i s r e g a r d f o r t h e

p ra c tic a l b asis from w h ich b o t h H e b b e l and Ludwig w o rk e d . For

e v o lv in g th eir th eo ries as t h e y d i d , not as d isin te reste d c ri­

tic s, but as p r a c t i s i n g d ram atists and w ith c o n s ta n t r e f e r e n c e ,

d irect or in d ire c t, to th eir own p l a y s , th e y were i n e v i t a b l y

c o n c e r n e d w i t h m any v a r i e d p r o b l e m s , w h ilst a t t h e same t i m e j

rela tin g e v e ry th in g to one par'am ount c o n s i d e r a t i o n : th e p u rsu it ^

of th eir own p e r s o n a l v o c a t i o n . It w ould a p p e a r e s s e n t i a l ,

th erefo re, i n o r d e r to o b tain a b a la n c e d view o f t h e i r d ram atic

th eo ry , to acknow ledge th e l a t t e r * s in te rd e p e n d e n c e bo th w ith

th eir in d iv id u a l creativ e process and w ith t h e i r actu al drama­

tic achievem ents.

T h e p u r p o s e o f a c o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n two d r a m a t i s t s o f such

d ifferen t calib re as H e b b e l and Ludw ig u n d o u b t e d l y a r e n o t t o

exam ine i n d e ta il every aspect o f t h e i r th eo ry , but ra th e r to

c o n c e n t r a t e on a few v a r i e d p ro b le m s w hich se em e d t o b e o f p a r ­

tic u la r in te re st and c o n c e rn to b o t h , a n d w h i c h h a v e sin i m p o r ­

t a n t b e a rin g upon th e developm ent o f d ra m a tic th e o ry in general*

At t h e same tim e i t is hoped to illu stra te th ereb y th e Æ iffe-

 - 27 -
rences i n t h e manner o f t h e i r ap p ro a ch and to throw l i g h t

upon the p u r p o s e s w hich u n d e r l i e t h e work o f t h e creativ e

d ram atist.
 B . o ch a t z ky

lo HEBBEL *3 AND LUDWIG *S VIEWS OF TRAGEDY JaS

REVEALED BY THEIR CONCEPTION OF THE TRAGIC

HERO^

A d r a m a tis t's th eo ry of trag e d y , i t has been p o in te d o u t,

c a n e i t h e r be m ere s p e c u l a t i o n on i n t e l l e c t u a l or a e s th e tic

m atters or e sse n tia lly the e x p re ssio n o f h is own " W e l t a n s c h a u -

ung (l). As f a r as t h e v a l i d i t y and im p o rta n c e o f a g iv e n d ra ­

m a tis t's v i e w s o n t r a g e d y ar’e c o n c e r n e d , such a d i s t i n c t i o n ,

sig n ific a n t t h o u g h i t may b e f o r h i s d ram atic p r a c t i c e , may

seem to be o f l i t t l e consequence. But f o r a c o m p a r i s o n o f tw o

such very d if f e r e n t w riters as H e b b e l an d Ludwig i t form s a

v alu a b le s t a r t i n g - p o i n t by s u g g e s t i n g a fundam ental d ifference

in th eir ap p ro ach to t h e problem o f th e t r a g i c h e r o .

A lth o u g h b o t h H e b b e l and Ludw ig v e n t u r e d a t d ifferen t tim es,

in t h e o r y as w e l l as i n p r a c t i c e , in to t h e s p h e r e o f comedy,

th eir c h i e f p r e o c c u p a t i o n was a l w a y s w i t h t r a g e d y . Its n atu re

and i t s demands u p o n t h e i r art were c o n s t a n t l y th e s u b je c t of

th eir d e lib era tio n s, and form , in d eed , th e v ery c e n tre o f t h e i r

d ram atic theory. T hat f o r H ebbel t r a g e d y form ed a ls o th e v e ry y/

c e n t r e o f h i s g e n e r a l view o f l i f e , as i t shaped i t s e l f during

a lo n g and arduous p r o c e s s of se lf-d isc ip lin e and s e l f - e d u ­

c a tio n can h a rd ly be d en ied . From an e a r l y age s u f f e r i n g and

p r i v a t i o n h a d p e r m i t t e d him l i t t l e o f the lig h te r sid e of lif e ,

and t h e m ost i n t i m a t e r e c o r d s of h is in n e r developm ent, h is

1 . x . E . L . S t a h l , "The G e n e s i s o f S c h i l l e r ' s T h e o r y o f T r a g e d y "

i n German S t u d i e s , p r e s e n t e d t o P r o f e s s o r H . G . F i e d l e r , O x f o r d
1 9 5 8 , p p . 4o4 f f .
 - 2 -

e arly d iaries and l e t t e r s , r e v e a l to an u n u s u a l d e g r e e t h e

te n sio n caused in the p o e t ’s m i n d by u n h a p p y a n d h a m p e r i n g

circu m stan ces and h i s q u ite d isp ro p o rtio n ate artistic sen si­

b ility . C o n flict was s o much t h e e s s e n c e o f h i s b ein g th a t

th e " r i f t "in h is own h e a r t m ade h i m s e e a r i f t i n t h e whole

w orld o rd e r, whose g o v e r n i n g p r i n c i p l e a p p e a r e d t o him t o b e

strife an d iialism (l). That l i f e fo r th e i n d i v i d u a l was

au stere and r e l e n t l e s s H ebbel b e l i e v e d to be th e o n ly r e a l

tru th - a t r u t h w h i c h no o n e , least of a ll the d ram atist con­

c e rn e d w ith u ltim a te r e a l i t y , cou ld ig n o re . In a very r e a l

sense th is may b e c a l l e d H e b b e l ' s p h ilo so p h y o f l i f e , m ould­

ed by p h i l o s o p h i c a l thought c u rre n t in his day and y e t fu lly

in tu n e w ith th e p rom ptings of h is own n a t u r e . But w h e th e r

em p iric o r m e tap h y sic a l - and t h e r e i s no d o u b t t h a t during

h is e a rlie r p e rio d Hebbel in c lin e d v e ry d e f i n i te l y tow ards

th e l a t t e r (2) - t h e v iew o f th e w o rld w hich H e b b el h a d con­

s t r u c t e d f o r h im s e lf even p r io r to h i s first t r a g e d y was

esse n tia lly trag ic, a n d came t o d om inate n o t o n ly h i s life ,

b u t t h e w hole o f h i s w ork. For a r t , he b e lie v e d , was n o t h i n g

if not th e h ig h est ex p ressio n o f l i f e , / a n d th e d ra m a tist

m u s t g i v e no m o r e a n d no l e s s th an the essence o f h is own

l o C f . h i s l e t t e r t o C h a r l o t t e R o u s s e a u , 25 O c t . 1 3 3 8 ; B r . 1
p . 348.
2o F o r a n e x a m i n a t i o n o f H e b b e l * s v i e w s o n t r a g e d y o n t h e s e
l i n e s o f . A .S c h e u n e r t, P e r P a n tra g is m u s a l s System d e r W elt­
a n s c h a u u n g : u n d A s t h e t i k - F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l s .I^ am bur^ a n d L e i p z i g
1 9 0 3 r ^ • Z i n k e r n a K e l o Die G r u n d l a ^ e n d e r H e b b e l s c h e n T r a g S d i e
B e r l i n 19o4- A b a la n c e d e s t i m a t e o f th e p la c e o f m e ta p h y s ic s
i n t h e w o r k o ^ H e b b e l i s g i v e n b y A . S c h a p i e r e , "Zu H e b b e l *s
A n s c h a u u n g e n li/^ber d i e K u n s t u n d k f b i s t l e r i s c h e s S c h a f f e n " i n
A r c h i v fCbe s y s t e m a t i s c h e P h i l o s o p h i e . I I A b t . X I I I , B d . H e f t 2 ,
1907
 - 3 -
deepest co n v ictio n .

L u d w ig 's fo rm ativ e y e a rs , to o , th o u g h lüessed w i t h a m ore

s t a b l e background, were n o t w i t h o u t th e ir h ard sh ip s and d i s ­

ap p o in tm en ts, as w e l l as t h e inner c o n flic ts o f g en iu s u n a b le

to come t o term s w ith i t s e l f . For m ost o f h i s life h e was b e ­

set by i l l n e s s and th e a n x ie ty about h is ab ility to acco m p lish

h is task , each r e a c t i n g upon th e o th e r and g iv in g r i s e to a

nervous s e n s i b i l i t y f r o m w h i c h h e was n e v e r w h o l l y f r e e . But

a ll th ese were p e r s o n a l m a t t e r s , and h a d l i t t l e b e a r i n g on

L u d w ig 's g e n e r a l co n v ictio n th a t life was g o o d , b e a u t i f u l and

h a rm o n io u s. B eing o f a s o l i t a r y d isp o sitio n and a b le to order

h is life alm ost e n tirely acco rd in g to h is own c o n v e n i e n c e , he

n e v e r e x p e r i e n c e d any r e a l o p p o s i t i o n from t h e w o r ld o u t s i d e ,

or the i n n e r n e ed to come t o term s w ith th e c o n flicts of lif e .

H is own n a t u r e l a c k e d t h e h a r s h e r , m o r e r i g o r o u s sid e th at

was i n H e b b e l , and h i s g en ia lity and q u ie t humour p e rv a d e

m ost o f h i s w ork. I n d e e d , . a f t e r h e h a d w r i t t e n a comedy en­

t i t l e d Hanns F r e i (l), L u d w i g was s t i l l i n 1845 o f t h e o p in io n

th at t h e h u m o r i s t i c n o v e l was h i s proper genre, to w hich h i s

own n a t u r e as w e l l as h i s . s t u d i e s were attu n ed ( 2 ). A gain and

a g a in he dadeavoured to t u r n to the l ig h t e r kinds of p o etic

creatio n , w h e t h e r i n comedy o r i n the p ro v in c ia l n o v el, and

1 . V. GS_ I I I p p . 561 f f . The p l a y was w r i t t e n i n 1 8 4 2 .

2 . tJ f. L e t t e r to L .A m brunn 17 M arch 4 5 ; B r i e f e . e d . c i t . .
p . 155 and L e t t e r t o E .V i/inkler, F a s t e r 1 8 4 5 , i b i d p . 157,
i n view o f th e v ig o u r o f t h e i r p resen ta tio n and th e im m ediacy

of th eir ap p eal, one i s b a f f l e d b y L u d w i g ’s s e e m i n g l y i r r e s i s ­

tib le p red ilec tio n for th e tr a g ic genre. Even w here h i s work

touches the sp rin g s o f g enuine tr a g e d y , it is o f a q uiet and

resig n ed q u ality , rev ealin g a n a tu ra l d isin clin atio n for a ll

th e v io le n t co n flicts ch aracteristic o f m ost trag ed ies, in

p a rticu la r th o se of % akespeare. B u t t h o u g h h e l a c k e d many o f

th e quali^ries o f a t r a g i c p o e t , L u d w i g was t o o s i n c e r e an a r­

tist to c u ltiv a te d e lib era tely a medium f o r w h ic h h e f e l t h im ­

se lf to be i l l - a d a p t e d . On t h e c o n trary , it is one o f t h e

iro n ie s o f h is career th at the g re a te r the apparent o b sta c le s ,

t h e m ore he b e l i e v e d i n h i s own p e r f e c t i b i l i t y - or at le a st

in th e need fo r e x p lo rin g to th e utm o st o f h is c a p a c i t y what

he felt in tu itiv e ly to be th e h ig h e s t f o r m o f a r t . T h i s wa s

Shakespearean trag e d y , t h e p a t i e n t s t u d y o f w hich r e v e a l e d a

w o rld o f such m agnitude t h a t it o u tw eig h ed in h is eyes any­

t h i n g w hich t h e d ram a tist cou ld c r e a te f o r h i m s e l f from h i s

own v i e w o f l i f e . The r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n l i f e and a r t was n o t

as i n t i m a t e f o r Ludwig as i t was f o r H e b b e l , a n d h e d i d n o t

fin d i t e sse n tia l th a t the d ram a tist sh o u ld f i r s t feel th e

p ulse o f l i f e q uicken in g in h i s own v e i n s b efo re he co u ld l e t

it beat through h is dram as. L i t t l e ^ in d e e d , o f any p h i l o s o p h y

of life h e may h a v e h a d i s d isc ern ib le i n L u d w i g ’s w r i t i n g s ,

and i t can be assum ed t h e r e f o r e th at it had l i t t l e d irect

b e a rin g upon h is theory o f

 - 5 -
trag e d y (l). B e in g c o n c e rn e d w ith t h e m ethods r a t h e r th a n w ith

th e u ltim ate aim s o f d ra m a , h e w a s , i n f a c t , stric tly opposed

to p h ilo so p h y in any form as a means o f a p p r o a c h , a n d no o n e

was m o r e a n x i o u s th a n h e to e x c lu d e from dram atic th eo ry every­

t h i n g w h i c h d i d n o t come w i t h i n t h e s p h e r e o f w h a t h e c a l l e d

"tan g ib le rea lity " ( 2 ). T he o n l y r e a l i t y as f a r as t h e m o d ern

d ram a tist was c o n c e r n e d was t h a t o f Shakespearean tra g e d y , and

by opposing i t to p h ilo so p h ical co n sid eratio n s o f any k i n d , he

was e n d e a v o u r i n g t o e m p h a s is e t h e p a ra m o u n t i m p o r t a n c e o f an

em inently co n crete approach. For he b e lie v e d th a t the stu d y o f

trag ic art, in s p ite of its obvious in te lle c tu a l q u a lity , coul^

be p r e s e r v e d from d e g e n e r a t i n g in to "mere s p e c u l a t i o n " if it

was b a s e d , n o t, in d eed , upon th e d r a m a t i s t ’s own c l e a r l y de­

fin ed e 1 1 a n s c h auun,£C, b u t s i m p l y a n d s o l e l y u p o n t h e contem ­

p la tio n of great and l i v i n g trag e d ie s, and s u p p o r t e d by th e

in sig h t g a i n e d f r o m h i s wwn d r a m a t i c p a c t i c e .

W h i l s t L u d w i g wa s t h u s esse n tia lly a f r a i d o f p h ilo s o p h y and

regarded i t as an a b s t r a c t b ra n c h o f s tu d y to be a v o i d e d by

th e p ra c tis in g d r a m a ti s t , f o r Hebbel i t c o n s titu te d but an­

o t h e r way o f a p p r o a c h i n g t h e s o l u t i o n o f l i f e ’s m a j o r p r o b l e m s

w i t h w h i c h t h e d r a m a i t s e l f was c o n c e r n e d . Ihrama a n d p h i l o s o ­

phy, he argued, em ployed v e r y d i f f e r e n t m eans, b u t th e e n d was

1 . No e x t i a u s t i v e s t u d y h a s s o f a r b e e n made o f L u d w i g ’s a t t i ­
t u d e to p h i l o s o p h y as s u c h . For a b r i e f a n a l y s i s o f t h e
q u e s t io n v . K a rl H o l l . "O tto L u d v ig -Problèm e^ i n G e rm a n isc h -
E o m a n i s c h e M p n a t s s c h r i f t I V , 1 9 1 4 , p p . 88 f f .
2% D i e d r a m a t i s c h e n A u f g a b e n d e r Z e i t - M e i n W i l l e u n d Weg"
GS V p . 35.
 - 6 -

in ev itab ly t h e same ( l )# A d r a m a t i s t and t h e o r i s t such as

O tto L udw ig, th erefo re, p r e o c c u p ie d c h i e f l y w ith m ethod and

tech n iq u e, c o u l d d e r i v e no b e n e f i t from p h i l o s o p h y , w hereas

H ebbel, who c o n s t a n t l y r e f l e c t e d u p o n t h e u l t i m a t e n a t u r e o f

tragedy, o fte n expressed h im se lf in p h ilo so p h ic a l term s, and

some o f h i s m a j o r t h e o r e t i c a l w ritin g s te n d thus to g i v e *t h e

im p re s s io n t h a t he f a i l e d to draw a s u f f i c i e n t l y c le ar d is­

t i n c t i o n betw een th e realm o f p h ilo s o p h y and th e re a lm o f

d r a m a . How f a r th is is in fact co rrect a n d how f a r h i s approach

d iffers from t h a t o f L udw ig w i l l b e s t b e s e e n by b a s i n g th e

present c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f th ie - t h e o r y o f t r a g e d y on t h e p ro b le m

of the t r a g i c h e ro ; th e p r a c tic a l im p licatio n s o f th is problem

w ill, it i s h o p e d , m ake a m o r e b a l a n c e d c o m p a r i s o n p o s s i b l e .

It is in te re stin g to n ote at the ou tset t h a t H ebbel him - !

s e l f to a certain ex ten t f o s te re d th e k ind o f s p e c u la tiv e

a ttitu d e which t a k e s a c c o u n t more o f t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l con­

ten t o f h is Llramas t h a n o f t h e c o n c r e te m ethod o f p r e s e n t a t i o n ;

" I c h b i n m ir b e w u s s t" , he w rote i n 1844, "dass d ie in d iv id u e l-

le n L ebens-ProC esse, d ie ich d a r s t e l l e und noch d a r s t e l l e n

w erde, m it den j e t z t obschw ebenden a llg e m e in e n P r i n C i p i e n -

F ra g e n i n e n g s t e r V erb in d un g s t e h e n , u n d o b g l e i c h es m ich

n i c h t unangenetim b e r f t h r e n k o n n t e , dass die K r i t ik b is h e r fast

a u s s c h l i e s s l i c h m e i n e G e s t a l t e n i n * s Auge f a s s t e , und d ie

1. Cf. "M ein W ort fib e r d a s D r a m a " ,/ w XI p , 29,

1843 -
 - 7 -

I deen, d ie s le r e p r 8s e n t i e r e n , u n b erû ck sich tig t lie ss, indem

ich h i e r i n wohl n i c h t m it U n r e c h t den h e s t e n B ew eis f â r d ie

w irk lic h e L eb e n d ig k e it d ieser G estalten erb lick te, so m uss i c h

n u n d o ch w ü n s c h e n , dass d iess e i n E n d e n e h m e n , u n d d a s s man

a u c h dem z w e i t e n F a k t o r e i n i g e V^flrdigung w i d e r f a l i r e n l a s s e n

m o^ge*. . " ( l ) I n s t e a d o f e m p h a s is in g t h e human, e sse n tia lly

d ram atic q u ality o f h is play s, Hebbel - p a rticu la rly in h is

e a rly w ritin g s - p o in ts re p e a te d ly to th e u n i v e r s a l problem s

and a l l - t r a n s c e n d i n g ideas r e p r e s e n t e d i n them , w h i l s t th e

fate o f the in d iv id u a l hero or h e ro in e a f t e r whom a p a r t i c u l a r

play "happens" to be named i s a l l e g e d t o b e o f s e c o n d a r y im­

p o rtan ce. Such an a t t i t u d e is n o t c o n f in e d to H ebbel*s th eo ry

o f trag ed y , but has its ro o ts in a view o f th e i n d i v i d u a l

w hich he h ad h e l d from an e a r l y age and w hich he d e s c r i b e d as

h is "own p h i l o s o p h y " :

"Es g i e b t nur e in e N o th w en d ig k eit, die, dass d i e W elt

b e s t e h t , w ie es aber den I n d i v i d u e n d a r i n erg eh t, ist

g l e i c h g d / l t i g , e in M ensch, der s ic h in L eid v e rz e h rt

und e in B ia tt, das v o r der Z e it verv velkt, s i n d vor.

d e r h ë c h s t e n M acht g l e i c h v i e l ••• d e r Baum h a t der

B lo tte r im Ï Ï b e r f l u s s u n d d i e W elt d e r Mens c h e n " (2 ).

Such an a t t i t u d e , w h i c h no l o n g e r fin d s th e cen tre o f g ra v ity

of life ex clu siv ely in the in d iv id u al, is not w ithout i t s

dangers and c o r^ o n ts th e d ra m a tist w ith p ro b lem s m ore a k in

! • P r e f a c e t o M a r i a M a ^ d a l e n a ^ 1 8 4 4 ; W XI p . 48.
2 . T I I 2 8 8 1 , 21 N o v . 1 8 4 5 . -
 - 8 -

to the im personal c h a r a c t e r o f G reek tr a g e d y th a n t h a t o f mo­

dern d r a m a w h i c h p; l a c e s a ll th e em phasis upon t h e in d iv id u al

(l). As e a r l y as 1 8 3 8 , b e fo r e he had em barked upon h i s own

d ram atic career, Hebbel d efin ed th e d i f f e r e n c e betw een th e

tw o k i n d s o f dram a as t h e e x p lo rin g o f th e m y ste rie s o f F ate

on th e one h an d and o f th e f u n d a m e n t a l la w s g o v e r n i n g human

n atu re on t h e o t h e r - " M e n s c h —N a t u r u n d M e n s c h e n f G o s c h i c k " ( 2 )«

He h i m s e l f s a w no r e a l d is c re p a n c y betw een th e tw o, except

th at, # iilst the in d iv id u a l c o n stitu te d for th e G reeks a means

to an end, for t h e m odern d r a m a t i s t he w as, i n fact, the v e ry

c e n t r e u p o n w hich t h e trag ed y rev o lv ed . In a t t e m p t i n g to

e s t a b l i s h H e b b e l *s own p o s i t i o n - a m a t t e r w hich h e '^ h im s e lf

c o n stan tly faced in a v e ry c o n s c io u s manner - it m ust n o t be

o verlo o k ed th a t as far as t h e m a j o r i t y of h is play s are con­

cerned, th e em phasis in the' i n i t i a l stag es o f h is creativ e

p r o c e s s l a y p r e d o m i n a n t l y on c h a r a c t e r . More t h a n o n c e H e b b e l

records in h is d i a r y how h i s i m a g i n a t i o n was c a u g h t b y som e

great h is to ric a l fig u re and t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s w hich i t seem ed

to offer to the d ram a tist (3). Thus, a l t h o u g h h e may l a t e r

refer to C h ristia n atonem ent as t h e i d e a o f Genoveva ( 4 ) . th e

actu al stim ulus to h is work on t h e s u b j e c t was p r o v i d e d by

none a t h e r th an th e ch aracter of Golo ( 5 ) ,and durin g h i s

l o C f . W XI p . Ao.
2 . T I l o 3 4 , lo M arch 1 8 3 8 .
3o V# h i s n o t e s o n N a p o l e o n ( I I l o l 2 , 6 M a r c h 1 8 3 8 ) , o n t h e
E m p e r o r M a x i m i l i a n (T I 5 4 5 , 3o D e c . 1 8 3 6 ) a n d o n H o l o f e r n e s
(W X I I I p . 6 , 1 8 4 o ) - 4 . T I I 2 3 3 7 , 2 9 May 1 8 4 1 . - 5 . " I c h h a b e
o f t û b e r d i e s e n S t o f f n a c h g e d a c h t u n d f i n d e s e i n e n d r am a t i -
s c h e n G e h a l t n u r im C h a r a k t e r d e s G o l o . . . D e r d r a m a t i s c h e D i c h -
t e r k a n n den Golo d e s a l t e n V o l k s b u c h s n i c h t . b r au c h e n , , n u r

e in e T ragfldie" - T I 1475, 2 Feb 1839.

 - 9 -
w ork on H ero des u n d M ariam ne h e w r o t e : " D i e s s Kg n i g s b i l d k a n n

etv;as w e rd en , in den C h a r a c t e r des H ero d es h i n e i n ist aber

auch d ie ganze B edeutung des Dramas z u l e g e n " (l). In the

p lay s o f h is e a rlie r p erio d , in d eed , th ere is u n m istak ^ ab le

ev id en ce o f a n a l l 9 oo s u b j e c t i v e a ttitu d e tow ards the tr a g ic

hero w hich i s absent i n L u d w i g *s w o r k a n d w h i c h H e b b e l h i m s e l f t

later condem ned. In fact, th e d a n g e r o f m aking h i s p rin cip al

c h a r a c t e r s m ere v e s s e l s for h is id eas was for th e latter far

less re a l than th at o f m ak in g them l a c k any s y m b o l i c a l s i g n i ­

fican ce and R e g e n e r a te , as h e f e a r e d J u d i t h m ig h t do, in to a

" b lo s s e Hxegese ein es d u n k le n M â d c h e n -C h a r a c t e r s ” ( 2 ).

The d u t y o f t h e d ram atist vjas c l e a r to H ebbel from t h e b e ­

g i n n i n g : h e m ust cap ture th e soul o f h is ch aracters in i t s

m ost ephem eral and d e l i c a t e phases w ith o u t m aking t h o s e q u a li­

tie s p e rta in in g so le ly to the in d iv id u a l the b a sis o f h is |

!
d r# ia, by r e l a t i n g t h e o f t e n b i z a r r e masks o f t h e s p i r i t to !

th at w hich i s ex ternal and p r e s e n t i n g th e e te rn al in the p la s tic

shape o f d ram atic c h a ra c te r ( 3 ) . He w i l l n o t achieve t h i s ,

how ever, by m ere ly a n a ly s in g e v ery m in u te p a r t o f a charac­

te r 's p s y c h o lo g ic a l m ake-up, b u t by m erging i t w ith problem s

o f m ore t h a n p e r s o n a l ijn pa rrt a n d t h e r e b y r a i s i n g th e in d iv i­

dual to a l e v e l where h e s y m b o l is e s the deepest problem s of

hum anity i t s e l f (4 ). Such a c o n c e p tio n n e c e s s a r i l y im p lies

1 . 3?f i l l 4 o o 4 , 4 M a r c h 1 8 4 7 .
2. T 1 1 .1 8 7 2 , 3 Ja n . 184o,
3. ? f L e t t e r to E lis e L ean in g , 18 June 1837; B r .I p . 2 1 2 ..—
4 . O f W XI p . 45.
 — lo —

th at th e c h a ra c te r o f H e b b e l ’s t r a g i c heroes is shaped s o le ly

tow ards th is all-im p o rtan t end, w h ilst th o se tra its w hich

h a v e no d i r e c t and a b s o lu te b e a rin g upon t h e i r fate in the

co n tex t o f the ete rn al c o n flicts of life are d iscard ed . The

in d iv id u a l case m ight be ex trem e - and H ebbel a rg u e d t h a t

e v e n t h e m ost e x cep tio n al ch aracters can p ro v id e apt m a te ria l

for th e trag ic part ab le to p e n e tra te to f u n d a m e n t a l human

p rin cip le s (l ) - but it was s t i l l o n ly by c o n c e n t r a t i n g u p o n

th e e sse n tia ls in th eir p ersonaJ_ity and a c tio n s th at th e dra­

m atist, far from d e t r a c t i n g from t h e i r e s s e n t ia l hum anity,

co u ld ensure the u n i v e r s a l it y of th e ir ap p eal, as lo n g as

fee lin g a n d n o t c o l d r e a s o n i n g was h i s c h i e f means ( 2 ).

But i t is p rec ise ly on t h i s s c o r e t h a t L udw ig c o n s i d e r e d

H ebbel to have failed in the p o rtray al o f tra g ic ch aracter,

a c c u s i n g him o f c o l d n e s s and p u r e l y in te lle ctu al approach.

"H eb b el'^s C h a r a k t e r e ” , h e w r i t e s , " s i n d Tag u n d N ach t in ih -

rer v o l l e n W appenzier; jede s e i n e r P e rso n e n i s t h ts t& n d ig

a u f der Jag d nach den e ig n e n c h a r a k t e r i s t i s c h en Z ügen. -

Der C h a r a k t e r i s t in j e dem b i s z u r M onom anie g e s t e i g e r t . S i e

w issen a lle, d a s s & ie O r i g i n a l e s i n d und m S ch ten b e i l e i b e

n ich t anders e r s c h e i n e n ” ( 3 )* S u c h c r i t i c i s m is b a s e d on an

a p p ro a c h w hich i s alm ost e x c l u s i v e l y concerned w ith c h a r a c te r

1 . O f . T I 7 2 0 . 13 A p r i l 1 8 3 7 .
2 j ^ - i t i i d . 1 5 7 5 , 2 May 1 8 3 9 : " G u t z k o w s N e r o . D i e A u f g a b e m ü s s t e
s e y n , den N ero zu v e r m e n s c h l i c h e n . i h n a u f e tw a s E w iges i n d e r
M e n s c h e n -N a tu r zu riick zu fflh re n . Aber n u r das G e fü h l v e r -
m e n s c h l ic h t und v e r m i t t e l t , n i c h t R aisonnem ent u nd S p e c u la ­
tio n ".
3 . GS V p , 3 5 8 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 .
 - 11 -

a n d w h ic h w ould a dm it i n t o th e sphere of th e dram a n o t h i n g

w h i c h p o i n t e d b e y o n d t h e i m m e d ia te p e r s o n a l i t y o f t h e h e r o , The

w h o l e n a t u r e o f L u d w i g ’s c r e a t i v e p ro c e ss, m oreover, was f a r

m ore i n t i m a t e l y p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h a n H e b b e l ’s g r a n d i o s e con­

cep tio n s: lav in g , i n b r i e f moments o f i n s p i r a t i o n , co n ceiv ed

h is ch aracters i n some v i v i d l y illu m in ed c h a r a c t e r i s t i c po­

sitio n (l), he p ro c e e d e d to l i v e every phase o f t h e i r d ram atic j

e x isten ce and to im agine a l l t h e m a n i f o l d a^iects o f t h e i r per­

so n a lity . T h i s p r o c e s s was d e v e l o p e d c e a s e l e s s l y i n one d r a m a tic

p ro ject after an o th er, a n d L u d w i g ’s n o t e b o o k s are fille d w ith

m in u te ch aracter sk etch es i n t e i ^ e r s e d w ith pregnant sn atch es of

d ialo g u e and d e t a i l e d r e f e r e n c e s to th e outw ard ap p earan ce o f

h is heroes. The c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f S h a k e s p e a r e a n dram a o n l y h e l p ­

ed to c o n f i r m L u d w i g ’s b e l i e f t h a t th e tr a g ic h e ro m ust be p r e ­

sen ted from many a n g l e s , i.e . in a v a rie ty of situ atio n s and i n

re la tio n to d ifferen t types of ch aracters - i f h e was t o b e e n ­

dowed w ith th at e s s e n t i a l l y human q u a l i t y w h ic h a l o n e c o u ld en­

g a g e t h e s p e c t a t o r ’s a tten tio n and sym pathy ( 2 ). But alth o u g h

th e advantages o f s u c h an e m i n e n t l y r e a l i s t i c m ethod s u g g e s t e d

th em selv es n a tu ra lly t o L u d w i g ’s m i n d , h e was a l s o w ell aw are

o f th e dangers o f c o n c e n t r a t i n g u p o n a c h a r a c t e r ’s p e r s o n a l pe­

c u lia ritie s w ith o u t h a rn e ss in g them t o one t y p i c a l human q u a l i ­

ty w hich w ould r a i s e his fate above th e m e re ly i n d i v i d u a l to a

1 . C f . GS p«.215 f f . " M e i n V e r f a J r i r e n b e i m p o e t i s c h e n S c h a f f e n " .

2 o "Es i s t h i c h t g e n u g , d a s s man n a m e n t l i c h des d r a m a t i s c h e n -
H e l d e n G e s i c h t k e n n e n l e r n t , m an m u s s a u c h s e i n e G e s i c h t e r k e n -
n e n l e r n e n " — i b i d p . 69* Cf." a l s o i b i d . p p . 6 6 , 7 7 , 4 7 8 ,'e-?^-
was - wotfkâiMt'g i n 1 8 4e
 - 12 -

al le v e l. Thus w h i l s t condem ning e v e r y t h i n g w h ich s a v o u r e d

o f th e m y stic al and s y m b o lic a l (l), and c o n tin u in g in h is own

p ra c tic e a p red ilec tio n fo r p sy ch o lo g ical d e ta il, L u d w i g cam e

to ev o lv e a t h e o r y w h i c h was t o form t h e v e r y b a s i s o f h is view

of th e trag ic hero. A n x i o u s a s h e was t o b r i d g e the g u lf b e t­

ween t h e in d iv id u al and th e t y p i c a l - a problem w hich i s symp­

to m atic o f much o f L u d w i g *s a r t i s t i c in d ec isio n and w hich form s

th e sta i-tin g -p o in t for h is th eo ry of p o e tic re a lism (2 ) - he

b e liev e d t h a t he h a d found th e o n ly p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n in Shake­

s p e a r e 's trag ed y of passion . T his im p lied n o th in g le s s th an th e

s u b o r d i n a t i o n , o f t h e h e r o *s c h a r a c t e r and tem p eram en t to an

o v e r r i d i n g human e m o t i o n w h ic h m o u ld s h i s w hole b e i n g and

raises him t o th e h e ig h t o f pure tra g e d y .

"W ir s e h e n e r s t das S t ü c k H o lz als e i n z u r Feuerm achung

w ie a u sd rû c k lic h und vor a lie n a n d e rn gem achtes ; dann

sehen w ir's e r g r i f f e n und z u l e t z t m ehr, wa& d a s F e u e r

d b e rh a u p t m it dem H o l z e a n f & n g t a l s das H olz s e l b e r ,

mehr d ie N a tu r der L e i d e n s c h a f t alsL d i e des C h arak ters

an s i c h ( 3 ). "

I n view o f h i s in ten se in te rest in every fa c e t of h is own

• liero ei^' p s y c h o lo g ic a l m ake-up, h i s claim fo r the su b s id ia ry

fu n ctio n o f ch aracter as " t h e m ere t h r e a d up o n w hich t h e p h a s e s

1 . C f. L u d w ig 's n o t e to h i s p la n n e d C h r i s t u s dram a on w h ich k a

f e d w i - g was w o r k i n g i n 1 8 4 o : " A l l é s M e n s c h l i c h e i s t a n i h n g e - .
w i e s e n .. .A llé s M y stisc h e , K a rfu n k e lm â ssig e , S ym bolische i n der
B ehandlung a u sg e sc h lo sse n " - IV p . 1 7 .
2 . C f i b i d p p . ‘' ^ I 7 5 , 2 5 9 “| 5 I o , i b i d . V I p . 59
3 . GS 7 ^ 6 3 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5
 - 13 -
o f a great p a ssio n are s tr u n g ” ( l ) , and h i s c o n c e p t i o n o f Mac­

b e th , not as an i n d i v i d u a l , but as t h e p erso n ificatio n o f am bi­

tio n ( 2 ), may a p p e a r s u r p r i s i n g . Yet t h e e x p o sitio n o f th e na­

tu re o f p assio n - a t once g r e a t and b e a u t i f u l , dangerous a n d dem

m onic (3) - as t h e d r a m a t i s t ’s c h i e f t a s k , became t h e g u i d i n g

p rin cip le o f h is th eo ry of trag ed y . At t h e s a m e t i m e , a f r a i d o f

an y k i n d o f e x c e s s , Ludwig i n s i s t e d th a t the am a t i s t m ust p o r­

tray o nly th o se p a s s i o n s w hich a r e fam iliar to everyone and

I
whose power e v e ry o n e has at le a s t t o so m e e x t e n t ex p erien ced (4 ) . i

H is own d r a m a t i c p r a c t i c e h a d shown him t h e n ecessity fo r such

a p rin cip le , fo r th e exaggerated d e p ic tio n o f v io le n t em otions -

a h e ritag e f r o m L u d w i g ’s S t u r m u n d L i'a n g m o d e l s - p l a y e d an a l l

too p ro m inen t p a r t in such e a rly plays as Per E ngel von A ugsburg

o f 1836 and th e su b se q u e n t v e r s io n s o f 1840 and 1842 ( 5 ), w h ils t

as late a s 1 8 5 6 t h e s c e n e i n G e n o v e v a , w h e r e G o l o ’s p a s s i o n

th rea te n s to become to o i n t e n s e , gave r i s e to th e r e jo in d e r in

L u d w i g ’s n o t e b o o k : "S ty lisiert! P arf n ich t zu g lû h e n d wahr w e r-

d en ” (6 ).

I n so far as H e b b e l c o n c e r n e d h i m s e l f a t a ll th e o re tic a lly

w ith th e n a tu re of trag ic p assion - and he d i d so p r i m a r i l y in

references to h is e arlie r plays (?) - it is p rec ise ly its in d i-

l o GS V p . 6 3 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 .
2. C f. i b i d . p. 1 9 5 , 1851-55: " In d iv id u e n kdnnen k e in S c h ic k s a l
h a b e n , d a s " h e i s s t k e i n t r a g i s c h e s ;denn d ie s s o i l d a s | A llg e m e in e
des m e n s c h lic h e n L o ses a u sd rü c k e n , d ie norm ale G e s t a l t d e s s e l b e n ,
n i c h t e in e A usnahm sw eise, e in e s e i n z e l n e n / F a l l é s m e n s c h i i c h e r A r-
t u n g " . — 3* i b i d . p . 1 85$ I 860—6 5 - — 4 . G f , -i h i d » p . 1 2 3 , 1 8 5 1 —55*
5 o F o r a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n and c r i t i c i s m o f t h e s e e a r l y a t -
te m p ts V .M o ritz H e y d r ic h , 0p .c i_ t. I pp. 148 f f . - 6 . ^ i t e d by H ein­
r i c h K r â e g e r , " O tto L u dwigs G e n ^ v e v e - F r a g m ^ t ^ " i n E u p h o r i o n V I ,

nerste"~Natuz' der L e id e n s c h a f t .
 — 14 — '
v isu a lisin g q u a l i t y w hich seem ed t o him c h a z 'a c t e r i s t i c . Thus

he w rote o f h is first dram a J u d i t h i n - 184 o : "Und s o h a t der

Kam pf, in dem d i e - E le m e n t e m e i n e r T r a g é d i e s i c h g e g e n s e i t i g

anein an d er zerreib en , d i e h S c h s t e symboG^sche B e d e u t u n g , obwohl

c r y o n _der l e i d e n s c h a f t entzflndet und durch d ie E a llu n g e n des

B lu ts u n d d ie V e r ir r u n g e n der S in n e zu ^nde g e b r a c h t w i r d ” ( l ) .

W >iether i n its phy sical m an ifesta tio n s dr, a s i n H e b b e l *s s u b ­

sequent p lay s, on t h e p u r e l y s p i r i t u a l plan e, p assio n is an

im p o rtan t facto r i n t h e m o t i v a t i o n o f m a n y o f H e b b e l *s t r a g i c

heroes, th o u g h th e manner o f i t s p resen tatio n is o ccasio n ally

so pow erful as t o r e n d e r them m ore t h a n l i f e - s i z e . Taken s o l e ­

ly on t h e p sy ch o lo g ical le v e l, th e hyperb o les o f a H o lo fern es

or th e e g o tism o f a H erodes ap p ear abnorm al, u n ab le to in sp ire

th e s y m p a th y w hich Ludw ig c o n s i d e r e d so n e c e s s a r y for a rig h t

a p p ro ach to th e t r a g i c hero ( 2 ). Thus i n th e eyes o f c r i t i c s |

such as L u d w ig , u n a b l e to see beyond th e im m ediate p e r s o n a l

asp ects o f H e b b e l *s c h a r a c t e r s and u n w i l l i n g to let th e la tte r 's ^

th e o r y o f th e sy m b o lical shape t h e i r in te rp retatio n , he had

failed co m p letely in a d ram atic p r e s e n t a t i o n of p assio n . T h is,

i n H e b b e l's own v i e w , i m p l i e d no l e s s th an th e in a b ility to

c reate ch aracter ( 3 ) . He was n a t u r a l l y u n w i l l i n g t o adm it t h i s

1. L e t t e r t o A u g u s t e S t i c h - C r e l i n g e r , 3 A p r i l 1 8 4 o ; l r . H p . 53
2 . C f . GS V p, 4 3 8 , 1 8 5 7 - 5 8 ; o f . a l s o i b i d . p p . 1 8 9 . 4 4 8
3. " L e i d e n s c h a f t en s e t z e n C h a r a c te r e v o r a u s " , H ebbel w r i t e s i n
a r e p l y t o a c r i t i q u e o f h i s work by J u l i a n S c h m id t i n "D ie
G r e n z b o t e n " o f 1 8 5 o ; I XI p . 3 9 o , 1 8 5 1 ( t h e a r t i c l e i s r e p r i n t e d
i n H e b b e l i n d e r zeit^genSs s i s c h e n K r i t i k , ^H.H. J u t s c h k e ; P e u t —
s c h e L i t e r a t u r denkm a l e d e s 1 8 . u n d 1 ^ . t J s l i r h u n d e i ts_, no . 1 4 5 >
B e r l i n 1 9 1 o , p p * 7 5 f^*
 - 15 -
d eficirn ib y and a g la n c e at fig u res s u c h a s G o lo o r K r i e m h i l d

g iv es su b sta n ce to h is claim , w h i l s t show ing a t t h e same t i m e

th at th e an aly sis o f p a s s i o n i n one form o r a n o t h e r co u ld n e v er

be th e s o le aim o f t h e d r a m a ti s t ; o n ly i n so far as i t was set

in t h e w i d e r c o n t e x t o f h u m an s t r i v i n g and o f i t s re la tio n to

t h e m o ra l law i t s e l f did i t assum e any r e a l s i g n i f i e ancco T h is

was i n fact fu lly in a c c o r d a n c e ' w i t h H e b b e l *s t h e o r y and i s

m ost c l e a r l y sta te d in h is P re fa c e to J u l i a , w hich t a k e s the

form o f a v i n d i c a t i o n o f h i s g e n e r a l in ten tio n s as a d ram atist.

( l ). T im e a n d a g a i n t h e p l a y h a d b e e n r e f u s e d a d m i s s i o n t o the

G erm an s t a g e on grounds o f im m o ra lity , a n d H e b b e l was at p ain s

to show t h a t , as l o n g as t h e means w ere n o t c o n f u s e d w i t h t h e

end, th e very re v e rse was t h e case: th at th e n a tu re o f th e he­

ro, and th e r e f o r e t h a t o f th e w hole p l a y , was i n t h e fin al

an aly sis e s s e n t i a l l y m oral. No o n e , i n d e e d , b e l i e v e d m ore

stro n g ly th a n he t h a t t h e i m p r e s s i o n c o n v e y e d b y a d r a m a ijn

its t o t a l i t y m u st be one o f t h e eth ica l order o f th in g s , but

th at th is of n ecessity im plied th a t the f o r c e w hich m a n i f e s t s

itse lf in its in d iv id u a l stag es th ro u g h th e t r a g i c h e ro m ust

be w h o lly opposed to th is, e th ic a l o rd e r. F o r,h e a s k s ,i f th e

trag ic ch aracters do n o t deny, t h e m o r a l l a w , what a v a i l s it

if th e p lay i t s e l f affirm s it? ( 2 ) And o n e o f t h e forces w hich

1 . V. n m i l p p . 1 3 3 f f . •
2 . T I I I 4 1 7 6 , 2o May 1 84 7 .
 - 16 -

irnpml t h e trag ic hero to act in th is c o n tr a r y manner i s p assio n —

whose v e r y essence, in Hebbel view , is im m orality and u n re a s o n ,

and which thus form s t h e v e r y s t u f f o f dram a b y r e v e a l i n g th e

n a tu re and c o n s e n u e n c e s o f the in d iv id u a ls tem porary n e g a tio n o f

m o ra], l a w ( l ). O nly i n th is lig h t can the fo llo w in g defence o f

Ju lia be i n t e r p r e t e d :

"U n stre itig f i n de t s i c h i n m e i n e r JüLlia v i e l U n v e r n & n f t i g e s

und v i e l U n s i t t l i c h e s . Ich b e h a u p tc aber, dass gar k ein O r a —,

ma d e n k b a r i s t , w elches n i c h t in a lie n sein en S tad ien unver-

n iln ftig O d e r u n s i t t l i c h w8r e . G-anz n a t û r l i c h , demi i n j e dem

e in z e l n e n otadium û b erw ieg t die L e i d e n s c h a f t , und m it ih r die

H in se itig k eit o d e r d i e M a asS L o sig k e it” ( 2 ).

P a ssio n co n stitu tes th at o v errid in g q u ality in th e hero w hich, if

it does n o t a c t u a l l y give r i s e to h i s ev il in stin c ts, yet stan d s

so effectiv ely in t h e way o f h i s good ones t h a t the c a t as t r o p h y

c a n no l o n g e r b e a v e r t e d ( 5 ), and h e shows h i m s e l f as a "m oral"

b ein g o n ly in t h e o u tco m e o f t h e s t r u g g l e when t h e s u p e r i o r i t y

o f th e m oral code m a n if e s ts ite e lf th ro u g h him . T h i s may t a k e

d ifferen t form s in th e in d iv id u a l plays - th us H erodes und M a ri-

amne, a c c o rd in g to Hebbel h im s e lf , ex alts C h ristia n ity as th e

lo ftie st in stru m en t of c iv ilisa tio n , w h i l s t Gyges u n d s e i n x tin ^

affirm s the e t e r n a l claim s o f m o r a lity and t r a d i t i o n - but al­

io C f. T III 4414, 2o J u n e 1 8 4 8 : " D i e g a n z e d r a m a t i s c h e K u n s t h a t

e s m i t dem U n v e r s t a n d -un d d e r U n s i t t l i c h k e i t z u t h u n , d e n n w as
i s t u n v e r s t S n d ig e r und u n s i t t l i c h e r a l s d i e L e i d e n s c h a f t ? "
2o W X I I I p 1 5 6 . - '
3® ? f . L e t t e r t o G e o r g C o t t a , l o Nov 1 8 5 7 ; P* 74
 - 17 -
w ays, H eb b el m stin tain s, in a m anner w hich i s e sse n tia lly dram a­

tic , p resen tin g th e t r a g i c hero first and fo re m o st in a ll h is

p assio n ate d efian ce: "w eil der s i t t l i c h e S i e g {iber L e i d e n s c h a f —

ten , d ie n ic h t vorhanden s in d , j a n i c h t mehr b e d e u t e t a ls, um

m ich v u lg & r auszudrôcken, die l e is tu n g ein er F e u e rs p ritz e , wo

es k e in e n B rand g i e b t " (l).

It is o bv ious f r o m H e b b e l ’s own d r a m a t i c p r a c t i c e th at it

was in fact t h e h e r o ’s m o r a l v i c t o r y o v e r h i s p assio n s rath e r

than t h e n a t u r e o f p a s s i o n i t s e l f w h i c h came i i c r e a s i n g l y to

H is atten tio n - an a p p ro a c h whose i n t e l l e c t u a l q u ality

it was n o t alw ays e a s y , as p l a y s s u c h as A?nes B e r n a u e r o r

G y^es u n d s e i n K ing show, to m erge c o m p l e t e ly i n d ram atic form®

No o n e was m o r e q u ic k t o s e i z e on t h i s th a n L udw ig; in a b rief

c o m m e n t o n o n e o f H e b b e l *s e a r l i e r dram as, M a ria M ag d alen a, he

accuses h im o f t h e c o l d n e s s o f t h e calcu latin g d ram a tist, for

whom c h a r a c t e r s a r e m e r e n u m b e r s , a n d who f a i l s to ex p lo it th e

em in en tly trag ic q u a litie s o f p a ssio n to b r in g a b o u t t h e h e r o ’s

fate ( 2 )® B u t w h i l s t d e n y i n g t o H e b b e l ’s t r a g i c ch aracters

any r e a l d ram atic q u a l i t y , L u d w i g ’s t h e o r y o f p a s s i o n , w here

it to u ch es p o in ts o f fu ndam ental im p o rta n c e , such as th at of

t h e h e r o ’s o f f e n c e a g a in s t th e m oral law , n e c e ssa rily bears a

c ertain r e s e m b l a n c e t o H e b b e l ’s v i e w . Thus h e b e l i e v e d t h a t ,

h o w e v e r p r e o c c u p i e d t h e d r a m a t i s t may j u s t l y be w ith th e de-

1 . L e tte r to G eorg C o t t a ,l o Nov. 1 8 5 7 ; p. 74.

2. O f. GS V p . 557, 184051: " S c h ille r g ieb t sein en Personen
g s e i n e r WSrme, H e b b e l - v o n s e i n e r K & l t e , a n d i b i d . p *
3 5 9 : "D ie L e i d e n s c h a f t i s t an s i c h . . . t r a g i s c h , - w e il s r e s i c h
(*in S c h i c k s a l b e r e i t e t , d a s d e s Mens c h e n e i g n e s i s t #
 ""18 —

p ictio n of a p articu lar c h a ra c te r in the g rip of a great

p assio n w hich a b s o r b e s and o b sc u re s th e l a t t e r * s m oral se n se ,

h e h i m s e l f m ust ta k e h i s stan d firm ly andnunm istakably on th e

sid e o f m o rality (l). Tragedy th u s tends to tak e th e form o f

a m oral le s so n , sin ce it is th e d r a m a tis t's duty to s h o w how

m an, once he a llo w s h i s p assions to assum e e x c e s s i v e propor­

tio n s, w ill in e v ita b ly h u rl h im s e lf to d e stru ctio n (2). Thus

Shakespeare, w ith o u t im p a irin g o u r com passion f o r the h e ro , is

ab le to raise us to the sta n d p o in t of h is own u n s w e r v i n g m o r a l

jud g m en t, b ein g c a r e f u l to d i s t i n g u i s h b e tw e e n p a s s i o n w hich

is im m oral and th e o b j e c ts o f passio n - s u c h as freedjem , domi­

n io n , love, renow n, - w hich a r e u n im p e a c h a b le (3).

"N ich t die so genannte Id e e , die der G egenstand d e r L e id e n -

s chaft ist; d ie l e i dens c h a f t s e l b s t b e g e h r t , w ird s c h u ld ig

u n d kSm pft; der S te rn b l e i b t unverrftckt und u n g e tr d b t,

aber d er M ensch, der ih n durch S c h u ld e r r e i c h e n w o l l t e ,

s t ü r z t m it gebrochenen F lû g e ln i n die T ie fe " (4),

But in one i m p o r t a n t r e s p e c t Ludw ig d i f f e r e d s t r i k i n g l y from

th e g en erally a c c e p te d view o f p a s s i o n , to w hich H eb b el* s

theory, to o , h a s b een se en to adiiere, nam ely t h a t of its no­

tab le l a c k o f judgm ent. For i t was L u d w i g ' s firm b e l i e f and

one to w hich he gave r e p e a t e d e x p r e s s io n t h a t th e tr a g ic hero,

e v e n w h i l s t u n d e r t h e sway o f a p o w e r f u l p a s s i o n , m ust be

1. C f. GS V p . 454, 1 8 5 7 -5 8 . .
2. p.^2o;
4 ! ■ ^ ^ f ^ r a m a t i s c h e n ^ A u f g a b c n d e r Z e i t , - M e i n W i l l e u n d Weg"
i b i d . p . 53.
 - 19 -
fu lly conscious o f t h r m ea su re i n which he i s o ffending ag ain st

th e m oral law ; he m ust, as i t w ere, preach m o r a lity w h ils t

actin g im m orally (l). The q u a lity o f p assio n i t s e l f , m oreover,

is, acco rd in g to L u d w ig 's t h e o r y , one o f s e n s i b i l i t y and p r e ­

sence o f m ind, engendering a d e te rm in a tio n to g a in i t s own

e n d s o f s u c h power and c o n s i s t e n c y t h a t it c a n make e v e n t h e

fo o lish prudent and t h e cow ardly b ra v e ( 2 ), What c a u s e s th e

trag ic o p p o s itio n w ith in th é hero is rath er th e presence of

em otional im p u lse s w hich, b e in g free from a l l law s o f expe­

diency and s u b o r d in a tio n , seek c o n s ta n tly to fru strate th at

very a im w h i c h p a s s i o n i s stra in in g to the u tte rm o st to rea­

lise ( 5 )* By t h u s d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g b etw een im p u lse and p a s s i o n -

”A f f e k t u n d L e i d e n s c h a f t ” - L u d w i g was m a k i n g a c o n s c i o u s and

d e lib e ra te c o n t r a s t betw een h i s theo ry and t h a t o f G oethe,

S c h ille r and H e g e l, a l l o f whom h e c o n s i d e r e d t o h a v e l a b o u r e d

under a ig isc o n c ep tio n o f the n a tu re of tragedy. Thus, w h ilst

ag reein g fu n d a m e n ta lly w ith H e g e l's d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n two

m ain f o rc e s - one im p u ls iv e and b lam ew o rth y , th e o th er reaso n ­

ab le and w h o lly j u d ic io u s - sim u ltan eo u sly activ e w ith in th e

trag ic hero (4 ), he cen su re d h is use o f th e term s " p a s s io n ” on

1 . C f . GS V 0 . 2 2 2 : " S h a k e s p e a r e l & s s t d e n Q h s r a k t c r e n n e b e n i h -
r e r L e i d e n s c h a f t im m er n o c h d a s B e w u s s t s e i n , w i e i h r e L e i d e n ­
s c h a f t s i c h z u r m oral i s chen K egel v e r h S l t , gegen d ie s i e v e r -
s t d s s t . . . J a g o u n d b e i E dm und, d i e s o z u s a g e n M o r a l p r e d i g e n ,
w Shrend s i e u n m o ra lis c h h a n d e ln .- B e i S h a k e sp e a re l i e g t d ie L ia -
l e k t i k in den H elden, b e i S c h i l l e r i n der S i t u a t i o n .
2o C f . GS V p . 4 5 1 , 1 8 5 7 - 5 8
3 . C f. i b i d . p . 445, 1857-58
4. C f. i b i d . p. 184, 186o-65.
 “ 2o —
t h e one hand and " p a th o s " on t h e o t h e r , sin ce th is co u ld o n ly

If.ad to con fu sio n and te n d to nut t h e wrong c o n s t r u c t i o n u p o n

th e tru e m eaning o f p a s s io n .

^hen h i s t h e o r y i s v ie w e d from t h i s an g le, it is not sur­

p risin g t h a t L u d w i g was e q u a l l y c ritic a l o f G o e th e 's fam ous

d ictum th at reason a n d a p u r p o s e f u l p a s o i o n c a n h a v e no p l a c e

in th e di am a , and t h a t the trag ic hero is led b lin d ly to h i s

se lf-a p p o in te d fate (l). T h is , Ludwig b e l i e v e d , may h a v e b e e n

tru e o f G re e k dram a, where t h e c ^ A r a c t e r s w ere d e t e r m i n e d i n

th eir a ctio n s and f o llo w e d t h e i r p a ssio n s v/itho ut c h o ic e, but

m odern dram a, if it was t o b e o f a m o r a l n a t u r e , m ust fo llo w

SV iakespe-are's exam ple and a c c o rd to the in d iv id u a l a much g r e a ­

t e r m ea su re o f freedom , the freedom o f c h o ic e b e tw e e n good and

e v il ( 2 ). But t h i s can. o n ly be a c h ie v e d i f th e t r a g i c hero, ar

from b e i n g s p i r i t u a l l y b l i n d , is fu lly aw are o f h i s actio n s -

a t h e o r y w hich s t a n d s in s trik in g c o n trast to L u d w ig 's own

p ra c tic e . B o t h i n Das F r & u l e i n v o n S k u d e r i a n d i n 8 i e P farrose

( 3 ) i r r a t i o n a l behaviour and m adness p l a y an i m p o r t a n t r o l e ,

w h i]st th e pow erful e f f e c t produced by Per E r b fB rs te r is in a '

i
1 . V . L u d w i g ' s q u o t a t i o n o f G o e t h e ' s w o r d s , p u n c t u a t e d b y h i s own
c o m m e n t s : "Im T r a u e r s p i e l e k a n n u n d s o i l d a s S c h i c k s a l , o d e r w e l ­
c h e s e i n e r l e i i s t , d i e e n t s c h i e d e n e N a t u r d e s M ens c h e n , d i e i h n
b l i n d ( b e i o f f n e n Aug e n . t r o t z o f f n e r u n d s e h e n d e r A u ^ e n . d a s w&-
r e d ie ^ h ^ e s o e a r i s c h e F o rm el) da o d e r dor t h i n f f a h r t. w a it en u n d
h e r r s c h e n ; s i e m u ss i h n - n i e m a l s z u f s o n d e r n im m e r v o n j s e i n e m
Zwecke abfG firen; d e r H e ld d a r f s e i n e s V e r s t a n d e s n i c h t m ^ c h t i g
s e i n ( d a s w&re d e r A f f e k t p e r e n n i e r e n d g e d a c h t . d e n n i n d e r _ L e i ­
d e n s c h a f t i s t d a s Moment d e s W i s s e n s . d a i i e r d e r i f ' r e i t j ^ i t j , d e r |
V e r s t and d a r f g a r n i c h t in a ie T rag S d ie e n t r i e r e n , a ls b e i N eben-
p e r s o n e n z u r D é s a v a n t a g é d e s H a u p t h e l d e n " — G^ p p .4 4 5 f*
2 . C f . G S VI P.1Q 7 F o r L u d w i g 's c r i t i c i s m o f S c h i l l e r ' s c o n c e p t i o n
o f p a s s i o n c f . G S V , p . 2 2 1 . - 3 . B o t h Das F r S u l e i n v o n S k u d e r i ( w r i t -
 - 21 - I
la rg e m easure clue t o t h e h e r o *s i n a b i l i t y to see beyond h is

own l i m i t e d c o n c e p t i o n o f what i s r i g h t — "im h e l l en W ah n sin n

d e r u ngerecV it un d b l i n d w achsenden L e i d e n s c h a f t ” ( l ) . But in

th is v e ry m adness, as Ludwig a l r e a d y p o i n t e d o u t at a tim e

wVien t h e p o sitio n of trag ic h e r o was s t i l l , o c c u p i e d b y a c h a ­

rac ter c a l le d B ern d t, th ere is a k in d o f c o n s i s t e n c y w hich en­

dows h i s actio n s and d e c is io n s w ith a farsig h ted n ess and s u r e ­

ness o f purpose a ll its own ( 2 ) . W it h h i s m o r e i n t i m a t e k n ow ­

ledge o f S h a k e s p e a r e *s t r a g e d i e s , how ever, th ere cam e t h e de­

sire to estab lish a p recise fo rm u latio n o f the r e la ti o n s h i p in

th e actio n s o f d ra m a tic c h a r a c t e r s b etw een r e a s o n and u n r e a s o n ,

b e tv ;e e n s u r e n e s s o f p u rp o se and s p i r i t u a l b l i n d n e s s , the com­

b in atio n a n d i n t e r a c t i o n o f w hich se em ed to him a t tim es al­

m ost p arad o x ical.

"Der t r a g i s c h e H e ld i s t n i c h t sein e ig n e r H e±r, und doch

fo lg t e r k e in e m frem d e n Zwange. Was e r t h u t , g esch ieh t ohne

sein e S elb stb estim m u n g , doch w i r d e r n i c h t durch e in ^ u s s e ­

r e s b estim m t. S e in e That i s t n i c h t ® cine T h a t, und doch eben

recht nur sein e eigne T h a t, der A u s flu s s s e i n e s g a n z e n We-

sens. So l i e g t d e r Kampf v o n F r e i h e i t u n d N o t w e n d i g k e i t -

a b e r .o h n e d a s s e s ihm b e w u s s t z u w e r d e n b r a u c h t e - im H e l -

den^^elber" (?)•

1 . T h u s L u d w i g h i m s e l f d e s c r i b e s t h e S r b f 8r s t e r i n a l e t t e r t o
■Eduard D e v r i e n t , 1 4 Aug . 1 8 4 9 ; P* 5 5 8
2 . D u r i n g h i s w o r k o n D i e W i l d s c h û t z e n (May 1 8 4 6 - e n d o f 1 8 4 8 )
L u d w i g w r o t e o f t h e E ÿ b f 8r s t e r *s p r e d e c e s s o r : " s e i n e ë n t s c h l û s -
s e m ü s s e n a l l é k o n s e q u e n t aue s e in e m v /lah n sin n .. . e n t s p r i n g en "
SWÜD.53L*"" 5» C i t e d b y L e o n M i s , p p . c i t . I L p . l T 9 y f r o m a n u n ­
p u b l i s h e d MS o f t h e S h a k e s p e a r e s t u d i e n .
 - 22 - !

I?or w h e r e a s a great and f u n d a m e n ta l human p a s s i o n , w hich i n ­

tro d u ces in to th e th o u g h ts and deeds o f t h e h e ro a k in d o f

S
gran d io se co nsistency ( l ) , b e a rs w i t h i n i t th e power o f s e l f -

d eterm in atio n , h is in d iv id u al im pulses, by ieo n a rd isin g h is

c o n tro l over h is own a c t i o n s , m ake h i m a s l a v e to h is o^n in ­

escap ab le n atu re. It is the co n stan t s t r u g g l e b etw een th e two

w h ich m ust c h a i* a c te r is e th e trag ic hero and le a d to h i s fin al

d e stru ctio n .

L u d w i g ’s d o ctrin e o f p a s s io n and im p u lse i s th u s seen to

form th e v ery b a s is of h is c o n c e p tio n o f freedom and n e c e s s i t y

in re la tio n to th e in d iv id u a l ; th e prim e r e q u i s i t e o f th és

c o n c e p t i o n wa s t h a t b o t h s h o u l d s p r i n g fro m t h e sam e s o u r c e ?

th e ch aracter o f th e trag ic hero. In th e a sse rtio n of p assio n

th e la tter rev eals the e sse n tia l freedom o f th e in d iv id u a l,

w hich at t h e s/ame t i m e , how ever, is in v a r ia b ly m o d ifie d by h is

own i r z a t i o n a l p erso n ality . It is th is m o d ify in g or c o n d itio n ­

ing force, w hich, alb e it on a v e r y d i f f e r e n t lev e l, p ro v id es

tVie l i n k w ith H e b b e l's th eo ry . H ere th e in d iv id u al, in s p ite

dfi
of h is "in co m ireh en sib le freedom ”, is s e e n i n d e n t i r e l y mew p e r ­

sp ectiv e, one w here t h e conscious ex ercise o f the p e rso n ality

m erely se rv e s to em phasise th e p recario u s re la tio n sh ip i n w hich

he stan d s to t h e w o r ld o f w hich he i s so u n d e n ia b ly a p a r t ( 2 ).

1. G f GS V p . 3 5 9 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5
2. C f . “^ M e i n W ort û b e r d a s Jhraraa” , W XI p . 3 , 1 8 4 3 .
 — 23 —

H is view o f l i f e had caused Hehhel to b e lie v e in th e

p o w erlessn ess of th e in d iv id u a l in the s te r n g rip of d estin y ,

and he c la im e d t h a t acquiescence in the in ex o rab le demands o f

N ecessity was t h e o n l y way i n w h i c h h e c o u l d e x e r c i s e h is so-

c a lle d free w ill (l). L u d w i g ’s c l a i m th at th e tr a g ic hero is

free to choose and t h a t it is his c h o ic e u pon w hich h i s fate

u ltim ately d e p e n d s was u t t e r l y a lien t o H e b b e l ’s fa ta listic

v i e w o f m a n ’s p l a c e in the u n iv e rs e , for alth o u g h a c t i o n was

t
by n a tu re the ex p ressio n o f p erso n al l i b e ^ ^ , he b e lie v e d , th e

i n d i v i d u a l ’s claim for u ltim a te freedom to be fo u n d ed on a

b lissfu l unaw areness o f h is dependence upon th e g e n e r a l law s

o f th e u n iv erse (20* D espite the q u ite ex cep tio n al w ill power

d i s p l a y e d by many o f h i s own c h a r a c t e r s , H ebbel a sse rte d th at

the trag ic h e r o who b r a c e s h im s e lf to so m e . g r e a t and d a r i n g

endeavour does s o , n o t by a s im p le act o f the w i l l, but in

o b ed ien ce to a h ig h er p o w e r o v e r w h i c h h e h a s no co n tro l and

w h ic h u s e s him f o r i t s own e n d s . It is not f o r him to renounce

tht demands o f N a t u r e i n o r d e r t o s a tis fy h is own p e r s o n a l

d esires, however l o f t y ; o n l y N aM re h e r s e l f c a n a b s o l v e him

from h e r own l a w s i n o r d e r to r e a l i s e a great goal for w hich

o r d i n a r y means a r e no l o n g e r s u f f i c i e n t (3). fhe ’’i n s i p i d ”

n o tio n o f th e i n d i v i d u a l ’s s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n is in h is eyes

no l o n g e r ten a b le , and m ust be r e p l a c e d by th e type o f tra g e d y

.
1 ” Der M e n sc h h a t f r e i e n W i l l e n . - d . h . e r k a n n e i n w i l l i g e n
i n ^ s N o th w e n d ig e " . — ^ I I 25o4, l M arch 1 8 4 2 . — 2 . C f, T I I I ,
4 9 § 9 , 21 N o v . 1 8 5 1 . - 3 , C f . W XI p p . 2 8 3 - 4 , 1 8 4 9 .
 — 24 —
f

vjhich shows human n a t u r e in i ts ab so lu te dependence upon th e

p o w e rs o f an e x t e r n a l fate (l ) - w hereby H ebbel c o n s c i o u s l y

a llie d h im s e lf w ith S c h ille r (2) as w e l l as i n some m e a s u r e

w ith the trad itio n o f Greek t r a g e d y , w hich c a l l e d fo r the

com plete su b ju g a tio n o f the in d iv id u a l ( 3 ). D e te rm in e d on

every sid e n o t o n ly by h i s own n a t u r e , but by th e h i s t o r i c a l

co n d itio n s i n w hich he f i n d s h i m s e l f , the trag ic hero d isp lay s

in h is actio n s* sim p ly th e w orkings o f h ig h e r N e c e s s ity w h ich ,

'
by th e pow erful com bination o f c ir c im s ta n c e s , le a v e s him i n

fact no o t h e r ch o ice th a n to act as h e does. T h is is what

H e b b e l m e a n s wh en h e s p e a k s w i t h p r i d e o f "the* e q u a t i o n b e t ­

ween a c t i o n and e v e n t ” i n th e th ird act o f M a r i a M a,e:dalena,

w h e r e t h e h e r o i n e ’s "freedom " expresses itse lf in her d ecisio n

to d ie - a d e c i s i o n w hich i s yet d ic ta te d by c ircu m stan ces be­

yond th e compass o f h e r w i l l ( 4 ).

It is, in d eed , ch aracteristic o f H e b b e l ’s approach th at he

n o t o n ly c o n s id e re d K la ra to have been fo rc e d i n to th e s i t u ­

a tio n i n w hich s h e fin d s h e r s e lf (5), but th a t he p laced th e

in itia l co n d itio n o f th a t situ atio n o u tsid e the a c tio n o f th e

p lay , th ereb y ig n o rin g the v ery q u e s t i o n w h i c h was o f p a r a ­

mount im p o rtan ce to h is con tem p o rary , th at o f t h e h e r o ’s p o w e r

to shape h is own d e s t i n y . L o o k i n g b a c k o n D i e M a k k a b & e r L u d w i g

m ig h t sa y o f Ju d ah : "E r, der s ic h verm ass, allés zu s e i n ,

1 . C f . H e b b e l ’s a r t i c l e o n M a s s i n g e r ’s p l a y L u d o v i c o . W X I
n . 2 4 8 , 1 8 4 9 . - 2.Gf i b i d . p . 2 8 3 . - 5 . C f . P r e f a c e t o M a r i a M a ^ -
d a l e n a . i b i d . p. 41, 1844. - 4. C f. L e t t e r t o E l i s e L e n s i n g ,
'67 T'g b ! 1 8 4 F 7 B r . I Î I p . a j o . " 5 . C f . T 3 o o 3 , 4 7 , 23 J a n . 1 8 4 4 .
 - 25 -
g leich sam der leid en d e, sc h a ffe n d e G ott der B çfreiu n g s e l b s t ,

und a ls so lch er entzfickt s i c h anzuschauen, nun auch n i c h t s

w elter sich e rs c h e in e n kann, als se in w ille n lo ses V /erkzeug,

dass es G o tt wax, der z e i tw e i l ig in ihm w i r k t e , was e r in s t o l -

zer ^ elb stv erg S tte ru n g für se in en e ig e n e n e n d lic h e n M enschen

h & lt” (l ) ; but from t h e developm ent o f t h i s ch aracter in th e

su c ce ssiv e stag es o f the dram a i t is cle ar t h a t L u d w i g ’s c h ie f

in te re st was t o show, n o t J u d a h ’s w e a k n e s s and e s s e n t i a l de­

p e n d e n c e u p o n G o d , b u t t h e w i l f u l way i n w h i c h h e fo llo w s

freely th e p rom ptings of h is own d e s i r e s and a m b itio n s (2).

H e b b e l ’s t r a g i c heroes, on t h e o t h e r h a n d , not only f e e l them ­

selv es, l i k e Hero d e s , t o b e t h e b l i n d i n s t r u m e n t s o f an i n s c r u ­

tab le fate ( 3 ), but are a ll dom injt e d by t h e s e n s e th at what

they are as w e ll as what t h e y do i s e x a c te d by t h o s e v e r y

pow ers w hich l a t e r s e n d them t o th eir d estru ctio n . W hatever

L u d w i g may h a v e t h o u g h t o f such a n o tio n of th e in d iv id u a l as

a view o f l i f e , h e was c o n v i n c e d t h a t its p rac tic al a p p lica tio n

c o u l d o n l y p r o p e r l y b e made i n th e n o v el: "H ier", he w r ite s in

Hom ans t u d i e n , "herrscht das G efflhl der N o tw en d ig k eit, der

m e n sc h lic h e n G eb undenheit, des E r g e b n is in d ie A bh& ngigkeit

v o n a n d e r n M ftchten" ( 4 ), w h ilst what i s param ount i n the dram a

is th e s e n s e o f freedom , th at "in d om itab le c itad e l of th e s p i­

rit", w h o s e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e m ay b e d e s t r o y e d p h y s i c a l l y , but

1 . C i t e d b y H . L û c k e , " M i t i / j c i l u n g e n a n s O t t o I * u d w i g ’3 l i t e r a r i -
schera N a c h l a s s , - i n P r e u s s i s c h e J a h r b û c h e r . B e r l i n 1 8 6 8 , XXII Bd,
4 . H e f t , p p . 4 8 5 f . - 2 . F o r d e t a i l s o f t h e g r o w t h o f L u d w i g ’s c o n ­
c e p t i o n o f t h e c h a r a c t e r o f Ju d a h from an e a r l y v e r s i o n . D ie
M u t t e r d e r M akkab& er, onw ards c f . L e o n M i s , op_.ci.t.1 p p . 315 f f .
3 . H e ro des u n d M a r i am ne. A ct V s c . v i i i . - 4.GS V I p . 1 6 9 ; c f .
a l s o L b iii* P*
 - 26 -
n ^ V f s x m o r a l l y . T he c o m b i n a t i o n o f e v e n t s a n d t h e h e r o *s s e n s e

o f com pulsion, so e sse n tia lly a part o f H e b b e l *s t h e o r y o f t r a ­

gedy, have i n L u d w ig 's o p in io n t h e i r r i g h t f u l p lace ex clu siv ely

in th e ep ic, w here s i t u a t i o n predom inates over c h a ra c te r; w here

as in th e dram a t h e fig u re o f th e hero reig n s suprem e, th e o nly

e ffe ctiv e o p p o sitio n c o n sistin g in h is own e t h i c a l judgm ento

Thus, w hereas H e b b e l's p h ilo so p h y o f l i f e obr u d e s i t s e l f very

m ark ed ly in to h is th eo ry o f the trag ic hero - and w h a te v e r th e

effect on h is d r a m a t i c p r a c t i c e may h a v e b e e n , th e co n sisten cy

w ith w hich i t is expressed leav es little doubt as t o th e genu­

ineness and s i n c e r i t y o f the c o n c e p t i o n - L udw ig e n d e a v o u r e d t o

so lv e the problem i n ex clu siv ely l it e r a r y terras by m aking i t a

q u estio n o f g en res. " I b r a m a t i s c h i s t der M e n s c h , d e r s e i n e r W elt

a n K n e r g i e f l b e r l e g e n u n d dem n u r e i n Z u s a r a r a e n f a l i e n d e r W e l t -

k r& fte und n u r da s e i n eth isch v erk eh rtes Thun, also er s e lb s t

i h r B undesgenossc gegen ih n s e l b s t w ird, û b erw in d en kan n. Er

im p o n iert d i e W elt u n d d r û c k t ihm i h r e n S t e m p e l auf". ( 1)p

Such a fu ndam ental d istin c tio n form ed t h e b a s i s o f L u d w ig 's

c laim t h a t H e b b e l's ch aracters a re o f an e p ic h a t u r e , d e te r­

m ined, as w ere S c h i l l e r ' s trag ic heroes, by " c u l t u r a l - h i s t o r i ­

cal co n stella tio n s" and w ith o u t any p s y c h o l o g ic a l d ep th (2 ).

The u n a s s a i l a b l e r i g h t o f th e trag ic hero to a s s e r t h im s e lf and

t o m ould the co n d itio n s o f h is own f a t e a p p e a r e d t o him t o have

been a l l too d ra stic a lly c u rta ile d by th e co m p ellin g force o f

1 , GS V I p . 168 , ,
2 . C f ± b ± d GS V p . 558 (]£« H e b b e l ) a n d i b i d . p . 257 (iLS. S c h i l l e r ,
 - 27 -
h isto ry to w hich b o th gave su c h p ro m in e n c e i n th eir dram as. The

p rev a ilin g im p r e s s io n o f H ebbel*s p la y s from J u d i t h to D ie N i-

b c lu n g en i s , indeed, one o f human b e i n g s stan d in g p recario u sly

b e t w e e n tw o w o r l d s and b e in g sw ep t away b y e v e n t s to o pow erful

for an y th in g but a b so lu te su b m issio n , even though th e in d iv id u a l

situ atio n s may a p p e a r t o h a v e b e e n c r e a t e d b y t h e trag ic hero

h im self. H e r o d e s may k i l l h i s w i f d ’s b r o t h e r and p la c e h e r own

life in jeopardy, but it is the g re a t f o r c e s w hich a re o u tsid e

h i m s e l f and e x e r t th eir i n f l u e n c e u p o n him t h a t give h is actio n s

th e stam p o f i n e v i t a b i l i t y . As e a r l y as F e b r u a r y 1 8 3 9 H e b b e l ,

in a d i s c u s s i o n o f L e n z *s p l a y D i e S p l d a t e n . h a d a s s e r t e d th at

it is th e duty o f th e d ram atist to s h o w , n o t hww a m a n a f f e c t s

th e w o r l d , b u t how t h e w orld a f f e c t s m an ( l ) , but th e co n clu sio n

w hich he drew from t h i s was n o t t h a t the trag ic hero is th ere­

fore p r e d e te r m in e d and h i s ch aracter an a c c o m p lis h e d f a c t , but

th a t, on t h e co n trary , it is h is developm ent w i t h i n h i s own p a r ­

tic u la r s i t u a t i o n w hich a r o u s e s our in te r e s t as b e in g o f t h e

utm ost im portance. T h e a im o f a l l art, he d e c l a r e s , m ust be th e

co n crete rep re se n ta tio n o f th e process of life itse lf, w hich is

one o f c o n tin u a l change and r e - h i r t h , an d w hich c a n o n l y m a n i­

fest itse lf in th e developm ent o f t h e h e r o ' s own s o u l sta g e by

stag e w ith in th e atm osphere s u r r o u n d in g him , "sey d ie se nun

ihm a n g e m e s s e n o d e r n i c h t " (2 ). T his l a s t p aren th etical com m ent,

1 . Cf. T I 1471, 2 F eb. 1839

2 . T I I I 4 2 1 8 , 2o J u n e ( ? ) 1 8 4 7 .
 28 —

am biguous t h o u g h i t may s e e m try v i r t u e o f th e laco n ism so cha­

rac teristic of h is th eo re tic al w ritin g s, m ust n o t be t a k e n to

m e a n t h a t H e b b e l was u n a w a r e o f t h e im p o rtan t r u le o f dram a

th at any r e a l developm ent o f c h a r a c t e r m ust be c o n d i t i o n e d by

t h e h e r o ’s clo se and i n e v i t a b l e c o n n e c tio n w ith h is tu at io n .

kor a few y e a r s later he v o ic e d th e c o n v ic tio n th a t win e r e a s in

real life peo p le a re f o r c e d on].y t o o o ften in to situ atio n s w hici

do n o t " c o r r e s p o n d ” t o them , in the dram a t h e n atu re o f th e

trag ic ch aracter and th e p a r t i c u l a r c o n d itio n s i n w hich he is

set m ust be i n e x t r i c a b l y in terw o v en ( l ). The i n t e r - a c t i o n b e t ­

ween c h a r a c t e r and s i t u a t i o n , in f a c t , m u st b e so com plete t h a t

th e hero is no t-m erely "tested " by c i r c u m s t a n c e s , a p lay th in g

of t h e waves w hich can b u t d e s tr o y him , b u t i s seen in every

phase o f h is d e v e lo p m e n t, w hich i s b o th com plete in itse lf and

a lin k in th e g re a t e v o lu tio n ary process o f hum anity ( 2 ). That

th is t h e o r y o f developm ent as an e s s e n t i a l facto r in trag edy

was alread y firm lÿ e s ta b lis h e d b e fo re H ebbel had even begun to

w rite h is first p lay , is proof o f h is a sto n ish in g m a tu rity and

sureness o f purpose. Ju d ith gave but the co n firm atio n o f th is

th eo ry , w hich H e b b el e x p r e s s e d once and f o r a ll in th e o p en in g

pages of " M e i n W o rt f i b e r d a s D r a m a " :

1 . C f. W XI p . 7 1 , w here H eb b el s p e a k s o f t h e "W e c h se1 -G ef1 e c h t

der C h a rc te re und S itu a tio n e n " . - C f. an i n t e r e s t i n g d i a r y
e n t r y o f 1 8 5 5 : " S c h i l l e r s C h a ra c te re s i n d . . . dadurch schS n, dass
s i e g e h a l t e n s i n d , G oethes d a d u rc h , d a ss s i e n i c h t g e h a l t en
s i n d t S c h i l l e r z e ic h n e t den M enschen, d e r i n s e i n e r K r a f t a b g e -
s c h l o s s e n i s t , u n d n u r , w ie e i n S r z ,d u jr c h d i e V e r h S l t n i s s e e r -
n r o b t w i r d , d e s w e g e n w a r e r im h i s t o r i s c h e n D r a m a g r o s s . G o e t h e
m a l t d i e u n e n d l i c h e n S chS p fu n g en des A u g e n b lic k s , d i e ew igen
M o d i f i c a t i o n e n d e s Mens c h e n d u r c h j e d e n S o h r i t t , d e n e r i { J u t , d i e s
i s t d a s Z e i c h e n d e s G e n i e s " - T I l j - 4 , 24 O c t o l 8 3 5 o
 - 29 -

"Von a l l e r g r f i s s t ç r W ich tig k eit ist d ie B ehandlung d e r Gha-

ractere . D ie s e d ü r f e n i n keinem F a l l als fertig e ersch ei­

nen, d ie n u r noch a l l e r l e i V erhSO -tnisse d u r c h - u n d a b s p i e -

len , u n d wohl a j l s s e r l i c h an G lftck o d e r U n g liic k , n ich t aber

in n erlic h an K ern und V i^esentiaftigkeit g e w in n e n u n d v e r l i e -

r e n kH n n en .-B iess ist d e r Tod d es D ram as, d e r Tod v o r der

G e b u r t . Nur d a d u r c h , dass e s u n s v e r a n s c h a u l i c h t , w i e das

I n d i v i d u u m im K am pf i ç w i s c h e n s e i n e m p e r s ô n l i c h e n u n d dem

allg em ein en W e itw illen, der d ie T h at, den A u s d ru c k d e r

F re ih e it, im m e r d u r c h d i e B e g e b e n h e i t , den A u sd ru ck d e r

N othw endigkeit, m o d ific irt und u m g e s ta lt e t, sein e Form

u nd s e i n e n Schw erpunct g e w in n t, u nd dass es uns so d ie Na-

tu r a llés mens c h l i c h e n H a n d e l n s k l a r m a c h t " (l).

O nce m ore t h e em phasis upon th e in d iv id u a l is S ig n ific a n t, and

t h o u g h t h i s m ay o c c a s i o n a l l y b e o b s c u r e d b y H e b b e l *s s p e c u l a -

tiv e lan g u ag e, it form s i n fact a fu n d am en tal part of h is prac­

tic a l approach to th e problem o f t h e trag ic hero. Thus agi e a r l y

as 1835 he e x p re s s e d th e b e l i e f t h a t it was t h e d r a m a t i s t *s

d u ty to c o m p l e m e n t h i s t o r y b y s h o w i n g how t h e c h a ra c te r he has

c h o sen to p o r t r a y h a s become w hat h e i s , a m ethod b e s t ex em p li­

f i e d by t h a t " B ib le o f dram a", Shakespeare, who d e p i c t e d th e

very grow th o f p a s s io n , "als VVurzel u n d Baum z u g l e i c h " ( 2 ).

S im ila rly , K le ist earned h is u n q u a lifie d ad m iratio n f o r h av in g ^

] . " M e i n W o rt A b e r d a s Di-ama", 1 8 4 3 , Î p« 4
2 . ’' Ü h e r T h e o d o r K g r n e r u n d H e i n r i c h v o n K l e i s t ,1 8 3 5 ,ib id P# 4 9
 - 3o -

- ^ . r i e d r i c h v o n Hombur.p:. e m i n e n t l y s u c c e e d e d i n the por­

tray al o f an i m p o r t a n t c h -T .a cter i n a ll the im m ediacy o f i t s

process of developm ent (l)^ w h i l s t he r e g a r d e d h i s own J u l i a —

for w hich he c la im e d b o th th e m e r i t s and d is a d v a n t a g e s of a

w ork i n w hich t h e s i t u a t i o n i s m ore a c c e n t u a t e d t h a n t h e de­

v elo p m en t o f ch aracter - as an e x c e p t i o n (2). But .th e r e c an be

little doubt th at, w ith the p o s s ib le e x cep tio n o f c h a ra c te rs

such as Golo o r K r i e m h i l d , w here a d e f i n i t e "q u a n titativ e "

d e v e l o p m e n t on t h e p u r e l y p s y c h o l o g i c a l plane can be t r a c e d ,

H e b b e l was p r i m a r i l y concerned w ith th e o u .ality o f d e v elo p m en t.

For the p sy ch o lo g ical rea lism which h e c l a i m e d f o r h i s d ram atic

w ork c o n s i s t s not p rim a rily in d ep ictin g th e grow th o f one do­

m in an t em otion, but ra th e r i n s h o w in g i n w h at m a n n e r man r e ­

a cts to th e changing c o n d itio n s o f th e o u ts id e w orld ( 3)0 fhe

m ajo rity of h is trag ic heroes are, indeed, too r i g i d to be

effectiv ely m oulded i n t h e o r d i n a r y s e n s e by t h e force of

e v e n ts ; b u t by a s u b t l e in terw eav in g o f c h a ra c te r and s i t u a t i o n

H ebbel succeeds in ra is in g th e manner o f t h e i r reactio n s to a

lev el w here t h e y a re s e e n i n a process o f developm ent o f w hich

th ey t h e m s e l v e s may h a r d l y b e ^ w a r e . The n a t u r a l o p e r a t i o n o f

th e course of h isto ry th u s becomes m a n i f e s t e d i n t h e i r own

1 . C f , r e v i e w o f " Der P r i n z v o n H o m b u r g o d e r d i e S c h l a c h t b e i
F e h r b e l l i n ” , 1 8 5 o , W XI p . 333
2 . C f . T I I I 4 3 1 2 , 24 O c t . 1 8 4 7 .
3 . C f . T I V 6 0 8 5 , 23 F e b . 1 8 6 3 : Mens c h e n a b e r k e n n * i c h , d e n n
i c h b i n s e l b s t e i n e r , u n d wenn i c h a u c h n i c h t w e i s s , _wie e r a u s
d e r V /e lt e n t s p r i n g t , s o w e i s s i c h d o c h s e h r w o h l , w i e e r , e i n -
rnal e n t s p r u n g e n , a u f s i e z u rf tc k w i r k t ” .
 - 31 -
P ersonal ex isten ce and co n d u ct to an e x t e n t w hich H eh h el h o p e d

w ould p o in t beyond th e s p h e re o f any p a r t i c u l a r dram a. W hat i s

to be r e g r e tte d is th at in h is later p e rio d , Hebbel did not al­

ways av o id th e te m p ta tio n o f la y in g ex cessiv e em phasis upon

th ese w ider im p licatio n s o f th e w orld p ro c e ss to th e d étrim en t

of t h e human a p p e a l o f h i s trag ic heroes. Thus h i s a v o w e d a im

in w r i t i n g M o l o c h was n o t h i n g l e s s th an th e d e p ic tio n o f th e

gradual in tro d u c tio n of c u ltu re in to a barborous w o rld ( l ),

a n d o f H i e r am, who may b e t a k e n to be th e h e ro o f th e dram a ( 2 ),

he w rote: ”E r s t i r b t m i t c3j^r t J b e r z e u g u n g , dass das G -?ttlich e

selb st in d e r r o h s t e n fte p r& s e n ta tio n noch m & ch tig er ist w ie

d er g e w a ltig s te M en sch .♦ , s e i n l e r k aber ü b e rle b t ih n , so w eit

es i h n z u f l b e r l e b e n v e r d i e n t u n d m an s i e h t zum S c h l u s s in ein e

W elt h i n e i n , d ie s ic h m it jedem Tage m ehr e r h e l l t und v e r k l S r t ”

( 3 ). A s i m i l a r c h a n g e was t o b e e f f e c t e d in h is dram a on C h r i s t

in whom e v e r y t h i n g was t o b e s e e n t o "grow ” , u n t i l , h av in g r e - |

nounced the i d e a o f an e a r t h l y k in g d o m , h e p r e a c h e s th e K ing­

dom o f H e a v e n ( 4 ). T he f a c t t h a t H e b b e l w as n e v e r a b l e t o com­

p lete eith er o f th ese dramas i s in d ic ativ e o f th e over-am bi­

tio u sn ess o f such co n cep tio n s and p o in ts to the d iffic u lty w hich

th e d ram atist e x p erien c ed in keeping h is m ind f r e e ob a b s t r a c ­

tio n s and s p e c u l a ti o n .

1 . C f , L e t t e r t o K r a n z S c h u m a n n , 3o N o v . 1 3 5 3 ; ^ r . V p , 1 3 6 , |
2 , C f . L e t t e r t o G u s t a v KflVine, 2 8 J a n . 1 8 4 7 ; IV p . 6 w h e re
H e b b e l a f f i r m s : ”m e i n H e l d i s t d e r a u f dem T i t e l g e n a n n t e ” ,
i . e . t h e g o d M o lo ch . - 3 . l e t t e r t o S a i n t Ren4 T a i l l a n d i e r , 9
A ug. 1 8 5 2 ; B r^.V III p . 4 5 * - 4 .C f.W V p . 316 f o r d e t a i l s v . H . N a g e l ,
S t u d i e n z u r E n ts te h u n g s g e s c h ie h te von F r i e d r i c h H ebbel*s C h r i s -

S c h a ff en. D iss . K i r c h h a i n , 1924.

 - 32 -

But r v r n i n H e b b e l ’s , m ore s u c c e s s f u l co n cep tio n s,

L u f^w i^ f o u n d much t o c ritic ise * A ll too awnre i n h i s own d r am c -

tic p rac tic e o f the danger o f a b s t r a c t i o n s and th e d iffic u lty

o f in v estin g h is "raw m a t e r i a l ” w i t h a t r u l y p o etic as w e l l as

d ram atic a n n e a l, he accused h is c o n t e m p o r a r y ’s t r a g i c heroes

o f m aking a b s t r a c t rem arks about t h e i r own s t a g e s of developm ent,

so th at e v e r y s t a g e bec,ame, as i t w ere, a "p sy ch o lo g icalp rep a-

ra tio n ” (l). However t h i s may b e , it is clear t h a t L u d w i g ’s

approach to the p r o b l e m was a v e r y d ifferen t one, th at, tru e

to h is th eo ry o f passio n , he was, in f a c t , c o n c e r n e d m ore w i t h

th e in te n sity th a n w ith th e u l t i m a t e q u ality o f developm ent ( 2 )*

The s i t u a t i o n rem ain in g co m p lete ly s u b o r d in a te , the trag ic hero

m ust be se e n to come g r a d u a l l y u n d e r t h e s w a y o f h i s passio n s

u n til he i s brought to a p o i n t whence t h e r e is no t u r n i n g b a c k *

At th e same t i m e , th e d r a m a t i s t m ust t a k e care not to attem p t

any change i n th e e s s e n tia ls o f h is h e r o ’s c h a r a c t e r , any t r a n s ­

fo rm a tio n or r e v e r s a l of h is form er s e l f , b u t m ust u n f o l d to an

u n su s p e c te d degree o f i n t e n s i t y th o se d u a litie s w hich a re al­

ready p resen t, le ttin g t h e s e e d grow i n t o a poisonous tree

w hich e v e n tu a lly chokes its own l i f e (?). "D ie T r a g i k liegt

ganz im G h a r a k t e r , es i s t die G e sc h ic h te e in e r M o rm alk ran k h eit ” ,

L udw ig w ro te i n c o n n e c tio n w ith h i s own W a l l e n s t e i n , whose i n ­

w ard ch an ge, re su ltin g in h is d estru ctio n , was t o b e g p a r t i o u -

lo->GS V p , 2 1 6 , - )Cf* S h i d * n , 1 1 4 . e m p h a s i s i n g L u d w i g ' s c o n c e r n
f o r d r a m a t i c e f f e c t : "^s w i r d m ir immer k l a r e r , d a s s b e i S h a k e -
sn e a re C h a r a k te r is tik . M alerei der L e id e n s c h a fte n , In te n s it% t
u n d Ex n a n s i o n d e r G e f f c l e a u s dem B e d ü r f n i s s d e s T h e a t e r s p i - l s
h e rv o rv in g e n ”. - 3. O f.i b i d . p .lo 4 , 1857-58; c f . a lso i b id ^ p .-^ -
52o, 1 861-65.
 - 35 -
1 - x l y emph%5 i s e r i ( l ) . Sq m uss d r r Ch^.rakte*?r” , c o n tin u ed ,

p o e t i s c h u n d s ch a u s n i e l # r i s c h , v o n An f a n g h i s z u En do w a c h s e n ,

ohne dass ihm a n g e k l e h t w / i r d e , was n i c h t in der Z eit oder in

dem TypUü 1 :<.ge. . .Man m u ss s e h e n , w ie s e i n F a l l ih n v e rw a n d e lt,

w ie er ein a n d re r w ird . E in U n t e r s c h i e d w a it e t z w i s c h e n dem

^^al l e n s t e i n im A n f a n g e , u n d s o f t e r , w i e z w i s c h e n dem j u n g e n

M anne, der zum e r s t e n M a l e s p i e l e n d e i n e n ( j o l d h a u f e n v o r s i c h

w a c h s e n s i e h t u n d dem a l t e n E n i e l e r , dem d a s S p i e l e n , das V/a—

gen B e d i i r f n i s u n d Gewinn k e i n e F r eu d e , wohl aher V e rlu st A rger

ist. d a b e i w üchst d ie S i c h e r h e i t , d a s T T h e r v e r t r a u e n a.üf s e i n

S l d c k u n d das Z uzw ingenm einens d e s G-lftcks — a b e r er h a t schon

im A n f a n g e d e n Keim zum S p i e l e n ” . B u t , as s o o f t e n , L u d w i g was

afraid th at h is own d r a m a t i c p r a c t i c e fell short o f h is th eo ­

re tic a l id ea l, th at the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y su b tle d istin c tio n

v;hich h e drew b e tw e e n what h e c a l l e d "E n tw ic k lu n g ” and "E n t-

f a l t u n g ” t e n d e d t o become d o n f u s e d i n t h e actu al c reativ e pro­

cess ( 2 ). Even i n h i s th e o re tic a l w ritin g s it is not alw ays

kept c le ar, and o n ly by a n a l y s i n g r e p e a t e d l y s p e c i f i c Shake­

sp e a re a n p lay s d id he adhere to h i s fu n d am en tal b e l i e f t h a t it

is in fa c t : not the p s y c h o lo g ic a l grow th and developm ent o f

an i n d i v i d u a l ch aracter, but th e u n fo ld in g o f p a s s i o n w hich

1 . C f . ^ V I p . 2 6 4 . B e t w e e n 1 8 6 1 * ^ 5 L u d w i g was w o r k i n g o n a h i s t o ­
r i c a l t r a g e d y e n t i t l e d L e b e n u n d Tod A l b r e c h t s v o n W a l l e n s t e i n
2 . " I c h w i l l d a s im Drama m a c h e n , was d a s D ra m a am w e n i g s t e n z u -
l ü s s t * yVie k a n n man e i n e n G h a r a k t e r d a r i n d a r s t e l l e n a l s e i n e n
# e r d e n d e n ! Man m û s s t e i h n a u f j e d e r n e u e n S t u f e d u r c h a l l e s e i ­
n e V e r h S i l t n i s s e d u r c h n e h m e n . Das g e h t h M c h s t e n s im p s y c h o l o g i -
s c h e n Koman, i n w elchem d i e C h a r a k t e r d a r s t e l l u n g b e r e i t s d a s
G e b i e t d e r e i g e n t l i c h e n P o e s i e v e r l S s s t - GS V p . 7 2 , 1 8 6 0 6 5 .
 - 54 -

m ust be th e (d ra m a tis t's c h i e f aim . "Im O t h e l l o " , he w rote b e t -

w een 1851 and 1 855, "lie g t a llés a u f d e r S n t w i c k l u n g u n d &m

'/'/achotum d e i L e i d e n s c h a f t , m a n w e i s s oder s o h lie s s t w en ig sten s,

dass der tflten d e b t r a h l z u le tz t aus d ieser WoIke kommen m u s s "

(!)•

At the very b asis of th is in te g ratio n of ch aracter and

p assio n - w hich i s f o r Ludwig t h e e sse n c e o f developm ent - lie s

co n flict: c o n flict of a personal k in d , such as th at b etw een

th e h e ro 's own h i g h e r n a t u r e and h i s low er d esires. Indeed,

h av in g in h is own e a r l y p l a y s i n v o l v e d h i s c h a ra c te i's in a ll

m anner o f e x te rn a l co n flicts, Ludw ig fo u n d i t necessary to

em nhasise again and a g a i n t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f c o n c e n t r a t i n g a ll

th e a t t e n t i o n upon t h e in n e r p ro c e s s o f th e cen tral c h aracter.

(
"W ir e r l e b e n s e i n e n K am pf", h e w r o t e o f h i s own T i b e r i u  .

G racchus, "bis zur K atastro p h e. D i e s e r Kampf i n T i b e r B r u s t

w ird d e r Ge h a l t des Ganzen" ( 2 ), 1 n e v i t a b lj ^ t h i s process m ust

fin d e x p re s s io n in c o n f l i c t w ith o th e r ch aracters - ch aracters

w h o ^ e very n atu re is so e n tirely opposed to th at o f th e hero

th at a c o l l i s i o n b e t w e e n them i s v i i t u a l l y a foregone co n clu - ,

sio n (5 ) - but a t t h e same t i m e , in support o f S h a k e s p e a re 's

m ethod and in c o n scio u s o p p o sitio n to the d ram atic th eo ry of

( 4 ), he i n s i s t e d t h a t b o th facto rs in th e c o n f l i c t m ust

1 . ^ V p .2 o 5 , 1851-55
2 . C i t e d b y F . h i c h t e r , O t t o L u d w i g ’s T r a n e r s n i e l n l a n ' T i b e r i u s !
B a c c h u s * u n d s e i n Zascmmenl-iang: m i t d e n ’S d h a k e s n e a r e s t u d i e n * . '
D i s s . B r e s l a u 1 9 5 5 ; p . l 5 A ct I o f t h i s p l a y o n w h ic h L udw ig.,
w o rk e d b e tw e e n 1862 and 1865 i s p u b l i s h e d by S t e r n , G S IV
p p . 5 8 7 f f . - J .G f .G S V p . 4 3 o , w h e r e L udw ig makes p a r t i c u l a r r e f e ­
r e n c e t o D6r E r b f f l r s t e r . — 4 . 0 f . i p _ i d . p « 5 o 3 .
 - 35 -
r .oivle firo t and forfîm ost w i t h i n t h e s o u l / o f one d o m in a n t ch&-

rejeter (l). T h ejo ractical b a sis for th is jjn u o rtan t a s p e c t of

L udw ig th eo ry o f th e tra g ic hero, how ever, can be tr a c e d in

t h e m^^nnei of n is own c r e a t i v e p r o c e s s , w here t h e co n tra st b et­

ween fig u re and g e s t u r e of a p a rtic u la r ch aracter, w hich p r e ­

sen ted itse lf to h is inw ard eye b e f o r e t h e p lo t had even begun

to to.ke s h a p e , c o n stitu ted , as h e l a t e r rea lised , th e v ery

essence of trag ic co n flict ( 2 ) . . . To c r e a t e from t h i s ^’h a l l u ­

c in a tio n , as it has b een c a l l e d (3 ), an a d e n u a te 4 d r a m a tic

a c t i o n re m a in e d th e c h i e f p r e o c c u p a t io n o f L u d w ig 's d ram atic

p rac tic e — a p rac tic e w hich p ro v e d e x c e e d i n g l y p r e c a r i o u s ,

sin ce the s l i g h t e s t d ev iatio n from t h e o rig in a l im age h a d t h e

effect of in v alid atin g t h e whole c a r e f u l l y conceived s i t u a t i o n .

1 4 )# W ith t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f L u d w i g ’s a rtistic ju d g m en t, th e

creatio n o f a ch aracter i n w hich s u c h an o p p o s i t i o n b e tw e e n

l . C f , L u d w i g ’s n o t e t o h i s own En^'^el v o n Aujo^sbur^ o f 1 8 5 4 :

" L u r c h A g n e s g a n z e S n t \ l j 3k l u n g m î b s t e d e r K a m p f z w i s c h e n L i e b e
u n d L d g e u n d d a s G e w i s s e n s l e i d e n urn d i e L d g e g e h e n " . C i t e d b y
E r i c h b c h m i d t , from an u n p u b l i s h e d " P l a n l i e f t " o f 1 854 ^ TV p ,
1 5 . - 2 . C f . ^ V I p . 2 2 o , 1 8 5 8 - 6o : " N u n w e i s s i c h , # a s j e n e G e s t a l t
u n d i h r e G e b & rd e w a r g n i c h t s a n d r e s a l s d e r s i n n l i c h a n ^ e s c h a u t e
t r a g i s c h e W id ersn ru ch ;d er ein e F a k to r d ie G e s t a l t , d i e E x is te n z
( d e r G ru n d d a v o n ) , d e r andr'e d i e G e b S rd e . . . L e r E r b f B r s t e r , d e r
Ju d a h und die L e a , auch s e l b s t d i e H e i t e r e t h e i sc h w e b te n m ir i n
s o l c h e n A n s c h a u u n g e n v o r , d a s g l û h e n d e G e f & h l f{ ir K e c h t im M o-
m e n t e , wo e s U n r e c h t t h u t ; d a r i n l i e g t a l l é s V o r h e r u n d N a c h h e r "
3 . C f . K i c h a r d M . M e y e r ,' O t t o Ludwigg- S h a k e s p e a r e s t u d i u m " i n J a h r -
b u c h d e r d e u t s c h e n S h a k e s u e a r e - G e s e l l s c h a f t ,57# J s h r g a n g , 1 9 o l ,
P P - 5 9 f f '- 4 . C f . L u d w i g ’s n o t e o n o n e o f h i s l a t e r p i a ; ^ : "Nun h a b e
i c h d ie v e r s c h i e d n e n C o n c ep tio n e n d er K au fm annstoclfer u n d ^ v i e l e
M o d i f i c a t i o n e n j e der d e r s e l b e n . . .D ie V 'e r s c h ie d e n h e it d e r Concep
t i o n h & n ^ t v o n dem G r u n d m o t i v im G h a r a k t e r d e s H e l d e n a b " . C i t e d
b y L / o n M i s , o o . c i t . I I , p # 1 7 2 , f r o m a n u n p u b l i s h e d MS o f t h e
S h a k e s o e a r e s t u d i e n . C f . a l s o L u d w i g ’s d e f i n i t i o n o f t h i s p r o b l e m
in g en eral term s, VI p . 2 1 9 , 1 8 5 6 - 6 q *
 ~ 36 -

wnat he CÎ2JTÎC t o c a ll h is e s s e n t i a l hum anity and i t s in d iv id u a l

n a tu ie t e n d e d t o become a d e l i b e r a t e and a l t o g e t h e r more i n t e l ­

le c tu a l process, and th e d ram atic s k e tc h e s fhrzn L u d w i g ’s la te r

p lay s are a ll b a s e d on a s i m i l a r f o r m u l a / : on t h e o n e h a n d ,

th e trag ic h e r o ’s g e n e r a l hum an i m p u l s e t o act in a certain

way, on th e o th er, h is i n d i v i d u a l n a t u r e w hich r e n d e r s him u n ­

su ited to the task (l). In p r a c tic e , th is o ften created th e

n ecessity for v ir tu a lly in v en tin g a situ atio n in order to in ­

itia te such a co n flict, a n d no o n e w a s * ^ o r e c o n s c i o u s i h a n

L udw ig o f th e danger o f ] et tin g th e s i t u a t i o n in fact tak e pre­

cedence and th u s producing a pu rely e x te rn al c o n fl.ict, such as

th at in h is own k r b f S r s t e r , w h e r e a n a c c u m u l a t i o n o f c o i n c i d e n ­

ces ten d s to overshadow th e p e r s o n a l c o n flict o f the h e ro . Yet

even th ese early p i ays c o n t a i n t h e germ s o f a t r u l y trag ic

co n flict, o f w h i c h L u d w i g h i m s e l f was p e r h a p s o n l y d i m l y awar e .

In a s c e n e s u c h as t h a t in the f i n a l v e r s i o n o f Die M a k k a b h e r .

for ex am ple, the s t a t e of affairs i n w hich , ow ing to th e

p assiv e resistan ce o f th e Jew ish p e o p le , the hero fin d s h im sel:

may n o t be e n t i r e l y o f h is own m a k i n g ; b u t b y b r i n g i n g h i m f o r

th e first tim e f a c t to f a c e w ith t h e v e r y power whose ends he

f e s s es t o serve, it engenders a c o n f l i c t w hich becom es in ­

c re asin g ly a c o n f l i c t betw een h i s own l o w e r a n d h i g h t r n a tu re .

The fact th at Judah i s not the so le hero of th is p lay , but has

to share w i t h L e a t h e s p e c t a t o r ’s a t t e n t i o n , tends to confuse

l . G f . e .g . G S V p. 1 7 8 , GS V I p p . 3 1 7 , 4 1 4 .
 - 37 -
th e issu e n.nd t o obscure th e c e n tr a l c o n flict, hut in argum ents

such as the f o l l o w i n g Ludwig i s c le a r ly b asin g h is d e fin itio n

not o n l y u p o n a c a r e f u l s t u d y o f S h a k e s p e a r e ’s m e t h o d , but also

on h i s own h a r d l y won e x p e r i e n c e :

"D ie S i t u a t i o n ist nur d a rz u s te lle n , in so fern sie als L e i­

denschaft in d e n Mens c h e n i s t , a n d e r en G -egenw irkung d e r

H eld % u sserlic h zu Grunde g e h t , u n d i n ihm s e l b s t als Ge—

w issen , a ls B ew u sstsein e in e r G ew alt, der e r im o f f n e n

Kompfe s i c h n ich t g e w ach sen f & i l t " ( l ).

True tra g e d y , he w ro te en a n o t h e r o c c a s i o n , is the co n flict

b e t w e e n t h e i n d i v i d u a l an d an e s t a b l i s h e d r i g h t w hose c la im .s -
ê
and h e r i n l i e s t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f h i s t h e o r y o f freedom - a r e
A

■fiilü.y r e c o g n i s e d b y t h e t r a g i c hero and a re i n d e e d p a r t o f h is

own m o r a l s e l f ( 2 ).

By ip resen tin g th e in d iv id u a l as a b ein g o f c o n tr a d ic tio n

and d is c o rd , Shakespeare had, i n L u d w ig 's o p in io n , based h is

dram as on t h e v e r y e s s e n c e o f human n a t u r e in its in ev itab le

c o n flicts, an d h a d t h u s m a n i f e s t e d o n ce more h i s fu n d am en tal

realism .

" D i e s en M is s io n , der. d i e H arm o n ie s t g r t u n d d e n g a n z e n Men­

s c h en n i c h t d a h i n kommen i S s s t , w o h i n e r kommen s o l l t e , d ie-

s e n W iderspru ch , d ie s e G ebrochenheit h a t S h ak esp eare n ic h t

W illk ü rlich als G run d v erh R ltn is des T ra g i s chen, n ich t als

b lo ss ersonnenes K ^ n stm itte l au fg eg riffen , n ein , er sah es

in d er m e n s c h lic h e n N atur und i n der G esch ich te als den

1, GS V p . 527. - 2. i b i d . p. 169
 - 38 -
le tz t^ n a u f f i n d ’bar^'în G r u n d d e s S c h i c k s a l s d e r M ens c h e n w i r k —

1 i c h VO r b a n d e n u n d nahm e s n u r i n s e i n e K u n s t h e r f l b e r ^ w ell

er es f a n d. u n d w e i l er s e in e Kunst durch aus a u f d.ie W i r k -

lic h k e it ^rftnden w o l l t e " (l).

Such ^ g en eralisatio n s are r a r e i n L u d w i g ’s w r i t i n g s , and n e v e r

attem p t an a p p l i c a t i o n to h is own w o r k . H e b b e l , on th e o th er

hand, a s we h a v e a l r e a d y h a d o c c a s i o n to n o tf', te n d e d to go t o

th e o th er ex trem e, and t h e k i n d o f a p p r o a c h o u t l i n e d i n the

passage quoted above b e a r s , in d e e d , so m e r e s e m b l a n c e to h is own

view , e x p r e s s e d m ost fo rcib ly i n t h e P r e f a c e t o Ma r i a Ma u d a l e n a .

th at the d r .ama t i s t ' s p o r t r a y a l of in d iv id u al co n flict is n o th in g

less th a n th e m a n if e s ta tio n o f the dualism in h e r e n t in th e ge­

n eral co n d itio n s o f th e w orld ( 2 ). C o n f l i c t was at th e v ery

cen tre o f H e b b e l ’s u n i v e r s e , a n d h e was- c o n v i n c e d t h a t th e

essence o f trag ed y la y in the e x p ressio n o f t h is co n flict by

m eans o f show ing th e t r a g i c hero at odds w ith h i s fe llo ^ ^ b e in g s,

w ith life in g en eral. V^iere h i s theory d iffers m ost stro n g ly

from t h a t o f L udw ig i s in h is co n cep tio n o f the q u a lity o f th is

stru g g le and o f t h e k in d o f p la n e on w hich i t is fought o u t.

K arely if e v e r does he r e f e r to the c o n flict o f th e in d iv id u a l

w ith h im s e lf, though th e in n er ten sio n apparent i n many o f

H e b b e l ’s t r a g i c heroes proves th a t he d i d in f a c t a t t a c h much

im p o rtan c e to it. Y e t s u c h t e n s i o n was b u t the n e c e s s a ry r e ­

su lt o f t h e s e more f a r - r e a c h i n g c o n f l i c t s i n w h ic h t h e i n d i -
*>
v i d u s l b e c o m e s i n v o l v e d on e v e r y l e v e l o f h i s e x i s t e n c e ; a s

I , ’ GS V n . 172. - 2. W XI p . 44.

\ " * ^ ^ '
 - 39 -

m a n o r woman, as a momber o f h i s or her p articu lar com m unity o r

race, as a part o f hum anity i t s e l f (l). The p r o j e c t i o n o f th e

trag io c o n flict in to th e h ig h e s t sp h ere o f l i f e is a recurrent

featu re in a l l H ebbel*s d e lib eratio n s upon t r a g e d y , and form s

a very s trik in g c o n tra st to L u d w i g t h e o r y , w hich s e e s in such

an a p p ro a c h t h e m ind o f t h e p h i l o s o p h e r r a t h e r than th a t o f th e

d ram a tist ( 2 )* B u t H e b b e l n e v e r doubted t h a t th e d j r a m a t i s t who

saw t h e trag ic hero as b u t one f a c t o r in a c o n flict o f m ore t h a n

personal sig n ifican ce co uld g iv e h i s plays the g r e a t e s t p o ssib le

d ram a tic ap p eal, and h e alw ays i n s i s t e d on t h e param ount im por­

tan ce o f th e in te n s ity w ith w hich t h i s co n flict is waged. The

m a n n e r i n w h i c h H e b b e l was i n t h e h a b i t o f fo rm u la tin g th e fac­

to rs of trag ic c o n f l i c t - m an a n d t h e d iv in e, th e in d iv id u a l and

th e sta te - ten d s in d e e d to o ver-em phasise i t s ab stract ity

and to take in su fficien t account o f th e v e ry r e a l clash o f per­

so n a litie s p r e s e n t i n such p lay s as J u d i t h . H ero d e r a n d Ma r i a m n e

o r D ie N i b e lu n g e n , w here w i l l m a tc h e s itse lf ag ain st w ill in a

fu rio u s c o n test to assert itse lf. At t h e same t i m e , how ever,

H e b b e l c l a i m e d an e q u a l i n t e n s i t y of co n flict for those o f h is

dram as w here th e trag ic h ero in e ao cu p ies a p o sitio n o f ap p aren t­

ly com plete p a s s i v i ty . Thus h e s a i d o f Agnes B e r n a u e r : " I h r

1 . C f.H eb b el* s c o n c e n tio n o f th e c o n f l i c t i n J u d i t h - T I I 1958,

3 A n r i l 1 8 4 o . - 2 . "Wenn p h i l o s o p h i s c h ( n a c h H e g e l ) i m m e r e i n e
h< 5 he re g e i s t i g e S t u f e d e s ^ T r a g i s c h e n g e f o r d e r t w i r d , s o s c h r e i -

s c h e n S k a l a schw% cher w i r d . . . - GS V _ n . 172

 - 4o -
S ch ick sal z r i g t , dass a u c h d i e h i os s e Sc?i8n V i e i t , d ie doch i h r e r

N atu r nach n ic h t zum H a n d e i n , g e s c h w e i g e z u e i n e m d i e N e m e s i s

au f r u f e n d e n H a n d e i n g e ] . a n g e n k a n n , also die ganz p a s s i v e h l o s s e

h rsch ein u n g a u f d er h8c h s te n Spi.tze ohne i r g e n d e in H in z u tre te n

des W illen s ein en t r a g i s ch en C o n f l i c t zu e r z e u g e n v e rra a g ” ( l ) .

T h e tw o p r o t a g o n i s t s ^ Agnes and H erzog ^ r n s t , f o r e a c h o f whom

Hehhel felt at d iffe re n t stag es an i n t e n s e in te re st, are n w e r

brought fa c e to face, and i t is clear th at, as th e p la y pro­

gressed, th e fu n dam ental i s s u e s in v o lv ed in th e co n flict w hich

had e n s u e d b e t w e e n them f o r c e d t h e m s e l v e s on H e b b e l ' s m in d w i t h

such urgency th a t t h e im m e d ia te human s t r u g g l e b e ca m e so m e w h a t

obscured. The q u a lity o f th e c o n flict i n w hich t h e sim p le b a r ­

b e r's d au g h ter f i n (is h e r s e l f i n v o l v e d c a n i n fact o n l y b e com­

prehended in i t s fu ll sig n ific an c e if raised to the in te lle c tu a l

lev el o f th e c lo sin g scen es, where t h e r i v a l claim s of in d iv i­

dual ^nd S t a t e are d eb ated w ith u n u su a l d e lib e r a te n e s s • Hebbel

h im self, how ever, saw n o t h i n g un d r a m a t i c i n th is a n d was con­

v in ced th a t the f u l l m eaning o f th e co n flict c o u ld be d eriv ed

ex clu siv ely fro m t h e human a p p e a l o f t h e ch aracters ( 2 ). As f o r

the n ice tie s of a th e o re tic a l d i s t i n c t i o n b etw een "ab so lu te"

and " p o s itiv e " rig h t ( 3 ) , H e b b e l was c o n s c i o u s of its irrelre-

vance for the d ram atist and d e t e r m i n e d t o leav e it to th e p hi­

losopher: "Ich glau b e, dass e s M o m e n te g i e b t , wo d a s p o s i t i v e

1 . L e t t e r t o Adolf P i c h l e r , 11 May 1 3 5 1 IV p . 29.

2 . C f . L e t t e r t o F r a n z S c h u m a n n , 21 J u n e 1 8 5 3 V p .lo 8
3 * C f . L e t t e r t o F r a n z D i n g e l s t e d t , 26 J a n . l 8 5 2 ; H r , . I V p . 3 5 o .
 — 41 **
K'*'cbt 7 i i . i r i i c k t r e t fïn m u s s ” , w rote to a frie n d in 1854j but

îBidded: N a ^ e l n Slfj m ich n i c h t i n d i e s e m eine W orte ; i c h b i n

n ich t d e r Mann d e r j ^ e f l e x i o n e n ; @er P h i l o s o n h J a c o b i d r G c k t

sich ein m al, w enn i c h m ic hX n i c h t irre, im A i i T ^ â l l v o r t r e f f l i o h

darfifler aus, u n d d e r Comment a r m e i n e s Gedankcns b i l d e t m ein Ge-

d ich t" (1 ).

SucVi a n a t t i t u d e vjas, a t 1 e o s t i n t h e o r y , fu lly in keeping

w i t h L u d w i g ’s c o n c e p t i o n o f dram a tic p r e s e n t a t i o n , "F&r d i e Ge-

sta ite n d e r t r a g i s c h e n KSmpfer” , h e w r o te o f t h o s e c ritic s

whose prim e c o n c e r n was t h e t h o u g h t c o n t e n t o f d r a m a , ”h a t t e n

sie k e in e n S inn. Ih n e n s c h ie n nun d ie H a u p ts a c h e d e r Kampf

d ieser w i r k l i c h e n o d e r v e r m e i n t l i c h e n B o r e c h t i g u n g en d e r P e r -

sonen, n ich t d e r Ksmpf d e r P e r s o n e n s e l b s t / i n denen s i e v iel-

mehr d ie an s i c h g le ic h g ü ltig e n T r^ger von je n e n sah e n ” ( 2 ).

But as far as the fundam ental q u ality of tra g ic co n flict is

concerned, the th eo ries o f H e b b el and L udw ig c o u l d n o t b e m ore

d iv erg e n t. For th e form er th e p rin cip le und erly in g a c o llisio n

b e t w e e n two f o r c e s i n them selv es eq u ally ju stifie d c o n stitu ted

a tru th o f w h i c h h e was f i m l y conv in ced , and whose p o t e n t i a ­

litie s for tra g e d y he f e l t u n ab le to ig n o re. "Das G u te s e l b s t " ,

he /iv ro te w hile s t i l l en g ag ed on J u d i t h , " k a n n F e i n d des Gut en

sein , d i e Hose kann d ie L i l i e v e rd r& ig e n w o lle n . B eid e s i n d

ex i s t e n zb e re c h t i g t , aber nur L ins h a t L x is te n z (3)» L u d w i g ,

1 . L e t t e r to F r i e d r i c h U e c h t r i t z , 1 4 D e c . 1 9 5 4 ; Br.,ZV p , 2o5
2 . GS V p. 420
3 . T : 1 1 8 2 3 , 7 Dec. 1 8 3 9
 - 42 - I
i

on th e o th e r hand, alw ays r e g a r d e d s n o h a t h e o r y w i t h profound r!

su sp ic io n , a n d thr^ f a c t t h a t he i d e n t i f i e d it w ith th e s o - c a l l e d 'j

T rag éd ie d e r ^leicV ien B e r e o h t ig n n g e n " s u g g e s t s th at he found

it d iffic u lt to d isso ciate it from t h e r e a l m o f p h ilo so p h y and

speculc?.tion ( l )# Thus h e w r o t e o f h i s co n tem n o rarv , w i t h whose

P refrce t o Ma r i a Ma; : d. a l en a and ”M e i n W ort ■fiber d a s Dr azna" h e

was fam iliar (2): "Hebbel th u t als D ra m atik er, daÿ das Drama

es w e s e n tlic h m it der p rak tisch en S e ite d e s Mens c h e n 7,11 thun

h a t, ganz v e rk e h r t, wenn e r das T r a g i s c h e in ein en t h e o r e t i -

schrn / J i d e r s p r u c h v e r l e g t ” (3 ) , a n d h e was c o n v i n c e d t h a t a

c la sh b e t w e e n two a p p a r e n t l y e cu a lly ju s tif ie d forces was o n l y

p o ssib le i f reso lv ed in to a c la s h b etw een r i v a l p assio n s, fin d -;

in g suprem e e x p re s s io n w ith in the t r a g i c hero h im s e lf (4 ). Even |

|;
50, h is b e lie f th at th e id e a o f "o b jectiv e" and " s u b j e c t i v e "

rig h t was n o t s o m e t h i n g a b s o l u t e , but ra th e r a d e l u s i o n on t h e

part o f th e c h a r a c t e r s , .s h o w s t h a t h e n e i t h e r accepted n o r, in ­

deed, fu lly un d ersto o d the is s u e i n v o l v e d i n H e b b e l Is t h e o r y .

T h is c o u ld h a r d ly be o th e rw is e i n view o f th e fact t h a t Lud­

w ig b e l i e v e d the t r a g i c hero to' be f u l l y aw are o f t h e su p erio - *1

rity o f t h e o p p o s in g power ev en w h i l s t actin g in c o n tra d ic tio n

1 . The te r m " B e r e c h t i , n i n g ” i s f r e q u e n t l y u s e d by H e g e l (v ^ e s p .
h i s V o r l e s u n ^ e n fiber d i e A s t h e t i k . e d .H . G .H otho , A b t . i l l p p . 5 5 5 , ,
f f . " a n d A b t. i p . 262, t o w h i c h L u d w i g h i m s e l f r e f e r s i n GS V
0 . 1 8 2 , I 8 6 0 - 6 S ) . A l t h o u g h H e b b e l ’s t h e o r y b e a r s m u ch r e s e m b l a n c e
t o t h a t o f H e g e l and h e h a d f o r so m e y e a r s b e e n f a m i l i a r w i t h
c e r t a i n a s n e c t s o f t h e l a t t e r ’s w o r k , i t was n o t u n t i l h e h a d

2 ! c f r ^ ^ p.360; 1851-55:-
4. C f . i b i d . p . 2 4 9 .
 ~ 43 "

to it, hr; l o t ' l l * c r i t i c i s r î d h i s own E r h f ^ r s t f o r n o t m a k i n g

it su ici^ n tly olfîar t h a t th<^ h e r o *s i d e a o f who.t h e f e e l s in-*

t.i.n c tiv e ly to be r i ^ h t on t h e one h a n d , and th e claim s o f con­

v e n tio n al ju stic e on t h e o t h e r , w ere from t h e v e r y b e g i n n i n g

m eant to c o n stitu te an u n e q u a l c o n t e s t , i n w hich t h e l a t t e r had

w ith o u t s h adoVi' o f d o u b t t h e ascendancy over th e form er. ^Der

trag isc h e H eld w -'iss, was e r s o i l , er th u t, was e r m a g ” ( l ) w a s ,

in fact, h u d w i g *s f o r m u l a f o r t h e trag ic co n flict - a fo rm u la

w hich he n e v e r t i r e d o f r e p e a t i n g i n one form o r an o th er, W ith

h is gaze firm ly f i x e d o n S h a k e s p e a r e , h e came t o s e e the essence

o f trag ed y in t h e h e r o ’s l o s s o f i n n e r harm ony, w h ic h clauses him

to set h is in d iv id u al a ctiin s, w ishes and y Y T :p ab ilities at va­

rian ce w ith th e g en eral s itu a tio n and t h e accepted duty w ith

w hich it o resen ts him . The l a c k o r e x c e s s o f o n e p a r t i c u l a r

q u a lity i n t h e h e ro he b e l i e v e d to be s u f f i c i e n t to b rin g about

/
th is t'^ n sio n jf a n d t h e s p e c t a t o r ’s s y m p a t h y - an im p o r ta n t facto r

i n L u d w i g ’s t h e o r y o f t r a g e d y - w ould be a ll the g reater i f he

w e re made t o f e e l ho w , b u t for th is one q u a lity , the c atastro p h e

m ig h t have b een av o id ed ( 2 ).

L udw ig th u s p laced the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y fo r th e trag ic co n flict

upon th e trag ic hero h im s e lf , and t r a c e d it to a flaw in h is in ­

d iv id u a l n a tu re . In h is own p l a y s it was i n fact th e m o tiv a tio n

1 .L e tte r to J u l i a n S chm idt, 1 4 Sep^- 1 8 5 8 : LS^ V I p , 418.

 - 44 -

o- t ). . t r c o n f l i c t w i t h w h i c h hir was p r i m a r i ] y c o n c e r n e d ,

I.ft lo n;^ o u c c f t s s i o n o f n l ^ n s for o, d r a m a s u c h as Per S rb—

— t ?r shovjs t h s . t , w hil.st t h e g e n e r a l n a tu re o f th e co n flict

w-to c . t a b l l s h e d <^t a c o m p a r a t i v e l y e a r l y late, th e causes

w elch Iftd t o it wftrft s u h j f t c t o d t o co n stan t changes - an

a n p r o a c h w hich c o n t r a s t s v e r y s t r i k i n g l y w ith t h a t adoptftd hy

H^bh'*'].^ who b f t l i f t v f t d c o n f l i c t t o hft a n a l m o s t in escap ab le con*

d itio n of life i t s f t l f and n o t b r o u g h t ab o u t by c e r t a i n w e ll-

d efin ed raialitifts of failin g s a p p e rta in in g to th e in d iv id u a l,

’Man m u s s im P r o m a d a s F a c t u m , w e l c h e s d e n t r a g i s c h e n Con—

flic t ftrsftugt, h in n f th m f tn , a u c h we nn fts i n r e i n z u fS llig e r

Gftst a l t a u ftritt, d e n n d a s F i g e n t h d m l l c h f t d e s Zu f a l l s lie g t

cben d a rin , dass er sich n ich t m o tiv ieren i S s s t , Pagegen

m uss in den C h a r a c te r en c in e h S h e re E x i s t c n z n o t h w e n d i g k e i t ,

a ls diftjftnigft z .B , w H re, dass das S tü c k n i c h t z u S t a n d s kom-

men k S n n t e , wenn s i f t n i c h t d i es ft o d e r j e n e E i g e n h e i t e n u n d

E ig e.n sch aftftn h S .tten , a u f g e z e i g t w e r d e n ” ( l )•

T h e s e w o r d s w e r e w r i t t e n w h i l s t H e b b e l was a t w o r k o n H e r o d e s

u n d M arim m ne, i n w hich t h e m u rd e r o f A r i s t o b 0 . 1 u s , t h o u g h p r o ­

v id in g the in itia l im petus to th e c la s h betw een H erodes and

Mar ia m n e , is t h e sy m p t o m r a t h e r than th e cause o f a co n flict

w hich is in f a c t u n av o id ab le i n view o f t h e in escap ab le con­

d itio n s o f H erodes* v e ry b e in g . H is p o sitio n in th e w o rld and

th e circu m stan ces i n w h ich h e f i n d s h i m s e l f h a v e made h im

w hat he i s , b u t when h e a s s e r t s th is h is p e rso n ality , he en­

co u n ters th e o p p o sitio n , not only o f o th ei ep u ally stro n g

1^ T III 4o51, 10 M arch 1 8 4 7 .

 - 45 -
p e rso n a litie s, "but o f a w o r l d w h i c h , though i t h a s made him

what he i s , has come t o a c c e p t new s t a n d a r d s and t h u s makes de­

mands u pon h i n w hich a re beyond h i s co m prehension* It is by

w h 'J : s h e is and b e l i e v e s , n o t by what s h e does th at a ch aracter

such a s iU'iodopc i s i n H e b b e l ’s e y e s c ap ab le o f en g en d erin g

trag ic c o n f lic t ; her very adherence, lik e th at o f G - e n o veva o r

] \ , l a r i a m n e , t o h e r own s t r i c t m o r a l c o d e o f b e h a v i o u r is o f such

a h ig h o u ality th at c o n flict w ith th e o rd in a ry w orld around h e r

seem s v i r t u a l l y u n av o id ab le.

T his view o f th e trag ic h^ro as i n v o l v e d i n a co n flict not

n e c e ssa rily of h is own m a k i n g b e a r s o u t what H e b b e l h a d a l r e a d y

f o r m u l a t e d i n t h e o p e n i n g p a g e s o f " M e i n W o rt f i b e r das D i 's in a " ,

T h e r e h e e x p r e s s e d a b e l i e f from w h ic h , though i t became d e ep e n ­

ed by e x p e rie n c e a n d acq>Jiired f o r H e b b e l. h i m s e l f i n c r e a s i n g

sig n ific an c e, he n ev er d e p a rte d : th e d ram atist, he d eclared ,

s h o u ld c o n ce rn h im s e lf not w ith th e p articu lar "d ire c tio n ",

rig h t o r w rong, i n w hich t h e t r a g i c hero ex erts h is w ill, but

w ith th e very fact of th is ex ertio n , ex p re ssin g itse lf in the

n a tu ra l a s s e rtio n o f h is in d iv id u a lity (. ). F o r L udw ig t h i s

w ould have m eant n o th in g l e s s th an th e com plete r e v e r s a l of

t h e m ost s a c r e d r u l e s o f trag ed y : "Der W i l l e s e l b s t " , he de­

c la red , "d er s i t t l i c h e r ' N atur i s t , d a r f im T r a u e r s p i e l e n ich t

b eim H e ld e n P l a t z h a b e n , so n s t w ird d ie g e g en ste h en d e M acht,

1. C f. " M e i n Wort f i b e r d a s Drama", 1843, 2 ^ I p. 4

 - 45 -

v f T if - V l .l t, zur u n s ittlic h e n , und das ( i a n z c m in S i e g d e s

U n s i t t l i e h e n fDier d a s S i t t i i c h e " (l). O nly i n so as i t is

id en tified w ith th e trag ic h e r o *s c o n c e p t i o n o f h i s d.nty, and

th u s in f--.ct c o n s t i t u t e s th e opposing fo rc e to h is in d iv id u a l

em o tio n .-» , c a n t h e hu m an w i l l p l a y any e f f e c t i v e part in th e

dram a, i ' o r him t h e c o n d itio n o f tr a g ic g u ilt was Q uite c l e a r l y

a co n flict b e t w e e n t h e h e r o ’s m o r a l o b l i g a t i o n and h ' s p e r s o n a l

d eclin es, and j.n o r d e r th at th is m ight m a n i f e s t i t s e l f in its

m ost pow erful form , it must i n e v i t a b l y r e s o l v e i t s e l f in to a

particu lar' a c t i o n o f re c o 'g n is a b ly w ro n g fu l co n seo ia en c es, actu-e.

- t ^ d n o t by th e w i l l but by p a s s io n .

"W ir s e h en e i n e n M h c h tig e n , die i n d i v i d u e l l e L e id ^ n s c h a f t^

gegen das a llg e m e in anerkannt M h ch tig ere s ic h erheben, des-

3 en M acht e r k e n n t , und an d e r e r zu G runde g e h t ; e r g e h t

also aus erhebung zu G ru n d e , i n b e w u - s s t e n W u g n is - ein e

ù ig en schaft dor L e i d e n s c h a f t . . .D i e s M ü c h t i g e r e m uss u n s

sic h tb a r als solches d n rg estellt w erden, sei es nun e i n

B e s t e h e n d e s , e in e N a tu r - o d e r s i t t l i c h e M acht - w ie das G e-

w i s s e n im M a c b e t h - nur n i c h t um gekehrt" (2).

B ut w h e th e r by t h e ex ertio n of th e in d iv id u a l w ill or o f a

p a rticu la r passion^ the t r a g i c hero was b y H e b b e l and Ludw ig

alik e c o n c e i v e d as t r a n s g r e s s i n g t h e n o rm o f l i f e . Thus l o n g

1 . GS V n . 1 7 4
2 . i b i d . p . 1 5 9 . O f . L u d w i g ’s n o t e t o P e r E n g e l v o n A u g s b u r g ;
"Zwei L e n s c h e n von g e w a l.tig e r L ie b e e r f a s s t , s o d a s s s i e n a c h
n i c h t s f r a g e n , a u c h n i c h t s h 8r e n u n d s i c h g e g e n d e n # e l t w i l l e n
d u r c h s e t z e n w o l l e n o d e r a n ihm s c h e i t e r n " . C i t e d b v E r i c h
S c h m i d t , GS IV 0 . 1 4 , f r o m a n u n p u b l i s h e d P lan h eft of 1854.
 - 47 -
be foi* '* h e came t o w rite h is first t r a g e d y H e b h e l ’s im ag in atio n !

Viad b e e n f i r e d b y t h e c h a r a c t e r o f N apoleon, whose t r a g i c g u ilt i

f o r him ^lay n o t in any e v i l m o tiv e a ttac h in g to h i s g ran d io se

aim s, but in the so le fact o f ?iis e x c e s s i v e s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e ,

w hich g a v e him u n d u e i n d e p e n d e n c e from t h e g e n e r a l law s s t i l l

b i n d i n g u p o n him as an i n d i v i d u a l (l). Â3 e a r l y a s 1 S 5 3 h e wa s

co n v in ced th at it was no l o n g e r t h e in d iv id u a l, but th e mass

w^iicb was o f p a r a m o u n t i m p o r t a n c e and t h a t anyone a s s e r t i n g h i s

p e rso n a lity in a n y way a b o v e t h e accepted sta n d a rd s o f the

com m unity, though in t h i s he o n ly fo llo w e d h i s inV nrn u r g e for

self-d efen ce and 5 e l f - p r é s e r v â t io n , was in cu rrin g trag ic g u ilt.

"Wos u d i e s e Ü b e r h e b u n g ? " H e b b e l h i m s e l f was t e m p t e d t o ask.

"Warum d i e s e r F l u c h d e r K r a f t ? " ( 2 ), b u t alth o u g h th e tru th was

h ard to accept and. i t was som e t i m e f b e f o r e h e fu lly reco n ciled

h i m s e l f to it, its im p lica tio n s w ere c l e a r t o him from t h e be­

g in n in g : "Bass das L e b e n a l s V e r e i n z e l u n g , d ie n i c h t M aass zu

h a l t en w e i s s , d ie S chuld n ic h t b lo s s z u f& lig erzeu g t, sondern

sie n o thw endig und w e s e n tlic h m it e in sc h lie sst und b e d i n g t " (3 ) .

These w o rd s w e re w r i t t e n when t h e fate of h is own J u d i t h was -3:6 .

s till fresh i n H e b b e l *s m i n d - J u d i t h who, b y t h e fact th at she

h a d a l l o w e d h e r s e l f t o become an i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e d iv in e pur-

l . C f . T I I 0I 2 , 6 M arch 1838
2 oT I I 2 5 7 8 , 29 J u l y 1 8 4 2
3o " M e i n Wort f i b e r d a s B r a m a " , 1843, I ^1 p . 4
 — 48 —

tz r . n s g r r n d beyond th e bounds of her own s e x ond t h u s

beorne g u ilty in the v e ry oct o f o b e d i e n c e « The f a t e of 0. I I

Ileb b elfo ch aracters is g o v e rn e d by t h i s p rin cip le : Ju d ith ,

nd K1 a r a , H erodes e n d K e n d a u l e s , a], 1 , w i 1 1 i . n g l y o r u n w i t t i n g -

jj'erve t h e ends o f a h i g h e r p u r p o s e , and. t h o u g h t h e y r r a y

act trorn t h e l o f t i e s t o f m o tiv e s, the fact th at they are in ­

d iv id u als b o u n d by n a t u r e and c i r c u n s t a : i c e m a k e s t h e en te r­

p rise d e te rio ra te under t h e i r v ery hands (l).

i^^or L u d w i g t h e p r o b l e m was less complex* The h e r o e s o f h is

ow n p l a y s b e c o m e g u i l t y o f '^ resu m p tio n , not as t h e chosen de­

p u ties of the d eity , but because, lik e C rom w ell, L e a o r M a r-

dochai (2 ), th e y w ro n g fu lly im agine th e m se lv e s to be such and

act in accordance w ith a f a l s e a nd e x a g g e r a t e d s e n s e of th eir

own i m p o r t a n c e . "Er kann s i c h n i c h t b e s c h e i d e n " p ro v id ed th e

b asis f o r man y o f L u d w i g ’s e o x l i e r co n cep tio n s o f th e tr-g ic

h ero, c o n ta in in g the g erm f o r h i s later t h e o r y , d e v e l o p e d i.n

c o n ju n c tio n w ith the s tu d y o f S h a k e s p e a r e a n dram a, of trag ic

g u tlt as e s s e n t i a l l y a d ep artu re from t h e norm (3 ). No p a r t

o f h is th eo ry o f tragedy i s , i n d e e d , m ore f i r m l y r o o t e d i n

h is own d r a m a ti c p r a c t i c e th an th is view o f t r a g i c g u ilt. Thus

-s early as 1846 Ludw ig h a d c o n c e iv e d o f B e r n d t , t h e h e r o of

l . ” Der M en sch ", H eb bel w ro te upon h i s co m p letio n o f J u d i t h .

"wenn e r s i c h auch i n d e r h e i l i g s t e n B e g e i s t e r u n g d e r G o t t h e i t
zum O n f e r w e i h t , ist n i e e i n gang r e i n e s O p f e r , d i e Sfind.enge-
b u r t b e d i n g t den S d n d e n to d " - T I I 1 9 5 3 , 3 A p r i l 1 9 4 o - 2. "Nnd
d e n n o c h z w in g t es i h n und t r e i b i f ^ e s i h n , w e l h a l b e r s i c h a l s
e i n W e r k z e u g d e r V o r s e h u n g a n s " ( n o t e t o Cro m w e l l c i t e d b y
L / o n M is . o n . c i t . I n . 2 8 7 > f r o m an u n p u b l i s h e d " P l a n h e f t en-
+ w ” C r o m w e l l , o n w h i c h L u d w i g was w o r k i n g d u r i n g
185o ) - # b e r m & t i g b i s z u m T r e v e l " (n o te to t h e f i r s t s k e t c h to
 - 49 -
P ic W iljlsnh{itzen, v.b a m?ji who c o n s i d e r s h i m s e l f e x e m p t from

th e taw s o f hum anity (l), and he alw ays m a i n t a i n e d t h a t a larg e

part o f t h e - E r h f S r s t e r Vs t r a g i c g u i ] . t was h i s iso latio n from !

th e o r d i n a r y w orld (2), When h e came t o analyse th e case for

such inw ard, and o u t w a r d i s o l a t i o n , h e saw i t once ag ain in

the ex isten ce o f one p re d o m in a n t c e s s i o n w hich t h e h e r o h a d

allo w ed to grov; t o an a b n o rm al d e g r e e an d f o r w hose c o n s e ­

quences he is th erefo re f u lly resp o n sib le* VAg M c t r t i n i n Das

F r & u le in von S g u d e ri says to G a r d i l l a c - a ch aracter who i n

fact a p p e a r s much l e s s free to determ in e h is own a c t i o n t h a n

L u d w i g ’s o t h e r h e r o e s -

D e r b f l s e K e im l i o g t freilic h in uns a lien .

Do c h u n s r e S c h u l d i s t ’s , ûberw llchst er uns. (3 )#

In a ll o th er a s p e c t s , Ludwig l a t e r in sisted , th e trag ic hero

sh o u ld approxim ate a s much a s p o s s i b l e to th e average, to th e

" e v e ry d a y o f hum anity" ( 4 ), r e v e a l i n g his. i s o l a t i o n , not as

a g iv en a ttrib u te of h is ch aracter, b u t o n l y when h i s excess­

iv e p a ssio n m an ifests i t s e l f in the w orld o f a c t i v i t y . "In

d e r T h at s a g t / e r s i c h von d e r O e m e in s c h a f l o s . * . S c h u l d fo% t

aus i n n e r e r I s o lio r u n g und i h r e H e r a u s s te llu n g - als T hatsa ­

che - in d ie H an d lu n g sw elt i s t d e r B eginn v f i l l i g e r Iso lieru n g

( 5 ).
1 . "S ein e tr a g i s c h e Sdnde, dass er sic h der M enschheit ftber-
h e b t " - SW V I p . ^ 3 1 -
2 . C f . GS“ V p . 4 2 2 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5
3 . Act I I s c . v i i
4 . GrS V. p. 5 2 0 , 1 8 6 1 - 6 5
5. i b i d . p . 282,1860-65
 - 5o -

In th is f ï nphns J . s u p o n a c t i o n l i e s an e s s e n t i a l rh' .f-Terence

■between Hei'^h -1 *3 pnfl l o u i w l g \s c o r o e n t i o n o T t h e tragic hero,

” Iin A n f r . n p e d e s j 3 r " ’^ a s ” , L u d w i g w r o t e i n a conrnarativelg e a rly

pass are on t r o r i o in e v it ahil.itp, "fordert der C horahter d u r eh

ein r om isses T h u n o d e r U n t e r l a s s e n d a s S c h i c k s a], h e r a u s , e r

tbut d e n e r s t on h t os s , v o n d a a n n u s s er s ic h w e h r e n "b i s sun

U nt-rgrnpe - n de n n a t d r l i c h o n , n o tw ruigen Folgen s e i n e r That"

(1 ) 0 G u i l t ; Vie n a i n t ^ i n e d , tViou^h i n large n e a s u r e cond i t ion-

ed h y t h e c h a r a c t e r Is m m n a t u r e , can only he t r a n s l a t e d in to
troly d r an a t i c t ='rns i f it nan i f a s t s itself in outward a c tio n

of a vivid and i n m e d i a t e l y c o m o r a h e n s i h l e n a t u r e ( 2 ) . Ma n y o f

L u d w i g ’s p r e l . i n i n a r y s t u d i e s t o Viis own plays s h o w how h e was

constantly at pains to dotcrnine the p r e c i s e manner i n which

his c h a r a c t e r s , h;' t h e i r own s e l . f - w i l l e d actions, produce a

reaction which oroves t h e i r undoing. H a v i n g o n c e g i v e n way

to Viis own d o m i n a n t im pulses, the tragic hero is continually^

fo rce d to act, w hilst at t h e s a me t i m e s u f f e r i n g from t h e oon-

Scfuences o f Viis a c t i o n s , w h e r e b y t h e i n t e r e s t becomes c e n t r e d

on a c o n s t a n t and c a r e f u l l y b a la n c e d i n t e r - p l a y b etw een a c t i n g

and s u f f e r i n g (5)« "Lie G lie d e r dessK ausalnexus mûssen L e id e n

u n d H a n d e l n zugleicVi s e i n , u n d wwar s o , dass im e r s t e n d a s 1

L eiden, indem es H a n d e l n w i r d , die Schuld g e b i e r t , und d ie

l . G S V p .4 1 7 ,1 8 4 C h -5 1 . - 2, i b i d . p . l 9 o ; 1 8 5 1 - 5 9 : " L i e S c h u l d
m S g l i c h s t scVilank g em a c h t und i n e i n e - b e s t i m m t e - T h a t g e -
k l e i d e t d ’ C f , a l s o i b i d . p p. 1 2 5 . 1 9 5 > 4 4 2 , - 5» Of S h a k e s p e a r e s
Homeo u n d J u l i e t h e w r i t e s ; " S l e l e i d e n das S u s s c r â t e n u r d u r oh
iVir e i g n e s H a n d e l n , auch t r i t t d i e s e s d u r c h _ d a s g a n z e S t r l c k
h i c h t a l s g e w a l t s a m e s , s o n d e r n mehr i n d e r Form des L e i d e n s ,
a l s o s e l b s t d i e S c h u l d M i t l e i d e r r e g e n d a u f " - i b i d o p . 189%
1851-55 e
 - 51 -

ans h an(3elnd d i a S c h u l d v e r g r ^ s ,s e r n d f o r t s e t -
a on” ( l ) . NotViinj: nond.d h ave h c c n f u r t h e r from ludvu.g Is i n -
t e n t i n n s t h a n t o p o r t r a y d-'^novova, as H .^b'nl h a d houo ^ 11 d-

m \ \ s s i j p a s s i v ” (2 )^ i.e .w ith o u t any a c t i v e p r o v o c a t i o n o f g u i . l t

on t h e c o n t r a r y , hy e x p l o i t i n g t h e i d o a n f G c n o v e v a /s l o v e f o r
CtqI o , o n l y ' ü m l y h i n t e d - t i n T i e c h ’s v e r s i o n o f t h e same s u h -

jo -t ( f ) , he hnr g u ilt the "c^.usa movens" o f t h e w hole

(4). ” Is (l-:o;f j,m L e i d o n d e n ” , l u d w ir w r o t e - ^ ith e r d u r i n g o r

i m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r h i s work on t h i s play, ’’n i c h t h l o s s die go-

m a r t a r t e , h i l f l n . s e S i n n l i ^ h k e i t e r s c h a i n e n , das l e i don muss

m ^ g l i c h s t i n Frrm e i n es H a n d e l n c r s c h e i n e n , w ie i n d e r S c h u l d

d as H u d el n i n Form e i n e s l e i d o n s ” ( 5 ) .

On e x a m i n i n g t h e e a r l i e s t o f H e h h o l i s t h e o r e t i c a l w r i t i n g s
from t h i s p o i n t o f v i e w , one i s made aware o f a v e r y d e f i n i t e

o h ift o f e m p h a s i s . Thus i n an e s s a y o f 1355 H o h h e l d e f i n e d ,

t r a g e d y a.s ”S c h i l d e r u n g j d e s Gedan n n s , d e r T hat w e r d e n w i l l
d urch H andeln oder lu ld e n " (o), and by p o i n t i n g t o K l e i s t ’s
P r i n z F r i o i c h v o n Homburg s u g g e s t e d t h a t t o i n v e s t t h e t r a ­
g i c h e r o w i t h one d o m in a n t t h o u g h t o r i d e a w hich w ould i n f o r m
h i s w h o l e p e r s o n a l i t y was t h e f i r s t and most o b v i o u s r e o i j i s i t e *

o f dromao Y e a r s l a t e r H e b b e l t e s t i f i e d from h i s wwn e x p e r i e n c e

! • GS V p . 5o8, 1 3 6 1 - 6 5 " - 2. l e t t e r t o F r a n z l i n g e l s t e d t ,
14 J u n e 1 3 5 8 ; VI p. 143 : "G enoveva s e l b s t , an s i c h n i c h t
e b e n Hjrmlich a u s g e s t a t t e t , h a t man do ch m i t K e c h t zu b i l d m ”—
s s i g p a s s i v g e f u n d e n . Das k o m i t e f r e i l i c h , b e i m e i n e r A b s i c h t
n i c h t " a n^ d e r s s e i n , a b e r m es T . f r a g t sM i c« h , r« ob/ich d i e s e A b s i c h t hor
^ /- i ____ '_____ • _ ^ 1-..

c lU ls lib id .llh .- K8 r n e r uïïïï H r l n r l c É v o n

K l e i s t " , 1 8 3 5 , I IX p . 39
 - ^2 -

to the in n o ssih ii.ity of creatin g trag ic characterF j w ith o u t su c h

•'^n i l o a , anH al t h o u g h i n h i s later th eo ries th is nay not alw ays

h e l^from o h i l o s o n h i c a l connot at io n s , th e n .n lo rly in g y r i n c i p l c /

i->, indeed, not d issim ila r f r o m L u d w i g ’s c o n v i c t i o n th at th e

id ea of a dram a m ust r e s i d e in and h e i d e n t i f i e d w i t h th e cha­

racter of th e hero, w hich, in p r a c tic e , o ften m an ifests i t Èe l f

in a so -c al.lo d id ee fix e (l). B ut w h e r e .a s L u d w i g h o l i o v e d t h a t

th is id ea cou ld only fin d ex p ressio n in actio n , H ehhel, hy v i r ­

tu ally e ou a t i n g a c tiv ity and p a s s i v i t y , set the ouest ion o f

trag ic g u ilt in an e n t i r e l y new p e r s p e c t i v e . "Durch D u ld e n T hun:

Idee des W eihe s ", he had n o te d in h is d i a r y o f 1859 ( ^ ) , thus

m aking i t cle ar t h a t when he c a u s e d J u d i t h to s a y : " D e r V/eg z u

m einer That geht durch d i e S i i n d e " , h e was i n f a c t concerned,

n o t 3 0 m u ch w i t h h e r dedd, h u t w 'th th e q u a li t y o f h e r g u ilt®

T his co n sisted in the in e v ita b le ten d en cy o f th e in d iv id u a l to

iso latio n , w hether m a n ife s te d i n h is actio n s or in h is very

ex iste n ce , and i r r e s p e c t i v e o f what H eb b el c a l l e d t h e "causa

prim a" (5K C h aracters such as Agnes o r R hodope a r e t h e r e f o r e

no l e s s in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h H e b b e l ’s c o n c e p t i o n o f t r a g i c g u ilt

t h a n C olo or H erodes, whose o v e n f e e n i n g p a s s i o n s reveal them ­

selv es i n some p a r t i c u l . a r and c l e a r l y m o tiv a te d actio n . For by

v irtu e of th e ir 's e x , the " a c tio n s " of th èse tra g ic h ero in es may

loCfoSW VI p . 2 5 5 , w h e r e L u d w ig s p e a k s o f r i g h t as "die fix e Idee

d e s S r b f S r s t e r s ' l - 2 , T 1 1 5 1 6 , 24 F e b . 1859*
5 . " M e i n V\fort û b e r d a s D r a m a " , 1 8 4 5 , W %I p . 5 1
 - 53 -
t ak(? t h r form o f o o s a i v e s u r r s n d f ^ r , but th is does n o t absolve

them from £ ; n i l t , sin ce acquiescence is eq u ally th e ex n rcssio n of

th e in d iv id u a l p e rso n ality , and i s as t h e im m e d ia te co n seq ien -

ces of in d iv id u atio n . " Dios o S c h u l d i s t ein e u ra n f ^ n p lic h e ” ,

Hebbel. w o t e in th is c o n n ectio n , " v o n dem B e g r i f f d e s M ens c h o n

n ich t z u t r e n n e n d e u n d kaum i n s e i n B em isstsein f a lle n d e , sie

i s t m it dem L c b e n s e l b s t ge :et z t " ( 1 ). T his bein g s n , g u i1 1 in

H e b b e l Vs e y e s was an a m o ra l c o n d i t i o n , to ta l ly d istin c t from

th e C h ristia n co n cep tio n o f ) s i n ( 2 ), i n c u r r e d by a l l alik e,

wh e t h e r th e y be aw are o f i t or n o t. Thus t o A gnes* q u estio n a,s

to what s h e h a s done t o deserve h e r crttel fa te F reisin g rep lies:

D ie O rd n u n g der '.'Veit g e s t f l r t , V a t e r u n d S o h n e n t z w e i t , dem

V olk s e in e n F d r s te n e n tf r e m d e t , e in e n Z ustand h e r b e i g e f ü lir t,

in dem n i c h t m e h r n a c h S c h u l d u n d U n s c h u l d , nur noch nach U r-

s a c h * u n d W irkung g e f r a g t w erd en kann! ( 3 )

F o r Ludvjig s u c h an a t t i t u d e was v j h o l l y u n t e n a b l e , bo th f r o m a.

m oral and from a d ram atic p o in t o f view . " S o n s t v e r l a n g t e man,

h e w r o t e b e t w e e n 1861 a n d 1 8 6 ? , "dass der t r a g i s c h e H eld

den s i n n l i c h e n S i n d n u c k ( i b e r w S l t i g e n d raachen m fis s te , jetzt ge-

nfigt, dass d ie n e fle x io n n ach w eist, e r h a b e d i e ph i l o s o p h i s c h e n

F r f o r de m i s s e zum t r a g i s c h e n H e l d e n ; s o n s t m u s s t e s e i n e S c h u l d

sin n lic h in d i e Augen f a l l e n . . . J e t z t genftgt n a c h z u w e l s e n , dass

er w irk lich -^in e S c h u l d h a b e , v ielleich t e in u n b ew u sstc o d e r un­

w i l l lo*lrl i c h e , und d esh alb n ic h t ohne Grund s e i , L e i d e n zu emp-

fin d en , also auch wohi w elche em pfinde" (4)#

1 . " M e i n W o rt ( \ b e r das D r a m a " , 1 8 4 3 , W p. 3 1 . - 2 . i b i d * p . 3 o . -

3#Agnes B e r n a u e r , Act V . s t c . i i . - 4. GS V pp. 496 f .
 - 54 -
To >1 n n m -n rj-r co n ce p tio n o f nornl it]/ v i r tu e and g u il t \^je-re

o f n e o s s s i t y m utuall^^ e x c l u s i v e , and th e t r a g i c h e r o who i s made^,

to suffer aith o n t o h v i o u s m i s deni e a n o u r c a n o n l y "he o f f e n s i v e .

Thus h i s c o in ion o f - p i ay su c h a s H e h h e l Va Ay n e s B e r n a u e r can ,

rea d ily he deduced from a c ritic ism a l r e a d y made h y h i m ah o u t |

v o n X * J r r i n g *s p i " y o n t h e s a m e s u b j e c t : ”Es i s t n ich t ein m al

Spur ein e s F r-n/olns in h e id e r L ich e, sie sin d sehr tu g c n d h a ft"

(1 ) 0 13e m i t y , h e n a i n t o - i n e d , w ith a g lance a t S c h i l l e r ’s Max

" n d T'-' opl ay c a n h e allow ed t o p e r i s h -only i f it cont ain s g u ilt

of a real and p o s i t i v e kin d , i n c u r r e d hy th e a ctiv e tran sg res- |

3 i o n o*^ t h e h e r o or h ero in e, and t h e r e f o r e w orthy o f p u n ish m en t |

(2 ). In h is own e a r l i e r p lay s, such as Die H e c h t e des H e rz e n s li

a n d D ^ r S n y e l v o n A n g g h u r m , Ludwj.g h i m s e l f h a d c r e a t e d c h a r a c ­

ters who s u c c u m h s o l e l y to th e v ic e s and i n t r i g u e s of o th ers, •

e x •ten r e s s i n a h i s t h e o r y o f t r a g e d vV i n
U
th e f o l l o w i n g^te> w o r d s : j
.I

I hr wag t e n ich t der Srde L u st zu nshien, ,|

Drum t r a t der Schm erz, der h e il* g e r ist, zu i h r , i

Urn i h r zu d i e n e n , urn s i e zu v e rk l& ren ,. ;!

"Ich m ein: d as E d l e muss u n t e r g e h e n , n ich t, w eil das L ehen s e i n

F e in d i s t , so n d ern w eil d a s L e h e n s e i n n i c h t w e r t h i s t " (3 ) . But ^

e v e n b e f o r e h e cam e t o occupy h im s e lf s e r i o u s l y w ith S hak esp eare

h is d ram atic in stin c t h a d t a u g h t him t h e i m p o r t a n c e of a ju st

p r o p o r t i o n betw een punishm ent and th e activ e p ro v o catio n o f

1 . ^ V p . 343, 1855-56
2% i b i d o ^ / . p . 5 4 o , 1 3 6 1 - 6 5 ; c f . a l s o i b i d . P o 5 4 .
3 o L e t t e r t o E d u a r d D e v r i . e n t , 5 D ev. 1 3 4 6 ; ^ V I p . 3 4 7 .
 - 55 - :

'in a '13 e n r l y as 184 7 h e w r o t e o f h i s E rb fg i's te r : |

file t r o . ^ i s o h e I r o n i e ih n , dor s i c h horausnim m t zn. g l . a u - ,

hon, or s - i h o s t i m m t , aus dor P - r th o i h e r a u s , s ic h zirm h i c h t o r

auC auw -rfon, b o i m W o r t o njjnmt u n d ihm d a s S t r a f r o c h t w irk lich 3

zu d b o rg o b o n s c h c i n t - nm os u n w i s s o n d a n s i c h so lb st zu v e i l - ;

ziohon, j.n d o r s o l b o n T h a t , in flor V c r b r c c h o n u n d S t r a f e zusajn- |

mon TUo I t " ( l ). T h is b e l i e f , th at the nor fo o t tr a g e d y coulb

o n l y b e c r - a t ' ^ d b y m a k i n g t h e h e r o ’s g u i l t ^ rise n e ce ssa rily

out of h is actio n s and b y y r e s a n t i n g h i s u l.tim ate d estru ctio n

as t h e i ' c v i t a b l e outcom e o f h is g u ilt, su p p o rted as i t was b y !

the exam ple o f S h a k e s p e a r e , was t o c o l o u r L u d w i g ’s v i e w o f a ll j

dram a, w hetlier an cien t o r m odern. Thus h e w r o t e o f S n h p o c l e s ^

trag ed y A n tip o n e:

"Ohne a llés W u n d er f o l g t d i e S t r a To n i c h t a ll e in a u f d ie

S chuld, K reon, dor t r a g i s c h e H old, t S t et im H i g e n s i n n e d ie

G -'^liobte s e i n e s Sohnes ; d ie s e r , da e r s i e \ n i c h t r o t t e n ;

kann, stirb t ih r n a c h : ih m d i e M u t t e r , und so h a t der H eld ;

sich o ci.b st g e s t r a f t " ( 2 ). '

N othing c o u ld be m ore c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f H e b b e l ’s t h e o r y o f

t t ag ic "u ilt t h an" h i s approach to

"L, .L
t h e same t r a g e d v .
W< U
F o r him

th e ent.ire s ig n i f ic a n c e o f t h i s " .I n c o m p a r a b le " work, was t o be j

il
found i n th e fig u re o f A ntigone h e r s e l f , who, t o r n betw een h e r :

d u t y t o w a r d s h e r b r o t h e r and h e r d u t y t o w a r d s t h e g o d s , h a s t o

p erish , a lth o u g h , i n H e b b e l ’s v i e w , she is g u ilty o f no o t h e r '

l o L e t t e r t o K a r l G u tz k o w ,1 5 M arch 1 8 4 7 ;B r i e f e . e d . c i t . p p . 2 1 6 f ; |
c f . t h e F r b f g r s t e r ’s words a t t h e end o f t h e f i n a l v e r s i o n : " I c h ,
wo1 1 t e r i c h t e r ^ u n d - h a b e m ic h s e l b s t g e r i c h t e t . V e r b r e c h e n u n d |
S t r a f e m i t e i n s " —A ct ^7 s c o v i i i . - ^ ^ P . 415; 134o—51* '
 - ^

o f F c n c r tv. on t \ ' i t of v io la tin g a law w hich in in its o l.f n n to n -

•■1)1.» ( l ) . Yet o wan s o o o n v i n c o f t^-o n e c e s s i t y for her l o "th

t h a t V) o T n o lc ll. c l tl'ic f e t e of h is own A y n ^ - 3 an o r — t h a t

"/m tijo n c o f m odern tim e s " (2 ) - ungn i t , m c.hin y h e r "th e p u rest’

v ictim ever s a c r i f i c e l in th e course e ll c en tu rie s to th e j

c l aim s of N ecessity " ( f ) . Tv. e re was no tv, i n g arb itrcx y in h is I

c o n c e p t i o n o f e v e n t h e mo- t p assiv e of h is h ero in es, f o r h e was |

as concerned as L u d w ig -A)out w h a t h e c a l l e d th e id en tity l e t -

I

w e e n f 1 .1 e an d c h a r a c t e r . Th u s d u rin g h is w ork o n Hcrod.es and '

M ariam ne he w ro t^ to a frien d : "Dcnke D ir C h a r a k t E r e , d ie A llé

^ e c h t hah en, d ie nirgcncis i n ’s H ^ s e a u s 1 a u f en u n d d e r e n S c h i c k - ^

sal d a r AUS h e r v o r g e h t , dass sie eh a n d i e s e M c n s c h e n s i n d und

k o in e andere, d e r en S c h i c k s a l aher dennoch e in fru ch th ares is t"

I
( 4 ). T his is fu lly in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h H e h h e l ’s v i e w s on t h e m is ­

c o n c e p t i o n o f h u m a n f r e e d o m , . a n d tVie p e c u l i a r p u ality o f h is

th eo ry o f trag ed y l ie s p rec ise ly in th e fact th at, d eterm in ed

as t h e trag ic hero is b o th by h i s own n a t u r e and th e circum ­

stan ces in w hich h e fin d s h im self, he is y e t made r e s p o n s i b l e

f o r what he h as done and c a u s e d ^ suffer the consequences «

Th e q u e s tio n o f punishm ent does n o t arise in th is co n n ectio n ,

nor does t h a t o f a p ro p o rtio n in g of it according to t h e m agni­

tu d e o f tVie h e r o ’s g u i l t such as L udw ig h a d o b s e r v e d i n Sv.ake-

^p earean trag ed y (5) : H ebbel speaks r a t h e r o f atonem ent and sa­

l e C f . " M e i n W o rt f l b e r d a s D r a m a " , ! 8 4 3 , E p p .3 o f.
2 . L e t t e r t o F r a n z D i n g e l s t e d t , 2b J a n , 1 8 5 2 ; B r . I V p . 3 5 o -
3 . C f. A g n e s B e r n a u e r e A c t V scc. X .
4 . L e ' t t e r t o H d u a r d B a n i n s k i , 1 4 A u g . l 8 4 S ; B r . IV p . 1 2 9
5 . C f . (JS V p. l o 5 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5
 - 57 -
c rific ^ 5 tV.i(^r;!jby c o m i n g i n font ^ 0.3 B rocht s u g g e s ts ^ v - r y ne ar

to the old C O nocotion o f " o x p l n t i o n ” p r e s e n t i n G reek t r o g e d y

(1 ). As e o . r l y os 1 8 3 9 , d uring h is w o r k o n J u d i t h . Hob b e l h o d

co n ceiv ed o f th e tro g ic heroes o f t h e G reeks os c a u g h t u p I n

th e in so lu h ].e r i d d l e of life , and s u b j e c t i n g them selv es in -

stin c tiv e ly to a h ig h er law w h i c h tli a y did. n o t u : d o r s t a n d , in

cton em en t for a sin o f whose p r e c i s e n a tu re t 'l e y wore u n a v a r e

( 2 ).

Hgr t h e h e ro o f m odern t r a g e d y H ebbel e n v i s a g e d two p o s s i ­

b ilitie s: e it h e r he p e ris h e s fu ll of defian ce and e s s e n t i a l l y

u n rep en tan t, o r h e b e e on os r e c o n c i l e d to h is fate, go.ining a

m ore c l a r i f i e d view o f h i s own p o s i t i o n (5 ). The l a t t e r p o ssi­

b ility can a l r e a d y bo s e e n i n H e b b e l *s e a r l i e s t trag ic h erd in e,

Ju d ith , w h i l s t Me i s t e r A nton, o n whom H e b b e l was engaged, at

th e tim e o f f o rm u la tin g t h i s d istin c tio n , is c le arly an exam ple

o f th e form er ( 4 ). In each c a se , how ever, H ebbel m ain t a in o d ,

th e u ltim ate reason for th e i n d i v i d u a l ’s g u i l t and th u s for h is

d e s t r u c t i o n rem ain ed , as it had. d o n e i n G r e e k t r a g e d y , e te rn a l-

l y h i d d e n f r o m manAs c o m p r e h e n s i o n , a Q u e stio n to w hich t h e r e

was no a n s w e r . In t h e o p i n i o n o f L u d w i g , H e b b e l was t h u s rang­

in g .h im self i n d u b i t a b l y on th e s i d e of S c h ille r and th e G r e e k s ,

in c o n tra st to th at o f Shakespeare: w ird g e z e i g t " , he w rote

o f th e la tte r * s trag e d ie s, "w ie S c h u ld und v e r k e h r t e s H a n d e ln ,

1 0^ 0 W .B r ec h t, *V/ege und Umwege der d e u t s c h e n L i t e r a t u i p e i t h u n -

dert J a h ren * i n Peutsche V i e r t e l l a h r f s s c h r i f t V I I .S t u t t g a r t
1 9 2 9 , p. 429*-’ 2e p .l7 3 * rev iei
o f V/ienbarg*s "Die P ram atik e r der J e t z t z e i t " ,1839#'^ 3. Of .Heb­
b e l ’5 own comment, T I I 2 9 2 6 , 8 D e c . 1 8 4 3 * - 4 * G f . L e t t e r t o A r n o ld
M g e , 1 5 S e p . 1 8 5 2 ; Br. V p. 55.
 - 58 -

w iç in s b rin g t, im d zwnr w i r d n i c h t dns

Wcrum ’i l s c i n K H îtsel, sondern als c in c V crn u n ftn o tw cn d ig lccit

in v o lls tc r K l - r h e i t v o r Angen g c s t c l l t , die w i r . . . v S l l i g b il-

l i g e n m d s s e n ” ( l ). It is ev id en t w h e re i n dw i g ' s own p r e f e r e n c e ,

lay , f o r h e was a l w a y s firm ly co n v in ced th a t the d r a m a t i s t Vs i

last wor^L m u s t b e o n e o f p o s i t i v e assurance and h a r m o n y . T h is

view i s alread y d isc ern ib le in his own " p r e - S h a k e s p e a r e a n ”

w ork, w here t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of m itig atin g the fin al catastro ­

p h e b y m e n a ^ o f t h e h e r o *s c o n f e s s i o n of h is g u ilt p resen ted

i t s e l f very re a d ily to h i s m ind. 'Ti^us i n h i s first sk etch of

D i e M a k k a b h e r L u d v j i g e n v i s a g e d two d i f f e r e n t e n d i n g s , one i n

w hich L e a , though h e r s e l f rem ain in g a liv e, is p u n ish e d by s e e ­

in g h er ch ild ren die one by o n e , and t h e o t h e r i n w hich a

denouem ent is effected , w h e r e b y , h a v i n g come t o r e a l i s e th e

e v /il effects of h er p rid e, she is p u r i f i e d by s u f f e r i n g and

becom es r e - u n i t e d w ith h e r c h ilr jr e n . In th e fin a l v ersio n of

th is p lay , w here L e a , a f t e r h av in g w itn e s se d th e death o f h e r

sons, has h e r s e l f to pay t h e suprem e p e n a l ty w h i l s t at the

i

same tim e acb/^now ledging h e r g u i l t - :

H err, was s t r a f s t du d i e K i n d e r ? S t r a f e m i c h ! |

Such m eine S c h u ld , H e r r , a n m i r s e l b e r heim ! (2 )

- her atonem ent r e c o n c i l e s h e r to h e r cu ^el fate. T his w illin g

accep tan ce o f punishm ent th ro u g h a fu ll rea lisa tio n o f h is '

tran sg re ssio n cam e t o c o n stitu te f o r Ludwig t h e u l t i m a t e func­

tio n o f th e trag ic hero, who t h e r e b y b o r e t e s t i m o n y t o an u n -

l . G S V p . 2 4 7 , 1 860- 6 5 .
2o D i e M a k k a b h e r , A c t I V s c . i
 - 59 -

sh a lib le faith in a w o r l d n r d r r b a s e d o n r i g h t ej^ous n e s s and

ju stic e . It -provided i n h i s view th e v e r y e sse n c e o f th e re c o n -

c ilia to ry 'lual i t y o f Sh a l: e s n e a r e *s d r on a s , and s t r e n ^ h e n e d him

in his b e lie f th at th e p u r g in g o f g u i l t m ust be h i s m ain c o n c e r r

as a trag ic p o et. "Was i s t denn d ie H a u p tsa c h e ? " he w ro te in

c o n n e c tio n w ith h i s work on Ifen o v e v a . "Bass G enoveva d u rc h P rl\-

f u n g v o n d e r H ”r t e des s i c h e r n T u g e n d s to lz e s '^ur d e m d t i g c n T u -

gend g e l h u t e r t w ird" (l).

Hebbe1 J to o , was r e a d y t o adm it t h a t h i s own G o l o r e a c h e s

th ro u g h h is very g u ilt a p o in t w here he s t a n d s "v io l r c in e r ,

sitt]ic h e r und g e l R u t e r t e r " ( 2 ), b u t t h e m ere fact th a t he con­

sid ered th e r i g i d i t y o f a M e ist e r A nton o r a H erodes of equal

v a lu e to th e trag ic d ram a tist, im p lies t h a t h e saw t h e p o ssib i­

lity of rec o n ciliatio n as b e in g on a l e v e l tran scen d in g th at of

the in d iv id u a l trag ic hero. Indeed, in 1847, even w h ils t work­

in g on J u l i a - in w hich G r a f B e r tr a m s a c r i f i c e s h is rig h t as an;

in d iv id u a l to t h e m o ral law even b e f o r e h i s d eath , and th u s

a c h ie v e s a c e r t a i n m easure of rec o n ciliatio n w ith in the actu al

(3j
pi ay/I— H e b b e l w r o t e :

"D ie V ersS h n u n g t o T rag isch en g e sc h ie h t im I n t é r e s s é d e r Ge-'

sam m theit und n ic h t in dem d e s H i n z e l n e n , und es ist gar

n ich t nRtlfig, o b g leich h e s s e r, dass er sich selb st ih rer be-

w usst w ird . Das L e b e n i s t der g ro s s e S trom , d ie In d iv id u a l1 -

1 . C ite d b y L e o n M i s . o n . c i t . I I p . 57, from an u n p u b l i s h e d n o t e ­

b o o k e n t i t l e d ’S k i z z e n z u T r a g f l d i e n ’ p . 5 8 .
2 . L e t t e r t o A r n o l d H flg e, 1 5 S e n . 1 8 5 2 ; p . 55#
3 . C f . H e b b e l ’s own c om m ent o n t h i s p l a y , T I I I 3 9 4 3 , 3o J a n 1847©
 — 60

tH itfïn B i n d T r o p f e n , d ie trag isch en aber ^ isstflc k e, d ie w ie der

zerscK m o lzen w erden m ûssen und s i c h , dam it d ies m Sglich s e y ,

an e i n a n d e r a b r e is s e n und z e r s t o s s e n ” ( l ) .

To r e s o l v e th e co n flict w ith in th e ch aracters th em selv es

w ould mean t h e to ta l d isin te g ra tio n o f th e in d iv id u a l a n d wouli

th u s underm ine th e very b a sis of th e dram a, whose c h i e f p u r ­

pose is to show how, in s p ite o f a tera o r a r y d istu rb an ce, th e

stream of life m ust i n e v i t a b l y co n tin u e. O nly by th e d estru c­

tio n o f th e cause o f th e d i s t u r b a n c e (5 ) , the trag ic hero, can

th e d ram a tist sy m b o lise the r e s t o r a t io n o f the b alan ce - pro­

v id e d t h a t he h im s e lf b e lie v e s in it and i s ab le to reco n cile

it w ith h is own v i e w o f l i f e ( 3 ). T his is an i m p o r t a n t p ro v i­

so, and e x p la in s why a d r a m a s u c h as G-enoveva, w i t t e n sb it

was d u ring a tim e o f g r e a t personal s t r a i n and u n h a p p i n e s s ,

in fact sy m b o lises, as H eb b el h i m s e l f c la im e d , little more

th an th e fu tility o f human e x i s t e n c e and b e a r s few t r a c e s of

1 .T I I 2 6 6 4 , 6 M a rc h 18415.- 2. C f. an i n t e r e s t i n g r e m a r k b y
H e b b e l a b o u t K a n d a u l c s i n Gy a: e s u n d s e i n R i n g : " S p l i t e d e r K a n - '
d a u le s , der n i c h t H a u n tfig u r se y n s o i l noch w i l l , Ih n en n i c h t '
b e s s e r z u s a g e n , w e n n S i e i h n i n s e i n e r B e z i e h u n g zum G a n z e n ,
e t w a a l s U n r u h e i n d e r U h r b e t r a c h t e n ? ”- L e t t e r t o M o r t e K q I -
b e n m e y e r , 28 J u l y 1 8 6 6 ; B r . V p . 5 3 1 . - 3 #C f . T I I I 4 1 5 o , 1 9
a p r i l 1 8 4 7 : " I c h w e i s s n i c h t , ob i c h m i c h i r r e , a b e r m i r
d & u c h t e s e i n e ü û n d e w i d e r d e n h e i l i g e n G^^ist d e r W a h r h e i t ,
wenn d e r D i c h t e r s e in c m K u n s tw e rk e i n e V e r s 8 h n u n g m it d e r
m e n s c h i i c h e n S i t u a t i o n u n d d e n W c l t z u s t Ûnden d b e r h a u n t e i n z u -
n-ehm enhauchen s u c h t , v o n d e r e r s e l b s t n och e n t f e r n t i s t " #
 - 51 -

c. r c c o n c i l i a t n r y o^nroach 11 ) . For alth o u g h the l a t e r added

Æ ailo.a, w ith its attem p t to r e s t o r e harm ony, h a d , acco rd in g to

th e a u th o r, been p a rt of h is in te n tio n from t h e b e g i n n i n g , he

, r t v c n t t f l
Î'
was for a lo n g t i m e ^from r e a l i s i n g th is b y h i s ?11 t o o in te n se

a b so rp tio n in th e phases o f G o l o Is d e v e l o p m e n t (2 )• H e n c e H e b b e l

d iv id ed h is d r;am atic work i n t o tw o d i s t i n c t p erio d s, th e one

com prising the p i ays from J u d i t h to M a ria M am dalena. i n w hich

th e sa crifice o f th e trag ic hero h erald s but fain tly a new a n d

b e tte r w orld, and t h e o t h e r com prising a l l the l a t e r p lay s, in

w hich t h e trag ic hero is actu ally c o n f r o n t e d by what H e b b e l

c a lle d h is "d iv in e o p p o site", and i n w hich t h e atm o sp here t t

the end i s m ore c o n c i l i a t o r y , alth o u g h th e personal a ttitu d e

o f H erodes is in f a c t m ore u n r e l e n t i n g than th a t o f a G olo(3 ).

But even th o u g h d u rin g h i s e a rlie r p e rio d Hebbel felt u n ab le

to b rin g about any p o s i t i v e rec o n c ilia tio n , h e was alw ays con­

vin ced t h a t , b y l e a v i n g no d o u b t as t o the a b so lu te n e cessity

1 . C f . L e t t e r t o C h a r l o t t e R o u s s e a u , 27 J u l y 1 8 4 1 ; B r , I I p . I l l : " M i t
dem S c h l u s s w i l l s i c h n i e m a n d a u s s ^ h n e n . * . A l l e r d i n g s is>t e r f ^ lr-
c h t e r l i c h , a b e r n a c h m e i n e r f e s t e n TTberzeugung i s t e r d i e e i n z l -
ge C onsequenz des G o lo sch en C h a r a c te r s und l i b s t n i c h t d ie g e -
r i n g s t e A n d eru n g z u .F s i s t m ir s e l b s t u n l i e b , d a s s d i e s Drama,
w e l c h e s l i n d w i e e i n e M o n d n a c h t a n f & n g t , s i c h m i r u n t e r d e n H&n-
d e n b i s zum H n t s e t a l i c h s t e n g e s t e i g e r t h a t ^ a b e r was k a n n i c h d a
fflr? Ë in e D ic h tu n g i s t k e in G e g e n sta n d d e r w i l l l d i r , d e r s i c h so
u n d a u c h a n d e r s m ac h en I f e s t , u n d m e i n e Muse w i l l n u n e i n m a l
B lu t .Ü b rig e n s l i e g t j a a l l e T ra g ik auch n u r i n d er V e rn ic h tu n g
und m acht n i c h t s a n s c h a u l ic h , a l s d ie L e e re des D a s e y n s .V ie li
l e i c h t b i n i c h b i t t e r e r , w i e m a n c h e m e i n e r V o r g S n g e r , d i e d i e Wun-
d e , d i e s i e n i c h t h e i l e n k S n n e n ,d e r S chw achen wegen g e r n m it e l -
nem H e f t p f l a s t e r b e d e c k e n , w S h r e n d i c h o f f e n u n d e h r 1 i c h a u f d e n
K i s s h i n d e u t e " . - 2<, C f . L e t t e r t o G u s t a v K ü l i n e , 3 1 . J a n . 1 8 5 2 ; B r 3 V
ppo 3 o L e t t e r t o A r n o l d KTÜge,15 S e p . 1 8 5 2 ;B r* V p p . 55 7 7
 — 62 —

fo r th e d e stru ctio n o f the trag ic h e ro , th e d r gm. a t i s t was at

lea st ab le to reco n cile th e s p e c ta to r to th e fin al c atastro p h e

(l). However c r u e l or d isp ro p o rtio n a te th e punishm ent o f cha­

racters such a s K l a r a o r A g n e s m i g h t s e era, t h e clear know ledge

th at th eir d e a t h was i n d i s p e n s a b ] e for th e g en eral good w as,

he b e lie v e d , su fficien t to resto re our faith in th e u ltim a te

ju stic e of life . " V e r s S h n u n g im D r a m a ” , h e w r o t e i n 1 8 4 3 > du­

rin g th e process o f c o m p le tin g M aria M a g d ale n a : "H cilung d e r

Wunde d u r c h d e n N a c h w e i s , dass sie fdr d ie erhôhte G esu n d h eit

n o th w e n d ig war" ( 2 ). D espite th e d ifferen ce o f L u d w i g ’s

approach and h i s b e lie f th at each in d iv id u al d r a m a was . a b l e

to d isso lv e a ll d i s h a r m o n y on a s t r i c t l y personal le v e l, h is

em phasis upon th e n e c e s s i t y o f t h e h e r o ’s d e stru ctio n , to u ch ­

in g as it does th e very r o o t of trag edy , bears a certain re­

sem b lan ce t o H e b b e l ’s th eo ry . The r e a l i s m o f Shakespearean

d r 2 ma h a d t a u g h t him t o s e e k r e c o n c i l i a t i o n , not in an a x is y

com pliance w ith t h e s p e c t a t o r ’s w i s h e s for a happy i s s u e , - I

w hich, in d eed , w ould s e t him a t v a r i a n c e w ith th e m o ral law

and th u s w ith l i f e itse lf (5 ) - b u t by c a u s i n g him t o accept

th e in e sca p ab ility o f t h e h e r o ’s fate by m aking i t th e .n ecess­

ary c o n d itio n for th e re -e sta b lish m e n t o f goodness and t r u t h

1.Cf.Lf-^^ea? Î : I I 2 7 7 6 , 29 A u g .1843-
2 . C f . T I I 2 8 4 5 , 11 N o v . 1 8 4 3
5.C f. ^ V p . 170,1857-58.
 — 65 —

o n ç?xt,h (l ) ;

" Wir ü o l l t m it P o rso n en , an d sn ^n w ir das m e i s t o Int ores-

., ' s c n e h m r n m G s s c n , ihr<^ L o i d e n l e i d e n , ih ro H offnungen h o f-

fen, ffir s iA f &r ch t o n nnrl z u l e t z t , w r n n d i e F u r c h t s i c h . r e -

a lisic rt h a t, m it sdssein S c h a u d e r d ie N o tw en d ig k o it des V er-

n û n f t i g e n v e r k l . - ^ x o n d f i b e r dem S c h m e r z e d e r L e i c h e n s c h w e -

ben 3 e h en" ( 2 ).

Yet trae rec o n c ilia tio n co uld o n ly be com plete if effected in

th e trag ic hero h im s e lf, and th u s d e m o n strated w ith in th e

i
sphere o f th e p articu lar drajna. It is tru e th at th e id ea o f |

ju stic e w hich th e F r b î S r s t e r h a s v i o l a t e d and t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o ;

its very o p p o site is resto red , i n L u d w ig 's own w o r d s , on a I

i
h ig h er lev e l, but th is tak es p lace, not in a sp h ere beyond th e j
‘l
r e a c h o r co m p reh en sio n o f th e h e r o , but p rec ise ly at th at p ointj

w here h i s eyes a re opened to th e consequences of h is own a c - '!

tio n s and he accepts the p e n a lty w ith o u t re s e rv e ( 5 )« I h e

id ea of ju s tic e was n o t c o n c e i v e d by Ludw ig as s o m e th in g o u t - i

sid e the hero and e s s e n t i a l l y a lien to him , b u t , as "die ganze;

M e ta p h y s ik des h e c h t s g e f f i h l s (4), an i n t e g r a l part of h is very

b e in g .

Thus it is th at th e trag ic hero c o n stitu te d f o r Ludw ig t h e

suprem e c e n t r e o f th e dram a, w h ilst any a tte m p t to adm it in to

it forces beyond th o se o f h is personal fate wa s i n danger o f 1

1 , " G e s u n d l i e i t d e r K u n s t , d . h . m i t dem L e b e n a u s g e s S h n t e , n i c h t
i h m f e i n d l i c h e K u n s t , l e s s e n Vtfeg d u r c h S c h S n h e i t u n d d u r c h ,
W a h r h e i t z u r Gfite , W a h r h e i t und. S c h S n h e i t f & i r t , s o l l t e d i e
H a u p t - u n d G r u n d i d e e j e d e s k û n s t l e r i s o h e n S c h a f f e n s s e i n " - Gem
d a n k e n O t t o L u d w i;a s .Aus s e i n e m N a c h l a s s a u s g e w % il t u n d h e r a u s -
g c g e b e n v o n C o r d e l i a L u d w i g . L e i p z i g 1 9 o 5 , P - l o l « ~ 2 .GS V p . 561-.
5 . G f .L e tte r to K a rl G u tzk o w .l9 M a r c h l 8 4 7 ; L r i e f e , e d . c i t , p . 216.
4.SW V I p . 2 1 1 . ------------
 — 64- ""

in to in o ro n h s t r n o t i o n s • Tho e s s e n t i a l l y eo.rth-'bou]^

m a l i t y of b is own c h a r a c t e r s - who w o r e n e v e r t o b e c o m e m e r e

"Id eo n j?:y er” (l ) - in fact n reclu d es a ll in te lle ctu al o r philo-",;

I
so p h ical d iscu ssio n o f i d e a s , and h is w hole c r i t i c a l approach |

to th e problem o f th e trag ic hero was c o l o u r e d b y h i s refusal I

to fo rfeit th e demands o f t h e liv in g stag e in favour o f c o n s i-

d o ratio n s w hich, in h is o p in io n , were p r o p e r to o th er spheres

and d e tra cted from th e im pact o f t h e hirnan f i g u r e o f th e h ero .

Not for the e te rn al enigm a s u r r o u n d i n g the p e rso n ality and

/
fate o f a H '^ m l e t - each one o f S h a k e s p e a r e 's ch aracters is a n

open book, w h o s e s t u d y m ay d e m a n d a l i f e - t i m e , b u t w hich h i d e

in th e last an aly sis few m y s t e r i e s to w hich t h e p a tien t and

d iscern in g o b s e r v e r m ay n o t fin d th e key. Una c eus tom ed as h e

was to p r o b e m ore d e e p l y i n t o t h e m t h a n was n e c e s s a r y for an

e x a m i n a t i o n #bf t h e im m ediate p s y c h o lo g ic a l problem s u n d e r l y i n g

th eir words and actio n s, it is not su rp risin g t h a t hb saw i n

th e tr a g ic heroes o f H e b b e l's d_romas l i t t l e m ore t h a n t h e r e ­

ar esen ta tio n of ab stract ideas and p h ilo s o p h ie s of lif e , w ith ­

out th e elem en tal q u a lity o f S h a k e s p e a re 's ch aracters.

Such c r i t i c i s m t h e n was i n e v i t a b l e , s in c e H e b b e l's w hole

th eo ry and p r a c t i c e o f t r a g e d y was b a s e d o n a c o n c e p t i o n w h i c h

Ludw ig c o u l d n o t and w ould n o t accept : th a t o f th e in d iv id u al

as s u b j e c t to forces beyond h im s e lf . In o th e r w ords, H ebbel b e -

l,C f. GS I V p . 26 a n d SW V I p . 531 e e t i ,
 — 65 —
lievrîf^ t h a t th e trag ic hero was n o t m e r e l y c o n c e i v e d f o r h i s own

sake, c l o .i m i . n g t h e a tten tio n o f th e sp ectato r h is p e rso n ality

""lone, h o t m ust r e a c h a p o in t w hore h i s own o a r t i c u l - r fate

assum es a hig h er sig n ific a n c e in h is r e 'j a t i o n t o what H eh h el

c all.ed th e Idea. T h a t h e h i m s e l f was. n o t u n a w a r e o f t h e p o ssib le

dangers in h -'re n t in such a theory is s u g g e s t e d h y a n illuJTiinat-*

ing passage 'w ritte n upon h i s c o m p l e t i o n o f M a r i a Magd a l e n a :

" Es kam d a r au f a n , durch das e i n f a c h o L ehe.nshild. s e l b s t zu

w irk e n und a l 1 e h ^ i t c n h l i c k e des Godankone und dor R e fle x io n

zu v e r m c i d e n . . . h a s ist o.bor s c h w o r e r , a l s m an d e n k t , w e n n man

es gewohnt ist, d ie k r s c h o in u n g o n und G e s t a l t on, d i e man e r -

sc h afft, i m m e r a u f d i e I de e n , d ie s i e rep r ^ en tiere n , ilh er-

haupt a u f das Ganze u n d T i e f e d e s L o b o n s u n d d e r Wo I t zurûck

zu h e z ie h e n . I c h h a t t e m ich a l s o so rg fh ltig zu h d t e n , m ich

bei der A rb e it zu e r h i t z e n , urn. n i c h t ü b e r den b e s c h r h n k t o n

R oilmen d o s G e i a b l d e s h i n w e g z u s e h n u n d D i n g s h i n e i n zu b r i n ­

gen, d ie n i c h t h i n e i n geh(*^ren, o b g leich os e b e n d i e s e D inge

sin d , d i e m i c h am m o i s t e n r e i z e n , d e n n das Ha u p t - V o r g n û g e n

des D i c h t e r s b o s t e h t f d r m ich d arin , e i n e n Ch a r a k t e r b i s zu

s e i n e m im A n f a n g v o n m i r s e l b s t durchaus n ic h t zu b e r e c h n e n -

d e n H(5hepunct zu f f t h r e n an d v o n d a aus d i e W elt zu f i b e r s c h a u -

en" (1)0

In h is le tter t o A r n o l d Rdge n i n e years later, d escrib in g th e.

two p e r i o d s in to w hich h i s dram atic work f a l l s , Hebbel ad m itted

1, T II 2 9 I 0 , 4 Dec. 1845.
 - 66"-

th n tj ae s o o n r.s t>io I d e a i t s e l f is em bodied in the dram a - as

for ox am]; l e by th e t h r e e K inys i n H erodes and M ario n n e - the

scope o f the in d iv id n a l ch "racters m ust - f n e c e s s i t y be r e s t r i c t ”

ed. Ht t h e s niie t i m e , h o v jev o r, Hcbbo] :-;as c n e v i n c e d y ^ t h a t it',is

did not ab so lv e t h e m odern d r a m a t i s t from t h e im ' o r t a n t dutyr o f

creatin g , n o t m ere a b stra c tio n s, but liv in :* c h a r a c t e r s , i n whom

t h e m ean ing o f t r a g e d y c o u ld fin d its m o s t n^^rfeet r e v ' l l a t i o n ( l ) .

lo C f. Hebbel *3 r e p ly to J u l i e n S c h m i d t ’s c ritic ism of h is w ork,

W XI p p . 39o f . 1851.
 II. ÎTiIRB:CL’S AND lUiyiVlG’S APPROACH TO THE CONCEPT

OF '•^NVIHOM.IENT.

Frop thn fn rn ^o in g ion o f H o b h o l ’s T'.nd Pui. '^wig’s

vioiTjs o f t r ''• '7 '^c''y i t mr.y n o t t o o .lto g eth er o tv io u s why

the nonoz o f tho tw o di"T n atin ts or" sonotiw os^ n o rtio u ] o rly in

yon or c l h i s t o r i e s o f i . i t o r o t n r o , counl*'d t o g e t h e r os h e r c l d i n g

" n o r " mo " r n ^o rio n o f l i t o r ^ ' r y vo.inoo - o r why Lu'"-"iy s h o r l ^

h "VO h e com o hno^ m ns o n e o f t h e c h i . o f onyonont.o of “p o e t i c re­

e l ism “ ( l ) , wh i l .' t H o h h e l is soirT t o h e t h e forornnnor o f th e

!

" o z p e r i m e n t n l ^sc hool o f h o i r , e n d I h r e n (2). N e i t h e r L udw ig, w ith |

!
h is ey^s s to .o d ily tnrnofi tow ards ShL .kcspeare, n o r in d e e d Hohhol ^

who, thoU;Oh c o n s c i o u s l y h r o n d o n i n g end e x te n d in g t h e tro d itio - j

n -'l poths of tro g o d y , h a d no w i è h t o depart fro m them a lto g e- i

th e r, w ould h a v e acco u n ted th em selv es rev o lu tio n a ries of p io - i

I
I
n a e r s . A ll th at t h e y w e r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h was t o ^ u rify dram a |
!

from the a r tif ic i'^ .litie s o f th e ^ast (g ) a n d t o preserve it j

from t h e ten d en tio u s in flu en ces o f the p resen t, w h ils t v iew in g ■

s u c h i n n o v â t oa’s as t h e i r c o n te m p o r a r y :e B i c h a r d Wagner w i t h t h e |

u tm ost s u s p ic io n ( 4 ). If they d id in f a c t h a v e s o m e t h i n g new t o I

I
say, an o r i g i n a l c o n trib u tio n t o m a k e , i t was n o t b y a n i m p a - ■

tie n t b reak w ith th e p ast, b u t by a f r e s h in te rp re ta tio n based i

on th e tim e-h o n o u red v a lu e s and g e n e r a lly avowed p r i n c i p l e s of :

dram atic art * |

l . v . e s p . R o b e r t P e t s c h , V/esen u n d F o r m e n d o s H r . a n a s . H a l l s 1 9 4 3 ;
p p e 6 0 , 39 f f o - 2 . C f . k i M V M g y e r , D i e d e u t s c h e L j t g r a t u r d e s j
1 9 , J a h r h u n d e r t s , B e r l i n 1 9 o o . p . 2 3 4 . ^ 3® F o r ' a" g e n r r a l o u t ­
l i n e o f t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e v i e w s o n G o r m a n c l a s s i c a l d r a m a x*. I
F o B r u n s , F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l u n d O t t o L u d v jig * E i n V ?r;-:loi'ch i h r e r ;
Ans i c h t e n S b e r d'a^s Di' a m a . B e r 1 i n 1 9 1 3 . - 4 #C f .GS VÏ n . 29 a n d 1

T I V 5o 9 9 , 3 : i a r c h 1 8 5 3 . I
 T h i s c a n b e s t b : cxcni^-^lified. by t h e i r g r c i u a l ani in icy in -

d e n t s'-' a p i n ^ 2 c o n c e p t ^/hosc i m p l i c a t i o n s bed h i t h e r t o re­

ceiv ed l i t t l e o r no a t t e n t i o n , b n t wh i c h was to become, a v e r y

p o t e n t f " \c to r i n y u r o p o o n droma i n t h e l a t t e r h a l f o f t h e c o n

tnry. It is c o n t a i n o d i n s u c h comments a s , "h:.n p l a u b t so we-

n i p an M c n s c h e n , d i e man n i c h t i n I h r er M a t i n n o . l i t a t w u r r e l n

sie h t, als -m W e i n t r a u b e n , m i t den on '‘i n P f l o c k behbscpt i s t ”

(1 ), or, ”Aus d e r B e t r a c h t u n p des 3 a n z o n Lobons g a n z e B n i s t e n

z on, m i t i h r en W n rzo ln und Umgebungen. l i n o los"^ a l t i s t ein

U rn riss . n e s , k e i n b i o s s e r TJmriss ; n i c h t die L i n i e i s t d i e Gc-
s ta lt, s o n d e r n d a s , w;a; s i c u m s c h l i e s s t ” ( 2 ) - each v o ic in g

an a t t i t u d e t o drmma w hich i s s t r i k i n g l y now and r o a l i s t i c ®

At t h e s a o o t i n e , g e n e r a l s p e o u l a t i o n s on t h e imp a r t . a n ce o f

environm ent i n a l l i t s v ario u s as p o e t s were n o t i n t h e m s e l v e s

new, and H e b b e l and L u d w i g w ere i n e v i t a b l y f o l l o w i n g i n t h e

f o o t s t e p s o f e i g h t e e n t h - c e n t u r y w r i t e r s s u c h as Mont.es q u i e u

who i n h i s h s a r l t des L o i s o f 1 7 4 3 , h a d s o u g h t t o e s t a b l i s h
by s c i e n t i f i c means a d i r e c t c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n e n v i r o n m e n t

an d t h e v . a r i o u s f o r c e s w h ic h c o n s t i t u t e t h e l i f e of a p a rti­

c u l a r p e o p l e . At '^ny r a t e , i t may be assum ed t h a t b o t h w ere

f ami l i o r w i t h t h e t h e o r i e s o f H e r d e r who, i n h i s char act e r i s ­
t i c a l l y i n t u i t i v e m anner, had s e e n a l l h i s t o r i c a l and c u l t u -

ta l d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e l i g h t o f t h i s new c r e e d . Nor w ere

l o L e t t e r from H e b b e l t o M a r i e W i t t g e n s t e i n , 2 L e e . 1 3 5 3 ; B%%
VI p . 216. - 2. N o t e to Die F r e u n d e v o n I m o l a . c i t e d by H r i c h
Sctiraidt from an u n p u b l i s h e d p i o n , ^ I V . p p r ~’$ 9 f .
H c 'b b n l r-L.nd L u d w i g t h e first to tra n sla te '. n t o p r a c t i o e w iiat

i ad f i r s t and fo re m o s t been an a t t i t u d o o f m ind ^ a m e td o d o f

in v e stig a tio n and o r i t i c ism , by h a r n e s s i n , ] d e l i b e r a t e l y +he

d et^ rm in in y facto r o f environm ent to lite ra ry ends ; f o r alm ost

a cen tu ry e a rlie r, Wi e l a n d , i n h i s p r e f a c e t o A - a t h o n , h a d ex­

pressed h is In ten tio n o f s h o w i n y t h e h e r o ’s d e v e lo p m e n t, m ould­

ed. b y c i r c u m s t a n c e as w e ll as b y h i s p articu lar so cial a n d ma­

terial environm ent (l). But s u c h trea tm en t o f the co n d itio n s

s u r ro u n d i n y a cb..aracter i n m in u te d e ta il is em inently s u i t e d

to th e n o v el, and i t is not su rp risin y th at it found i t s way

o n ly v e ry y r adual l y in to th e dram a. It is, in fact, not u n til

the r i s e o f th e B d ra 'e rlic h e s T rauers o ie l t h a t we h a v e th e b e-

y in n in y s of a re a listic p o rtray al of a very sp e c ia l e n v iro n ­

ment - th at o f co n tem p o rary m id d le - c la s s life - as a p art, not

m erely o f th e d e c ^ r. but o f th e trag ic a ctio n itse lf; w h ilst

th e ardent re s u s c ita tio n o f th e p a s t by th e R o m a n tic s, co u p led

w ith a ta ste |o r lo cal co lo u r a n d a t m o s p h e r e , m a d e a. d i r e c t con­

trib u tio n tow ards the su b seq u en t, a lb e it less id e a lise d por-

lo 'w V ie la n d w r o t e i n h i s P r e f a c e t o A a a t h o n t h a t i t h a d b e e n t h e
a u t h o r ’s i n t e n t i o n " a u s s e i n e m H o l d e n e i n e n t u y e n d l i a f t e n ^ ' e i s o r
z u m a c h e n , u n d z w a r s o l c h e r y e s t a l t , d a s s man y a n z d e u t l i c h m o c h t e
b e y r e i f e n kM nnen,w ie e i n s o l c h e r M ann-so y e b o r e n - s o e r z o y e n - m i t
s o l c h e n F b l i i y k e i t c m u n d H i s p o s i t i o n e n - . • <, a n e i n e m s o l e h e n O r t j
und in e in e r so lch en Z e i t- i n e in e r so lc h e n G e s e lls c h a f t- u n te r '
einem s o l c h e n H i m m e l s - S t r i c h - b e y s o l c h e n H a h r u n y s m i t t e l n (d e n n i
auch d i e s e h aben e in e n s t f c k e r n H iu f lu s s a u f W e ish e it und Tu- ’
^ e n d , a l s s i n h manche M o r a l i s t en e in b i l d e n )-b ey e i n e r s o l c h e n ,
D i s t - k u r z , u n t e r s o lc h e n yeyebenen B ed in y u n y en ,w ie a l l e d .ie je n i-
y e n U m s t ï n d e s i n d , in\y e l c h e r e r d e n A y a t h o n b i s j e t z t y e s e t z t I
h a t , u n d n o c h s e t z e n w i r d ; e i n s o w e i s e r u n d t u y e n d i . i a f t e r M a n n hd
b e s e y n l c 5 n n e n u n d . . u n t e r d e n n e h r a l i c h e n , o d e r do c h s e h r S r m l i - ,
c h e n U m s t l i n d e n e s a u c h n o c h h e u t z u t a y e w e r d e n k < 5 n n t e ” ( W c r k e , ed.;
G - . K l e e , B d o 5 * p p . I l f * O f . a l s o H. Gi*oss , ’ C . M . V / i e l a n d s ’’G o s c h i c h t e |
d e s A a a t h o n ‘- E n t s t e h u n v s . f ^ c s c h i c h t e ^ i n G e r m a n i s c h e S t u d i e n . B e r ­
l i n l Ԥ 5 o o H e f t 8 6 , p p . 6 6 " f f , 1 3 3 f f . . ' I
 - il-
triy :.l o f h i s t o r i c n.1 ^ . i l i o u (!)♦ From t h ? poin t o f vi'^'w o f r o ~

oln.-om, th ? J u n,p d o u t c h 1 an i m o v o ^ o n t mr ri? a n o t h e r im p o rtan t -Ofl-

v-ince, w i n n i n g hook, f r ^ 'iro.ma, 0.3 K inderm ann h 03 p o in ted , o u t,

th e life o f everyday, "lo ca lia ed in the c u ltu ra l m ilieu of

th e p resen t" (2). And a l l th e tim e a new s c i e n t i f i c i i r g e wa s

h ep in n in g to inform w riters* m in d s, f o s te r in g and dovdoping

the id e a o f the i n t c r - r el. a t i o n h o t w e e n n o n " n d h i s e n v iro n —

ment {3 ) 0
"Am n o c h h a l t i g s t ^ n " , H e b h e l w r o t e durin g h is h rief v isit

to London i n 1862, "w irk t a u f m ich das m o r a l .is c h e K lim a , das,

w ie das p h y s i s c h j e den ntom zug t i n g i e r t " (4 ), and n e it h e r

h e n o r Ludw ig c o u l i n f a c t he e n tirely immune f r o m t h e c li­

m ate o f th e t i r e s i n w hich th e v 1 i v e d a n d w^ o r k e d . It i s ,^

th erefo re, not a lto g eth e r su rp risin g th at the facto r o f en- *

vironm ^nt sh o u ld at one a n d t h e s a m e t i m e h a v e f o u n d i t s way

in to t h e w o rk o f two d r a m a t i s t ^ w ritin g in d epend en tly o f one

a n o th e r and w ith sa c h v e ry d ifferen t aim s « T h i s does n o t mear

th at th e Q u estio n o f environ m ent i n dram a hecame i n t h e i r

hands an i s o l a t e d proh^n, a "progrcm m e" to he expounded i n

the manner o f th e N a t u r a l i s t . In stead , it grew n a t u r h l l y and

- to judge hy th e general silen ce of lite ra ry c ritic s on t h i s

l o F o r t h e im p a c t o f t h e ±iom antics on t h e m ind o f t h e young

L u d w i g V. L e o n M i s ^ 0 0 . c i t . I p p . 6 6 f f 2. H e i n z K i n d e r m a n n , I
•D ie l i t e r a r i s c h e L n t f a l t u n g des 1 9 . J a l i r l i u n d e r t s • i n ^erm ani"^
K o m a n isch e M o n a t s s c h r i f t 1 9 2 6 ,X lV p .4 6 . - 3 . F o r a g e n e r a l sum -
m a r v v . b . V ^ a l z e l . D e h a l t u n d G - e a t a l t im K u n s t w e r k d e s D i c h t e r s
P o t s d a m 1 9 2 9 ; p # 5."^ 4 . L e t t e r t o C h r i s t i n e H e b b e l , l d ) J u n ë l S 6 2 ;
B r. V II p . 1 9o.
 -
snhjfïot - im p ero rîn tih ly out o f t h e i r (Iram atic w ork, and i t is

o n l y on an a c c u m u l a t i o n o f t h e n a n y r - f * r e n c c s scattered through,

out th eir m ’i t i n y s , b o t h in th e shape o f a llu s io n s to th eir own

n ]. a y s an d i n c o n n e c t i o n wi t h g e n e r a], d r am a t i c n r o h 1 ^ms , t h at one

comes t o reco g n ise th e u .n m istak ah le b e g in n in g s o f what has come

tds b e c alle d , thnngh in r ) || i a r r o w e r s e n s e , th e th eo ry o f M ilie u (l )

It is ch aracteristic o f t h e tw o d ram atists th at w h i l e He b b e l

b e g a n hy b e i n g o c c u p i e d w i t h th is problem in a th eo re tic al way,

L udw ig f i r s t encountered it in /h is early d ram atic p ractic e» He

had be^n n u rtu re d on t h e itom .antic t r a d i t i o n , and th ro u g h h i s

m u sical e d u c a t i o n was no d o u b t w e l l a c q u a in te d w ith such o peras

a s W eb e r *s I ' r e i s c h f i t z . w h i c h g a i n s much o f i t s effect through

lo ca l co lo u r. In a d d itio n , h is own i n n a t e ta ste for the th ea tre

and h is keen p e rc e p tio n o f w h a t was g o o d " t h e a t r e " as w e l l as

o f what c o n stitu ted g o o d drama m ad e h i m s u s c e p t i b l e to c o lo u r

and a tm o sp h e re i n a f a r more r e a l i s t i c sense th an any o f h i s

predecessors. The i n t e r e s t in th e outw ard s e t t i n g o f h is p lay s,

th ere fo re, is a sp e c ia lly p rom inent f e a t u r e o f L u d w i g ’s w o r k .

Hv«'n o u r s c a n t y evid en ce of h is e arlie st p lay s, w here ttiis

appears t o h a v e b e e n no m o r e t h a n a s u p e r f i c i a l u s e of lo cal

c o lo u r w ith a ll th e trap p in g s and h i g h ly co lo u red decor borrow ­

ed from t h e s o - c a l l e d "fate trag e d ie s", S tu rm un d D rang i n t r i ­

gues and th e n o v els o f S .T .A . H offm ann, affords o ccasio n al

1 . For th e N a tu ra lis ts * view s on m i l i e u v . Arno H o l z , D ie K u n st

I h r vVesen u n d i h y ? G e s e t z e , B e r l i n , 1 8 9 1 ; a n d E , Z o l a ’s in tro d u c -
t i o n to h i s T h fe^ se H a ^ u in . P a r i s , 1925.
 — 7J —

g lim p ses o f an u s u a M y alio t ic approach. The s c e n e of h is

first v ersio n o f P e r h n ; < e l v o n A u - s h u r .a ( l 3 4 o ) , for ex o n p le,

was to he .1 aid in a m o u n t a i n o u s h o r d e r - c o u n t r y , and. :^53 i - t o de­

p ict the life o f the in h ah itan ts of th e forest in t h e wildso(;K„<(

n atu re (l). w ith th e gradual em ergence o f c h a r a c t e r s of flesh

and b l o o d o u t o f t>ie h o s t o f m ore o r l e s s shadow y, p u p p e t —l i k e

fig u res, th ere c a m e 'th e grow ing r e a l i s a t i o n th at tim e and p la c e

sh o u ld have a d e fin ite rela tio n to th e k ind o f c h a ra c te rs de-

n icted , w ithout as y e t , how ever, any p r e c i s e n o tio n as to th e

b earin g w hich th e one s h o u ld hav e upon th e o t h e r . In a sp ecial

n o te to P ie W aldburg (2) he c o n s id e re d th e p o s s i b i l i t y ’' o f t r a n s

p la n tin g h is new p l a y in to th e tim e o f th e peasant re b e llio n s ,

w h ilst th e hero was t o be a peasant "honest to the p o in t o f

terro rism " ( 5 ). In th ese and o t h e r r e f e r e n c e s are c o n ta in e d

th e fain t b eg in n in g s o f an i n c r e a s i n g aw areness o f the r e la tio n

b etw een c h a r a c t e r a n d m i l i e u , w h i c h was t o form th e v e r y c o re

o f Per h jy b fS rster. U n til th e co m p letio n o f t h i s p lay , how ever,

L u d w i g *s t r e a t m e n t o f e n v i r o n m e n t was n o t f o u n d e d o n a n y p a r ­

tic u lar: th eo ry , b u t was t h e outcom e o f h i s n atu ral talen t for

th e se n sitiv e d e p ic tio n of a p a rticu lar en v iro n m en t and h is

fee lin g for atm o sp h ere, w hich i s as apparent in the short sto ­

ries and. n o v e l s as i n th e plays of th is early p erio d , and w hich

I « G f .SW V I p . 2 1 7 . - 2 . T h e d a t e o f P i e % % l d b u r g a s g i v e n b y
H e y d r i c h ( o p . c i t . I p . ,186) i s 1 84o , w h e r e a s P . M e r k e r (SW V I p .
2 o 7 ) p u t s i t J a n . 1 8 4 5 * - 3 . i b i d . p p . 233 f . C f. a l s o i b i d .
p . 23o.
 - 7Y-
was to r e m a in a ch aracteristic featu re o f L u d w i g ’s w o r k as a

w hole. I

Hohbcl first broached the Q u e stio n o f environracnt in dram a i n

h is th eo re tic al w ork, th o u g h how, in fact:, h e c am e t o b e aware

of its im p o rtan ce Ln t h e first olace is a m atter for co n je c ­

tu re. But it is ev id en t t h a t by t h e b e g i n n i n g o f 1837 - m ore

th an tw o -an d -a-h alf y erfs before h is first d r am a - he h ad a l ­

ready ev o lv ed c e r t a i n v e ry d e fin ite view s on t h e k i n d o f s c i - ■

e n tific a p p ro a c h w hich a lo n e coul(i e n s u r e a tru e and c o n v in c - ;

in g dr" am a t i c p re se n ta tio n o f rem ote h i s t o r i c a l ev en ts. H aving

form ed th e am b itio u s p lan o f w ritin g a dram a on A l e x a n d e r t h e |

Gr a t ,7 who s o e n t h i s w hole l i f e w o n d e r i n g- w h e t h e r h e was a sons

o f K ing P h i l i p o r o f J u p i t e r Ammon, h e w r o t e : |
1
"% ust& nde d e r ^ r t s i n d e i n z i g u nd das U n e r m e s s l i c h e i s t i n |j
I
ihrem G e fo lg e ; aber der L i c h t e r , d e r s i e su r Anschauung |
ir
b r i n g e n w i l l , m u s s s i e g a n s u n d g a r d u r c h j e n e Z e i t , d u r ch. }

ih ro L onkw eise, s u begrfhoden s u c h en. Es s i n d m i t h i n d i e u r n - ’’;

fas sends te n b tu d ie n , n ament l i c h i n Bezug a u f m a c e d o n is c h e , )

p ersisch e und e g y n tis c h e S e s c h ic h te e r f o r d e r l i c h ”( l ). !

T h e s e wor@s •and t h e em phasis w hich th e y l a y on t h e c u ltu ra l I

and h i s t o r i c a l background of the d r a m a t i s t ’s s o u r c e s , are

e c h o e d a g a i n a n d a g a i n t h r o u g h o u t H e b b e l ’s w r i t i n g s « P a s c i -

n a te d as h e a l w a y s was b y t h e m o r e u n u s u a l , en ig m atic fi- |

gures of h isto ry , h e was at t h e same t i m e c o n s t a n t l y at p ain s jj

lo L etter to E l i s e Lens in g , 2 1 Feb. 1 8 3 7 ;Br I p p . 174 f . 1.
 — 7s* —

t o make them c r e d i b l e , n o t o n ly by p r in tin g them as com plete

p e rso n alitie s in th em selv es^ b u t by t a k i n g in to account th e

sp iritu a l clim r.te in which t h e y w e r e r e %red, Some s i x m o n t h s

In ter, he a p p lie (3 t h e same p r i n c i p l e to r. c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e |

d e v e lo p m e n t o f n hob o s p i e r r e , p e ro e i v i n g th at in a c ertain en­

vironm ent a c h a r a c t e r ; though he m ight sp rin g from p u r e and

w holesom e elem en ts, co u ld w e ll develop in to th e v e r i e s t te rro ­

rist (l)

Thus p sy ch o lo g ical in sig h t co u p led w ith o. s e n s e for r e a l i s t i c

in v e stig a tio n ch aracterised a lre ad y at th is e a rly stag e th e

"ttitu d e of th e y o u n g H ebb c l w h o , in 1339, was t o w r i t e h i s

first dram a, J u d i t h . Bo+h q u a litie s , are d isc ern ib le in h is

tr
h an d ] i n g o f t h e b i b l i c a l m a t e r i a l , u n d l y i n g t h i s play., th o u g h
A
n o t a l t o g e t h e r i n t h e way o n e m i g h t h a v e b e e n 3,cd t o e x p e c t .

For in s te a d o f ta k in g t h e h e r o i n e ’s ch aracter, h e r m o tiv es

I
for k i l l i n g H o lo fern es and h e r su b se q u e n t triu m p h as r e c o r d e d |

by h i s source, he c a l l e d them " b a s e " ( 2 ) and p r o c e e d e d to

c h a n g e them a c c o r d i n g to h is own c o n c e p t i o n ; i n s t e a d o f mak­

in g h e r tr e a c h e r o u s deed c re d ib le by r e l a t i n g it to a rea li­

stic a lly co n ceiv ed background o f th e tim es i n w hich i t was

com m itted , he t r i e d to re n d e r it a c c e p ta b le by b a s in g it on

u n iv ersally a c k n o w le d g e d human m o t i v e s . H e r v e r y au d acity

and even th e in tim ate r e la tio n i n w hich sh e s t a n d s to th e

1. Of. T I 6 3 5 ; 3 S e p . 1 8 5 7 .
2. % I I 1 3 7 2 ; 5 J-.n. 184o.
 - H -

dj.vinpî r a i s A above h or p a r t i c u l a r e n v iro n m en t, v v h i ] .s t t h e

"Im ost superhum an fig u re of H o lo fernes "p lu n p in g out of a d u ll

pan th eism in to t h e m ost o u tr a g e o u s excesses o f m o n o th e ism ” ( l ),

is at best a. h i j h l y exasperated e x p re ssio n o f th e tim e s, in ­

deed, from h i s Preface to th e p lay , w here H e b h e l l a y s a ll the

em phasis upon th e u n i v e r s a l appeal of its problem s and denoun­

ces i n no u n c e r t a i n term s a ll attem p ts at a resu sc ita tio n of

th e past for its own s a k e ( 2 ), it w o u l d seem, a s t h o u g h h e n o t |

o n ly n e g le c te d , but d e lib era tely a v o ided g iv in g any p rom inence !

to t h e k i n d o f w o r ld i n w hich J u d ith , and H o l o f e r n e s moved.

One g l a n c e at the p l a y show s t h a t th is is n o t, how ever, en­

tire ly the case. The i m p r e s s i o n somehow c o n v e y e d by t h e w h o le - " ,

and p a r t i c u l a r l y by th e scene d ep ictin g t h e s t a r v i n g mob o f "

Jews i n .BhTHULlA - of tu rb u le n t, h ero ic tim es, w here c o r r u p - |

tio n and m u r d e r c o e x i s t w ith a deep ly r e l i g io u s faith , is un- |

m istak ab le. T h is is a ll t h e m ore r e m a r k a b l e as the e x t'^ rn a l

I
||

se ttin g o f s l a v e s , cam els, a ltars and t e n t s is but lig h tly

sk etch ed , thus p o in tin g to a s ig n if ic a n c e beyone th a t o f m ere

lo cal colour*

A clu e to th is sig n ific an c e is p r o v i d e d by H eb b el n o t lo n g

after th e com pletion o f J u d ith in the o p e n i n g o f " M e i n W ort

lb er das Drama” , w h ere he c o n s i d e r s th e r e la tio n o f rtram a t o

h isto ry :

" I n w elchera Verh&1 1 n i s s ' ”' ^ s t e h t d a s D ra m a z u r G e s c h i c h t e

u n d i n w ie f e r n m uss es h i s t o r i s ch s e i n ? Ich denke^so

l.W X I I I p . 4, P r e f a c e to Ju d ith
2 . C f . W X I I I p . 4,
 - -

w "lt; als rs d i e s e s s c h o n an und ffln s i c l ' i l e t , und als die

Kunst ;^{lr d i e ' u ^ c b s t r (%e s cl : i c h t s s c h r e i b u n g ^ e l t c n darf,

i n den s i e die ^ r o s s a r t i g s t en u n d b e d e u t ends t e n L e b e n sp ro '*

cesse gar n ich t d e r s t e l l en k ann, ohne d ie e n tsch eid en d en

und h i s t o r i s c h en K ris en, w elche s i e h e r v o r r u f o n und b e d in -

g e n .. .m it einem W ort : d i e A ^ m o s p h ^ x e d e r % e i t e n z u g l e i c h

m it 7 . u r A n s c l '^ u in g z u b r i n g e n (l).

T his is one o f H ^b b cl* s c h a ra c te ristic a llg pregnant pronounce­

m ents, so fraught w ith m eaning t h a t its vario u s im p licatio n s

w ill only g r a d u a lly em erge. But i t is at once c l e a r th a t he

was s t a r t i n g from c e rta in su p p o sitio n s w hich w ere l i k e l y to

p red e term in e tiiis th eo ries on e n v iro n m e n t to a very co n sid er­

a b le ex ten t and to s e t him at v arian ce w ith L udw ig, who d i d

not in a n y way s h a r e them . H is prem ise th at th e dram a i s by

n atu re h i s t o r ic a l is in , i t s e l f (lam. e t r i c a l l y opposed to the

v i e w o f L u d w ig who, by v i r t u e of h is co n cep tio n o f th e r e l a - '

tio n b etw een d ra m a tic ch aracter and s i t u a t i o n , co n ten d ed th a t

the on ly p la c e for H isto ry as an a c t i v e d eterm in in g f o r c e was

th e novel ( 2 ). V\s f o r t h e u s e o f h i s t o r i c a l m a t e r i a l in the

dram a, he drew a c a r e f u l d i s t i n c t i o n betw een th e h i s t o r i c a l

l o W. X I , p . 5 o
2 . C f. L u d w i g *s n o t e o n M a r i n o F a l i e r i , o n w h i c h h e was w o rk in .j
b e tw e e n 185b and I 8 6 0 : ^ u n i s t das Aanze s i n N o v e l l e n d r a n a ,
do li. d i e H i s t o r i é g i b t n u r d e n A ah m e n u n d d a s I m p o s a n t e . D i e
B e s o n d e rh e it der V e n e tia n is c h e n V erfassu n g w ird s e h r v e r e in -
f a . c h t u n d a u f d a s z u r G c k g s f R l i r t , was u n u m g f n g l i c h i i o t w e n d i g
z u r B e d in g u n g des V o rg a n g e s " - C i t e d b y L6 on M is, o n . c i t . I I
p . 6 2 from an U n p u b l i s h e d s k e t c h .
 - n -

r.nd th f ! f i c t i t i o u s ("1% oinç. ( ’^ N o v o l l c n d x . 2 m a ” ) . In th e l u t t e r type

h isto ry pro v id e (3 no m o r e t h o . n a c o n v e n i e n t fram e w ork f o r the

actio n , such as i n h i s own v e r s i o n o f th e s to ry o f Agnes B e r -

n a u ' “r , w here t h e c h a r'^ c te rs of th e two l o v e r s provided the

sta rtin g -p o in t and t h e i r personal fate was t h e p r i m a r y c o n ­

cern o f th e a ctio n (l). In the fo rm er t y p e , on t h e o th er J j .a n d ,

th e c h ie f c rite rio n was h i s t o r i e s ] , tru th in th e sense of a

strict adherence to the e s s e n t i a l hp^.t-orical facts and con­

d itio n s w ithout any adm ixture o f id ealism or u n h is t- r i c a l mo­

tiv e s. The d r c m a t 1 s t who w o u l d t r e a t a su b ject such as th at

of a ll o n s t ein , for exam ple, m ust n o t adopt th e ”s e n t i m e n t a l ”

approach o f a S c h ille r, who h a d , i n L u d w i g ’s o p i n i o n , offendec

ag ain st th e ’’i n n e r tru th ” of a r t by f a i l i n g to e stab lish an

exact re], a t i o n b e tw e e n o u tw a r d h i o t o r i c a l costum e and th e

e sse n tia l n atu re o f th e tim es as r e v e à l e d by t h e ch aracters

(2 ) 0 Thus, when t u r n i n g t o L u d w i g ’s - p i a n s fo r h is own a llsn -

s t e i n , we f i n d t h e fo llo w in g n o te : ” Das Cos t ü m e wo h i zu b e -

ach ten ; auch i n d e r B p r a c h e m uss das B i l l dor % eit h e r v o r -

treten ” - "Sprache, S itten , A l l é s muss ein stim m en , h i s t o r i -

5 che T r e u e ” (5)* ^or although h is h ig h est i d e a l was t o r e n d e r

th e sp irit of H isto ry ( 4 ), t h e m e a n s b y w h i c h h e s? o u g h t t o

a tta in th is end c o n s i s t e d in a clo se a tte n tio n to the par­

l e C f . L e t t e r t o E d u a r d L e v r i e n t , 2 J u n e 1 8 5 4 ; CB V I p . 535»
2 . C f. a q u o t a t i o n from an u n p u b l i s h e d o f the Shakes pear e-
S t u d i e n by L ^ o n Mis , p p . c i t . I I p . 1 6 .
3 o C ited b y L 4on M i s , i b i d . p . 199 from an u n p u b l i s h e d n o t e - b o o k
d e v o t e d t o t h e p l a y . " ' - 4 . C f . L u d w i g ’s c om m ent o n S h a k e s p e a r e s
H i c h a . r d I I I ; ” Das S t i l c k i s t d u r c h a u s C o s c h i c h t e . . E s i s t e i n ^
K ( ÿ r p e r d e s Ate i s t e s d e r G - e s c h i c h t e s e l b e r , n i c h t d i e I d e a l i s i e —
ru n g i r g e n d e i n e s b e s o n d e r e n S t i l ç k s . C e ^ b h i c h t e . A l l e s i s t t y -
p i s 8 h uhd a l l g ç m e i n , 3 o c h a r a k t e r r s t r s c h es i s t - q s V p . 218
 - -

1 1 cul r r hir, t o r i c a l foot p i'o v id c l t y h i s sources (l). Ho n c e

tl'ie (1 r r r a t i s t must clives t h im s e ] f o f a l . l s u h j c c t i v e p reju d ices

^r\d m a h r t h e jou rn eir i n to th e p o s t w i t h h i s m ind u n c lo u d e d

co n s.i.d eratio n s o f the p r o s e n t . On 1 y th :u s can a w?ioily u n / i -

fi 0 d im p r OSS i o n o .T t h e t :im o b o e n s u r e d ( 2 ) *

but evn w h ere L udw iy c o n s i b o r e d th e cen tre o f g r a v i t y to

be o T c lu siv '^ ly in t^'io h i s t o r i c a l d em ent, h is w hole co n cep tio n

and t r e a t m e n t w ere d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e o f H ebbel. T he l a t t e r

never tre a te d h isto rie n ] events for t h e i r own s a k e , b u t s e e k ­

ing to reveal the fundam enta ] tru th s and e t e r n a l law s in h eren t

in th e h i s t o r i c a l process, as it rev ealed itse lf to h is in ­

tu itio n , he d e te r m in e d the d ram atic v a lu e of a p a rticu lar pe­

rio d o o].ely by i t s relev an ce to th is e sse n tia l purpose. As h e

sta te s in h is pref'^.ce t o Ju d ith ( 3 ), th e d r a m a t i s t is duty i s

not to r e n d e r the tern o r a l etern a], by r e s u s c i t a t i n g an epoch

v irtu a lly ex tin ct, ^"uit t o illu m in a te a h isto ric a l e v en t w hich

s till has a v ita l b e a r i n g u p o n c o n t e m p o r '^ r y p r o b l e m s , T h i s

im p lies th at th e d r a m a t i s t must f e e l h im s e lf to have a duty to

th e present as w e ll as t o th e past and n o t adopt a p o sitio n of

such com plete o b jec tiv ity tow ards th e l a t t e r th at, i n L u d . w i g ’s

w ords, "he s e e s th e th in g s o f the a n c ie n t w orld s o l e l y w ith

1 . C f .IkfaA^Éig o n Sh a k fi>6 'n » g,rfc^ 2 ?1 ,

1 8 6 0 - 6 5 D ie B e s o n d e r h e i t ( i s t ) ?ben das H i s t o r i s c h e ” ,
2 . D f. ib id o p. 2 4 1 , 1 8 6 0 - ^ 5 , w here Ludw ig draw s p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n
t i o n t o t h e w av i n w hich S h a k e s p e a r e w a a b l e t o e n t e r f u l l y
i n t o t h e s p i r i t n.nd n o i n t o f i i r l u t a r c h .
3 .W X I I I p. 4 *
 th.r o f tVi^ obsorv^tr" (l). r e l ’^.tion. b^tv./o^n
o'\->t o.na or ori f o r Hrbbol r. v i t 0.1 one ^ onl one o/hi.oh i s
woakenod r o t h e r th o n s t r on;’-thenefl h y on nndno pr e o o n u p tt.io n
w ith nero h i s t o i i c o l f o o t s w i t h o u t s e l e c t i n g t h o s e which h ove

.s p c c iT l i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r ns t o - l e y .

-But w h i l s t t h i s r e l o . t i o n p r o v i d e s t h e s t o r t i n g - p o i . n t ond

h os i c a s s n m p t i o n , i t s dron o t i c pres e - t o t i o n con o n l y he o c h i e v -

ed s u c c e s s f n l l . y i f th^ g e n e r o l c o n t e n t o f h i s t n r y i s , os i t

W'^re; e n c o s e d i n t h e s h c l . l o f o po.rti c n l "r p e r i o d whi.ch s h o . l l

he c o r e f u l l y s e l e c t e d ond. then portrayed, i n i t s e s s e n t i .o l. f a c ­

tors ( 2 ) . And. however Ludwig *s ond H ^ h h e l ’s t h e o r i e s may d i f f e r

h o t h i n .aim and e m p h a s i s , i t is c l e a r t h a t i n each c o s e some

k now ledge o f t h e n o r t i c u l or p e r i o d which t h e d r a m a t i s t has cho­

s e n f o r h i s p u r p o s e was c o n s i d e r e d es s e n t i " ] , Tv./^t H e h h e l , for

one, d id n o t d i s r e g a r d t h e im p o r ta n c e o f s t u d y i n t h i s r e s p e c t

w-'s a l r e a d y f u l l y e v i d e n c e d i n hi.s f i r s t pi.ay. I n d e e d , i t is

r e c o r d e d hy Karl Werner t h a t , a f t e r Hehhel had g o t heyond t h e

i n i t i a i , s t a g e s o f " p la y in g " w it h h i s m a t e r i a l , h e was i n t h e

hah i t o f making an e x t e n s i v e s t u d y o f a g r e a t d e a l o f r e l e v a n t

. l i t e r a t u r e f o r a more i n t i m a t e / k n o w l e d g e o f t h e m i l i e u (3 ).

1 0 OS V p. 2 4 2 , 1 8 6 0 - 6 5 * - 2* Cf. P r e f a c e to M oria Maxdalena

1 8 4 4 , JW XI ppo 5Bf :" (-Gs ) I s u c h t c t e i n , doss d i e Kunst i n dem a l l g e
me i n en M ecr, w o r in W elle v / e l l e v e r s c h i i n g t ,n o ch l a n g e Baken stek'
k e n , und. der Nachwel t den a l l g e m e i n c n und a l l e r d in g s an s i c h u n-
v e r l . i e r h a r e n , w e i l u n m it t el h or im Lchen ou f g ch e n d. e n , Geh a l t der
G e s c h i c h t e i n der S c h o a l e der s p e c i e l l en P e r i o d e n , d e r en S p i t z e ,
s i e i n i h r e n v e r s c h i e d e n e n G l i e d e r u n g en h i l d e t , ü h e r l i e f e r n ^ihr
a l s o , wenn auch n i c h t das w e i t l & i f i g e und g l e i c h g ü l t i g e K e g i s t e

Ge—
No'A'her r o theno o t o o onnrliict orl more as s i dr or s i y t h a n i n t h e

o a s e of H o b h c l *s o n l y " ' t r i c t l y h i s t o r i c a l o l a y , B o m e t r i u s , and

e v e n L u l a ' i y r i y V t havf" b oon irnare.ssod hy t h e p a i n s vjhich h e t o o k

i n cia'’'^r t o hocemc a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e k i i s s o - - ' o l i s h w o r l d -

” 'jVolch ■■^in G r a n s ” , ho s i d o f i t , hr t n e v e rth e le s s a special

j o r r n e y t o Krakow and compos ed p a r t e f t h e a c t r a l p]. ay i n t h e

s r y p e . î t i v o atm osphere o f i t s m e d ia e v a l '-hnrches (l). Althoryh ,

as xi.ll. V.'ornor p o i n t s o n t i n h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n t o D o m e t r i n s (2),

H c h h e l s;.'..s h e r e con s t r a i n e d hy t h e v e r y n n f a m i l \ - - r i t y o f t h e

m a t e r i a l t o make more s e a r c h i n y i n v o., t i s a t i o ns t h a n was h i s wont

i n h i s o t h e r p] a y s , w h er e he wa. to a l a r y e ext ent ah l e t o draw

on p - ^ r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e and h i s i n t i m a t e k n o w l e d g e o f t h e B i b l e ,

t h e method h y which t h e s e i n v e s t i g a k i o n s wore c o n d u c t e d i s c h a ­

racteristic o f H o b b c l ’s p r o c e d u r e as a w h o l e . Had h i s m a i n con­

c e rn been a d e t a i l e d accumulation o f h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s , the h i ­

s t o r y h o o k s w o ul d h a v e g i v e n him a l l h e r e q u i r e d : hy m a k i n g a
special j o ' ^ r n e y t o t h e a c t u a l s c e n e o f h i s p i a y , h o w e v e r , he

h o p e d t o o b t a i n s o m e t h i n g o f more v i t a l i m p o r t a n c e , n a me l y t h e

prevailing atmosphere o f the place ( 3 ) . H e b h e l *s i n t u i t i v e feel­

i n g f o r a t m o s p h e r e was i n d e e d t h e l i n k b e t w e e n h i s p r e l i m i n a r y
s t n d i e s an d. t h e ac t u a l d r amas , t r ans form i n g h i s t o r i c a l d a t a and

l o L c t t c r t o C h r i s t i n e H e b b e l , 12 S e p , 1 8 5 8 5 p . 2 o l , , and l e t ­
t e r t o M a r i e W i t t g e n s t e i n , 2o O c t . 1 9 5 8 ; i b i d . p . 2o 2. - 2. W VI p.zrv.
5 . O f , L e t t e r t o F r i e d r i c h S chw a r z 0 nb erg^lTF" J iil y 1354 ;B r . V p . 1 3o :
"Mi r i s t G e s c h i c h t e e t was I n d i v i d u e l l e s , was m i r d u r c h a u s k e i n un­
d e r e r mac h e n k a n n ; a b e r m i r h e l f e n k a n n / e i n J e d o r , u n d das B e s t e
iyut "Ber j e n i g e ftir m i c h , d e r m i r
e i n B a r o m e t e r i n d i e H‘-.nd g i e b t , wonach s i c h d i e 3 e d e s m a l i g e A t -
mosph&L'o b e s t i m m e n I f e s t " .
 - 8 /cL'”*

n-'x-^fvlly a h p , o u t , w a r f ' ’ ciro rn-, t"n co 3 into flroT.atic form •

for, an h o h i n n o l f s a i r l , - " h e t w o on t h e y l . o t t e and th e painting

ti' 1 e f n i :: ■~'1_\^)oy -> o. o f f or o " (1 ) ♦

Ludwig t r i - d bin >■and a t m o r o o p o c i f i c " 0 .1 y h i s t o r i c a l , p i ays

t h "'n Hohh - y - n d heir.*; " i . o s s t r a v o l . l o d man - h e n e v e r Tarssed

th e horderr. of nativ/^ 1 --nd - h e r e l i e d ez d r . n i v a l y on - 1 1

1 1 '' h i - t o r i.e ' 1 nor.rcan eoTail -h"i a , idn i'-'h h - n t u d i e d m o r e as3 i —

d n o ’a s l y a nd far 1 ars critically "d- - n h i s cont enroor-ry. Prompt ad

hy t h e d^r to a^a r^al intiodJr^ c'^m--ct datura of a n-r-

t i.cr 1 ' T oa r i a d o f hi t o r y •-.nC'. a o n f r o n t a d vj 1 1 h t h a t a s k a f s a™*

loatin^^ from t h e v a s t m a t / ^ r i a l which h^ i n v a r i a b l y collected

for til i s orrpose, Lu 1 r i g often d e v o t e d w h o l e n a me s of h sp r e -

1 i n i nary sketches of pl-ys to a m inute enum eration of t h e many

difC-"^rent factors o f a chosen m il i e u * In a "Planheft" belonging

1 0 Ma . i-no F a l l a r i . Tor e:c a m p l e , h a n o t e s all the attributes of

the position, natural surroundngs and c o n s t i t u t i o n of Venice,

intending to incorporate tfiem i n t h e i vagary o f t h e play ( 2 ).

The c o n s c i o u s effort which he devoted to assim ilatin g his raw

'1 : teriol dram atically into a given play is shown by h i s succès-

siv e versions o f t h e Agnes l o r n au or s t o r y , and a c o m p a r i s o n o f i

t.hem w t t h H e b b e l *s p l a y on t h e same s u b j e c t is i l l un i n a t i n g

1.T II I o l 9, 31 d " n .l 344# - 2 . "N.B. zur G esc h l o s s eid;a i t w ird /

b e i ^ t r a g e n , we n n i e i 1 do r u . s •w• a l 1 e aus V on c d i g s L ag o , H at u r

h u t p S c h if fcrlains t dor Go n do 1 i o r c , F i s c h f a n g , M u r a z z i , d.-"t^T‘ we 5 von

S t oM arkus, v a m e z ia n is c h e G obr"ucho, desg lo ic h e n o r i e n t a l i s c h e , die
V erb i n dung Vo n e d i g s m it dem O r i e n t , I m s a lia s muss das M aterial
zu den B ild e rn g e b e n . . "G it ed by oVich Sctim idt from an unpub 1 i s h -
ed sk etch for M -^.r i n o F al i or i ^ GS IV p. g f ,
 -
Th-^ ..'tory )f the yonnj j j i r l of th e flfto '^ -.th cen tu ry

bo3 0.1’V030-5 b on :ittr.o ctiv o to h o i —o n (li'?ro ti._ % ord the tem p -

^ ot ion to c 0 n c 0n t r " t o o p on t'» 0 c o l o n r f i;J. p ictn .re wh i c h i t c 0n -

jn r 05 up for J.to o'vn 5 o.he is pro-^.t, iyon Hein-.ol, convince.d

t h 0.t nt 1 o 0.51 ' n o t t on-i p t mu5 1 h ^ ^ ct 2 ”V o r a n s c l '^ 1 i c h u n g

dor nilflcn p ovjal t i p on Z o it” (i), stap es 0. compor o.tivol^" lav ish

. g p ' ^ c t 0.0I e ; thouph when on '' e x am i n 0.5 the ^-'oss of h ist^-rical

fi-to p r o v i d e 1 ^-^3" P ^ u l von Z t o t t o n ’s C h ro n icles of An 3 3 b u r p ,

w hich he used, one becomes aw are of th e carefu l process of

s e le c tio n w hich preceded Hebbel *5 d r a m a tis at i o n ( 2 ), L udw ig ,

on the o th er h and, v jith a sim ila r d esire to g i v e a v iv id and

fud. 1 p i ctur 0 o f ”j e Zc i t mi t ih r er Tot a l i t ht, ilir er 3in n l i-

ch en K ra ft, itirer p ew altip en Lei dens c h a f t " (3 ), borrow s fre e -

I3' and m ore e l a b o r a t 013/ from th e sto re-h o u se of m ediaeval ch i-

valrjr and p o e t r y ( 4 ). % e r e Hebbel is co n ten t w ith few broad

stro k es of the brush 13^ m e a n s of o ccasio n al references or a

te llin p an ecd o te, Ludwip o b t a i n s h is effe ct b^'- an accum ulation

o f d e ta il woven w ith a g reater or less degree of d ram atic ne-

ness i t 3^ in to th e d ialogue*

Hut i t is i m p o s s i b l e t o t r e a t H e b b e l ’s and L u d w i g ’s t h e o ­

r i e s o f mi l i e u purely- i n t h e s e n s e o f h i s t o r i c a l ’’s e t t i n g ” ,

1 . L etter to Franz D i . v g e l s t e d t , 26 J a n . 1 8 5 2 I V p. 3 4 8 *
2 . C f. T I I I 4 9 4 3 . 1 5 O c t . 1 3 5 1 . Cf. a l s o A .L n @ w on stein .The Sp^ur-
CCS o f Heb b e l ’s Apn es Bor n au e r . Cambridge ,19o 9* *“ OS IV p. 14
4 o & e r e Hebb e1 has ”d i e H0 n i g r eime und 3 ohmeiche1sprE chc des
H e i n r i c h s von O f t o r d i n g en und Wolframs von E3 ch e n b a c h ” (Act I I
s c . v i ) , t h e s c e n e o r i g i n a l l y i n t r o d u c i n g t h e f i r s t act o f Lud­
w i g ’s un/^eijvon Augsburg o f 1856 c o n t a i n e d t h e w hole p a l 0^ 3^ o f
m e d i a e v a l German p o e t s [ p u b l i s h e d 13 ^ He-'-'dr'ich.oi^ c i t .1 p p . 3 3 9 f ^
But a l r e a d 3'' i n t h e .next v e r s i o n he red.uced t h i s to t h e l e s s
p i c t u r e s l u e , but more m anageable g e n e r a l i s a t i o n o f W o r s e u nse
r e r H (?fisch en P o e t e n ” (OH IV p. l 7 7 ) o
 -
^ v i t h o u t h x i - ' i j l n - th.^m i n t o lino with the quojti'^n o f c h a ra c ­

t e r j.ootion, Indeed, o n r h r i . ' ^ f e x an i n n t i o n o f ttoeir e a r l y work

'! as oi.r"ady s - r v e d to show t h a t the two a s p e c t s went for them

n e c e s s a r ily h-nd in hand, thonyh the precise nature of this

i ter-relatio n had n o t as y e t keen fix e d in term s o f dram atic

theory. To s a y t h a t for e ith e r dram ati-t the one o f o t h e r

aspect was t h e m è r e i m p o r t a n t would m e re ly he heyying th e

question, hut s in c e Hebhel never conceived o f c h a ra c te r as

apart from t h e h i s t o r i c a l process^ r e l i g i o u s , s o c i a l and p o l i ­

tical, w h i l s t L u d w i y ’s s o l e c o n c e r n was t h e portrayal o f cha­

racter and p a s s i o n , o n e may w e h l e x p e c t a consid.ero.hle diffe­

rence in emph a s i s .

I n L s i d w i y ’s case it must h y a in he e m p h a sise d t h a t his whole

a p p r o a c h w"3. n e c e s s a r i l y determ ined by th e peculiar nature of

his creative process. T h e way i n w h i c h , in the earliest mo­

ments of inspiration, h e c o n c e i v e d h i s ra.ain c h a r a c t e r s in a

single vividly illum ined s itu a tio n w ithout reference to their

s u r r o u n d i n g s , seems to have p rec lu d ed any r e a l organic connec­

t i o n betw een c h a r a c te r and e n v iro n m en t ; and t h e choice of

m il i e u wa s i n fact f o r Ludwig somewhat arbitrary. This is

borne o u t b y m-^ny o f h i s plans and s k e t c h e s where t h e s e t t i n g

is not im m ediately established, hut is s u b j e c t e d to constant

changes. Of h is various versions o f Dor J a k o b s t a b L u d w i g w r o t e

h alf-jokingly to h is friend and a d v i s o r E duard L e v r i e n t : "ich

h ab e e i n E t f i c k d a v o n i n P r o s a , dann i n Vers en, e i n ebenso gro­

sses cassiert, bin damit i n I t a l i e n g e we s e n , wieder nach

 -Stf--

D e u ts c h l'in i h e r d b ( l ) . Nor w9.3 thr; t l m e - s ^ t t i n j a l -

wa y s .w -iediatoiy arid n o a l t a r a b l y fixad; tVm s a v o r a l conceptions

of bis early p l o y D i o Wal l b n r ,a. for exo.m,p] ns c i l i a t e d b e t w e e n

on th e on.'* b a n d t h e tim e of the peasant rebellions a n d on t h e

other th at of the fr^^nch K e v o l u t i o n (2). Of p a r t i c u l a r interest

is the fact t h ' ^ t L u d w i g was b y no m e a n s certain about th e pi ace

and p e r i o d o f Dio Makkab dor : t h u s in a sketch for his earlier

version of 1 951, e n t i t i . c d Die M u t t e r d e r MakkabS^.er, we f i n d h i m

»

considering the possib il.ity of "m odem ising" t h e w>’o l e p l a y and

tr a n s pi an tin g it into th e tim e o f L^uis :{VI o r again in to that-

of the war in the Oev e n u e s (3).

However, his later theories o nly h e lp e d to s u p p o rt such a

practice by a f f i r m in g t h a t environm ent in i t s e l f was, after all,

!

relativ ely unim portant, For, h a v in g s t u d i e d S h a k e s p e a re a n drama !

from t h i s and o t h e r angles, h e dame t o the conclusion th at for ,

plays such as Ot h e l l o or Macbeth - i.e. plays i n which h i s t o r y :

p ro v id ed m erely th e background - it wa s i m m a t e r i a l w h e n a n d

where th e action took place, since t h e s p e c t a t o r ’s attention

wa s c o n c e n t r a t e d e n t i r e l y upon th e i n n e r development of p^3sion.

1 . L o t t e r t o E d u a r d D e v r i o n t , 9 O c t . 1 8 5 o ;GE VI p . 364= O f . a l s o G-S

I V p . 2 4 - 0 ^ 2 . V SW V I p . 2 3 3 * - 3e F o r a n e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e
d e v e l o p m e h t o f t h i s d r a m a y . L e o n M i s , o n . c i t . I I p p . 233 f f «
 -

Only th e flesire t o ma k e s u c h a (development c r e d i b l e prom pted '

the (IramatlBt t^ ask h i r s e l . f what manner o f e n v iro n m e n t would

hest 1 :nrd i t s e l f to h i s purpose. 'Thus h e t o o k t h i s or th a t par-

tioular p'^ riod hecan.se i t is there that the characters which he

w ished to portray revealed them eelves most effectively. "Sehen

t)ie 7 oho Pen 0 p r i o l a n ” . h e i s r e p o r te d to have t o l d a friend

in 1 9 6 3 . ”2 ^ 3 w ^ r o j l e i c h j d l t i j , wo d e r s p i e l t e , es k a n n ü h o r a l l

sein; "her in d e r / - ^ei t , in d i e s cm K l o i d e niixamt s i c h der S to lz

am h e s t e n aus" (l). In s h o r t , i t seems t o h a v e b e e n L u d w i g ’s

b elief that since both the locality a n d t h e mome nt o f tim e

were entirely su b s e rv ie n t to the end o f c r e d i b l e characterisa­

tion, th e y m ight w ith im p u n ity be changed a t w i l l .

Nothing c o u l d h a v e b e e n more a l i e n t o H e b b o l ’s approach th an

the apparent arbitrariness o f such a procedure. His poetic ta- |

e n t , having, as he h i m s e l f d e s c r i b e d i t , been k i n d le d by the

f l . a me o f H i s t o r y (2), it is unlikely t h a t he would have ta k e n

the m atter o f h i s t o r i c a l mil i e u lightly. On t h e contrary, being

firm ly rooted in the conviction that it was o n l y c e r t a i n k i n d s

o f w e l d . - de f i n e d periods in the h is to r y o f th e w orld which p re ­

sented a fru itfu l field for the particular problem s he w ish e d

to present, h e was f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g d e t e r m i n e d inSjais c h o i c e .

This expl"ins why a p a r t i c u l a r mi l i e u seemed to force itself

u p o n him at the c r u c i a l mome nt of the creative process w ithout

any question as t o its "suitability". Moreover, he firm ly be» I

1 , "G esprhche O t t o Ludwigs m i t J o s e f L e w in s k y " , 2 4 J u l y 186? ,

V I n . 3 1 7 . C f . a l s o ^ V p . 2 9 7 , - 2 . y . L e t t e r t o A r n o l d R{!l§er7 ‘
15 ü e p .1 8 5 2 ; # - %I" p. 253".
 - S6 -

1irvnd th at r. f ^ r m r t i c ontrtlo n of plv-n cho.roctors ond

rvo'-'to, h o T j o v o r ^-ol]. dnonr ^ont Of^, c o n l <1 onl v r l n p true if they

w r r 0 cnnooivofl hy th n dro..-oilst oof o f tho g e n eral h i s t o r i c a l

''.71d n a t i o n a l condition of the tim es to which th e y in fa c t he—

longed. Ag a i n and a g a in ol echoes h i s oaid y c o n t e n t i o n of

V^?7 t h a t even t h e m ost i n c r o d .i h lo character can he invest^;d

with tragic inovitability if the d r am a t i s t sncceeds i n showing

his neculi.ar conditions suh j cot to the ".tmosphere in which he

lived. Jin.t woe t o the d r am a t i s t who i g n o r e s tt: e mome nt o f h i -

storvj which b e lo n g s a s mnc.h t o h i s d r a m a a s S y r i a ’s s u n t o

Syri^.*s gains J fo r h is c r e a t i o n wi l d, b e devoid o f a l l life

and m e a n i n g ! (l). Ho.d H e b b e l b e e n a b l e to cast one g l a n c e into

the w o r k s ho I') o f h i s c o n t cm g o r a r y h r d w i g , h i s indignation could

h .‘^r dly-h''■VC b e e n l e s s t.n a n t h - ' t a r o u s e d b^r M a s s i n g e r ' s tragedy

L u d o v ic o , which; though based on t h e s t o r y o f Herod, was cast

in an I t a l i a n m ould - a fact which p r o v e d t o H c bbol b e y o n d any

doubt that ttie a u th o r had c o m p lete ly failed to s e i z e upon th e

essentials of the event by not a tte m p tin g to show t h e h e r o and

his retiens as an i n t e g r a l part of his own d i s t i n c t i v e cultu-

r al m ilie u (2 ).

This theory of tra g ic necessity as p r o d u c e d b y t h e s t r i c t - '

est i n t erdependence betw een character and e n v ir o n m e n t colour­

e d H e b b e l *s a p p r o a c h t o e a c h one o f h i s dramas. In w r itin g of

I
1 . He v i e w o f M a s s i n g e r ’s p l a y L u d o v i c o , 1 8 4 9 , V/ XI p . 253*
2. "Das i s t s c h l i m m , das i s t s e h r s c h i m m , das 7.e igt g l e i c h a u f I
d e n e r s t e n B l i c k . d a s s a u c h e r dam u n g e h e u r e n V o r f . a l l , a u f d a n c
ar s a in S td ck g ru n d e t,n u r die t r i v i a l e , an ecdotische H cite ab-
g e w o n n e n h a t , Wo b i c i b t d i e u n t e r g e h c n d e , i h r c m S c h i c k s a l n o c h

sta lte te neue! ” - ibid.

 - 5^ -
Viis c ol i c ^ n t i o r i o f 'Doric t r i l l s he cTphc.s i s e r i t h e D iffer ere c in

this r e s n c o t hot r^; een h i s orm a t t i t i i D c or.D t h e t o f t h ? c l es s i ­

e d Dr en e t 1 s t s who p r e o o D c D h i n * w h i l s t S c h i l l e r ’s i m o . e i r e t i o n

heD h e e n s t i n n l - . t e D si'^nly en D s o l e l y - h y t h e yc o r d him en

f - ’c t o r of f ‘~ t o , hn h i m e m lf f o i t hounD t o h e s c >>is D r e n e f i r s t

enD f o r o m o s t u p o n the Slev world, which, with h is usuel yresn

of rssontiels, ho procooDoD to cherectoriso es " g r e e t , though

i n t o r n,el], y D i v i d c D " (l). I n tVio s e m e we y h-' n e i n t e i n o D t h a t he

oxiDe-voureD t o h e s o D e n o v c v e , M r.rie M e p l : . l n e , ^ p n es Dorne.uer

enD D i e N i b o l u n - on u p o n "the G em enic worl.D. i n its w erious

s t epos o f D e v c l opm o n t " ( 2 ), e n d p r i d e D h irns o l f i n 1 a t o r y e e r s

on h i s picture o f JiiDee i n J u d i t h end h i s presentation o f me-

Dir.evel mi d a n c i e n t Germanic conditions i n Go no v e v a (l). At

the s e me t i m e i t is in t er estin g to note th^t the p erio d o f the

l atter dvy, for cmemple, d s D e s c r i b e d by H e b P d as "dis poo-0

tische 2isit" ( 4 ); for, a] t h o u g h h e w o u l d h a v e h a d no D i f f i c u l ­

ty in fixing the precise date of the h a l f leg e n d ary . h a lf h i ­

storical action ( 5Ü, h i s m a i n c o n c e r n was n o t do c u m e n t a r y

exactitude, but the establishing of the general atm osphere in

1 • L e t t e r t o J u l i u s G l o s e r , 4 A u g • 1 8 p 8 ; B r . IIL p* 9 9 , - 2 « L e t t e r t o
M a r i e W i t t g e n s t e i n , 2 Dec# 1 9 5 8 ; i b i d . p • 2 1 6 • - 5 , C f . l e t t e r t o
A r n o l d J b d g e , 1 5 S e p . 1 8 5 2 ; B r •V p . 4 7 , " 4,W I p# 95 u n d e r Ihr am a t i s
P e r s o n a e # - 5 , C f . T I I 2 4 ^ , 51 J a n . 1 8 4 2 : " D i e S c h i a c h t b e i P o i ­
t i e r s , wo K a r l M a r t a l l D.c|^ Ab d - e r - A h a m a n , deH A n f u l i r e r De r Mqs
lorn e n w a r f , f i e l 7 5 2 v o r . I n j enem J a h r s p i c l t a l s o m e i n e G e -
noveva"#
wy.iioh h o t h ", (zn 1 0 • nh Gonovcvr. n o n l h h o v r t h e i r n ^ . t r r "1. ^.ce,

AS ]':'VO " I r ti " n o o v sio n to not ", "oLtmosnhoro o f t h e

t i r OS" ; i s inOoof'' ty-.e o p o r " i v e w n r i n Hohn o l t^-ionrios n f
"nv.i r o n v o n t , oh I'jhio'- , hos.i.rmio n o t t n h o.vo i t n i s i n t o r p r ^ ' t od

hy o r ’t 'i . o s on oh as P r j f os s o r H o i h o r y , h e g nv " '-'is own he f i n i t io]

i n ”Ih *i n Wort i*lh o r P. .s D- .-m" " ; h e vvc.s, ho o x n i " i n o P , n s i n g t h e

word i n i t s w " t " -ihysiool. s o n s o h y o '""n-ting i t w i t h t h o t orm

i t y 0 i s t "y s i r i t o f tho t i m . o s , l oh i o h one], o s os t h o s ^ i r i t n . o l

^ À ~ ^
fonntoin of iifo , tho s t r e.n o f i P . o o s , os t hv' s i r is onolo-sed

hy "itvosoher"' i n th o 'hysic''! s^nse ( l ). Th^ w o t h o h y ’^ h i e h

n n ; r t i c u l s - . r kiiK"^ o f " t/'o sy h ore eon ho evoked i n n r net i e ni

P r VO a t i e t orws do-on- h" on t h e i n d i v i ' t / r.l e' n r ^ e t ^ r of the

y]yy end does n o t lend itself ess 11 y to yroeiso dofinition*

Bi-^.t i t s n o - 1 t n e g i h i o n ' - n i f e s t " t i o n i n H eh^ o l *s own yl e y s is

yor]'!"ys to he for.nd i n t h e more " oyi s o Pi e " scenes, where et-

mo s y h e r e is d r e . m e t i e e ] . l y c o n c e i v e d , "s e \ nr n e t o r s , whieh seem

to h e v e no o t h e r r e i s o n d f e t r o then th a t o f i n t one i f y i n y t h e

imorOSSion o f e given environm ent. A c i v i l i s a t i o n , for exam yle,

w h i c h o / oul d y r d d u e e an A t t e e i c r x e s , the "hitman c l o c k ” , was c a -

nahle of the greatest outrages against the y e rs o n a litÿ/( of th e

individual - this is the c h i e f i m p r e s s i o n ^-'roduced. h y h i s

fleeting appearance i n Hero des n nd M ariemne (2)c S im ilarly,

the s t ' ^ r v i n g mop i n J u d i t h or the C h a p l a i n i n Die N j.h e lu n ra n

conjure up v i s i o n s o f a c u l t u r e which to a large e x t e n t moulds

l.C f. W XI p . 2 2 . - 2. A ct IV s o i v .
 - g f- j
!

miiidj o f c\ H ? o' ./-j-o tt 2 1 t\-t " ,1 2 j

-• t i l . 1 i n v'ViL ".". i - It vt-T. i - l . l y ' " . o t t v - t c ' i i n j t o z l o f ^ o l n ?

J Tyn-1 Tn-i:. ',0V';.l ^ ! nf.u, -ni if tb e Jo:«; !

v; ' - ' 0 t' " ""on ' \ ; i ? f n - n ? n t i n th'i o'nr? pi.

■-VO'-':" i n 1 ■t I T y--;vo t ' . ’••? i - i i oo'? 1 % o «?'f C i c t i f ^ - n o v e v : .

to bo due t o tho no tn to i n r 0 ^ :0 :toti.on i f the I fiiilo Ajos

niich Tjnj t o c o rt 'in m t-'-t 'n t'-io ch p r o c t o r (i).

■'^in ' ' i n n 1^"- i n n i n t'-^ono o T -In'"n - h o t n ' i o n t h e n t-1 1 3 o r1 th
i " ' r . - A. : 1 J : n i - - '" n t , .'’'• T* C ' "1 : r ,r» T ''' I , f)'»"' 0 /a c< r> n'’ T T-i rï. r l

ir the f i l l mn' :

" h ix tn-'vontij o l : I n 2i v i i a -.1 i . s i c r * n j j j r 0c c s 3 1s t v l c l i n i c h t

'Inz'ch W'^3 i r m h 0j t )n z u v e i ' s i n n l i o h e n . o r "11 i s t
iv.o W-'Ss " r Wnoo o r un ^ i c r Mcnsch h ^ u s c h ; uhon v ± ^ j ones

v o n j :-'1 i r hr I j c h l c h t o, l u r c h o i l co 3 t r ”r t , oio r o ic h o rt,

" i n i n J - - ' i n n i s 3v 111 in Vor j s s c h t i ' c h n n n i n r t , s o d e r M?ns oh

e i n K i - o n t l i ^ u l i c h e s v o n he i t , h - . t i o n ^ 'ieo h i i c h t c un d Go-
- ' *c'- ” f2 ^

A lthough ho affirned that y / 3 T y one m u s t ho o.hle t o I d e n t i f y

h i m s e l f w ith th e n o t i o n s o f H e r o des ( 0 ), h e m a i n t o.ined a t t h e

same tim e t h . t th is is host achieved i f the dram atist shapes

his c'laractars not a c c o rd in j to hins 'I f and h i s conditions,

h u t i n s u c h a way t h / t o present them n a t u r a l l y w ith in t h e i r

0 wn a n v i r o n m e n t ( 4 ).

l o i ^ t t e r t o F r a n z H i n j e l s t e d t , 1 4 J u n o 1 3 5 o ; H r . VI p . 1 4 5 =
2 , T I I I 5179p 1 6 S e p . 1 3 5 1 =
5 oC f * L e t t e r t o H , ï h . iii’t s c h e r , 2 2 Dec » 1 3 4 7 ; ^ I V p« 7 4 .
4 o S f . ? .B o r n s t e i n , n r , c i t . ' . v o l . I p. 5 8 8 .
 — Qq —

/C .il"t d i f f ’T i n j "^11 y f r o m H o b b o l *5 h i o t o r i c a l

V 1 Cl/vs o f "nvironmoTit, h r l m i j c o u l d ho.vc h o d f e w o b j e c t i o n s to

3 u ch a p r i n c i p l e a B g l n j hi_ms ol f c o n s t c ^ + l p a t pains to e mp h a ­

size tbr. ” - ' t ■^• r na l l p v a l i d t y p o s ” o f drama, h o was always an-

xions "nd, indeed, n atn rally isclinod to b r i n p out as v i v i d l y

as possih'' the individu'^1 . f^'atures of the period and p l a c e

which constitute w h a t Via c a l l e d t h e "historicche B o le n ” . His

own d e f i n i t i o n of this as ” f “i t - , D e n k - , u n d G e f f i I s a r t , Na­

tional it h t” (l ) bcars in ti-enry a marked re s e m b la n c e t o Hob-

b o l ’s conception of ” -".tmosp^!ere” , b u t it is in fact f " r more

com prehensive a nd d-rf'dled in conception. H a v i n g s p a r e d no

pains in acquaint ing h im s e lf w ith i t s various aspects, h e was

not co n ten t m erely to characterise it in general tarm s, but

investigated w ith g r e - t precision the ideas, ethical codes

and i n s t i t u t i o n s of given m ilieu as w e l l as i t s more p h y s i ­

cal asp*'cts ( 2 ), T>.e p l a y w h e r e L u d w i g achieved such a render­

in g most p-^rfectly, b e c a u s e most s p o n t a n e o u s l y , is Do r R r b -

f B r s t ' u ; ^ w hich ^though s'^t i n t h e s o l i t u d e of a forest, trans­

ports the spectator into the v ery m idst of those troubled

1 , GS I V p . 4 5 , c i t e d b y H r i c h S c h m i d t f r o m a n u n p u b l i s h e d n o t e
to Die K a u f m a n n s to c h te r von M e s s in a (l3 6 o -6 4 )* - 2 . For a t y p i
c a l d e s c r i p t i o n y « L ,^o n M i s , o p . c i t . I I p . 2 o 3 : ” De r h i s t o r i s c h e
Bo d e n m u s s s i c h u n s i n s i n n l i c h e r A n s c h a u l i c h k o i t d a r s t e l l e n ,
d i e h a r t en S c h ü l d g e s e t z e , d ie G r a u s a m k o i t , m it der d i e p a t r i - ^
z i s c h e n G l h u b i g e r s i e h a n d h a b e n , d a s Hi e n d d e s Vo I k e s , d i e Ge
f a h r , f f i r d e n G t a a t a u s dera M a n g e l e i n e s M i t t e l s t a n d e s , w e i l '
die P r o l e t a r i e r n i c h t h e i r at en, d ie Ucberhîlufunj
m i t § k l a v e n , u . s . w . ” . C i t e d f r o m -an u n p u b l i s h e d ’’P l a n h . e f t
d e v o te d to Marino F a l i e r i .
 Q1 —

-nd tn rb n l.rn t tim rs (l). ev^-n -'i;h?rc L u d v j i g , b y f?T

m orr in tin .:t,'5 ly r o o t r i n b is n n tiv ^ so il th n n , wns u n -

n h l5 to 'i rn w u y o n o o r s o n o . ! o x p o r i < * n c e 0.3 wns t h e ons0 in th is

tr-n^^ody o f oom no n 1 1 h is p r o d i l o c t i o n vn3 o] wnys f o r populox

tx o .d itio n o l n ah j^ o ts, nnrl e v o n i n h i s h isto ric a l plnys th ere is

a norkod '"^ referen ce f o r t h e t y p o o f mi l i e u v ; h io h h a d n o t y e t

lo st its sonsuousness J i t s p 0.33 ion''•■to w i l t o e s s and c l o s e n e s s

to n atu re (2). T his in -^rrn h o s its own p a r t i o u i ’’c o s t u m e " ,

whose o a re fill an aly sis and f u s i o n w ith tho h i s t o r ie n ] . fou^fdiiioT

n-ve the fu lle st scope t o L u d w i g *3 g i f t o f m in u te o b s e r v a tio n .

"Da i s t das r e i z v o l ] o S iz ilie n ", runs a ch aracteristic passage

"d as r o m c n tis c h e M i t t o l a l t e r . T T lorall die dom s i n n l i o h e n L c h e n

und seinem sfld lic h e n hoichtum zugew andte S s i t . K oine S p u r von

m etap h y sisch en S c h a tte n . S in e k a t h o l i s c h e Nuance - doch h l o s s

als K ost& a & her a l l den h u n te n B e g o h n is s e n , der f a r h ig e n K ra ft

und der 5c h a r f e n Z e ic h n u n g d e r w '^iche, k lare, h l a û l i c h e S&den-

d u ft. D i'% e r s i e h t der lan g rû ck ig e, grimme A t n a . Die sch w fcrs-

1 i c h e n We g o n a c h N o r d u n d i n L i c h t z e r s c h m e l s e n d e n a c h S&dcn.

Der K c jia l v o n M e s s i n a m i t F - t a Morgana-, S c h w e r t f i s c h e n , D el-

ph in en , S c y l la and C h ary h d is, S eesch lach t, das u n z u g ^ n g lic h e

l o C f . E o T y r o f f , "Das H e i m a t e r l e h n i s i n den W o rk e r O t t o L u d -
wi.-^’s i n G ^ r m a n i s c h e S t u d i e n , B o r 1 i n 1 9!$d , H c f t I 0 6 p . 6 5 - • • •
u n d 3 0 ft’JI' ' t d i e S z e n e d e r S ^ re n zs c h e n k e im i^rh f o r s t e r
in d n ,3 GSxftix d e r Z e i t , d i e s e l b s t i n d i e e n t l e ^ e n s t e n W a l d t V
l e r i h r e n Z f L n d g t o f f w i r f t , , d e r j e r a de d o r t i n d e n n - m s e l i f e e n
H ü t t e n (1er d e r r e i c h e Nal'irung f i n d e t " . - 2 . O f . n o t e t o Kg-
n l t D r r n l e y s T o d ( o r M a r i a v o n b c h o t t l o . n d ) - ’be,g;un i n 1 8 5 5 ) :
■^Dic W i l d h e i t u n d S i n n l i c h k e i t d e s g a n e e n Z e i t a l t e r s s o i l n b s ]
a l l e r s o h e i n e n " —C i t e d b y S r i c h S c h m i d t , G S _ I V p , 2 8 . C f . a l s o n o ^ e
t o H e r m a n n ( o r A r n i m ) : ”D i e w i l d e n h e i z e d e s a l t e n D ç u t s c l i l ^ i n a s ,
d e r dû s t e r e u n d d o c h m i l d e S i n n d e r D e u t s c h e n , d e s r o m a n t i c s c h e

19%9. H e f t 7 9 ,p .15. !
 — 92 —
Gens c h i n So f ie r S c e l l e m i t A^s-^^icht n n f i i e v e r 1e r e n e H e i i n n t

und dns wil l e M ccr In zw isch en als G nf"zijnis dns crst so S lrg o s-

^ewi ssen. *. (l )

By t h u s g iv in c free rein to h is i m a g i n a t i o n L u d v ; i g ’r e n d e r e d

h is ta s k o f co n ceiv in g d ram atic ch aracters in th e sp irit of

th eir en v iro n m en t, w h ilst at the same t i m e c a r e f u l l y preserv­

in g th eir "ty p ical g e n e ra l hum anity" ^ ex ceed in g ly d iffic u lt.

T h i s m ay a c c o u n t for th e fact th a t he o c c a s io n a lly even con­

demned t h e " i n d i v i flu a l l s a t i o n ” o f t i m e and p la c e (2 ), a n d was

c o n stan tly attem p tin g to defin e th e e sse n tia lly d ifferen t

treatm en t demrinded hy t h e dram a an d t h e n o v e l r e s p e c t i v e l y ,

w h ilst th e b a s is of a ll c h arac terisa tio n is still t h e know-

1 e d g e o f hum a n n a t u r e in g en eral, it is the n o v e l i s t , he

c l aim ed , in h is i i - o i n a n s t u d i e n . who h a s th e added d u ty o f m aking

a study a f a "p articu lar p ro v in cial n -.tu re ” in its inm.ost r e ­

cesses, w h ere human h i s t o r y , p o sitio n , c lim ate , v eg etatio n ,

food, o ccu p atio n , trad itio n , leg en d , fl.enom ination, e d u catio n

e tc . a ll e x p la in and m o d ify one anf^ther (3 ). In h is d ram atic

th e o ry he endeavoured to ap p ly a very d ifferen t u r i n e i p , de­

m an d in g t h e most g e n e r a l and p r i m i t i v e of m o tifs w ith o u t too

much i n d i v i d u a l co lo u r ( 4 ). But it is one o f th e iro n ies of

1 . C i te d by h r i c h S chm idt from an u n p u b l i s h e d s k e t c h f o r D ie

Ka i i f m - a n n s t o c h e r v o n M e s s i n a^GS I V p . 4 3 . - 2 . O f . L u d w i g ’s c r i t i ­
c i s m o f t h e f i r s t tw o a c t s o f Di e Ma k k ab h e r o n t h i s a c c o u n t ,
a s c i t e d b y H e y fir i c h . o u T c i t . I p . 2 2 . - 3 . ffS""Vl p^ 2 3 2 f
4 . GrS V p . 3 4 7 ; I 8 6 0 - 6 5 : Am d' a u s t i s t s o r e c h t z u s eh e n , w e 1 c h e n
p o e t i s c h e n V o r t e i l das S c h la n k e und P r i m i t i v e g i e b t . G r c t c h e n
k f i n n t e u n s n i c h t s o a l s d a s B f i r g e r m ^ j l c h e n u n d d a s Weib s e l b s t
e r s c h f i t t e r n , w e n n w i r m e h r v o n i h r w i i s s t e n . . Wir s e h e n s i c s e l b s
n i c h t In i h r e r e i g e n t l i c h e n U m g e b u n g , w o d u r c h s i e u n s s c h o n z u
i n d i v i d u e l l w ü r d e . . W i r 3 e h e n b ï o s s d a s Vvhib u n d d a s M o t x v d e r
L i e b e , a l l e r a llg e m e in s te p r i m i t iv e M otive ,
 - 93 -
!• u 'A'i - *r, r t i =1 1 i c t - J . n t. t h •'■t h i s v ^ r v v i- s i ]. i 1 7 ar ^d t o

fror ^ r i : . n t i s i n ^ \M\th r i n ? - T n i n d t s ^'irti~

niil'^.r T t '='n rn? o n w h i c h h e w".s ot ony o n e t ici 0 ond i n

"'ooo - ' n os th hii 0 0 m o or e f n i 1 7 d n f i n o d t h e o r i e s . Tho v o r y

f - ' o t o 35 w h i o h r e n d e r h i s d r om a t i c characters so nocnlirrly life*

lik e "nd a t t r a c t i v e ro those w hich, in h is opinion, should

h.::vo t h e i r rig h t fui place in the novel, a n d h e was f o r c e d more

th a n once to r e g r e t having chos'^n t h e drama as h i s favourite

"rt f o r m o ’’rCtwcS L’h n l i c h e s ” , h e w r o t e in a cons i d (^ ra tio n o f

hir via] t e r o c o t t ’s c h a r a . c t e r s , " h a h e n m c i n c F i - u r on im E r h —

f ( ^ r s t o r , was d i e Leh' •' ds i i l l l l c d o r s el h e n I v ^ t r i f f t . D i e s sind

reines T h f r i n g e r G e w f c h s . f i n e h r z h a l u n g m it s o l c h c n F i g u r en

- d s s t c nun . her auch i n T hilringen s p i e l en. V/fre i c h do c h a u f

dcm vVegc 1 e r P r c ' u k t i o n w i e im E r h f ô ’r s t ^ r go''lich en , hftte

mich d m it ^Ijer dem rioman z u g e w a n d t ” ( l ) .

Ap-'rt from t h i s consciousness o f " bei ng " e r p e t u a l . l y h a m p e r e d

hy h i s own n o v e l i s t i c t e c h n i q u e L u d w i g was c o n s c i o u s of a

certain d isc re p a n c y hotwcen h is own d r a m a t i c practice and what

he b e lie v e d to he fundam ental principles of a r t . The m o s t im­

portant o f t h e s e vr's t h e need for a perfect b a lan ce between

the general and i n d i v i d u a l elements in drama - a principle to

which h o th Hebhol a nd L u d w i g h a d a t an e a r l y s t a g e given t h e i r

assent, and which forms an i n t e r e s t i n g point of contact in

their approach to the problem o f environm ent. H ebbel, i t w ill

l . G S VI p . 0 3 .
 — 94 —

be rernerbcrca, w: j "t '"in s to bnizir irto srooini -r^rin'^rcm

the n^r.a f o r i n v e s t i g g t h e u n i v e r s ^.1 n c t u r ? o f o flrr.rrr. w i t h

",n i n i i v i du ol. fl.ovour ;T-'rivoi f r om t h e p o r t i o u l r r type of cul-

turr], ••.nd h i s t o r i c n l m i l i c u in which it is set. In other words,

01. t h o n y h h.Ls p r i m n r y c o n c e r n woo n l w o y s w i t h ' ^^ep u n i v e r s r 1

t.ruths und f u n d - '.monto l h n m - n p r n h l o m s ^ h e s u s nt th e srme tim e

desirous not to l . o s o ;; i y h t o f th "t i n d i v i du ol i s i n y p r o c e s s

w^'iich i s the 1 i f c —b l o o d o f " 1 1 ^rue d r "omn ( l ) . H isto ry being

"the p r e c i p i t ' to o f th e mnrch o f t i m e " ( 9 ) , the dr"m "tist must

of necessity capture its significnnce i.n .o v i v i d pres ent n tio n

of its Vn r i o n s phnses o f developm.ent, "nd n v i t nl conception

o f the i n d i v i ' " ’u 0 . 1 n a t i o n is s p i r i t u e l mnhe —u p was t h e onl ] ' ' w r y

of p r o v i d i n g him w i t h the nec^ss cry colo u r for h is p o i n t i n g ( f ).

Thus he s p e a k s o f i-tomc ."nd C o r t h p e os c o n s t i t u t i n g the bock-

ground to his Moloch - a. d r a m a i n t e n d e d t o p o r t r a y no l e s s than

the evolutionary process of religious and p o l i t i c a l conditions

- and t h e s t a t - e o f a n c i e n t Germany as p r o v i d i n g t h e necessary i

i
I
colours for a p l a y which would ott^erw isc h ave R e g e n e r a t e d i n t o

col c u r l ess n e ss (4 ) . That, t h i s has little to do w i t h "local co­

lour" a glance at the actual play w ill suffice to show, and

Hebbel waj3‘ h i m s e l f firm ly convinced th a t a too close adherence

l o G f o T I 1 2 6 j Of e t . | S' 3 5 ~ Ga n . l S 3 6 :" Auf gc a be a l l e r K u n s t i s t d i e Gar-

s t c l l u n g des h e b c n s , d . h . V e r a . n s c h a u l i c h u n g des U n e n d .lic h cn an^
der s in g u la r a n E rsch e in u n g "• -
2 . " M e i n yvort d b e r d a è D r a m a " , ^ XI p . 3 5 , 1 3 4 3 »
3 . C f . T I I 3 o l 9 , 31 d '" n . 1 3 4 4 .
4 . Cf. T I I I 9 9 4 3 ; 41 f , 3o J a n 1 8 4 7 .
 - c\r

to ':t ' il " c c o r ft? i l l cith o t r c . l ^ h i s t o r i c '"1 v i c v ; o f t h i n g ' s ( l )

Moxcov-^r, h i s c o n c c t i o n o t th'^ ini p o r t -r.t c u l t u r e l h o c k ^ o u n d

o f t h e i n d i v i d u 0.1 p].-y c.s o. l i n k i n t h e g r e e t c h r . i n o f t r o g c -
•11 es w h i c h h e h n ^ c d would give c v n r c s s i o n to th e c o n d i t i o n o f

hum m i t y -md t h e w o r l d -^t l o r g e ( 2 ), m o m s thc.t t h e n o r t r n y a l

o f n d r rm " t i c c h n r n e t or i n nn i n d i v i d u e l e n v i r o n m / * n t c o n s t i ­

tuted. f o r Hohbel not o n ly n u s e f u l css et for gr en ter v iv id n e s s ,

hut c hound e n d u t y which « v e r y dr am n t i s t must f u l f i l in

s' -'i' ving t h e f^s o f H i s t o r 2^ ns w e l l as tho.se o f h i s own a r t .

" Wi e j e de K r i s a l l i s n t io n von g e w isse n p h y sik e i.is chen Be-

d i n g u n g o n a h h ’i n g t , so j e d e I.n d i v i d u a l i s i e r u n g dos nv^ns c h i i c h e n

We s c n s v o n d e r G c s c h i c h t s e p o c h e , in die es ffllt. Biese

Id 0 d i f i c a t i o n c n d c r Me ns ch e n - N a t u r in i h r e r r e1 a t i v en Not h -

w endigkeit s u r Anschuung su h r i n g en, ist d i e H a u p t - A u f go­

be, die die P oesie der G csch ich to gcgenflbor h a t (l).

It is im portent to n o t - ^ , h o w e v e r , t h a t H e b b e l ’s t h e o r y applied

the in d iv id u a l is ing process not s o mu c h t o t h e m i l i e u itself -

in his e s s a y on L u d o v i c o , for example, he r e f e r s expresslj^ to

the ,g e n e r a l conditions of th e world, the n a tio n and t h e period

- "s t o ttie p a r t i c u l a r effect which i t has upon e characters.

I n L u d w i g *s c a s e the issue tends t o becom e som ewhat c on­

f u s e d b \ 7' t h e fact that sta te m e n ts connected with h is wwn d x a -

n atic w ork t e n d o c c a s i o n a l l y to run co u nter to h is more gene­

ral t h e o r i e s . In _r act ic e a past m aster in the painting of

I p C f . L e t t e r to A r n o l d n i ig c ,1 5 S e p . 1 3 5 2 ;Br.V p. 45. - 2.L ctter

t o A u g u s t e S t i c l i - C r e l i n g e r , 1 1 B e c , 4 5 ; B r 7 T l p . 5 4-8 . - 5* *i
5 6 8 5 , 24 D e c . 1 9 4 6 .
 - 95 -
is-t _ i l (l), he c o n d u c t e d t h e d epic^tlon of p '^rticiil^.r h i s t o -

r i c n l ^1.11 i c u w i t h ,such m i n u t e c e r e t b o t be wos a l m o s t t e m p t e d

on some oc ere, i o n s t o nir.Ve i t ^,n end i n i t s el f , -"nd m'^ny r. r e -

mrr]-: i n h i s drm m ntio n o t e - h o o l c s shows t h r t h e was o n l y t o o

aw are o f t h i s ;* t h u s ,^ w h i l ^ 't on one •r*-r ^w*’n / b e lo n cin
*.. "^ t o r ^n l ^ n

for P i 0 h r c u n de v o n I m o l a , h e i n t e n d s t o ma ke i t ^nite obvious

th-t bhrplry t-kes place in It'ly during the time of the he-

n'^.issance^ on a n o t h e r he finds it necessary to check h im s e lf,

feoriny th'it he has o n c e more .succumbed t o h i s fault of exces­

sive individualisation ( 2 ), Since it is in fact the m ilieu on

w h i c h -^hc i n . d i v i d u - l i s i n y p r o c e s s is here c o n c e n t r â t ed, it is

not surprising t h ^ t L u d w i y was constantly at p^ins to emphasi-

ze t h e n e e d f o r c lo w a * p a y i n g more a t t e n t i o n to the general

character of " d r a m a a n d was c o n c e r n e d a b o u t the integration

o f the v ario u s factors o f environm ent with all the other "in­

g r e d i e n t s ” of a play in to a typical whole. " J o des S tiic k ", h e /W

w rites in an e a r l y part o f t h e Sh al:e s p e ai' t u di en ^ "m uss, wie

es selbst einen F a ll u n t:r vielen darstellt, d i e s en so v o l l -

stfndig und i n d i v i d u e l l ausmalcn a ls m ^glich, ohno das l y p i s c h c

zu v c r w i s c h e n ; i e d e s F i n z e l n s t e muss zu diesem Oanzen g e s tim m t

sein, N atur, g e s c h i c h t 1 i c h e r Bodsn, Situation, L eidenschaft,

S p r a c h e . ^ . ( l ). Whereas f o r He bb c l the r d a tio n between g e n e ra l

and i n d i v i d u a l was a natural one and t h e u n i v e r s a l element in

l , G f . ^ XI p . 6 l f o r H e b b e l ’s v i e w o n " B e t a i l m a l ? r e i " w i t h p a r t i ­
c u l a r - r e f e r e n c e ^ to t h e h i s t o r i c a l n o v e l . - 2 , Cf. e x tra .ct c i t e d
b y F r i c h S c h m i d t , C S I V p p . 3 9 - 4o . L u d w i g was w o r k i n g o n t h i s p i as
b e t w e e n 185o and 1 8 6 2 ,
 - 97 -
r. ^ ••'r'^cj.or-] b y tbvr f a c t that the chrrac-

tcr^' w-i'- c o n c e i v e d i n t h e a y i r i t of their tirre, f o r Lv. daâg

thlL relation oonotitiit.^rl -n u n e 0 3 y oonnrnT^ise (l ). It

was m - : i n i y i n nrd-r tn ov'-rnone th e difficu lty of reconeiling

the tynicnl ^nith the indien.du- 1 ti" 't he e s trh lis h e d . th e need

for coteoir'to consistency hetw eoV i-^x^ctcr end e n v i r o n t r e n t in

"I I . thei.r v a rio u s v - nif'^'st - t i o n s ( 2 ), In go.rticul " r , h e men­

tions K i n g Le::.r as a 1 "y i n w h i c h t h e r e is complete corresnon

dence between t h e h l s t o r i o n l mjJJyni, character, situ ttio n , mo­

tives ^ "ctions) g u ilt -.nd c a t a s t r o p h e , s i n c e ^ h o w e v e r much t h e

p e r s o n n a g e s may d i f f e r from one an o th o r, they a ll reveal in

their ‘^ . c t i o n s a nd s u f f e r i n g the wild greatness of th e ir tim e

(3)y -nd i t is 'p re c ise ly the la c k of fin e r traits i n von

T ' S r r i n g ’s A g n es B e r n a u e r i n w h i c h h e c o mm e n d e d a s corresponding

with the sim ple character of the time in. w h i c h t h e play is

set (4 ) 0 The m i l i e u o f h i s own p i . a y s h e a v i n g o n c e b e e n fixed^

hudyjig saw a l l its m anifold im p licatio n s with alm ost disturb?

ing clarity and d e v e l o p e d t h e m o f t e n in a highly im .aginative

manner - oualities which were t o a gro'^t extent m odified in i

1 o O f . a n u ng u b 1 i s h e d n o t e t o D i e K a u fm a n n s 1 0 c h t e r v o n M e s s i n a ,
c i t e d b y . I r i c h S c h m i d t , ^ I V ' p . 3 9 ï Di e Ch a r a k t o 2 *e u n d S i t u a t i 0
n o n .ira & e i s t c d e r Z e i t g e d a c h t und. e m p f u n d e n ; d o c h s o , ' ^ a s s d i e
M o t i v e i h r t y p i s c h a l l gome i n Me ns c h i i c h e s n i c h t v c r ] . i e r e n " «
2 . That t h i s wa s a v e r y c o n s c i o u s a n d d e l i b e r a t e p r o c e s s c a n b e
s e e n from t h e l a s t t h r e e v e r s i o n s o f t h e Agnes B e r n a u e r p l a y s ^
w h e r e t h e same d e s c r i n t i o n o f t h e s t a t e o f t h e c o u n t r y i s p u t
. f i r s t i n t o t h e mouth o f Agnes ^ f a t h e r j t h e n i n t o t h a t o f t h e t
o l d w i t c h , "nd. t h e n , i n k e e p i n g w i t h t h e m o r e s t r i c t l y h i s t o r i c a l
c o n c e p t i o n , i s r e n d e r e d i n v e r s e b y Duke S r n s t * I n e a c h c a s e , t h e
w o r d i n g a n d f o r m o f t h e p a s s a g e ".re s l i g h t l y m o ' ^ i . f i e d t o s u i t
t h e c h a r a c t o r o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r s n e a k e r , - 3 *Df. G 8 V p . 2 l 6 ,
1 8 5 1 - 9 ? . - * 4. O f . i b i d . p~. 3 4 4 .
 ^ Q8 -
1 "trr by the r e s t r i c t i v e effect nf his t'c o rie s.

At 'iiy it is inters tine to nnte thot it n-.' his earlier

'-i-ySj no t -h 1 y Dj h : -h h a r "nd P e r E r b f S r s t -r . c c n ^ n ^ . n i e d

'.s t h e y "v^re h y "-r f'^Tjer t h e o r e t i c a l d é l i b é r a t i o n s , v./hich

'••ch i . e v e d mort "tr ik in ' ".rmony het r. veon t h e cl- o r a c t o r s "nd

their envjr^nm'^nt^ ’/ / h ^ t h ' ^ r h i s t o r i c ""1 o r c o n t e n n o r " ’r y ; " n d e v e r

1.t* O s l - . r W a l . z c l ’s ch:r - - 1 c r i s et io n o f L n laâg d s r ^ t h o d in the

former f l a y as ”''^ivin'.torisch" (l ) is czayycr"ted, it would

s e e m t h a t L u ' h vl y b e n e f i t e d in th is case from a 1 -^ck o f c o n ­

scious effort,

I n so f :.r as b o t h b e li e v e d th at characters arc th e direct

erni'ossion o f t h e i r environm ent, the theorj.es of the two dra­

m atists show a c e r t a i n m ^ ' - a r r e o f a g r e e m e n t . Thus H o b b e l , too,

o" " i n t . a i n e d t h " t the l i v e l y p re s e n t at ion o f t r u l y dram atic cha­

r a c t e r s d en ends u o on t h e ab i l i t y o f t h e d r am a t i s t t o ma k e t h e i ]

ev^r ^^ w o r d r e f ] a c t the atm osphere .in whj.ch t h e y m o v e , Ho e x ­

près s ly included in this connection the so -c a lla d "physical"

"tuo sp h ere - " d i e go i s t i g e wie die l e i b l i c h c , den I d c c n lc re is '

w i e V o l k u n d L ' - . n l , S t a n d u n d h'^.ng" (2), but even so he r e l i e d

again on h i s intu itiv e sense o f atm osphere r a t h e r t h a n on p r e -

cj.se t o p i c a l - 1 l u s i o n s . His mind, by n a t u r e less hampered th a n

L u d w i g *s b y c o n s i d e r ' ’.t i o n s of detail, seized on t h e essentials

and c l o t h e d them i n t u j . t j.v e ly i n the speech of the characters.

Tq r e c a l l th e blasphemous b o a s tin g s of H olofernes, H h o i o p e ’s 1

l o O s k a r Vi/rtzcl, H e b b e l r o b l e m e . S t u d i e n . L e i p z i g 1 9 o 9 ^ P * l o 9 *
2 . T I I I 4271, 17 13471
 - no -

i-Tis t i n 0 1 i _ v t o c o .1.1. sV' o h o ' ' i ’.s n'f tVi «n i iS’^'o h o s zroooivofl. j

or tVt o Yjor r i n f M i v t c.'r A>i t o n : ”

”1 .1 1o:n Au' -nnT' ^l lokj i oh b o r ' - r k o , ins? n o n r.uf D l c h m i t F i n -

■j''^rn z n i r t — wF»r'^* l oi: r i c h r^'sioron. n n i d i 0,5 snlv^^r *

j-cb U i r zUj r o.si?^r ' .lob. l.cii ^ ^ n z o r Kr^rl Il’o. ' - -nonst so. z' ^n,

o.o o o i *ms 1) o:__ ocl: j o j c b o b e n , . . ” ( l ) ,

Iz t o ,i'Ocall t b ? w.hol^ o . t m o s o % o i n i^/hich t b . 0 3 o rli.f ^^oro n t oho—

r " o t or.3 n o r o n n r t n r o r i on a o f n h i o b th^.y o r e t h e l i v i n g dmhodi-

mo n t .

M " r j - '1 M -i c l Çn 0 . i s « b y v i r t n o of its oontornnomy" 3 o tt in g , the

o n l 3^ where i n t u i t i o n is fused with o.ctu.ol o x y ^ r i e n o e in the

o r o ' - . t i o n o f e n v i r o n m e n t , and i t is not s u ry ris in g j there fore,

that the o h y s i o . o l m il i e u o f Mois t o r A n t o n ” d.or gem n i n e Moiih

i m hUu ' l i c h e n K r o i s e ” ( 2 ) - should fin d unusum lly r e o i l s t i c ex­

pression in the dialogue, list ot t h e same t i n e conveying th e

e ” t r c ’'^e n a r r o w n e s s of its c o n v e n t i o a. 1 i Ay % frio s m a l l p r o v i n e is il

town w ith its church, its puh^ i c . h o u s e , the a p o t h e c a r y *s s h o p

and t h e p r i s o n : M oist o r Anton at h i s bench: the ta b le s , clm rrs

"nd cu p -b o a rd s w h i c h scorn t o w e l c o m e t h e r e t u r n i n g F r i e d s ' i c h b y <

v ery I
t h e i r ^ f am i l i a r i t y : t h e p a n e a k e s w. hi ch h a v e t o b e made t h i n n e r b e ­

c au se Mother i s s a v i n g to buy K l a r a a new d r ^ s s - it is all therf

wAy€n n a t u r a l l y into \he dialogue and f o r m i n g a complete l i t t l e

world, a world in which th e things o f everyd.ay h a p p e n w i t h s u c h

inexorable re g u la r ity that there s e e m s no ex c a n e from i t - save

by death or a fresh st^^xt in another land. This is

how K l a r a ’s
S
l o Agnes B ern a u e r . Act I I so .i. - 2.T I 677, 4 A pril lSf7
 — lo o —
b ro th er ohJir a c t c r i s e s it:

"Das F e u e r z e u g ist no o h am a l t e n J r ' l a t z , ick w ette, denn w ir

haben h ie r im H a u s e n u r z w e i M a i z e k n G e b o t e . Dor H ut g e k S r t

a u f den dr i t te n w a g e l, n ich t a u f den v ie r te n i Um h a l b zekn

m u s s m an müde s e i n ! V o r M a r t i n i d a r f man a i c k t frierea, nack

M artin i n ich t s c h w itz e a i • • ,H cut * i s t D onnerstag, sie kabea

K a l b f l e i s o k s u p p e g e g e s s e n # . . wkr *s W i n t e r , s o k k t t * s Kohl g e -

geben, vor iîastn ao k t w eissen , a a o k F a s t n a c k t grtinea! Das s t e h t

60 f e s t , als dass d e r D o n n e r s t a g kommen m u s s , wenn d e r M i t t -

week d ag ew esen i s t . . * ” ( l )

la 1854 H cbbel w ro te : ”E in C h a r k k t e r h a n d l e u n d s p r o c h e n i e flber

sein e W elt h i n a u B , aber fflx d a s , was i n s e i n e r W e l t m S g l i e k i s t ,

fin d e er d ie r e i n s t e Form , den e d e ls te n A usdruck, s e l b s t d e r Bau­

er” (2 ), fo rm u latin g th e r e b y what he h ad e n d eav o u red to achiev e

th ro u g h o u t h is d ram atic career - nam ely to a v o i d cm t h e o n e h a n d

a crude n a tu r a lis m and dn th e o th e r an i d e a l i s m to ta lly u n relat­

ed to r e a l i t y .

L udw ig, who d e v o t e d much c a r e f u l thought to th e q u estio n o f

d ictio n , was eq u ally c e r ta in th at th e speech o f th e c h a ra c te rs !

sh o u ld be e x p re ssiv e of th eir en v iro n m en t. Nowhere i n h i s own

w ork i s th is m ore s u b t l y ach iev ed th an in Der F r b f f l r s t e r . i n th e

a tm o s p h e r e o f whose r u s t i c s e t t i n g L u d w i g was h i m s e l f t h o r o u g h l y

a t hom e. Just as M e i s t e r A n to n u s e s w ords w ith w hich h e i s fa­

m iliar from h i s trad e of carp en ter to d escrib e co n cep ts o u tsid e

1 . M a ria M agdaden», Act I I I sc .v ii^ - 2 . T IV 5 3 2 8 , 3 3 A u g .1 8 5 4

 — lo i —

h i s spJttcre o f k n o w le d g e , s o t h e h om ely i l l u s t r a t i o n s o f U l r i c h ,

w hich t r y t o e x p r e s s t h e a b s t r a c t i d e a s im h i s m in d , i n d i c a t e

t h e c l o s e bond w hich e x i s t s b e tw e e n t h e man and h i s ”H ev ier" #

”F S r s t c r . . « "S • i s t m ir a b e r , wenn i e h p r e d ig e n w i l l , a ls

i c h den P a s t o r im Chorrock h i n t er einem H a sen h er# S©;

j e t z t hab • i c h d ie F ^ t e . Es w e c h s e l t e i n H ir s c h vom L u tzd a r

f e r h eriïb er# H first Du, R o b ert? Und nun, p a ss* a u f ; h i e r d ie

G abel i s t der H ir s c h ; H e ii|d a , s i e h s t Du? H ie r das S a l z f a s s ^

das b i s t Du. Und der Wind kommt vom T e l l e r daher# Was

m ach st Du nun, um den H ir s c h zu b e s c h i e i c h en? Was? Du-nun?

(I)
The s u b t l e i n t e r w e a v i n g o f c h a r a c t e r i s a t i o n and d e p i c t i o n o f

en v ir o n m en t th r o u g h d ia l o g u e i s a r e c u r r i n g f e a t u r e o f Ludwig*s

e a r l i e r and more s p o n ta n e o u s p la y s and i s i n f a c t more i n k eep ­

i n g w it h what h e came t o admire i n S h a k e s p e a r e a n drama th a n h i s

l a t e r , more s t u d i e d p l a y s . The d i c t i o n o f S h a k e s p e a r e *s cha­

r a c t e r s , he f e l t , h e l p e d to endow a p a r t i c u l a r p la y w ith i t »

own e s s e n t i a l atm osp h ere (A tm o sp h lr e ” - a word r a r e l y u s e d by

Ludwig i n t h i s c o n t e x t ) #
"Wie m a lt z#B , d i e B i k t i o n des KauAnannes, Romeos u .s .w # da»

i t a l i e n i s c h e , d i e des H a m le t, M acb eth , Lear* das n o r d is c h e

#
Klima#* D@rt dehmen s i o h a l l uns r e G e fflh le , uns r e S e e l e

se lb st aus u n t e r dem E i n f l u s s e der b e le b e n d e n W&rme der

h e i t r e n H im m els, h i e r z i e h e n s i e s i c k u n t e r der Vi^irkung

1# A ct I so# iv #
 - 102 -

des BLRsskalten N e b e ls zusammea" ( l ) *

It is t h e more r e g r e t t a b l e , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t w ith t h e s t u d y ©f

S h a k esp ea r ean drama i n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n Ludwig *s p r a c t i c a l m ethod

became at o n ce more c o n s c i o u s and m e t i o u l o u f ( 2 ) . A n d ^ althou gh

h e c o n t in u e d t o b r i n g to h i s s u b j e c t s h i s o u ts ta n d im g i n s i g h t

and i m a g i n a t i o n , i t is p a i n f u l l y o b v io u s t h a t t h e s e q u a litie s

t e n d e d i n c r e a s i n g l y t o f a i l him i n t h e m ost im p o r ta n t p h ase o f

t h e c r e a t i v e p r o c e s s * On r e a d i n g a d ra m a tic fragm ent su ch as

M arine F a l i e r i , where numerous a l l u s i o n s to t h e b e l l s o f S t .

Maxk, to p a lm s , la g o o n s and ©ranges s e r v e but t o u n d e r l i n e t h e

" I t a l i a n c o l o u r i n g ” ( 3 ) , w it h o u t any r e a l b e a r i n g upon i t s cha­

r a c t e r s or a c t i o n , one i s rem in d ed o f H e b b e l* s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l ­
l y v i v i d rem ark: "Es w ird durch d i e h i n e i n gehStngten G o b e lin s
mflhsam zusammen g e t r a g e n e r L o c a l - S c h i l derungen od er durch das

K la p p ern m it s i g n i f i c a n t e n A usd rü oken, d e r en s i e h d i e Ohnmacht

zu b e d ie n e n p f l e g t , n i c h t s e r r e i c h t ; d i e Le u t oh en mSgen so v i c ­
i e S i g n o r a ’s ©der D onna’s i n den D ia lo g i h r e r S tflc k e k i n c i n
f l i o k e n , w ie s i e w o l l e n , und g a n z e B e rg e vo n G©ldorangen a u f -

h S u f e n , man kommt I t a l i e n und S p a n ie n um k e in e n H a h n e n s e h r it t

l .G S V p , 3 1 6 . - 2 . C f , e . g . n o t e t o M arine F a l i e r i ^ c i t e d by £*e^n
B ± io h S ek m id t ,GS IV p . 3 7: D ie S p rach e muss das S e e —und KaufbiSn— .
n i s c h e , fr & c h tig e .S & d lic h e ,Ü p p ig e ,G r o s s p a tr io tis c h e ,H e r r s e h e n d e ,
m it a l l e n W e l t t e r l e n V e r k e h r e n d e , A r i s t o k r a t i s e h - S t r e n g e , s ü d l i c h
W elch e(a u e h des D i a l e k t s ) , das i t a l i e n i s e h L e b e n d ig e und L e i d e n - '
s c h a f t l i e h e , M a r m o r n e , M e r r s p i e g e l n d e . . .h a b e n " . - 3#][# n o t e t o
M arino F a l i e r / i . c i t e d by Léon M is , o n . o i t . I I p. 93: "Das i t a -
l i e n i s c h e C o l o r i t , das A u s le b e n der i t a l i e n i s e h en A r t" .
 - 1®3 -
n SÜ ie r” ( l ) .

H eb b el b e l i e v e d tkiat t h e o n l y way t@ a c h i e v e a tru e r e f le c t—

i® a o f th e essence ©f a c h a r a c t e r *s p h y s i c a l and c u l t u r a l en-

v i r o a m e n t was n o t b y m e a n s © f a c o l d p r o c e s s of reaso n in g , but

by a t r u l y creativ e process, w hich c a u s e s t h e s p e c t a t o r to be

draw n i r r e s i s t i b l y in to an a tm o s p h e re o f w hich t h e ch aracters

a r e so in te g ral a p art »s t o len d c r e d ib ility and d ra m a tic ne­

c essity to th e w hole.

"W ir s e h m e o k e n d i e L u f t , d ie s i e atkm en, w ir s a u g e n d i e D£Lf-

tc, d ie i h r das B e r a u s c h e n d e u n d B et& ubende g e b e n , m i t ih -

nen e in , darum v e r s t e h e n w ir s i e , darum nehm en w i r am i h n e n

T h eil" ( 2 )*

In p ra c tic e , th e atm o sphere i n t h i s in ta n g ib le sense is no­

w here m ore c o m p e llin g t h a n i n Gyges u n d s e i n E i a ^ ; t h e w h o le

o f th e m y th -lik e a ctio n seems to b e s u f f u s e d w ith s o u n d and

sc e n t, lig h t and d a rZ n e ss, rem oving th e ch aracters in to a d is­

tin c tiv e sphere of th eir own f r o m w h i c h t h e y co u ld n ot be de­

tach ed any m ere t h a n , i n L udw ig*s v i e w , L e a r is sep arab le in |

o u r m inds from h e a t h and sto rm .

Such i l l u s t r a t i o n s , bo th t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l , o f Heb­

b e l *s c o n c e p t i o n o f a t m o s p h e r e , w hich i s an e m in e n tly p o e t i c

l . K e v i e w o f W. G firtner*s A ndreas H o f e r .l849<W XI p . 2 7 9 * C f . a l s o

H e b b el *s own p l a y J u l i a ,A@t I S Q .v : ”i c h kann^s m ir r e e h t l e h -
h a f t v o r s t e l l e n , w ie angenehm e s j e t z t b e i uns zu Lande vom
dem F ir n e n h e r w e h t ! J a ,T y r o l , T y r o l ! A b e r h i e r , wo d ie E i e r mur so
l a n g e f r i s ch s i n d , a l s d i e Henne s i e n©ch n i c h t g e l e g t h a t-G © tt
G o t t , w i e g l f i c k l i e h werde i c h m ich f û h le n ,w e n n i c h k e in e O r a m -
gem umd C it r o n e n mehr s e h e , a u s s e r v e s i e h in g e h ë r e m ,am Weih—
n a e h t s a b e n d im d ie P u n s c h t e r r i n e o d e r a u f d i e B r a t e n s e h f l s s e l
i m M aule e i n e s E b e r k o n fe s!
 — 104 —

orne an«L h a s few m a t e r i a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , r e v e a l s a h i g h l y s u s c e p ­

t i b l e m iaâ a b le t o s e i z e on t h e m ost e l u s i v e q u a litie s o f âra-

m a t ie a r t i s t r y . L u d w ig, h o w e v e r , who d id n ot s h a r e H e b b el* s

o t h e r c h a i a g e r i s t i o s o f s t r i n g e n c y and c o n c e n t r a t i o n on e s s e n ­
tia ls, and a llo w e d h i m s e l f more b r e a d t h o f tr e a tm e n t th a n Heb­

b e l e v e r c o n c e d e d t o t h e drama ( l ) g i v e s ev en more prom inence

t o t h i s s e n s e o f atm osp h ere as c o n v e y e d by c h a r a c t e r s i n c l o s e

harmony w ith t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r e n v ir o n m e n t. I t s q u a l i t y , more­

o ver, is very d iffe r e n t; f o r w h i l s t i n H eb b el* s mind atm osphe­

r e was i n e x t r i c a b l y bound up w ith t h e h i s t o r i c a l and c u l t u r a l

m ake-up o f t h e p e r i o d , Ludwig e q u a te d i t w it h h i s g e n e r a l no­

t i o n o f Stinunung ( 2 ) , b r i n g i n g i t i n t o l i n e w it h h i s f e e l i n g

f o r " c o stu m e” and l o c a l c o l o u r r a t h e r t h a n w ith h i s w e l l docu­

m en ted c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l b ack g ro u n d . Thus i n a d e s ­

c r i p t i o n , i n i t s e l f a v e r i t a b l e S tim m u n g sb ild . o f t h e means by

w h ich S h a k e s p e a r e a c h i e v e d t h e a s t o u n d in g r i c h n e s s o f h i s cha­

r a c t e r s , he w r ite s :

"Zur J u l i a g e h i r t d ie Sommernacht, wiel^er B a l l und L o r en zo s

Z e l l e , und d ie F a m i l i e n g r u f t ; zu unserem Ge d&ch t n i s b i l de ^ j
d es a l t en L ear i s t H e id e und S tu rm , der B l i t z , Donner, H e-

g e n , H ürde, j a d i e F a c k e l G l o s t e r s , zu G l o s t e r s d ie v e n a u -
t e t e K lip p e b e i Dover w e s e n t l i c h . Zu unserem B i l d e H am lets
l * C f , L e t t e r to F r i e d r i c h U e c h t r i t z , 1 9 March 1 Q5 5 ;D£..V p . 2 2 1 ,
w here h e w r i t e s t h a t t h e d e p i c t i o n o f atm osp h ere e t c . i s b e t ­
t e r a c h i e v e d i n h i s c o r r e s p o n d e n t *s n o v e l s th a n i n h i s drama;
"da vom Drama nun ein m a l e i n g e w i s s e r L aconism us u n z e r t r e n n l i c b
i s t " . - 2.%. Gg, V p . 7 3 , 1 8 4 0 -5 1 :" Jed e He de und S i t u a t i o n durch
Z e i t und Ort no ch mehr i n d i v i d u a l i s i e r t , s o g a r durch N a tu r s z e —
n e n .J e d e s ;z (s e in e r S tflc k e h a t s e i n e e i g n e h e jr le r c od er t r f ib e r e
A tm o sp h S r e .J e d e S z e n e h a t w ie d e r i h r e S tim m u n g,• • • "
 - 1#5 -
s i n d d i e d u n k eln V o r s t e l l u n g e n der F © r s t m i t t c r n a e h t , T e r r a s s e ,

K l i p p e , h e f t i g e Z e i t , H a h n s c h r e i, K©mëdie, G © tte sa c k e r v e n g r S —

s s e r e r G e w a lt, a l s m ir m e i n e n . . . " ( l ) .

T h is h a s n © th in g t© d® w it h modern N a tu r a lis m s e e k i n g t o e s t a b ­
lis h f ir m l i n k s b etw e en t h e work o f a r t and t h e " t r i v i a l e Ausse:

w e lt " ( 2 ) , b u t ap p ea rs r a t h e r i n i t s m in g l in g o f p h a n ta s y and

r e a l i t y t o p o i n t t o t h e Kom antie t r a d i t i o n o f T i e c k , H offm ann,

o r Werner ( 3 ) . As f a r as h i s t h e o r e t i c a l s t a t e m e n t s g o , i n d e e d ,
Ludwig d i f f e r e d l i t t l e from h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s and w a s, m o r e o v e r ,

p e c u l i a r l y v n a f f e c t e d by h i s own e a r l i e r and more r e a l i s t i c d ra­

m a t ic p r a c t i c e . F©r t h i s - i n th e sh a p e o f Per Erb f i r s t e r and

"Die Makkab&er". had i n f a c t a lr e a d y b ro k en new g ro u n d , i n i t s

u s e o f n a t u r a l en v iro n m en t n o t m e r e ly as a phenomenon o u t s i d e
human e x p e r i e n c e , b u t as p a r t o f an e f f e c t i v e i n t e r p l a y b e t ­

ween man and n a t u r e . Nor can L u d w ig ’s m ethod be d e s c r ib e d

s i m p l y as " d ie ErgScnzung des M en sch en in n ern durch das Stimmungî

b i l d e i n e r Lands c h a f t " (4 ), fo r th ere is n o th in g v a g u e o r id ea -

lis tio in h is d e p i c t i o n o f la n d s c a p e i n r e l a t i o n t o d ra m a tic

c h a r a c t e r . N ow here, i n d e e d , d oes t h e m eaning ©f " p o e t ic r e a -

l.G S V p . 5 1 6 , 1 8 6 1 - 6 5 # - 2 . Arno H o l z . o p . c i t . p . 5 9 # - 3#Z# & t y p i ­

c a l n o t e t o Hermann. c i t e d by H .K r a e ^ e r . a r t . c i t ^ . p . l 6 : " I n i h -
r e n Na t u r s c h i l derung en etw as A n d â c h t i g e s - u b e r a l l G ÿ tte rn S k e—
damn N e c k i s c h e s - G nom en,E ifen - wunderbare N a tu r e r s c h in u n g e n
. . a l l é s A hnungs- und S tim m u n g s v o lle :N e b e l,M © n d s o h e in ,d ie Schan
e r der N a c h t ,d e r W ald nacht, das l e i s e TJJnen d es Bodens s i n d i n
ih n e n S c h i c k s a l s s t i n m e n , das Habengekr&chz ; s i e b e e b a e h t e n das
h e i m l i c h e Leben v o n T i e r e n und P f l a n z e n ; a l l é s l e b t i h n e n , a b e r
n i c h t m e n s c h lic h p i a s t i s oh w ie den G r i e c h e n , s o n d e r n g e i s t e r —,
stim m ungs—m f i r c h e n h a f t . l y r i s c h . . " . C f . a l s o W .Schmidt—O b e r l o s s —
n i t z , f p . c i t . . c h a p t e r l l l . w h e r e h e d i s c u s s e s t h e p a r t i c u l a r inr-
' f l u e n c e w hich Z a c h a r ia s W erner’s p l a y s appear t o h a v e hhd upoi
t h e " N a t u r s p ie l" i n L u d w ig ’s D ie MaJdcahaerSwitb. p a r t i c u l a r
f e r eue e t . t h e e a r l i e r D ie M u tte r der Mairlrah&er.- 4*iBi%*. |o,7U.
 — 1®6 —

lis m " emerge m«re f o r c i b l y th a n i n L u d w ig ’s b le n d i n g ©f atmo­

s p h e r e w ith a c a r e f u l l y m a p p e d - o u t ,e m in e n t ly r e a l i s t i c m i l i e u .

The wooded g o r g e i n Per Erb f & r s t e r may be r o m a n t i c a l l y " p i t t o -

resk" (l), but t h i s d oes n o t p r e v e n t Ludwig from c o n v e y in g t o

t h e s p e c t a t o r as w e l l as t o t h e r e a d e r as c l e a r a p i c t u r e o f

t h e f o r e s t as o f t h e l i t t l e T h u r in g ia n town i n h i s n o v e l Z w i-
s c h e n Himmel und E r d e. G r a d u a lly and a lm o st i m p e r c e p t i b l y i t

e m e r g e s : "der h e i m l i c h e Grund", "das T a n n e n d ic k ic h t u n t e r den

K lip p e n am L a u t e n s t e g , wo der a l t e F e ls w e g darûber h i n g e h f j

Überm Bach - danhbem d i e Wei d e n , . i n der M i t t e der k l e i n e %/ie-

senraium", and " m itte n im walde das einsam e J& gerh au s" i n w hich

t h e t r a g e d y o f t h e ü *rb filrster and h i s f a m i l y i s p la y e d o u t .

The f o r e s t i s mo^e th a n a s u g g e s t i v e background 12 ) t o t h e

a c tio n s o f th e ch a ra c te rs - i t c o n s t i t u t e s th e very l i f e - b l o o d

o f t h e i r b e i n g , w it h o u t w hich i t seem s i m p o s s i b l e f o r them to

e x ist O ):
"Und vom Wald A b s c h ie d nehmen, der den g a n zen ra g s o grûn

zu a l i e n F e n s t e r n h e r e i n g u c k t . Wie s t i l l ’s urns vorkommen

w ir d , wenn w ir das h a u sc h e n n i c h t mehr h S ren und den Vo­

g e l s a n g und den c h la g h a l l en den g a n zen Tag" (4 )#

B oth H eb b el and Ludwig i n t h e o r y a g r e e d t h a t costum e and

d e c o r must be r e d u c e d t o a minimum, rhus i n t h e prefac% to h i s

1 . S t a g e d i r e c t i o n t o ^ o t I I I s c . v . - 2. C f . V .S c h w e i z e r . Ludwigs
W e r k e ,ij e ip z ig tuid w ien 1 8 9 6 , v o . I p . 3 i n h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n t o
L>er Hr b f o r s t e r . - 3 #Cf . L e t t e r to -ciduard P e v r i e n t . 4 F e b .1 8 5 3 ;
GS V l p . 3 6 8 : "Die Umgebung w ir d b e i z a r t e n , t i e f f f l h l e n d e n Wes en
e i n r e i l des P a s e i n s ,und d i e Vor&nderung d e r s e l b e n i s t e i n e |
Amputât i o n , im d er v i e l w e r v e n f hden z e r r i s s e n wer d en , d ie
sch w er h e i l e n ”. - 4#A ct IV s c . i v .
 - le 7 -

e a r lie st drama, J u d i t h , t h e ferm er l a i d i t down t h a t , w h i l s t

a c e r t a i n d i s t i n c t i o n i n ou tw ard a p p earan ce b e tw e e n A s s y r ia n s

and Hebrews must n e c e s s a r i l y b e o b s e r v e d , to o much f i d e l i t y i n

s u c k m a t t e r s m e r e ly s e r v e d t© d e s t r o y t h e d r a a a t i c i l l u s i ® n ( l ).
Throughout h i s d ra m a tic c a r e e r H ebb el a d h e red s t r i c t l y to t h is

p r i n c i p l e by g i v i n g o n ly v e r y b r i e f and n o n -co m m ita l d i r e c t i o n s

f o r t h e o u td o o r and in d o o r s e t t i n g s o f h i s p la y s * Not t h a t su ci
a m ethod put any s t r a i n upon h i s n a t u r a l i n c l i n a t i o n ; f o r hav­

i n g a l e s s v i s u a l mind th a n Ludwig and b e in g c o n c e r n e d e x c l u ­

s i v e l y w it h t h e i n n e r l i f e o f h i s c h a r a c t e r s , he was n a t u r a l l y

o p p o se d to a n y th in g w hich s a v o u r e d o f e x t e r n a l i t i e s * With Lud­

w ig t h e c a s e was v e r y d i f f e r e n t , and when he demanded t h a t t h e

d e c o r e t c * must be m e r e ly i n d i c a t e d and t h a t p l a c e and tim e
a r e t o b e t r e a t ed i d e a l l y and p la y n® e f f e c t i v e p a r t i n t h e

a c tio n 1 2 ) , he was condem ning what i n Per E r b f S r s t e r and P ie

Makkabher had b e e n t h e outcome o f h i s s p o n ta n e o u s t a l e n t * Here
t h e atm osp h ere c o n v e y e d by t h e s p e e c h o f t h e c h a r a c t e r s i s in

f a c t most e f f e c t i v e l y en h an ced by t h e v i s u a l means o f w e l l - d e ­

f i n e d s t a g e s e t t i n g s , which come t o l i f e as i n t e g r a l p a r t o f
t h e l i v e s o f t h e s e c h a r a c t e r s as t h e a c t i o n u n f o l d s b e f o r e e u i

ey*e« (%) B f * W X I I I p* 4 : " . . .im Ü b r ig e n h a l t e i c h dafflr* dass

zu g r o s s e T reue i n s o l c h e n P in g en d i e I l l u s i o n eh er s t o r t ,
a l s b e f S r d e r t , indem d i e Au f mer ks amke i t da durch a u f fremde
GregenstSnde g e l e i t e t und von der H a u p tsa c h e abgewoggen w ir d ” *
2o C f . GS V p . 5 5 6 , 1 8 61-65*
 — lo 8 —
eyes (l).

M t h o u g h Ludwig n e v e r ack n ow led ged t h e d i s t i n c t i v e v a l u e

o f thÈÉL h i s e a r l i e r d ra m a tic p r a c t i c e , i t u n d o u b te d ly i n f l u ­
e n c e d h i s l a t e r w ork, b o th t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l . F®r e v e n

w here he came t o be c o n c e r n e d c h i e f l y w it h t h e h i s t o r i c a l a s­

p e c t o f e n v ir o n m e n t, henever f a i l e d to tak e account o f th e '

p r o fo u n d t i e s w hich must b in d c h a r a c t e r s t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r

s u r r o u n d in g s i n w hich t h e d r a m a t is t h a s c h o s e n to p l a c e them ,
demanding t h a t t h e y s h o u l d be f i r m l y r o o t e d i n t h e i r n a t i v e

s o i l and seem t o grow n a t u r a l l y and i r r e s i s t i b l y o u t o f i t ( 2 )<

H e b b e l, as h as a l r e a d y b een i n f l i c a t e d , m en tio n s t h i s p o in t
a g a in and a g a in w it h much g r e a t e r e m p h a s is , making i t a ne-

c e s s i t y f o r e v e r y drama w orthy o f t h e name. The atm osp h ere

m ust be so c o m p e lli n g and t h e e l e m e n t a l q u a l i t y o f t h e c h a r a c ­

t e r s so c l o s e l y bound up w it h i t t h a t t h e l a t t e r ap pear i n - i

e v i t a b l y c r e a t u r e s o f none o t h e r th a n t h e i r own p a r t i c u l a r en-*

1 # Y * sta g e d i r e c t i o n t o t h e f i r s t a c t o f D ie M a k k a b & e r » • r e c h t s
f& hrt e i n F e ls e n w e g aus dem T h a le h e r a u f , das den B e r g , a u f dem
Modin l i e g t . u m g i e b t ; . * l i n k s v o r n mdndet e i n e F e l s e n s c h l u c h t aus
h i n t en e i n Thor der S t a d t M©din;dber der S t adtm auer, d ie me i s t
aus n a td r l i c h e n F e l s en b e s t e h t , d i e H lu s e r der S t a d t ,u n d fiber
d i e s en f e r n und f e r n e r d i e z a c k i g e n Hfirner des G e b ir g e s Judah; ,
der H o r iz o n t hoch angenommen.Palmen und T h e r e b in th e n den T a h l-
weg h e r a u f und s o n s t v e r s t r a u t # ( A c t I s c # i ) . T h e s c e n e comes
t o l i f e i n t h e v e r y f i r s t words o f t h e p l a y :
Jo achim*
(indem e r l e b h a f t e r y S h le n d an d ie Bank t r i t t und i n das T hai
h in u n te r z e i g t ) ^
Da - d i e s s e i t s i n dem Tatil der T e r e b in t h e n
Lag S a u l , d o r t G o l i a t h . m it se in e m Heer# 1
D ort aus dem Bach nahm D avid s i c h den K ie s e l -
2 . C f , N o t e t o T i b e r i u s G r a c c h u s. c i t e d from an u n p u b lis h e d ”? l a n -
h e f t ” by Lean, M is^o n . o i t .%1 p7 2 o 8 .
 - 1® 9 “
vir® nm ent ( l ) * A c h a r a c t e r n o t r o o ta ÿ ’Çhe l i f e ©f h i s n a t i o n
l a c k s , i n h i s v i e w , o r g a n ic n e c e s s i t y , and h e t h e r e f o r e f e l t
it t <9 be h i s bounden d u t y , n o t o n ly t® p l a c e him i n an appro­

p r i a t e m i l i e u , b u t t© d e v e lo p him o u t o f i t w it h a l l t h e i n ­
t u i t i v e s k i l l i n h i s pow er.

Hence H e b b e l* s d ra m a tic c h a r a c t e r s , thou gh on t h e w hole l e s :

e a r th - b o u n d t h a n L u d w ig ’s , are o f t e n e q u a lly c o n sc io u s o f th e

f o r m a t iv e i n f l u e n c e s o f t h e i r " n a t u r a l ” en vironm en t* When Ben­

v e n u to i n L u d w ig ’s Per J a k o b s s t a b " s a y s ,

” da u n t e r

Pern d e u t s c h e n N eb el fla m m t’s n och i t a l i e n i s e h ,

H i t z i g e r Junge! ” ( 2 )

o n e i s rem in d ed o f a s c e n e i n H e b b e l ’s J u l i a * w here G raf Ber­

tram r e i n f o r c e s h i s s t o r y about men who k i l l s im p ly i n o rd er

t o f o r f e i t t h e i r own l i v e s , by s a y i n g :

"Es kommt v i e i l e i c h t i n einem Lande n i c h t v o r , w© d ie Son­

ne a l l e Tage s c h e i n t . G l e i c h v i e l ! B e i u n s , w® d i e L i c h t -

s c h e u e b e s s e r g e d e i h t , wo S c h i r l i n g und B in s e n k r a u t so
h och a u f s c h i e s s e n , d ass man s i c h d a r u n te r n i e d e r l a s s e n und
I

tr&umen kann, g i e b t e s M enschen, d ie das thun! Mancher Ra-

b e n s t e i n kann e s b e z e u g e n ! ” ( 3 ) .
l . C f . L e t t e r t o E r i e d r • U c c h t r i t z , 19oMareh 1 8 5 5 ;B£. V p p .2 2 o f :
" • .n u r v e r m i s s e i c h i n den S i t u a t i o n e n fd e r RosamundLe vo n
U e c h t r i t z l * . • das A tm o sp h S r isc h e und i n den C h a ra k teren das da-
m it g en a u zusammen hSngende A n t o c h t h o n is c h e , das s i e a l s n o th -
w en d ig e P e r s o n e n eb en d i e s e s und k e i n e s an d eren Bodens e r s c h e j
n en l& s s t " # - 2 # GS IV p . 84* Ludwig was w ork in g on t h i s p la y
d u r in g 1 8 5 ©•— 3 #Act I I I s c .iiv £ »
 — 11® —

I n t h i s p la y H ebb el w a s, in d e e d , c o n t e n t m e r e ly to l e t t h e cha­
r a c t e r s t a l k somewhat s e l f - c o n s c i o u s l y about t h e i r n a t i v e m i l i e u

w it h o u t making i t a r i s e o r g a n i c a l l y out o f t h e i r a c t i o n s , and

o n e m ig h t a p p ly t o h i s own d ram a/th e c r i t i c i s m w hich h e l e v e l l e d

a t o t h e r co n tem p o r a ry d r a m a t i s t s :

"Die L e u t e s c h w i t z e n n i c h t ! " m Schte i c h zu j e dem u nserer j e t -

z i g e n Di-amen- D i c h t er s a g e n . Ob *s Juden od er Tflrken, H e id e n

Oder C h r i s t e n , Opium-K&uer od er K n o b la u c h -E ss e r s i n d , man

cierk t *s der AtmosphSre n i c h t an" ( l )#

W ith t h e y e a r s , h o w e v e r , su ch r e f e r e n c d s t o a c h a r a c t e r ’s na­
t i v e en v iro n m en t become more c o m p e llin g and o f g r e a t e r d r a m a tic

im p o r t a n c e . T h is i s p a r t i c u l a r l y o b v io u s i n H e b b el* s l a s t com­

p l e t e d p l a y . D ie N ib elu n .g e n , where h e i s d e s i r o u s , n o t o n ly t o
b r i n g i n t o r e l i e f t h e g r e a t ÿ u l f w hich s e p a r a t e s I s e n l a n d from

t h e w o r ld o f t h e N ib e lu n g e n , b u t t o m o t i v a t e th e c h a r a c t e r o f

t h e " m y ste r io u s " B r iln h ild o u t o f h e r v e r y en v ir o n m e n t:

" B ei H is und S c h n e e , zu r A ugenw eide

v o n H a l und W a l f i s c h , u n t e r einem Himmel,

Der s i e n i c h t ein m a l r e ch t b e l e u c h t e n k ann ,

Wenn n i c h t e i n B erg aus u n t e r i r d * s c h e n S c h lü n à e n

Z u w e ile n s e i n e r o t h e n B l i t z e s c h i c k t ,

1 s t a l l e r J u n g f r a u ’n h e r r l i c h s t e e r b lü h t" (2 ).

l . I I I I 5 1 8 2 , 16 Sep 1 8 5 3 .
2 . D e r •g e h flr n te S i e g f r i e d . Act I s c . i .
 - I ll -

C o n s c i o u s l y aud d e l i b e r a t e l y H ebb el t u r n e d away from Rom antic

d r a m a t i s t s su c h as Fougue or R aupach, whose c h a r a c t e r s h ave no

life s a v e t h a t o f t h e shadowy t w i l i g h t w orld i n w hich tÿ:ey

move l i k e c r e a t u r e s on t h e raoon ( l ) , t o a c l e a r e r and s t r i k i n g ­

ly r e a lis tic c o n c e p t i o n o f e v e n t h e m ost m y t h i c a l f i g u r e s .

I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t b o th h e and Ludwig were a t

p a in s to t r a c e i n t h e i r p la y s b a s e d on t h e s t o r y o f Agnes B e r -

n a u e r t h e en v iro n m en t from w hich sprang h o t - b l o o d e d young Duke

A lbrecht^ m aking i t an im p o r ta n t f a c t o r i n t h e m o t i v a t i o n o f

t h is in t r ig u in g ch a ra cter ( 2 )# The v e r y t i t l e o f Per Erb f o r s t e r

h i n t s at t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e w hich t h e a u th o r a t t a c h e d to n a t u r a l

h e r i t a g e from t h e p o in t o f v ie w o f d r a m a tic c h a r a c t e r i s a t i o n
1 3 ) . But t h i s c o n c e p t o f h e r e d i t y was a t th e tim e o f H eb b el

and Ludwig a new one i n drama, and n e i t h e r o f them en d ea v o u red

t o f o r m u la t e i t i n term s o f d ra m a tic t h e o r y . I t was i n f a c t

o n l y an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h e i r g e n e r a l approach t o t h e problem

o f e n v ir o n m e n t. For Ludwig t h e m ain c i t t e r i o n was t o an e v e r

in c r e a s in g degree th e r e a l i s t i c p r e s e n ta tio n o f c h a r a c te r in

a l l i t s many and v a r i e d a s p e c t s , w hich i n c l u d e d t h e c o n d i t i o n s j

im p o sed by t h e p a s t as w e l l as by t h e p r e s e n t . I t i s tru e th a t

t h i s ##s t o some e x t e n t n o t e n t i r e l y new : h i s d e l v i n g i n t o t h e

l * C f . r e v ie w o f Emanuel G e i b e l s B r u n h i l d . 1 8 5 8 . W X II p . 1 6 5 .

vor
m ir d i e S t e l l e ^ e h a b t, und m ein G ross v a t er v o r meinem V a te r ;
s i e h e i s s e n m ich den j& r b fër ste r im g a n z e n T h a i; i c h wSr * der
e r s t e aus meinem Stamm, d er a b g e s e t z t w S r e .. . ” ^ w.
 - 112 -

mysteritfjfcfs accom panying t h e b i r t h o f C a r d i l l a c i s e m in e n t l y Ro­

m a n t ic i n t r e a t m e n t 11 ) , But j u s t as H eb b el r e j e c t e d Fouque^f's
i n o r g a n i c c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e N ib e lu n ^ e n i n fa v o u r o f h i s own more

r e a listic a p p r o a ch , so Ludwig t u r n e d from t h e b i z a r r e r i e o f h i s

im m a t u r it y t o a c l e a r e r p e r c e p t i o n o f what he h i m s e l f c a l l e d

" th e c o n d i t i o n s o f r e a l i t y " . By t r e a t i n g t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s , t h e
d r a m a t i s t , he b e l i e v e d , w ould endow h i s c h a r a c t e r s w it h an or­

g a n i c e x i s t e n c e o f t h e i r own, w h i l s t a t t h e same tim e d e t r a c t ­

i n g i n no way from t h e i r p o e t i c q u a l i t y : he w ould i n f a c t c r e a t e

" r e a l i s t i c a l l y c o n d itio n e d id e a ls " (2 ). I t is c l e a r from Lud­

w i g ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e t r a g i c h e r o , h o w e v e r , t h a t where h e en­

d e a v o u red to c r e a t e c h a r a c t e r s w i t h i n t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e i r
c u l t u r a l and s o c i a l en v iro n m en t 1 3 ) , i t was from no o t h e r d e -

sir e th a n t h a t o f r e a l i s t i c m o t i v a t i o n . "Der R e a l i s t " , he w r i t e

" m o t i v i e r t das 8 c h i c k s a l s e i n e s H e id e n durch d j î s s e n S c h u ld , d i e

S c h u ld durch S t a n d , N a t u r e l l , G ew oh n h eit, Z e i t , B e r u f , h i s t o r i -

6 Chen Bo d en , u s w . " . . ( 4 ) The i d e a t h a t a c h a i'a c te r i s d o m in ated

by th e fo r c e s o f i t s e n v ir o n m e n t, t h a t i t becom es t h e i r " v ic ­
tim" ( 5 ) f was c o m p l e t e l y a l i e n to L u d w ig 's t h e o r y o f t h e para­

mount im p o r ta n c e o f p a s s i o n i n t h e make-up and f a t e o f drama­

tic c h a r a c t e r s . C am iola i n D ie K a u fm a n n sto ch ter v on M e s s in a

l . Das F r & u le in v o n S c u d e r i , e s p . A c t I I s o . i x . - 2 . | ^ V p . 5 2 5 ,
1 8 é l - 6 5 * - “ 3 #C f. an u n p u b lis h e d n o t e on G enoveva, c i t e d by E r ic h
S c h m i d t , GS IV p . 3 5 :"D ie Gr&fin e i n g r o s s a r t i g e s W e ib ,e in e c h -
t e s Kind i h r e r Z e i t und der B e d in g u n g e n , d i e i n i h r e r E r y i e -
hung und i n ihrem S ta n d e l i e g e n " . - 4 # ^ V o . 5 2 5 ,1 8 6 1 —65*
5 oCf« d e s c r i p t i o n by E . I y r o f f ^a r t . c i t . , p . 6 6 . o f vVeiler i n
Der E r b f S r s t e r as e i n O pfer der Z e i t #
 - 1 13 -
may b e a t r u e c h i l d o f t h e M id d le A g e s , imbued w ith t h e i d e a s

o f h o n o u r, c h i v a l r y and n o b le -m in d e d n e s s ( l ) , but t h e h i s t o r i c a l
m ilie u i s , as i t w ore, no more th a n t h e p rem ise on w hich t h e dra

mat i s t p r o c e e d s t o b u i l d ' h i s c h a r a c t e r s . lu d w ig - n e v e r in t e n d e d

t h a t i t s h o u l d p la y any d e c i s i v e p a r t i n th e a c t i o n o f t h e drama

T u rn in g to H e b b e l* s p l a y s , we f i n d t h a t R hodope, t o o , i s "the
d a u g h te r o f h e r r a c e " , whose p e c u l i a r c o n d i t i o n s h a v e from h e r

e a r l i e s t y o u th m ould ed h e r c h a r a c t e r and o u t l o o k . But t h e em­

p h a s i s h as e n t i r e l y s h i f t e d ; i t is th e in e s c a p a b le h e r it a g e o f

h « r c h a r a c t e r w hich b r i n g s h er i n t o c o n f l i c t w ith an e n v ir o n ­

ment l e s s hampered by t r a d i t i o n * I n a s i m i l a r way, K la r a i s so

shut i n by t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l i t i e s of h e r own b o u r g e o is m i l i e u
t h a t s h e i s i n c a p a b l e o f a c c e p t i n g new s t a n d a r d s o f b e h a v io u r

and h a s t o c h o o se d ea th as t h e o n ly a l t e r n a t i v e ; th e c o i n c i ­
d e n c e s and s i t u a t i o n s wlriich combine "to make a poor girl"Tmad"

a r e o f h e r own narrow en v iro n m en t w hich c l o s e s i n r e l e n t l e s s l y

upon t h e c r e a t u r e i t h as moulded* % e t h e r by a p a r t i c u l a r c u l ­

t u r a l t r a d i t i o n or by t h e d e t e r m in ig ^ f o r c e s o f s o c i a l c o n d i -
j
t i o n s , H e b b e l* s c h a r a c t e r s a re i n a m y s t e r io u s way c o n d i t i o n e d ’

by t h e i r e n v ir o n m e n t, e v e n i f , l i k e K a n d a u le s, t h e y a re a b le

to s e e b ey o n d i t :
l * " C a n i o l a i s t e i n Kind des M i t t e l a l t e r s , w e lc h e s - s i e f & l l t /
n och i n d i e b e s s e r e H it t e r z e i t - hJauptsS-chlich von der I d e e der
E h r e , der R i t t e r l i c h k e i t , des E d elm u ts e r f f l l l t war und beim
w e i b l i c h e n .G e s h le c h t e v o n defc der Zucht und S i t t e " . C it e d by
L éon M i s , o n . c i t . I I p . 1 6 3 .
 - 114 —
”I c h w e i s s g e w i s s , d i e Z e i t w ird ein m a l kommen.
Wo a l l é s d e n k t, w ie i c h ; was s t e e k t denn auch

I n S c h l e i e r n , Kronen od er r e s t * g e n S o h w e r te r n ,
9 a s ew ig w S re?” ( l )

-But by w a n tin g to r i s e above h i s tim e and i t s c o n v e n t io n s h e

h a s u nd erm ined t h e v e r y ground which b o re him and th u s i n c u r r e d

p u n ish m en t f o r h i s presum ption #

Such a t r e a t m e n t - t h e s a c r i f i c i n g o f a c h a r a c t e r , o f t e n

w it h o u t p e r s o n a l g u i l t , to f o r c e s o u t s i d e h i m s e l f , f o r c e s , more­
o v e r , w hich o f t e n b e lo n g t o a c u l t u r a l m i l i e u lo n g ago s u p e r s e ­

d e d , i n e v i t a b l y i n v i t e d t h e s t e r n e s t c e n s u r e on t h e p a r t o f

L udw ig: "Las S c h i c k s &1 b e i H e b b e l” , he w r i t e s , " [ist% mehr e i n

E r g e b n is d er Z e i t , i n der s e i n e M enschen l e b e n , a l s das i h r e s
e i g n e n Thuns# S i e l e i d e n n i c h t , was i h r e e i g n e N a tu r , s o n d e r n

was d i e D enkart der Z e i t iim e n a u f e r l e g t , ' d i e i n ih n e n h a n d e lt "

( 2 )* I n t h e o r y , Ludwig w ould h ave p r e f e r r e d to r e l e g a t e e x c l u ­

s i v e l y to th e n o v el the p r e s e n ta tio n o f th e s e v a rio u s fa c to r s

w h ic h , i n h i s v i e w , c o n s t i t u t e i n a l a r g e m easure t h e mode o f
t h i n k i n g o f a p a r t i c u l a r p e rio d # For i t i s i n t h e n o v e l t h a t 1
we a r e , a c c o r d in g t o h i s v i e w , c o n c e r n e d more w it h man as t h e

p ro d u c t o f h i s en v iro n m en t th a n w it h h i s c h a r a c t e r and
l # A c t V L 3L 8o9#- 2 #GS V p ï 3 6 o . Ludwig r e f e r s h e r e e x p r e s s l y t o
H e b b e l* s "Mein V/ort“^ e r das Lrama*' and t h e P r e f a c e t o Marra
M a g d a le n a # t h e r e b y p r o v in g , as O .W a lz e l p o i n t s ou t (Hçfl^b.slpro^
b l e m e # p . l o 6 h ”d a ss ^er d i e s e E i g e n h e i t der_ T ra gS d ie^ H eb b els^ m it
à e s s e n a l t en t h e o r e t i s c h e n A nschauungen v S l l i g e i n s t i m i g g e i u n
den hat#A n d i e s e r S t e l l e b l e i b t j a der P r a k t i k e r H eb b el b e i dem
t h e o r e t is c h e n E r g eb n isse s e in e r Z e it s te h e n .
 - 115 -
p a ssio n s ( l ) . But f a r from e x c l u d i n g "human i n s t i t u t i o n s , manners

and custom s" ( 2 ) from h i s own d ra m a tic work, Ludwig s p e n t g r e a t

cai'e on t h e i r d e p i c t i o n as p a r t o f t h e s o - c a l l e d " A u s le b e f le is c il'

w hich he a lw a ys c o l l e c t e d f o r h i s p l a y s . Thus i n h i s W a l l e n s t e i n

h e i n t e n d e d t o enliance t h e p i c t u r e o f t h e p e r i o d by g i v i n g s p e ­

c i a l a t t e n t i o n t o manners and custom s l 3 j), w h i l s t i n Marino F a -

l i e r È — a l s o one o f h i s l a t e r d ra m a tic fra g m en ts - h e r e f e r s i n

some d e t a i l to t h e a n c i e n t r i t e o f t h e Logeas b e t r o t h a l t o t h e

s e a l4 ) * Even more prom inence i s g i v e n to s i m i l a r f a c t o r s i n

h is b ib lic a l drama, D ie Makkab&er : i n an e a r l i e r v e r s i o n , D ie

MakkabSierin o f 185©, h e ev e n i n t r o d u c e d t h e famous m o t i f o f t h e

d o u b le mai’r i g g e o f Judas to L ea and M ir z a , thou gh i t is in te r ­

e s t i n g to n o te th a t i t s s u b s e q u e n t o m is s io n added to r a t h e r th a n

d e t r a c t e d from Ludwig *s s e n s i t i v e p o r t r a y a l o f t h e J e w is h p e o p le

in i t s s t o i c h e r o is m and i t s u n q u e s t io n i n g a d h eren ce t o t h e Law.

But ev en t h e memorable s c e n e i n t h e f i n a l v e r s i o n d e p i c t i n g t h e

JewsW s t r i c t o b s e r v a n c e o f t h e S abb ath Ludwig may l a t e r have

r e g r e t t e d ; f o r a lt h o u g h t h e c h a r a c t e r s r e s p o n d to i t n o t b l i n d l y

o r as v i c t i m s o f a h i g h e r i n s c r u t a b l e N e c e s s i t y , b u t by a c o n -
1.GS VI p i 87 : "Das TTbergewicht des A u sse r en z e i g t s i c h s chon i n
d er B e s c h a f f e n t i e i t . Wir s eh en m ehr, was Z e i t , S i t t e , S t e l l u n g i n
d er G e s e l l s c h a f t . .a n dem M enschen ge t h a n , a l s d o r t im Drama".
2 .GS V p . l 6 4 î ”D ie D a r s t e l l u n g v on m e n s c h lic h en E in r i c h t u n g e n .
S i t t e n ,G e b r & u c h e n .D ie s e g e h S ren a l s D a rstellu n g ^ d em E pos".
3 . S p r a c h e , S i t t e n , A i l e s muss e i n s t i m m e n , h i s t o r i s che Trutie" -
c i t e d by Leon M i s , o n . c i t . 11 p . l 9 9#Gf. a l s o n o t e on Hermann: L e i —
dens c h a f t en u r s prung i i c E n a tu rm & c h tig , aber d i e S i t t e n noch-m ach-
t i g e r i n den g e w a l t i g e n G ebrB uchen.D ie N a tu r fr S m m ig k e it- D ie S i t
t e an den D e u ts c h e n s t r o n g e r - b e o b a c h t e t , a l s ir g e n d e i n G e s e t z .
A ls o das Ganze aus it ir e n S i t t e n e n t w i c k e l t , s o d a s s das S tu c k zu—
g l e i c h e i n S it t e n g e m B ld e i s t " . C i t e d by H. K r a e g e r , ^ t , Ç.ij.# ,p * lo #
 — 116 —

s c i o u s a c t o f th e w i l l , it y e t p la y s a d e c i s i v e part in th e p lo t

However t h i s may b e , by 1 8 5 6 Ludwig was o f t h e o p i n i o n t h a t t h e

"p ow ers” r e p r e s e n t e d i n a g i v e n draraa, i f i t w is h e s to p r e s e r v e

any c la im t o u n i v e r s a l i t y , m ust n ot appear as cu stom s and man­

n e r s whi ch w ere o n l y v a l i d a t c e r t a i n tim e s and i n c e r t a i n coun

tr ie s :

"Doch i s t es g u t , wenn auch d i e Handlung b e i a l l e r Besonfer-

h e i t i n dem S in n e a l l g e m e i n e r N atu r i s t , d ass d ie d a r in d a r -

g e s t e l l t e n MSichte n i c h t a l s S i t t e n und G-ebrSuche a u f t r e t e n ,

d i e nur zu g e w i s s e r Z e i t und i n g e w i s s e n Lândern g e g o l t e n

h a b e n * ..N u r was zu a l i e n Z e i t en w ar, das i s t - fS # d ie Tra­

g é d i e - w ir k l i c h ” ( l ) .
T h is im p o r ta n t p o i n t , h e c l a im e d , H ebb el had o o m p le t e ly d i s r e ­

g a r d e d , t h e r e b y u n d erm in in g t h e w hole v a l i d i t y o f h i s dr*ama.

IftiBn t u r n i n g to H eb b el *s a c t u a l p la y s i n t h e l i g h t o f t h i s

c r itic is m , i t i s im p o r ta n t t o r e c a l l t h a t h e was n e v e r c o n c e r n ­

ed w it h h i s t o r i c a l e x a c t i t u d e , b u t a llo w e d h i m s e l f t h e g r e a t e s t

l a t i t u d e i n a d c ^ t in g h i s m a t e r i a l . T h is i s no l e s s a p p l i c a b l e
t o h i s t r e a t m e n t i n d ra m a tic form o f custom s and t r a d i t i o n a l

modes o f th o u g h t and b e h a v io u r , t h e o n l y p r e r e q u i s i t e b e in g
t h a t i t s h o u l d be " t r u e ” i n t h e s e n s e o f co n fo rm in g t o t h e m ain

i d e a o f th e p a r t i c u l a r drama. Vi/e h av e a lr e a d y s e e n how l i t t l e

r e s p e c t H eb b el had f o r t h e b i b l i c a l a c c o u n t o f J u d i t h , but e v e n

more i n t e r e s t i n g i s h i s h a n d lin g o f t h e n a i v e s t o r y o f H erodotus

l.G S V p . 8 2 , 1 8 5 5 - 5 6 .
 - 11 7 -
w hich t e l l s o f t h e a d v e n tu r e s o f King K andaules o f L y d ia ( l ) .

As W alzel p o i n t s o u t , H ero d o tu s knows o n ly o f a queen who does nc

n o t w ish t o be s e e n u n v e i l e d by a s t r a n g e r ; i t i s H e b b el who addf

t h e f i c t i o n o f Htiodope *s " S c h l e i e r r e c h t ”, making i t a t on ce a

s u p e r s t i t i o n and a sym bol fo r e v e r y t h i n g i n woman w h ich s h r i n k s

from l a y i n g b a r e h e r in m o st s o u l 1 2 ) . Even w h ere, as s o o f t e n ,

t h e b ack grou nd to a p a r t i c u l a r s e t o f b e l i e f s or cu stom s i s r e ­

a l i s t i c a l l y sk etch ed in , i t is i t s s y m b o l i c a l im port w hich cha­

r a c t e r i s e s H eb b el *s m ethod (3)*
T h is S y m b o lic a l s i g n i f i c a n c e s p r i n g s from H e b b e l* s w hole con­

c e p t i o n o f drama, n o t a b l y from h i s v ie w t h a t i t is t h e drama­

tist's d uty n o t o n ly t o r e f l e c t a c e r t a in p erio d o f h is t o r y in

its t r a n s i t o r i n e s s , b u t t o p o i n t to i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e i n humani­

t y *s e v o l u t i o n a r y p r o c e s s ( 4 ) . Not c o n t e n t w it h t h e mere " p ic ­

t o r i a l ” q u a lity o f h is drama, h e must s t r i v e t o r a i s e i t to t h e

h i g h e s t form o f n e c e s s i t y w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f w o rld h i s t o r y .

I n o r d e r to b r i n g t h i s a b o u t , he must c h o o s e t h o s e p e r i o d s whicb
h a v e a v e r y s p e c i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r a l l t i m e s . A c c o r d in g l y a

drama muét be s e t i n a tim e o f t r a n s i t i o n and c r i s i s , and h i s j

own h a n d lin g o f h i s s o u r c e s shwws t h a t he b e l i e v e d t h e drama­

tist t o b e a t l i b e r t y t o sh a p e h i s m a t e r i a l t o t h i s im p o r ta n t

l . v . D ie Gres c h i c h t e des H e r o d o ts f l b e r s e t z t v o n F .L a n g e ,I # 8-13»

2t e v e r b e s s e r t e A u f l a g e , B r e s l a u , 1 8 2 4 * - 2 . Oskar W a l z e l . o n . c i t . .
p p . l l 3 f :)ZMan h a t im Nor den w u n d e r lic h e B rS u ch e,
D e n n ,w ie d i e B e rg e w i l d e r w e r d e n , - # i e
D ie munt *ren E ic h e n d ü s t e r n Tannen w e ic h e n .
So w ir d der Mens ch auch f i n s t * r e r , b i s e r e n d l i c h
S i c h ganz v e r l i e r t und nur das T h ie r noch h a u s * t ! ”
(S i e j g f r i e d * s Tpd.A c t I I I s c . i ) . - 4 . C f .L e t t e r to E m il P a l l es ke
2 7 . Jan 1 8 4 8 , IV 84.
 — llT b L —

en d . The N i b e l u n ^ e n l i e d had g i v e n him a h e a t h e n s t o r y w ith a

C h r i s t i a n c o l o u r i n g C o n d it io n e d by t h e tim e i n w hich t h e me­

d i a e v a l p o e t h i m s e l f was w r i t i n g ; i n h i s own N jb e lu n g e n t h e s e

e le m e n t s become t h e v e r y s t u f f o f t h e drama i t s e l f . The c l e a v ­

age b e tw e e n two d i s t i n c t modes o f l i f e , whose e s s e n c e i s a lrea d y

so a c u t e l y fo rsh a d o w ed i n t h e o p e n in g s c e n e , ru n s th r o u g h t h e
w h o le o f t h e a c t i o n , sh o w in g t h e c h a i a c t e r s on t h e v e r y ed ge o f

a v o lc a n o w h ic h , th o u g h s t i l l s m o u ld e r in g w ith t h e a n c i e n t t r a ­

d itio n s, is about t o e r u p t , in a u g u r a t in g a new e r a d o m in a ted

by new s t a n d a r d s .

By a d o p t in g su ch an a p p ro a ch , H ebbel was s e t t i n g h i m s e l f a

t w o - f o l d t a s k whose i m | l i c a t i o n s a r e n o t e ^ y to r e c o n c i l e . He
m ust show a c h a r a c t e r b o th as a v i c t i m o f h i s p a r t i c u l a r en­

v ir o n m e n t and as s u b j e c t t o t h e e t e r n a l l y r e c u r r i n g c o n f l i c t s
o f h i s t o r y ; Agnes B e r n a u e r , by succum bing to t h e demands o f th e

c h a n g in g t im e s i n which sh e l i v e s , must a t t h e same tim e become

"das r e i n s t e O p fe r , das d er N o th w e n d ig k e it im L a u f a l l e r J a h r -

h u n d erte g e f a l l e n i s t " ( l ) . On t h e o t h e r h a n d , th e d r a m a t is t
must p r e s e r v e theà^acudte v i s i i n o f t h e modern o b s e r v e r , w hich

a lo n e can s e i z e on t h e e s s e n t i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e u n d e r ly in g a pe­

r i o d o f t r a n s i t i o n and b r in g t h e i n d i v i d u a l p r o c e s s e s o f l i f e

i n t o l i n e w ith t h e g e n e r a l p rob lem s and p r i n c i p l e s t h a t ars s t i l l

o f v i t a l im p o r ta n c e f o r t h e p r e s e n t . As H ebb el w r i t e s i n "Mein
Wort ftber das Biama", any modern drama can be h i s t o r i c a l i f i t

shows p o s t e r i t y n o t as t h e d r a m a t is t im a g in e d h i s f o r e b e a r s to

l.A c t V s c .x .
 - 11 8 -

h a v e a c t e d , b u t as h e h i m s e l f th o u g h t and f e l t U )• On t h e

o t h e r h an d , he ou|jht n ot t o sp u rn t h e u s e o f h i s t o r i c a l or

e v e n legen d ai*y m a t e r i a l and c o nAe i v e h i s d ra m a tic c r e a t i o n s ou t

o f a i r y n o t h in g s ; on t h e c o n t r a r y , h e must s t e e p h i m s e l f i n t h e

c u l t u r a l atm osp h ere o f b y -g o n e a g es w hich p ro d u ced t h e k in d o f

c r isis still v a l i d t o - d a y . Tkiis p r o c e s s H ebbel d id n o t i n f a c t

a lw a y s f i n d a v e r y s im p le one : ”Es i s t n i c h t l e i c h t ^ , h e w ro te
i n c o n n e c t i o n w ith Oyges und s e i n h i n ^ . ^ s ic h aus der modernen
W elt h e r a u s i n e i n e Anschuung zu v e r s e t z e n , wodurch das Weib

b l o s s S a c h e war, und das w ird nun ein m a l verlan gt'" ( 2 ). Indeed,

s u c h s c e n e s as t h a t i n t h e s e c o n d a c t o f t h i s p l a y , where t h e
young s l a v e g i r l L e s b i a i s s e n t by t h e i^ing as a " g i f t " t o G y g eg

who r e j e c t s h e r , b e t r a y an o b v io u s d i s s o n a n c e , and c r i t i c s have

fo u n d i t d i f f i c u l t t o r e c o n c i l e su c h t r a i t s w it h t h e fundamen­

t a l l y modern problem p o s e d by t h e drama, n e b b e l h i m s e l f f e l t

a c e r t a i n u n e a s i n e s s on t h i s p o i n t , r e a l i s i n g f u l l w e l l t h e

i s s u e s i n v o l v e d by h i s h i g h l y i n d i v i d u a l tre a tm e n t# N e v e r t h e le s s

h e w ro te on c o m p le t in g t h e p la y i n 1 8 5 4 ,

" ic h h o f f e , den B u r c h s c h n i t t s p u n c t , i n dem d ie ant i k e i n die^

m oderne AtmosphSre {Lbergeht, n i c h t v e r f e h l t und e i n e n Con­

flic t, w ie er nur i n j e n e r Z e i t e n t s t e h e n k o n n te und der i n

den e n t s p r e c h e n d e n Fa rb en h i n g e s t e l l t w ird ÿ a u f e i n e a l l g e -
m ein^ m e n s c h l i c h e , a l i e n Z e i t e n z u g S n g li c h e W eise g e l S s t zu

h ab en ( j ) .

l.W XI p . 9. - 2 # L e t t e r to K arl W erner, 16 May 1 85 6 ^ p .3 o 7 *

5.1j’e t t e r to F r i e d r i c h U e c h t r i t z , 14 B e e . 1 8 5 4 :i b i d ^2o4.
 - 119 -

T h u s, w h i l s t Hebb e l en d ea v o u red to p r e s e n t t h e e t e r n a l l y

r e c u r r i n g c o n f l i c t s o f mankind s e t i n t h e t h e c u l t u r a l m i l i e u
o f t h e p a s t or e v e n , as i n M aria Ma;cdalena. i n t h e p r e s e n t ,

by t a k i n g an i n d i v i d u a l , s u b j e c t i v e v ie w o f h i s t o r y , Ludwig

saw i n t h i s n o t h in g b u t a c o m p le te m i s c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e p r in ­

c i p l e s o f u n i v e r s a l i t y g o v e r n in g d ra m a tic a rt» I n a n o t a l ­

t o g e t h e r l u d i d argu m en t, i n h i s R om a n stu d ie n » h e w r i t e s :
"Wenn H eb b el v e r l a n g t , das Lraraa s o l i e der N ach w elt g eb e n ,
w ie wir g e d a c h t u . s . w * , so s c h e i n t er m ir d i e N atur des

Pramas v e r k a n n t zu h aben; das Prama s o i l g e b e n , w ie der

Mensch deh kt und h a n d e l t , n i c h t a l s Bflrger e i n e r g e w is s e n
Z e i t , s o n d e r n eb en a l s M e n sch ; darum s o l i s e i n S t o f f n i c h t

Z e itsitte , D enkart e i n e r Z e i t , so n d e r n L e i d e n s c h a f t und

N atu r des M enschen s e i n (l).

Sven i f t h i s s t a t e m e n t be a p p l i e d t o H ebb el *s t r a g e d y o f

common l i f e ^ ^ h î 8S ^ £ u â^ ig i s h e r e i n t e n d i n g t o make i s n o t
q u i t e c l e a r . B r o a d ly s p e a k i n g , h o w e v e r , he i s once a g a in a(3r-

v o e a t i n g h i s t h e o r y o f p o e t i c r e a l i s m w hich r e g a r d s as t r u e
n ^*1
t h a t w hich i s t i m e l e s s ^ and t y p i c a l and w hich alw ays happens
as o p p o se d to i d e a l i s m w hich t r i e s t o d e p i c t t h a t w hich n e v e r
h a p p en s and a c c o r d in g to i t s s t a n d a r d s s h o u ld alw ays h ap p en ,

o r t o n a t u r a l i s m w hich t a k e s from h i s t o r y i s o l a t e d c a s e s and

i n d i v i d u a l i s e s ^ s t i l l more 1 2 ) . R ea d in g t h e p a s s a g e q u oted
l.G S V I p . 9 4 . - 2 . C f. GS V p . 528.
 - 12o •?
ab ove i n t h e l i g h t o f t h i s d e f in it io n o f th e th ree typ es o f
d ra m a tic p r e s e n t a t i o n , one i s f o r c e d t o c o n c lu d e t h a t Ludwig

w ould h a v e r a n g e d H eb b el on t h e s i d e o f t h e n a t u r a l i s t s , had

n o t t h e e x t r a o r d i n a r y c h a r a c t e r o f h i s p la y s i n Ludwig *s ey e s

d e fie d a l l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .

But e v e n i f d i v e s t e d o f a l l i t s more modern c o n n o t a t i o n ,

t h e t e c h n iq u e o f n a t u r a li s m i s h a r d ly c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f H eb b el *£
t h e o r y o f e n v ir o n m e n t. W hile on t h e one hand h e n e v e r f e l t any

k i n s h i p w ith S c h i l l e r , e s c a p in g from t h e r e a l w o r ld i n t o an

i d e a l one o f h i s own, whose a zu re b ack grou n d s u f f i c e d to s e t

o f f h i s h e r o e s and h e r o i n e s ( l ) , on t h e o t h e r hand he condemn­

ed i n t h e s t r o n g e s t term s a l l n a tiu ra lism o r " f a l s e r e a lis m "

w h ich t a k e s t h e p a r t f o r th e w h ole and i s c o n c e r n e d o n ly w it h

su p e r fic ia l r e a lit ie s (.2). A lth o u g h i t wa^ u n d o u b te d ly t r u e

th a t i t i s p a r t o f t h e c r e a t i o n o f a r t i s t i c i l l u s i o n t o b r in g

a drama i n t o a c e r t a i n harmony w it h r e a l i t y , t h i s m ust n e v e y ,

h e c o n t e n d e d , become an end i n i t s e l f - e x c e p t on t h e v e r y low ­

est le v e l, "wo z . B . I f f l a n d s c h e S c h a u s p i e l e und P h o t o g r a p h ie n

en tsteh en " ( 3 ) . Whether l e g e n d a r y or c o n tem p o r a ry , w heth er s e t i

in a h is t o r ic a l en vironm en t or a m i d d l e - c l a s s m i l i e u , a drama

m u s t , he b e l i e v e d , o f n e c e s s i t y b r e a k w it h th e r e a l i t y o f t h i s

l o C f , " S c h i l l e r s B r i e f w e c h s e l m it K S r n e r " ,1 8 4 8 -4 9 j E p .l4 o .

2 . C f r r IV 6 1 3 5 jl5o , 1 May 1 8 6 ) . _ ^
3 . i b i d . 5 9 9 6 . 2b N o v . l 8 6 2 . C f . a l s o T H I 4 3 7 5 , 16 May 1 8 5 1 :
"Wenn man e i n I f f l a n d s c h e s pp. NaturstC ick g es eh en h a t und a u f
d i e S t r a s s e o d er i n s W ir tsh a u s kommt, s o g la u b t man, e s s p i e l e
fo rt" .
 - 121 -

w o r ld and c r e a t e a # i o l l y p o e t i c one i n i t s p la c e (l). Thus to

t h o s e c r i t i c s who w ould r a i s e o b j e c t i o n s a g a i n s t t h e r e a l i s m o f

p la y s su c h as Gyges und s e i n RiiK o r D ie N ib elu n ,2:en, H ebbel r e ­

p l i e d t h a t h e r e as a lw a y s h e was c o n c e r n e d n ot w it h c o s m ic , but

w it h p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e a l i s m , c o n t e n t t o c a p t u r e a l l t h e wondrous

lig h ts and c o l o u r s w hich p erv a d e our a c t u a l w o rld w it h a new

r a d i a n c e , w i t h o u t , h o w e v e r , changimg t h e im m utable law^by which

men are g o v e r n e d ( 2 ) .

" P lu m p e ste r R e a li s in u s ” ( 3 ) , "gem eine Y /ir ic l io h k e i t ” - n o t w it h ­

sta n d in g t h e ir d e e p - r o o t e d d i f f e r e n c e s , H e b b el* s and L u d w ig ’s

t h e o r i e s m eet i n dondam nation o f e v e r y t h i n g w hich w ould e x t e n d

t h e l i m i t s o f d ra m a tic p r e s e n t a t i o n b eyond t h o s e » e t b y t h e de­

mands o f p o e t i c t r u t h . ”H a tu r , Wakirheit, sch S n e - n i c h t zu eng

genommene W i r k l i c h k e i t s i n d m eine K u n s ts td c k e g e w e se n , d i e i c h

an gew and t” , Ludwig w ro te i n 185o (4 ), and w h i l s t h i s p r a c t i c a l

a p p roa ch t o t h e problem o f en viron m en t i s more im m e d ia te ly r e ­

a l i s t i c in q u a l i t y th a n t h a t o f H e b b e l, h i s fu n d a m en ta l t h e o r ie ;

n e v e r q u it e k eep p a ce w ith i t : "denn e i g e n t l i c h g r i f f e i n r e a -

l i s t i s c h e s Gefittil i n m einen b i s h e r i g e n Werken mehr meineai B e -

v m .s s t s e in v o r , a l s dass e s d u rch g S n g ig v on d iese m b estim m t g e­

w esen wSre" ( 5 ) ,
1 #"Das p o e t i s c h e Drama kann gar n i c h t e x i 3 tif^ r e n ,o h n e m it d ie s e ,
Welt zu b r e c h e n und e i n e an d ere dafflr a u fz u b a u e n ,g a n z g l e i c h -
g d l t i g , o b e s s i c h i n e i n e r B d r g e r s tu b e oder einem K flnigs-Saâtl
a b s p i e l t " - T IV 6 l o 7 , 9 March 1 8 6 3 . - 2 . C f . i b i d . 6 o 8 5 , 2 3 F e b .1863
5 . L e t t e r to Adolph S t e r n , 6 S e p . l 8 6 l ; B r V II p . 6 8 . - 4 . L e t t e r to
C . G . S c h a l l e r , 25 March 1 8 5 o , c i t e d by V . 8 c h w e i z e r . Ludwigs
v o l o l p . 5 # - 5 . ^ VI p . 1 8 .
 122 —
G r a d u a lly and a lm o st s p o n t a n e o u s l y t h e t h e o r y o f e n v ir o n ­

ment h as b e e n s e e n t o t a k e sh a p e i n t h e work o f H eb b el and Lud­

w ig . Though ea c h m ig h t p u rsu e v e r y d i f f e r e n t p a t h s , t h e s e A d id

a t c e r t a i n , o f t e n q u it e u n e x p e c t e d p o i n t s c o n v e r g e and l e a d i n

t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s t o ends w hich fu n d a m e n ta lly w ere n o t a l t o ­

g e t h e r d i s s i m i l a r . Even i f t h e e f f e c t w hich t h e s e t h e o r i e s

h a v e had on t h e su b s e q u e n t developm ent o f t h e drama i n Germany

is i n d i r e c t and d i f f i c u l t to g a u g e , i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e y d id
much tow ard s e n g e n d e r in g a more r e a l i s t i c a t t i t u d e t o d ra m a tic

p r e s e n t a t i o n , w h i l s t at t h e same tim e h e l p i n g to p r o v id e Germar

drama w it h a fir m and e n d u r in g b a s i s .

 III. HEBBEL *S M B LUDWIG CONCEPTION OF

DHMiATIC STRUCTURE.

So f & r t h e e x a m in a tio n o f H ebbel*s and L udw ig*s d ram atic

th eo ries h a s b e e n fo c u s e d on problem s co n n ected p rim a rily

w ith t h e c o n t e n t o f dram a. N e i t h e r o f t h e m , hovy^ever, w a s

ever b lin d to its form al asp ects, but as a p rac tisin g dxa-

m atist e a c h was f u l l y aw are o f t h e n e ed f o r c o m p le te harm ony

betw een th e tw o, and lo o k e d to form i n its v a rio u s m anife­

sta tio n s fo r th e re a l consum m ation o f any p l a y . P o in tin g to

th e e x a m p le o f S h a k e s p e a r e , L u d w ig saw i n i t s r ig h tf u l use

the very essence o f tru e dram a, s i n c e it show ed th e dram a­

t i s t *s a b i l i t y , to s u b lim a te and tra n s c e n d th e v e ry b a s e s t

su b je c t m atter Cl)* F o r H e b b e l t h e m a s t e r y o f f o r m c o n s t i ­

tu te d n o th in g le s s th a n th e suprem e f u l f i l m e n t o f th e de­

m ands im p o sed by c o n t e n t , th e c o -o rd in a tin g f a c to r w ithout

w hich t h e dram a m u st d isin te g rate and lo s e its e sse n tia l

m ean in g (2). "P e r G rehalt” , h e w ro te w ith r e f e r e n c e t® M a r i a

M agdalena. " k a n n n u r im G a n z e n , i n der v o lle n d e te n G esch lo s-

sen h eit d e r Form g e s u c h t w e r d e n (3 ),

But form b e i n g v e r y c l o s e l y b o und up w it h c o n t e n t , is

fu lly e x p lica b le only in the l i g h t o f th e d r a m a t i s t *s i n d i ­

v id u al p ra c tic a l achievem ent, and does n o t le n d i t s e l f

e asily to th e o re tic a l fo rm u latio n s. N ev erth eless, the pro­

t o C f . GS V p . 2 7 0 .
2 . O f . t T T 1 3 9 5 , 6 D e c . 1 8 3 8 a n d T. 11 3 1 3 5 , 2 2 May 1 8 4 4 .
5oi b i d 7 2 9 2 6 , 8 Dec. 1 8 4 3 .
 - 12 4 -
blem o f form - and in p articu lar th at o f d ram atic s t r u c t u r e

- is an i n t e g r a l part o f b o t h H e b b e l *s a n d L u d w i g ’s t h e o r y ,

and w ould seem to w arrant a m ore c a r e f u l an aly sis than has

h ith e rto been th e case. It is tru e th at th e problem i s not

alw ays e x p re s s ly m en tio n ed i n t h e i r w ritin g s, but it is al­

ways i m p l i c i t i n them as b e in g o f t h e u tm o s t im portance.

T his is p a rticu la rly so i n t h e case o f H ebbel, who r e g a r d e d

b e a u t y o f form as a m atter of course, b u t was a l w a y s r e a d y ,

to b r in g a ll the pressure of h is unco m p ro m ising g e n iu s to

bear in ste rn , d isd ain fu l c ritic ism w herever he d e te c te d

any d e f i c i e n c i e s in th is resp ect. Thus "L in e v o l l s t â n d i g e

U n k en n tn is d e s H a n d w e r k s u n d e i n M a n g e l a n ë s t h e t i s chem

H i n n ” , was h i s v erd ict o n M e l c h i o r ’M e y e r ’s A g n e s B e r n a u e r .

tru e to h is claim th at c ritic ism s h o u ld now here be a p p l i e d

m ore s e v e r e l y t h a n i n t h e c a s e o f a w ork w i t h o u t f o r m , -at

t h e same t i m e , h o w e v e r , h e n e v e r b e l i e v e d i n win a t L u d w i g

calle d ’’e m p t y ” f o r m (l), form f o r its own s a k e ; on t h e con­

trary , b o t h demanded t h a t i t m ust be th e g e n u in e and i n e v i ­

tab le e x p re ssio n o f th e d r a m a t i s t *s g e n e r a l i n t e n t i o n , th e

gzmment m o s t p e r f e c t l y s u i t e d to c lo th e th e body o f h is

id ea$ .

H ebbel felt it to be u n n e c e s s a r y , th erefo re, to dw ell

in d e t a i l upon t h e m ere q u estio n o f ru le s and p r i n c i p l e s

o f tech n iq u e w hich, if they are e sse n tia l to h i s purpose,

l.C f. GS V I p . 3 8 .
 — 1 2 5 ""

w ill force them selv es n a t u r a l l y upon th e a rtist V at the

rig h t mom ent i n t h e creativ e process (l).

^ o r L udw ig^on t h e o th er hand, it is p rec ise ly th is as­

pect o f d ram atic t h e o r y w hich form s the n a tu r a l b a s is of

h is approach to th e problem o f s t r u c t u r e . He was a firm be­

lie v er in th e v a lu e o f craftsm an sh ip , and th e first page

o f h is only s y s te m a tic essay - “D ie d r a m a t i s c h e n A u f g a b e n

der % eit" - is d e v o te d to a v in d ic atio n of h is stu d y o f

S h a k e s p e a re 's p lay s from t h e tec h n ic al an g le. In fact, the

p rac tisin g d ram atist, he claim ed , sh o u ld re g a rd h is art in

th e first place f r o m no o t h e r p o in t o f view th a n t h a t of

th e c ra fts m a n 's a p p re n tic e. “Jed e K unst s c h l i e s s t ein

H andw erk i n s i c h ein ; das Handw erk d e r K unst n enne i c h den

le il d erselb en , der g e le h r t und g e le r n t w erden k a n n . . . Gar

m ancher o f t n ic h t s c h le c h t beg ab te b l e i b t l e b e n s l a n ^ im

d r a m a t i s c h e n Handwerk s t e c k e n ; g leich w o h l führt d e r Weg

z u r k tln s tle r is c h e n V o llendung durch s e in e « œ r k s t â t t e . . .D er

a u s ù b e n d e Kilns t i e r so llte daher d ie d ra m a tis che Kunst z u -

n & c h s t v o n k einem a n d e r n G e s i c h t s p u n k t e a ls von dem d e s

handw erks1e h rlin g s i n s A ug e f a s s e n " (2).

W ith t h i s c h arac teristica lly em p iric approach i t is in ­

te re stin g to com pare t h e g r a n d o p e n in g p a s s a g e o f H e b b e l 's

" M e i n V/ort f i b e r das D ram a":

l a C f . T I 1 5 o 5 , 2o F e b . 1859*
2 a GS V pp. 5 5 f .
 — 126 —

"D ie K unst h a t es m i t dem L e b e n , dem i n n e r n u n d S u s s e r n

zu th u n , u n d m an k a n n w o h l s a g e n , dass s i e B eides zu-

g leich d a rste llt, sein e rein s te F o r m u n d s e i n e n h8ch-*

S t en G e h a l t . D ie H a u p tg a ttu n g e n d e r K u n s t u n d i l i r e G-e-

setze ergeben s ic h u n m ittelb sr aus der V ersc h ie d en tieit

der E lem en te, d ie s i e im j e d e s m a l i g e n F a l l aus dem L e ­

ben herausnim m t und v e r a r b e i t e t ” ( l ) .

By v i r t u e of h is view o f th e in tim ate re la tio n s h ip i n w hich

dram a s h o u l d s t a n d to life and th e w o rld i n g e n e r a l, H e b­

bel n e ce ssa rily saw t h e problem of co n stru ctin g a dram a

from a very d ifferen t an g le from t h a t o f L u d w i g who vjas a l ­

ways a f r a i d o f a too c lo se c o n n e c tio n betw een a r t and l i f e

and whose avowed e n d e a v o u r i t w as t o lift dram a o u t o f t h e

w h o le com plex w o r ld o rg a n is m and to shape i t in to a sepa­

rate w hole i n s t r i c t acco rd an ce w ith i t s own l a w s # The p r o ­

cesses of life as th e y r e v e a l e d th e m se lv e s to H ebbel, on

th e o th er hand, w ere an i n t e g r a l part o f th e d r a m a t i s t *s

m ate ria l. The p r e s e n t a t i o n o f th e n a tu re o f co sm ic a ctiv i­

ty was s o m e t h i n g w h i c h n o t o n l y e m e r g e s n a t u r a l l y and i n ­

e v itab ly o u t o f any g r e a t d ram a, b u t w hich S h o u ld be th e

d e lib era te aim o f t h e d i'a m a tis t who i s aw are o f i t s con­

d itio n in g fo rce w ith in every p a rt of h is plays# T h us w h e n

H ebbel speaks o f th e rea d er o f any dram a as s t a n d i n g m id­

w a y b e t w e e n tw o s t a g e s on w hich t h e same a c t i o n i s b ein g

1# W X I p . 3, 1845o
 - 127 -
perform ed, i.e . b etw een th e w o rld s t a g e on w hich i t actually

to o k p lace and th e th e a tre w hich r e n d e r s it in a c o n cen trat­

ed r e f l e c t i o n (l), he is u n co n scio u sly p o in tin g to a facto r

w hich i s th e p e c u l i a r m ark o f h i s own d r a m a t i c p r a c t i c e .

T h is, b ro ad ly sp eak in g , co n sists in th e attem p t actu ally to

in tro d u c e in to th e personal sphere o f h is p lay s elem ents

from w o rld h i s t o r y , th u s c o n stru ctin g them , as i t w ere, on

two d ifferen t planes at once. P lay s su c h as H e ro d es und

M ariam ne a r e th erefo re h ttè èisa rily b u ilt on an a l t o g e t h e r

larg er scale th an th o se o f Ludw ig - o r in d e e d any o f h i s

co n tem p o raries, w ith th e p o ssib le e x c e p t i o n o f Wagner - and

th is m ay p a r t l y account f o r H e b b e l *s o f t e n alleg e d a lie n a ­

tio n from t h e th ea tre .

L udw ig, who c o n c e i t e d o f t h e dram a i n term s o f .the a c t o r

and h i s stag e, a n d who b u t r a r e l y c o n c e rn e d h i m s e l f con­

s c io u s ly w ith th e "reaso n ab len ess o f th e w orld o rg an ism ”

(2), was c o n t e n t w i t h t h e compact w o r l d - i n - m i n ia t u r e o f

th e th e a tre . When h e s a y s o f Shakespeare^ ”S d i n e r K u n s t

V orivurf i s t der W eltlau f, ih re S eele d a s i n n e r e G-esetz d e s

W e ltla u f s ” (3 ), he i s far from l a y i n g down a g e n e r a l p r i n ­

c ip le to w hich h e h i m s e l f m ig h t h a v e a d h e r e d . On t h e con­

tra ry , S h a k e s p e a r e , h a v in g once e s t a b l i s h e d th e model f o r

a p e r f e c t "ooxdséntrated p r e s e n t a ti o n o f the course o f th e

l . C f . T IV 3 7 6 2 , 8 N ov. 1 8 5 9 . - 2 . C f . L e t t e r t o Ju lian
S c l f i m i d t , 3 J u n e 1 8 5 7 P* 3 9 3 . - 3 . G 6 V p . 17p.
 - 128 -

w orld" (l), it o n ly rem ain ed fo r su c c e ed in g d ram atists to

em ulate h is p a r t i c u l a r m ethod. S h a k e s p e a r e 's law h a d b e e n

t h e law o f l i f e itse lf; th eirs m ust be none o t h e r t h a n

S hakespeare.

He e n d e a v o u r e d i n fact to d eriv e th e ru le s govern in g

th e stru c tu re of p lay s, as he d e r iv e d h i s th eo ry o f tra g e ­

dy , n o t from an i n d i v i d u a l We1 1 a n s c h a u u n g . b u t from t h e

c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f S h a k e s p e a r e a n dram a. H a v in g p e r c e i v e d ,
I

for in stan ce, th at th e e th ica l c o n ten t o f Shakespeare*s

p lay s rev ealed i t s e l f in th e e n d by means o f a g r a n d v i s i o n

o f Judgm ent Dayy he p r o c e e d e d to analyse th e m ethod by

w hich su c h an e f f e c t was a c h i e v e d . T h i s was no e a s y m a t t e r , ;

and L udw ig, who h a d f r o m h i s e a rlie st youth been w e ll

grounded in th e th e o ry o f m u sic, o ften found i t h e lp fu l to

c la rify such d e lic a t^ e p o in ts o f d ram atic te c h n iq u e by

u sin g m u sical te r m in o lo g y . Hence he d e s c r i b e s th e clo sely ,,

lin k e d c h a i n o f c rim e s w hich a re co m m itted i n H am let and

w hich a re a ll p u n ished in one f i n a l catastro p h e, as a fugue

b u ilt on a p r i n c i p l e o f what he c a l l s "trag ic co u n ter­

p o in t" (2). P roceeding as a p rac tisin g d ram a tist, he t r a n s ­

lates a general e f f e c t by means o f v i v i d and c o n c r e te

language in to sp ecific term s of stru c tu re , th ereb y an aly s­

ing alm o st w i t h o u t know ing i t , t h e way i n w h i c h f o r m may

become t h e o u tw a rd e x p r e s s i o n o f an i n n e r m ea n in g ,

l.œ V P.H3 2 , 1 8 5 5 - 5 6 . - 2 .ib id . p . 83, 1855-56.

 - 129 -

C o n flict iaa a n o t h e r case i n p o in t^ ; w hereas H ebbel sp eak s

b ro ad ly o f c o n flic t as t h e l i f e - b l o o d o f p o e tr y (l), w ith­

out fin d in g it n ecessary in h is d e lib era tio n s upon dram a to

trace its p ra c tic a l im p licatio n s s t r u c t i u '6 , L udw ig, by

seein g it i n term s o f c o n t r a s t , makes i t an im p o r ta n t and de­

l i b e r a t e means o f c o m p o s it i o n . A g a in he makes t h i s c l e a r by

way o f c o m p a r i s o n w i t h a Bach f u g u e , i n w hich them e and

c o u n ter-th em e ru n s id e by s id e (2 ), or, o n a n o t h e r ©Lccasion,

w ith th e co m p o sitio n o f a s o n a ta , ”w e l c h e i n der M itte das

Thema, d ie C h ai-ak terid ee des H eld en m it dem G e g e n t h e m a -

dem a n d e r n f a k t o r des t r a g i s chen W id e rsp ru ch s - in d ie in n ig

ste VV echselw irkung u n d K o n ^ t r ^ t i e r u n g b r i n g t ” ( 3 ) . îtiis, foi

him , wa s t h e o n ly t r u e m ethod o f c r e a t i n g by d r a m a t i c means

a w o rld i n w hich t h e v a r i e t y o f th in g s does n o t d isap p ear

a lto g e th e r, b u t w hich i s w elded i n to a u n i f i e d w hole th r o u g t

harm ony and c o n t r a s t (4).

The c h i e f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f H e b b e l *s t h e o r y , on t h e o th ea

hand, is p rec ise ly the fact th e he did not draw a n a b s o l u t e

d i s t i n c t i o n b e tw e e n t h e law s o f d ram atic s t r u c t u r e and th e

p rin c ip le s by w hich t h e w o rld o rg a n ism i s governed. It is

tru e th at in the very first pages o f "M ein v/ort ü b e r das

Drama" h e w r o t e : "Aber d e r I n h a l t des Lebens ist unerschB pf-

lic h , u n d d a s M edium d e r K u n s t ist § e g r|n z t. Das L e b e n

1 .G ». T I I 3 o o 3 , 1 9 , 23 J a n . 1 8 4 4 . - 2 . C f . G 6 V p . 9 4 ,
1 8 5 8 - 6©, - 3 , i b i d , p . 8 9 , 1 860- 6 5 . - 4 . C f , i b i d . p . 4 5 9 ,
1858- 6©.
 - 13o -

k ennt k ein en A b sch lu ss, d e r Faderi) a n dem e s die ^ r s c h e i-

nungen a b s p in n t, zieh t sich in ^ s U n en d lich e b i n , d ie Kunst

d a g e g e n muss ab sch liessen , s i e muss den F a d e n , so gu t es

g e h t, zum K r e i s zusam m enknûpfen” (l). But a t t h e same t im e

he claim ed th a t for the a rtist th e u ltim a te r e a l i t y was

art, and th a t th e w orld, life and n a t u r e co u ld o n ly be

a p p r e h e n d e d b y him t ti r o u g h h i s p a r t i c u l a r m edium , fo r only

th e n c o u ld h is sp irit, striv in g fo r sy n th esis and form ,

p erceiv e them i n th eir to ta lity ( 2 ). In d e e d in so far as

power to g i v e s h a p e im p o s e d i t s e l f s p o n t a n e o u s l y on e v e r y ­

th in g w hich p r e s e n t e d i t s e l f to h i s m ind, a r t became f o r

him t h e h i g h e s t e x p re ssio n o f l i f e , and t h e d r a m a t i s t w ould

f i n d no d i f f i c u l t y in tra n s la tin g even h i s most g r a n d io s e

c o n cep tio n s in to t h e c l o s e d f o r m o f h i s medium* "Dem D i c h -

ter ist es n & n lic h v e r g f ln n t, sich das U niversum , als aus

e i n e r u n e n d l i c h e n K eitie v o n K r e i s en b e s t e h e n d , v o r z u s t e l l e n

d ie s ic h sp iralfflrm ig a u sein an d er w ickeln, und von denen

der w eitere den e n g e re n i n dem S i n n e b e d i n g t , dass d i e fflr

d i e s en g e lt e n d e n G e s e tz e i n d e m s e l b e n Moment a u s s e r K r a f t

treten , wo s i e m i t d en i n %enen h e r r s c h e n d e n h i n d e r n d u n d

hemmend z u s a m m e n s to s s e n " (3). Thus t h e dram a, to o , was p i c ­

t u r e d by H ebbel as c o n sistin g o f a l a r g e number o f s m a l l

l.W XI p o 6 , I 8 i 3 . - 2 *Cf. I I 5 4 8 ,3 1 D e c .1 8 3 8 and W XI p l 5 6 ,

1 8 4 4 . - 3 . H e v i e w o f V . P . W e b s t e r *s D i e W a l r i a b i t i n *1849*1^ KI
p o2 84.
 - 131 -

c irc le s w hich, though each has its own f u n c t i o n , receiv e

th eir tru e fu lfilm en t o nly in a n atu ral r e la tio n to th e

great c irc le i n w hich e v e r y t r u e work o f a r t ,m o v e s and

w hich, in tu rn , is but part o f an a l l - e m b r a c i n g c i r c l e

tra n sc e n d in g the in d iv id u a l p lay . T his H ebbel r e g a r d e d

not as h i s p e rs o n a l view , b u t as a p rin cip le fu n d am en tal

to a ll d i 'a m a , whose o b s e r v a t i o n alo n e co u ld en su re an un­

a ssa ila b le so lid ity of stru c tu re 11 ) . He b e l i e v e d t h a t th e

tru e a rtist, c o n c e r n e d as h e i s w ith th e t o t a l i t y o f the

w orld and em bracing i n h i s w ork e v e r y t h i n g w hich l i v e s and

moves w i t h i n i t , m ust ^ w i t h o u t , h o w ev er, p ay in g undue

a tte n tio n to d e ta il, have a h ig h se n se o f form al s y n th e s is

(2 ). In flu en cin g and p e rv a d in g e v e ry p a r t of th e dram a,

th e m ethod o f S h a k e s p e a re , whose dram a k n i t s to g eth er th e

g reatest and th e s m a lle s t a n d c omm ands e v e r y t h i n g from an

im m utable c e n t r e , even th e f l y w hich f a l l s to t%e g r o u n d

on th e farth e st ed g e, m u st, he b e li e v e d , be a d o p te d by

every p lay w rig h t 13) - & p o i n t w hich L udw ig, to o , endor­

s e s r e p e a te d ly by em p asisin g th e s t r i c t u n ity o f s tru c ­

tu re w hich u n d e r l i e s th e v ery v a r ie ty and i n f i n i t e d iv er­

sity o f S h a k e s p e a r e a n dram a 14).

l . C f . r e v i e w o f V . P . W e b e r ’s D i e W a h a b i t i m . 1 8 4 9 ^ 2 8 5 : " A q f
d e n B a u a b e r , a a f d i e S o l i d i t S.t d e r G r u n d v e s t e n kommt e s
a n . . 0 " - 2 . S c h i l l e r ^s B r i e f w e c h s e l m i t K g r n e r ” , 1 8 4 8 - 4 9 ;
W XI p . 1 4 1 . - 3 . C f . W i l l p . 1 4 5 , r e v i e w o f B o o k e n t i t l e d
S h a k e sp e a re s Z e itg e n o s s e n und i h r e W erke;l858. -
4 o C f . e . g . œ V p . 255.'
 - 152 -
But ag reem en t b etw een th e tw o d ram a tists on t h e n e c e s s i t y

for d ram atic u n ity d o e s n o t go b e y o n d t h e s e v e r y g e n e r a l

p rin cip le s, to w hich any a r t i s t m u st t o a certain ex ten t

g iv e h is assen t. The i m p o r t a n t i s s u e on w hich t h e i r theo­

ries d iv id e is t h e m e th o d vjhereby t h i s effect is achieved

and th e d e g re e o f em phasis w hich e a c h a t t a c h e d to u n i t y on

th e one h an d and d i v e r s i t y on t h e o th er. A clu e to a ne­

cessary d iv erg en ce on t h i s p o in t is alread y p r o v i d e d by

th e g en eral n a tu re of th eir th e o re tic a l w ritin g s w hich

sheds co n sid erab le lig h t on th e esse n tia l d ifferen ce in

th eir in d iv id u al t a l e n t : th e ep ig ram m atic c h a r a c t e r o f muct

o f H e b b e l *s d i a r i e s and th e sty le of h is essays and a r ­

tic le s, condensed o f te n to the p o in t of in su fficien t cla ­

rity , b etray a m in d whose p r o c e s s e s o f th o u g h t are h ig h ly

c o n ce n tra te d ; w h ilst th e rh ap so d ic e ffu siv en ess o f th e

S h a k e sp e a re s t u d ie n . w ith t h e i r d e ta ile d and r e p e t i t i v e ob­

se rv atio n s, p o in ts to the v ery o p p o site. The d a n g e r o f

allo w in g e ith e r of th ese ten d en cies to dom inate d ram atic

p rac tic e, is o n ly too ap p aren t, a n d t h a t H e b b e l and Ludw ig

w ere b o th acu tely aw are o f i t is c learly ev id en ced i n thei]

w ritin g s. Thus, after the com pletion o f J u d ith th e form er,

w ith a fain t feelin g of u n easin ess, w r o te t o Ludw ig T i e c k :

"S in e l y r i s c h e F o n ta in e w erden S ie n i c h t fin d en ; ob i c h

aber n ich t au f der e n tg e g e n g e se tz te n S e ite zu w e it g egan-

gen und in d e r d r a m a tis c h e n C o n c e n tr a tio n h i e u n d da zu

 - 133 -

Starr g e w o r d e n b i n , das 1 s t es, was i c h v o n I h n e n z u e r f a h -

ran w d n s c h e " ( l )• C onscious of h is sh o rtc o m in g s, Hebbel

seem s to h a v e e n d e a v o u r e d t o make amends f o r th e unadorned

co n ce n tra te d stru c tu re o f th;^is h i s first p la y by t u r n i n g

to d e n o v e v a . whose s u b j e c t , i n h i s v ie w , need ed a f a r w ider

canvas w ith a m u ch g r e a t e r number o f "sin g le t h r e a d s ” ( 2 )o

S tep p in g out o f th e u re e k tem ple of Ju d ith in to what Em il

Kun c a l l s th e G o th ic m inst@ K 3) o f G e n o v e v a , H e b b e l , far

from ex p erien cin g a sense of g reater a rtistic freedom , was

ch eck ed by th e co m plexity o f th e task and a p p e a rs to have

a n tic ip a te d the danger o f lo s in g h is h e a rin g s in th e fo llo w

in g d iary en try w ritte n ten days b e f o r e he actu ally s ta rte d

work on h i s new p l a y : ”B e i S h a k e s p e a r e i s t g e i z i g s t e Oeco-

nom ie t r o t z h d c h s te n H eichthum s, Z e i c h e n d e s g r ô s s t e n Ge­

n ies ù b e rh a u p t” (4 j. A lthough at th e tim e o f i t s com pletion

w ell sa tisfie d w ith th e form o f G en o v ev a. H eb b el so o n r e a ­

lise d th at to conceal a rtistic economy b e n e a t h a w e a l t h o f

d e ta il as S h a k e s p e a r e h a d done 15), w as, in fac t, co n trary

to h is own n a t u r a l d ram atic talen t, and\^ h e l a t e r charac­

te rise d the p lay as " la b y rin th in e " (6). A fter p ro d u c in g the

suprêm e exam ple o f m a s t e r l y c o n c e n tr a tio n , M aria M agdalenat

and su b s e q u e n tly h is T r a u e r s p i e l i n S i c i l i e n . Hebbel him -

1 . L e t t e r t o Ludw ig T i e c k , 17 «Jan.l84o ; £ r . i x p ,2 7 #
2 .1 I I 2 4 1 1 ,2 9 D ec.1841. - 3. -
4oT I I 2 1 1 9 , 3 S s p , 1 8 4 o # - 5 . G f . r e v i e w o f " S h a k e s p e a r e s
Z e i tg e n o s s e n und ih re^W erk e,1 8 5 8 ,W X II p . 1 6 3 .- 6 . L e t t e r to
F r a n z D i n g e l s t e d t , 1 4 J u n e 1 8 5 8 ; ^ V V ’I p . 1 4 2 .
 - 134 -

se lf cam e t o th e co n clu sio n th a t h is dram atic talen t tend­

e d to v !;a r d3 c o n c e n t r a t i o n , a n d h e was f i r m l y c o n v i n c e d t h a t

what th e present c alle d a fau lt, w ould be r e g a r d e d i n t h e

fu tu fe as a v irtu e (l).

As t o p recise d e fin itio n s o f th e k in d o f s tr u c tu r e

w hich c o n c e n t r a t i o n demands, for t h e s e ®ne w o u l d s e a r c h i n

v ain ;ainor]Jst H e b b e l *s d r a m a t i c th eo ries, sin ce th e p a rti­

cu lar t r e a t m e n t wa s a l w a y s f o r him p r e s c r i b e d by t h e k i n d

o f m aterial concerned.

But i n g e n e ra l term s, stric t economy o f s t r u c t u r e im ­

p lie d reducing th e a c tio n to ab so lu te e sse n tia ls in th e

purest sense o f th e w ord, even i f th is in p ra c tic e very

o f t e n went h a n d - i n - h a n d w ith "perhaps too arrogant a d is­

d ain fo r a ll a cc esso rie s" (2 ). Waen H e b b e l e x p r e s s e d t h e

fear th at such a m ethod m ig h t be c o n fu s e d by u n d is c e r n in g

c ritic s w ith co ld n e ss cm t h e p a r t o f t h e d ram atist 1 3 he

was an ticip a tin g th e k in d o f c r i t ic i s m w h ic h l u d w i g m ore

than once l e v e l l e d a g a i n s t him . Thus t h e l a t t e r com plained

th a t h is co n tem p o rary d id not conceal w ith s u f f i c i e n t ar­

tistry th e b are bones of h is h ig h ly c o n c e n tr a te d dram as,

and c o n tr a s t e d t h i s w ith S h a k e s p e a re 's p l a y s , w h e r e we

forget t h e m ere " s k e l e t o n " and e n jo y th e r i c h , .b u t con­

t r o l l e d m ovem ents o f t h e b o d y :

l o C f p T I I I 3919*2o J a n . 1 8 4 7 . C f * a l s o L e t t e r t o A r n o l d Hflge,
15 S e p , 1 8 5 2 ; ^ V p . 5 3 . - 2 . L e t t e r to G u sta v K ühne, 8 Nov.
1 8 5 2 l i b i d o p . 7 2 . - 3 . G f . L e t t e r to F ra n z L i n g e l s t e d f ,1 2 June
1 3 6 2 ; B ? 7 v ’ p . 2 2 . - 1. 0 ? V p , 5 'Q.
 - 135 -

”W ie i n der p o ly p h o n isch en S c h r e ib a r t, wo d i e ein fach e

H arm o n ien fo lg e zu v e r s c h i e d e n e n Stim m en e r a a n z i p i e r t ist

deren jede ih r eig n es G esetz d e r Bewdgung i n s i c h h a t ,

•..u n d doch wohl e i n g e o r d n e t i s t ” (l).

# iilst fo r H ebbel th e a c c e n t l a y on c o n c e n tr a ti o n and

c o m p a c t n e s s , Ludw ig a lw a y s ad v o cated th e g r e a t e s t p o ssib le

b read th and m u l t i p l i c i t y w h i c h was c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e

sp iritu a l u n ity o f a d r a n a , m aking t h i s th e d istin g u ish in g

m ark o f r e a l i s m as o p p o se d to id ealism , ”Der H a u p t u n t e r -

sch ied d e s k d n s t i e r i s c h e n H e a l i s m u s vom k d n s t i e r i s c h e n

I d e a l i s m u s ” , h e w ro te b etw een 1858 and I 860, ”i s t , dass

der K e a lis t sein er w i e d e r g e s c h a f f n e n W elt s o v i e l v o n i h -

rer B reite und M a n n ig fa ltig k e it iS sst, als s i c h m it der

g e i s t i g e n E inJrieit v e r t r a g en w i l l , w o b e i d i e s e E inJrieit

se lb st zwar v i e l l e i c h t schw erer, aber daffir w e i t g r o s s a r -

tig e r i n s Auge f & l l t ” ( 2 ), The y e a r s o f p a i n f u l ex p erience

w hich l i e b eh in d t h is em phasis on " s p i r i t u a l u n i t y " , m ust

be c le a r to a n y o n e , who h a s cast a g lan ce in to th e w e lte r

o f e v er-m u ltip ly in g p lo ts and s u b - p l o t s , in trig u es and

c o u n te r-in trig u es w hich c o n s t i t u t e th e g r e a te r part of

L u d w i g *s d r a m a t i c s k e t c h e s . S eein g as h e d i d w i t h d istu rb ­

ing c l a r i t y the im p licatio n s and consquences o f e a c h new

facto r in th e p lo t, he te n d e d to d issect it in to m in u te

l.G S V p . 4 5 7 ,1 8 5 7 -5 8 .- 2 . i b i d . p .4 5 8 ,1 8 5 8 -6 o .
 — 136 -

d e ta il, a l t h o u g h h e was h i m s e l f o n l y t o o conscious of th e

dangers o f such a procedure from t h e p o i n t o f view o f d ra ­

m atic co m p o sitio n ;

"i^s s c h e i n t , i c h b i n w i e d e r m i t v o l l e n S e g e l n a u f m einem

a l t en Irrw e g e . W e l c h e r Turm v o n B a b e l v o n D e t a i l u n d E n t - ]

w ick lu n g b a u t sich h ie r auf! I c h m uss w i e d e r ein e 2 e i t -

lan g S hakespeare le s en, um d e n M a s s t a b w ieder zu f i n d e n "

- " g e r a d lin % ) t", "ein fach st", "rund, g ed rân g t, g esch lo s-

3en”, " ja k e in V er& steln in s U n e n d lic h e ..." ( l ).

Such rem arks are ch aracteristic o f th e ad m onitions w ith

w h ic h Ludw ig c o n t i n u a l l y b r a c e d h i m s e l f t o h i s task . But

seem in g ly q u i t e u n a b l e t o make a p l a n i n term s o f sim p le

stru c tu re (2), he ten d ed to a p p ly re m e d ie s w hich w ere o n ly

too freq u e n tly o f a som ewhat h a p h a z a r d n a t u r e , lac k in g a ll

o rg an ic n ecessity . The l o n g h i s t o r y o f Der E rb f< ü rste r i s aU

s u c c e s s io n o f such rem ed ies, w here t h e o m is s i o n o f one p a r i

■ !
o f th e d ram atic s tr u c tu r e for th e sake o f b r e v i t y alm ost

in v a r ia b ly le d to th e in tr o d u c tio n o f new m o t i f s . t h u s comj

p iic a tin g th e a l r e a d y com plex p l o t e v e n m o r e . T h e o n l y wayj

o u t was t o s i m p l i f y th e p lo t, and t h i s i d e a was n o d o u b t

at the ro o t o f L u d w i g ’s t h e o r y o f S h a k e s p e a r e ’s c o n c e n t r â t '

ed a c tio n w ith in a s o - c a ll e d free f o r m . K nowing t h e d iffi-;

l . N o t e t o D ie E reu n d e von I m o la . c i t e d b y E r i c h S c h m i d t , ^ ;
IV p p .4 o f . - 2 . V . L e t t e r o f 9 O c t . l 8 5 o i n an s e r t o one o f |
E r a n z D i n g e l s t e d t , i n w hich t h e l a t t e r a d v i s e d Ludw ig to
c l a r i f y to h im s e lf in a c l e a r l y w orked-out p la n th e a rra n ­
gem ent and o r g a n ic developm ent o f h i s m a t e r i a l V lp. 364.
 - 137 -

c u lty in h is own c r e a t i v e process o f reducing th e ”n o v e l -

listic c o n t e n t ” to a short a c c o u n t and t h e te n d e n c y w hich

th e u n r u ly m a t e r i a l h a d o f grow ing b e n e a th h i s hands in to

n o v els tl), h e was m o r e t h a n o n c e t e m p t e d t o tak e th e l i n e

o f le a st resistan ce and rem ould h i s m a t e r i a l in to novel or

short sto ry form (2 ). But th e unequal s tr u g g le in v ariab ly

c o n tin u ed , as he t r i e d a g a in and a g a in to a n a l y s e t h e me­

t h o d b y w h i c h S h a k e s p e a r e h a d g a i n e d m a s t e r y o v e r h i s ma­

te ria l. Thus h e found, th at it was n o t u n t i l the l a t t e r

had tra c e d th e p lo t in a few b r o a d s t r o k e s w ith in a sim p le

p lan - one m ain s i t u a t i o n , one them e, one c h i e f c h a r a c t e r ,

one s i n g l e aim - t h a t he s t a r t e d e la b o r a tin g and d iv id in g

in to scenes:

"Shakespeare en tw irft d i e Fab e l i n w e n i g e n g r o s s e n ZQ.-

gen, d ie, k au sal m itein an d er v e rk n û p ft, feststeh en .

Dann t e i l t er dèn F a b e l - s o l c h e r g e s t a l t in Szenen, dass

d ie M otive v o lls t& n d ig k l a r , d er â u s s e r e V organg v o l l -

s t Sin d i g an sch au lich s ic h d arin d a r s t e l l e n k S n n en ...N u n

b ere ich e rt er d i e H andlung m it m a n n ig fa ltig e m D e t a i l ”

(3).

Such problèm e w h ich w ere c o n s t a n t l y b e s e t t i n g L udw ig ne­

v e r c l a i m e d H e b b e l *s a t t e n t i o n for one m om ent. A s t o r y ,

l . C f . "M ein V erfairiren beim p o e t i s c h e n S o h a f f e n " ,G S V I p . 2 1 6 .

2 . O f , L e t t e r t o L u d w i g T i e c k , 1 3 ^ a r c h 1 8 4 3 iB r i e f e ^e d . c i t .
p ^ 7 5 ; L e t t e r to K a rl G u tzk o w ,9 F e b .1 8 4 7 ;i b i d . p . 192 ; and L e t ­
t e r t o F d u a r d D e v r i e n t , 5 D e c . 1 8 4 6 :GS V X - 0 . 3 4 3 . -
3 .GS V p . 93", 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 .
 — 158 -

" f a i t h f u l and sim p le ju st as th e ch ro n ic le r recorded i t " (l),

u su ally p ro v id ed th e p lo t, though n o t w ith o u t d r a s t i c changes

in the in n e r a ctio n . S om etim es, in d eed , it seem ed as th o u g h

th e m ateria l p ro v id ed by h is s o u r c e was a l r e a d y so com plete,

so rounded o f f in itse lf as t o leave th e d ram atist l i t t l e

scope ( 2 ). But w ith h i s k e e n wye f o r e sse n tia ls, Hebbel soon

re a lise d th at th is w ould b e a f a l s e a s s u m p t i o n 1?è4 n , and he

observes th at a "common a n e c d o t e h u n t e r " who t h i n k s h e c a n

produce a d ra m a s i m p l y by t a k i n g some h i s t o r i c a l event and

c u ttin g it in to d i a l o g u i s e d s c e n e s w ould be s a d l y d isillu ­

s io n e d by th e r e s u l t (3). H ebbel w ould h av e agreed w ith Lud-

w ig t h a t e v e n S h a k e s p e a r e ’s m a s s i v e dram as c o u l d be t r a c e d

back to th e v e ry sim p le s t o r i e s from w hich th e y o r i g i n a t e d

14), but he d en ied th a t th e n o v e l% istic arrangem ent o f th e s e

sto ries i n a n y way c o i n c i d e d w i t h t h e stru c tu re o f a dram a.

L udw ig, for whom t h e r e l i â t i o n b e t w e e n t h e g e r m s t o r y and th e

fin al d r a m a was m u c h l e s s c o m p l i c a t e d t h a n f o r H e b b e l , made

no s u c h d i s t i n c t i o n ; he felt t h a t S h a k e s p e a r e ’s s o u r c e s - h i s

an ecd o tes and s t o r i e s - i n t h e m s e l v e s h a d p r e p a r e d t h e way

f o r him p e r f e c t l y , sin ce a l l have in th em selv es an i d e a l u n i ­

ty stro n g enough to b e a r th e g reatest ela b o ratio n . The w h o le

1 . C f . L e t t e r t o F r a n z D i n g e l s t e d t , 1 2 D e c . 1 8 5 1 ; B r . I V p . 357#
2 . C f . L e t t e r t o H .T h .H 8 t s c h e r , 2 2 D e c . 1 8 4 7 : i b i d . n . 7 3 : "Hr Q ier
S t o f f j s c h è e n m ir sch o n zu v o l l e n d e t , zu a b g e ru n d e t i n s i c h ,
um dem K û n s t l e r a u c h n u r n o c h s o v i e l A r b e i t z u g e b e n , a l s n 8 -
th ig i s t ,w e n n e r s i c h ^ e g e i s t e r n s o i l . . " .- 3 * C f .r e v ie w oi
M a s s i n g e r ’s L u d o v i c o . 1 8 4 9 :W XI p . 2 5 3 # —4 . C f . L e t t e r t o M ^ i e
W i t t g e n s t e i n , 27 J a n . 1 8 5 9 : 3 r . V I p . 233 ; " A l l é s ,w as d i e s e n g S h a k e -
s p e a r e j z u r d r a m a t i s c h e n S p i t z e d e r J a l n r h u n d e r t e m a c h t , k a n n dez
C o m p o n is t n i c h t b r a u c h e n ; e r m uss d i e u n g e h e u r e n K u n s t w e r k ^ ^
w ied er i n d ie e in fa c h e n H o v ellen a n f l d s e n , a n s^ ^ ^ n e n r e
 - 139 -
C
a c t i o n )would b e c o m p r e s s e d i n t o m ite a short form ala

w hich, even in th e m ost ab stract shape, p le a s e s by i t s

v e r y sym m etry (l).

H e n ce fo rth th is " f r e e ” form , w hich a llo w e d t h e dram a­

tist a ll k inds of v a ria tio n s and a l e i s u r e l y e la b o ra tio n

of h is b asic sto ry , became f o r L udw ig t h e only p o s s ib le

l a w o f s t r u c t u r e : " I c h s e h e immer m eh r e i n , dass d ie Sha-

k e s p e a r i s c h e Form fflr d i e v o l l k o m m e n s t e T r a g f l d i e u n e n t -

b eh rlich y d ais sie k ein e L ic e n z , dass s i e e in G esetz i s t "

(2). In h is own p l a y s th e ad o p tio n o f t h is form seem ed to

g i v e him a l l th e scope for d e ta il and e x p a n liv e n e s s th at

he c o u ld d e s ir e , for a re a listic p re s e n ta tio n o f charac­

ter and a t r u e d ep ic tio n o f i t s m an ifo ld phases and con­

d itio n s - a ll o f w hich n e c e s s i t a t e d a s tr u c tu r e very

d ifferen t from t h e co n cise, c o n c e n t r a t e d fo rm , w here t h e

threads o f the p sy ch o lo g ical a c t i o n t e n d e d i n L udw ig*s

o p i n i o n to become e n t a n g l e d i n t h e se q u e n c e o f o u tw a rd

ev en ts 13)* A c c o r d i n g l y , h e n o t e d i n a p lan fo r h is

dreas H p fe r:

"V iele A u f t r i tt e , v iel â u s s e r e B e w e g u n g , Kommen, A b -

gehen, wo d u r c h d ie H a u p tp erso n en und ilire E n tw ick lu n -

gen re c h t oft zusammenkommen; e i n e g e w i s s e B r e i t e ,

1 . C f . L e t t e r to J u l i a n S clim id t,3 J u l y , 1 8 5 7 VI p p .3 9 7 f*
"So d e r K a u f i n a n n v o n V e n e d i g : ^ r e u n d s c h a f t g i e b t s i c h um
-L ie b e w i l l en i n d ie G ew alt des H a ss e s u n d w ird von d er
d a n k b a r e n v o r s e i n e r H a c h e g e r e t t e t . I n Homeo : L i e b e b e -
s i e g t d e n H a s s i n i h r e m Un t e r g a n g e a n d e m s e l b e n " .
2 .G S V p. 2 2 8 ^ 1 8 5 5 - 5 6 . - 3 . O f . i b i d . 0 . 1 9 5 . 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 : " B e i d e r
k o n z e n t r i e r t e n F(%frm,wo m a n " S u s s ' e r l i c h e W i r k u n g e n zusamr-
 — 1 4o —

d u i ’c h w e l c h e i 3 e i d e a , O f t s e h e n der H auptpersonen und B re i­

te, d e r ^ u s c h a u e r h e i m i s c h e r g e m a c h t w i r d im S t û c k e ” ( l ) «

The f a c t th at th is p lay , to o , rem ain ed a fragm ent g iv e s a

rin g of trag ic iro n y to t h e c l a i m made by Ludw ig t h a t dram a­

tic form and t h e d r a m a t i s t *s own c a p a c i t y m u s t b a l a n c e o n e

an o th er ( 2 ). It is th e lesser d ram atic talen t, he d e c l a r e s ,

w hich n e e d s th e c o n ce n tra te d a rt form , fav o u rab le as i t is

to co n stan t te n sio n , w h ilst th e stro n g d ram a tist needs th e

freer form , w hich i n tu rn p ro vid es a n atu ral a n tid o te to h is

su rp lu s power*

"B in schw aches G - e t r S n k m ag m a n zum G e n u s s e k o n z e n t r i e r e n ,

e in sta rk e s m u s s m an v e r d ü n n e n u n d %Ü_ldern. J e w e n i g e r G e -

w alt e in S to f f b e s i tz t, d e s to mehr w i r d e r i n k o n z e n t r i e r -

ter i?orm g e w i n n e n ; je g ew altig er der ^ to f f an s i c h , d esto

m ehr w ird es ihm g u t th u n , in freier Fo rm b e h a n d e l t z u w e r ­

den".

But w h ils t on th e one hand r e a l i s i n g th at in th e case o f

a d ram atist less in command o f h i s medium t h e u s e o f S h a k e ­

s p e a r e *s m e t h o d was n o t o n l y i l l - a d v i s e d , but h arm fu l, on

th e o th e r, he c o n s id e re d i t , a s we h a v e s e e n , to be th e o n ly

one p ro p e r to g r e a t dram a.

Not so H e b b e l, who n e v e r allo w ed h is ad m iratio n for th e

K ing o f d r a m a t i s t s to be u n q u a lif ie d . "Es i s t f û r m ich k e i n

l . u l t d d by o . j i s c h e r . 0 0 . c i t . p 6 5 . L u d w i g was w o r k i n g o n
t h i s p i a y I w h i c h a t o n e t i m e was e n t i t l e d Bm-r S a p (^ w j,rt v o n
P a s s e i e r . d u r i n g 1 8 5 o 2 . G f , G S V p * 427*
 — 141 —

Z w eife l", he w rote in h is d iary o f 1846, "dass se in Z erflie.

s s e n i n u n e n d lic h e - S in z e lh e ite n s i c h m it d e r Form d e s D ra­

mas n i c h t v e r t r S g t o Vor der Kunst i s t es g l e i c h , ob e i n

F eh ler a u f k f l n i g l i c h e W eise o d e r B e t t l e r - M a n i e r b e g a n g e n

w ird (1 ) . F o r him S h a k e s p e a r e h a d o f f e n d e d a g a i n s t th e fun­

d a m en ta l law s o f a r t by r a n g in g h i m s e l f i n h i s exp ansive­

ness e sse n tia lly on t h e s i d e o f N ature and f a i l i n g to ob­

serve th e r u le s o f co n tra ctio n and c o n c e n tr a tio n d ictated ^

if n d t by h i s m edium , th e n by t h e v e ry v a s t n e s s o f h i s ma­

terial# F o r H e b b e l h i m s e l f d i d n o t cheese w h a t h e c a l l e d

"th e h ig h e st art re stin g on a b s o l u te c o n ce n tra tio n ", be­

cause th e canvas ag ain st w hich he p l a c e d t h e actio n s of h is

own d r a m a s was l e s s b r o a d t h a n S h a k e s p e a r e ^s ; o n t h e oèh-e

trary , by th e v e ry fact th a t h is d r a m a was t o tran scen d

th e m erly p e rs o n a l and mount t h e w o rld s t a g e , w h e r e no

lo n g er th e fate of a n a tio n , but o f th e w orld i n g e n e ra l

was at stak e, he f e l t h im s e lf c o n s tr a in e d to eschew a l l

d w e llin g upon d e t a i l and to sin g le o u t o n l y t h e v i t a l mo­

m ents o f th e a ctio n l2 )# I n J u d it h he had a lre a d y p o in te d

1 # T I I I 3 6 7 9 ,1 6 S e p tl8 4 6 # - 2 , C f .L e t t e r to F ra n z D i n g e l s t e d t
1 2 J u n e 1 8 5 2 ;B £ ,.V p .2 2 : . • " d a s S t ü c k p i e r o d e s u n d M ariam n e') .
b eh teJd eM k e i n - V 6 l k e r - ,s o n d e r n e in ^ a llg e m e in e s '^ e l t s c h ic k -
s a l ; f r e i l i c h i s t e s a b e r m i t e i n e r s o l c h e n A u f g a b e , w e n n mai
n i c h t z u r T r i l o g i e g r e i f e n , a l s o d a s W erk f ü r e w i g v o n d e r
Bdhne a b s c h l i e s s e n w i l l , a u c h u n t r e n n b a r v e r b u n d e n , n i c h t zu
t i e f i n s D e t a i l h i n a b z u s t e i g e n ; n u n k a n n e i n H e f e r a t , z u dem
doch o f t g e g r i f f e n w erden m u s s ,n i e i n so b renneiiden F a rb e n
g l& n z e n ,w ie d ie u n m itte lb a i* e ,h ie r a b e r b e i so w e it a u sg e -
s p a n n t e m Halimen n u r i n d e n H a u p t m o m e n t e n m S g l i c h e D a r s t e l -
l u n g , u n d s o w i r d d e n n l e i c h t d i e h S c h s t e , a u f a b s o l u t e r Con­
c e n t r a t i o n b eru h en d e Kunst m it K â lte v e rw e c h se lt" #
 - 142 -

c o n scio u sly to the p o ssib ility o f s u c h a t r e a t m e n t whose

e sse n tia l featu re is a kinJL o f s y m b o l i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e ; not

only d o e s J u d i t h ’s d i v i n e m i s s i o n em b o d y t h e ete rn al pro­

blem o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l ’s r e l a t i o n to p th e u n iv e rs a l am h e r

en co u n ter w ith H o lo fe m e s sig n ify th e c o n flict betw een th e

sexes, but th ese tw o i d e a s w hich a re w elded i n to one ac­

tio n aie in tu rn c o n ta in e d in a k ind o f m etap h y sic a l w orld

dram a w hich h a s to a larg e ex ten t its independent s u b s tr a ­

tum i n th e scene d ep ic tin g th e Jew ish p e o p le . The a m b i t i o n

for c reatin g a so -called "epoch-m aking" dram a i n c o n t r a s t

to a"sem i-n atio n al" on th e one h a n d , and a " s u b j e c t iv e -

in d iv id u a l" one on th e o th er (l ) n ev er l e f t H ebbel, but

assum èd^ ev er l a r g e r p ro p o rtio n s in th e su c ce siv e sta g e s

o f h is d ram atic career. A l r e a d y i n 1 8 4 4 H e b b e l v^rote :

"Ich denke nS m lich n i c h t T h eater - oder L e s e -î'u tte r zu lie -

f e r n , s o n d e r n i n einem e i n z i g e n g r o s s e n G e d i c h t , d e s s e n
n ich t
H eld/m ehr d ie s e s o d er je n e s In d iv id u u m , so n d e rn d ie

M enschheit s e l b s t ist u n d d e s s e n H a h m en n i c h t e in z e ln e

A n e c d o te n und ^ o r f & l l e , s o n d e r n d i e g a n z e G e s c h i c h t e um -

sc h lie sst, den G r u n d s te i n zu ein em ganz n e u e n , b i s jetzt

no ch n i e d a g e w e s e n e n Dramas z u l e g e n . . " ( 2 ) . But w h atev e r

h is su b je ct, H ebbel endeavoured n e v er to lo s e sig h t o f th e

k in d o f s t r u c t u r e m ost a p p ro p riate to h is purpose, and th e

m ore c o m p re h e n siv e h i s dram as b e ca m e , t h e m ore he b e l i e v -

1 . P r e f a c e t o M a r i a Ma -gcdalena. 1 8 4 4 p .4 o .
2 . L e t t e r t o C h a r l o t t e R o u s s e a u , 29 M a rc h 1 8 4 4 ; D r . H I p o 6 2 ,
 - 143 -

ed in the n e c e s s ity f o r what h e c alle d "aesth etic l o g a r i t h m ”

(1 ).
In t h e o r y , L udw ig to o claim ed th a t s t r u c t u r e sh o u ld be

a re la tiv e facto r, depending e n tire ly on t h e aim s and c o n ­

d itio n s o f th e in d iv id u a l d ram a tist. Thus h e h e l d u p S h a ­

k e s p e a r e 's m eth o d o f c o m p o s itio n as b e in g t h e m ost e x p e ­

d ien t in th e sense o f a c c o rd in g m ost p e r f e c t l y w ith h i s

p articu lar purposes ( 2 ). "S hakespeare gin g von der L a r s t e l -

lung e in e s S c h ic k s a ls aus, u n d d i e Form b e q u e m te s i c h da-

nach und m usst e es ; d ie a l t e n F r a n z o s e n v on den fG nf A k te n

u n d d r e i F i n l r ie i te n , u n d d e r S t o f f muss t e â i c h danaoh b e -

quemen" (5)* D iv id in g th e dram a b r o a d l y i n t o an cien t, or

G reek, and m odern, or S h a k e sp e a re a n , (French dram a he r e ­

g a r d e d as a h y b rid form ), he c o n f id e n tly ra n g e d h im s e lf

on th e sid e o f S h a k e sp e a i'e , w ith o u t b ein g aw are o f any i n ­

co n sisten cy in the id e a o f em u latin g a d ra m a tist b o rn th ree

c en tu ries e a rlie r and t h e r e f o r e w orking u n d e r v e ry d i f f e ­

rent c o n d itio n s from o ne l i v i n g in th e n in e te e n th cen tu ry .

W ith o u t, in fac t, m aking c l e a r t o h i m s e l f th e p r e c i s e na­

tu re o f th ese d ifferen t c o n d i t i o n s , L u d w i g wa s s o m e t i m e s

t e m p t e d t o make u n f a i r com parisons# Thus h e s e t what he

c o n s id e re d to be th e p e rfe d tly o rg an ic stru c tu re o f Shake­

s p e a r e 's p lay s o v e r a g a i n s t G reek tr a g e d y , i n w hich he

1 . L e t t e r t o S a i n t h e n e T a i l l a n d i e r , 9A u g . 1 8 5 2 ; B £ , V I I I p . 4 4 ,
2oC f.G S V p . 8 5 . C f # a ls o i b i d . p . 4 2 3 ,1 8 5 1 - 5 5 *
3 . i b i d . p . 426.
 - 144 -

found an u n r e l a t e d m ix tu re of ly ric and e p ic elem en ts, ”wo

An f a n g u n d iilnde K e l i e f s und nur d ie M itte freiste^d e druppe

sin d , wo d i e arm e H a n d l u n g g e w a l t s a m g e d e h n t u n d im m e r, ehe

w ir noch h e im isc h d a r in w erden k o n n te n , von u n e n d lic h e n ,

u n d r am a t i s c h e n C h o r g e s & n g e n z e r r i ^ S e e n w i r d ” ( l ) .

H ebbel, w ith h is e n tire ly d ifferen t approach, saw t h e

great p erio d s o f w orld l i t e r a t u r e in h is to ric a l p e rsp ec tiv e

each c o n tr ib u tin g , in accordance, w ith th e p a r t i c u l % view

of life o f th e tim e, to a d e v e l o p m e n t w h i c h was s t i l l con­

tin u in g in h is own t i m e and to w hich h e f e l t h im s e lf to be

c o n trib u tin g . The/extrem e i n s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the in d iv id u al

in th e face o f h is gods endowed G reek T rag e d y w ith a ”c h a s f

restrM m t v%ic% was i n e v i t a b l y l o s t in th e fu ll ep ic

b r e a d t h o f S h a k e s p e a r e a n dram a (2 ).B u t betw een th e two l a y

the r i s e of C h ristia n ity , and o f P r o t e s t a n t i s m in p articu ­

lar, g iv in g to th e in d iv id u a l an e n t i r e l y d ifferen t sta tu s

in th e w orld, and i t was b u t as a n a tu ra l consequence o f

th is e v o lu tio n ary process t h a t S h a k e s p e a r e was f o r c e d t o

reverse th e s o - c a lle d ’’e c o n o m y ” o f t h e dram a and a d o p t a

new fo rm ( 3 )*

The q u estio n o f s tr u c tu r e is th ere fo re c l o s e l y bound up

w i t h t h e k i n d o f sc o p e w hich t h e dramgbist g i v e s h i s charac­

ters, and i t is at th is p o i n t t h a t H e b b e l *s a n d L u d w i g *s

t h e o r i e s m ust be e x p e c te d t o come i n t o p a r t i c u l a r l y m arked

co n flict# For w h ils t b oth re c o g n is e d th e r ic h d ep ic tio n o f

l . C f . G S V p . 8 5 . - 2 # C f . r e v i e w o f L * E c k a r d t *s T b : a m a t u r g i s c h _ e
S t u d i e n . l 8 5 3 : W X I I p . 3o . - 3 * C f . P r e f a c e t o M a r i a M a ^ z d a l e n a #
1844;W XI p . 3 5 .
 - 145 -
a vast range o f in d iv id u a l ch aracters to be th e essence o f

Shakespearean dr*ama, L u d w i g r e g a r d e d t h i s as t h e p rim e con­

c e r n o f any m odern d r a m a t i s t , w hereas H ebbel c o n ten d ed

th at it m u s t b e s u p e r s e d e d b y a new t y p e o f d r a m a a l t o g e ­

th er. H ebbel c h a r a c t e r i s e s th e two t y p e s in h is e s s a y on

S c h ille r's c o r r e s p o n d e n c e w i t h K 5 rn e r as on t h e one h a n d

" d ie m it N o th w e n d ig k eit im H a s r e l i e f s t y l g e h alte n en C h a r ^

tere der A lt e n " , and on th e o t h e r as "die m arkigen, b is in

d ie l e t z t e F a se r h in ab selb stân d ig gew o rd en en L e s t a l t en

der N eueren" (w hich h e a l l e g e s S c h ille r to have t r i e d to

com bine w i t h o u t s u c c e s s ) (l).V /hen one r e c a l l s such i n t i ­

m ately p o rtra y e d ch aracters as J u d i t h o r G olo, it is ob­

v io u s t h a t H ebbel, p articu larly in h is e a rlie r p erio d ,

was s t i l l far from r e a l i s i n g th e form er ty p e ; yet a com­

p a r is o n w ith the k in d o f c h a r a c te r is a tio n i n M oloch o r

D em etrius c le arly p o in ts to a developm ent i n t h a t d irec­

tio n - th o u g h th e frag m e n ta ry c h a r a c te r o f b oth th e s e

p lay s in d ic ate s th at it rem ain ed l a r g e l y th eo re tic al.

That t h i s w as, ind eed , a co nscious developm ent, is borne

o u t by H e b b e l *s own s t a t e m e n t about h is a i m s i n H e r o des,

a n d M a r i a m n e : "Und d a b e i h a b e i c h m i r die A ufgabe g e s t e l l t

he w rote i n 185o , " d i e Form m S g l i c h s t z u v e r e i n f a c h e n u n d

d i e g r o s s e n h i s t o r i s c h d n Mas s e n s o w o h l ^ . d i e ^ d i e F a k t o r e n

l i ' S c h i l l e r s B r i e f w e c h s e l m i t Kfirn er'^ 1 8 4 8 - 4 9 p * 1 4 o #

The f a c t t h a t i n t h e same y e a r H e b b e l e m p h a s i s e d t h e n e ­
c e s s i t y f o r k e e p i n g h i s M o l o c h " d u r c h a u s im B a s - r e l i e f -
S t i l " th ro w s an im portant l i g h t on h i s a t t i t u d e to G re ek
d r a m a a s a p r a c t i s i n g d r a m a t i s t I C f # T I I I 4 6 1 1 ^^1 2 ^ J n n e
 — 146 —
d es p s y c h o l o g i s Chen P r o c e s s e s b i l d e n , als auch das D etail

der N ebenpersonen und der S i t u â t io n en in den H in te r g r u n d

drhngen, da ic h d b e rz e u g t b in , dass aus dem S t y l der G rie-

c h e n u n d dem S t y l S h a k e s p e a r e ' ^ s dur chaus e in M ittleres ge—

wonnen w erd en m u s s ” ( l ) . In t h i s ^ second p e rio d , then, the

sim p le c o n c e n t r a t e d fo rm was t o b e b r o u g h t in to lin e w ith

H ebbel*s d e lib era te re stric tio n o f th e scope o f th e in d i­

v id u al ch aracters (2 ), th e p sy ch o lo g ical and h i s t o r i c a l

b re a d th o f Shakespeare b e in g , as i t w e re, m o d if i e d by t h e

f o r m a l p e r f e c t i o n o f t h e G r e e k s . T h e s e tw o e l e m e n t s , each

sp rin g in g from v e r y d ifferen t co n d itio n s of th e p ast, w ere

th u s to form t h e b a s i s for a new d r a m a , fu lfillin g th e

needs and c o n d itio n s o f th e p resen t.

F o r L udw ig s u c h a c o m p r o m i s e was a c o m p l e t e c o n t r a d i c ­

tio n in term s, s i n c e S h a k e s p e a r e a n dram a m eant t h e g r a d u a l

u n fo ld in g of ch aracter and p a s s io n and th u s n e cessitated

th e g reatest fle x ib ility , w hereas G reek tr a g e d y and

its d escend an t, Prench c l a s s i c a l dram a, wh e afe t h e c h a r a c -

(
t e r 5 and t h e i r fate w ere p r a c t i c a l l y c o m p le te from t h e b e ­

g in n in g and th e strictest c o n tin u ity of a c tio n w ith in a

c lo sely k n it fram ew ork a c c o r d in g ly p r e v a i l e d - or sho u ld ,

id ea lly , have p re v a ile d . Hebbel tried to h a v e t h e best of

l # L e t t e r to S a i n t Hene T a i l l a n d i e r , 9 A u g .1 8 5 2 ; B r . V I I I p ,
4-6 , rje mo l o c h w h i c h "dem S t y l n a c h z w i s oh e n m o d e r n e r u n d
a n tik e r T ragodie in der m itte s te h e n d u r f te " .O f . a lso
L e t t e r t o G u s t a v Kflhne, 1 9 M a rc h 105o ; D r . I V p . 2 o 7 .
5 . Of . L e t t e r to A r n o l d K d g e , 1 5 ^ e p . l 8 5 2 ; £ r . V p . 5 6 .
 - 147 -

b oth w o rld s, he argued, im p ly in g t h a t th is was b o u n d t o

stra in the stum ctu re o f h is dram a to b r e a k i n g p o in t. For

sin ce in a co n fin ed space th e c h a r a c t e r s h a v e l i t t l e op p o r­

tu n ity for developm ent through a ctio n , H e b b e l was f o r c e d

to r e s o r t to th e e p ic m ethod o f l e t t i n g h is personages

"ex p la in " th em selv es, th e r e b y im peding th e r a p i d flo w stf

e sse n tia l for d ram atic effect. H e b b e l ’s answ er to su ch

charges w ould h a v e b e e n to p o in t / a t a d r a m a s u c h a s G-yges

und s e i n h i n g , w here, in h is view , th e fact th at it was

em in en tly s u ite d for th e th é â tre fran p ais, and p o s s e s s e d

a ll th e a ttrib u te s w h ic h L udw ig c l a s s e d w i t h t h e s i m p l e

form o f (jree k dram a, was b y no m e a n s i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h the

e sse n tia l d i’a m a t i c q u a litie s r e q u i r e d by th e m odern t h e a ­

tre: "Aus e in er a l t en F a b e l des H ero d o ts h e r v o r g e s p o n n e n ,

ab en th eu e rlic h bunt in den S i t u â t io n e n , s ic h b is zum l e t z -

t e n M om ent i n d e r H andlung s t e i g e r n d , und dennoch ,g rie-

ch isch ein fach in d e n G h a i’a c t e r e n , d a b e i k n a p p im Z u s c h n h t

u n d r a p i d im V e r l a u f " , i s how h e h i m s e l f d e s c r i b e d t h e

p l a y some t i m e b e f o r e its com pletion (l).

When c o n s i d e r i n g L u d w i g ’s c r i t i c i s m o f H ebbel attem p ­

ted f u s i o n o f G reek and S h a k e s p e a re a n e le m e n ts , it is im­

p o rtan t to bear i n m ind, how ever, t h a t he does n o t appear

1 . L e t t e r t o S i g m u n d E n g l â n d e r , 6 May 1 8 5 4 ; L r . V p . l 5 9 * ^ u t
c f . a l s o i b i d . 25 F e b . 1 8 6 3 , £ £ V I I p . 3 o 2 : d a s s i c h k e i —
nesw egs d a r a u f a u s g in g , e in e a n tik e T rag S die zu d i c h t e n ”.
 — 148 —

to have been a c q u a in te d w ith e ith er G-y;<es u n d s e i n n i n ^

o r H ero des u n d M ariam ne y n o r , in d eed , w i t h H e b b e l *s t h e o ­

retica l sta tem e n ts on th e s u b j e c t (sin ce th ese appear

c h ie fly in l e t t e r and d i a r y f o r m ) . From h i s comm ents i n

th e Shakes p e a r es t u d i e n i t w ould seem t h a t h e b a s e d h i s

c ritic ism alm o st e x c l u s i v e l y on H e b b e l* s J u l i a , w hich,

tho u g h th e au th o r h im s e lf had h e ra ld e d i t as so m e th in g

en tire ly new b o t h i n co n ten t and form (]E) , i s n o t one o f

h is best o r m ost r e p r e s e n t a t i v e p lay s. " H e b b e l” , L udw ig

w rites in h is c ritic ism of it, "hat die d re i u n v erein ­

b a r s t e n H inge i n s e i n e m Hrama v e r e i n i g e n w o l l e n : m o d e r n -

sten S to ff, S h a k e sp e a i'is che C h a i 'a k t e r i s t i k und a n t ik e

Form ; g r ô ' s s t e K o n z e n t r a t i o n d e r H a n d lu n g b u e i a u s g e f & i r -

te ste r G h a r - a k te r is tik ” ( 2 ). It can, indeed, h a r d l y be

d en ied th a t in J u l i a H ebbel had in fact trie d to im pose

a form f o r w h i c h h e was n o t y e t r i p e , and th a t th e flaw s

to w h ich Ludw ig p o i n t s , d isc ern ib le as th e y ai*e i n Ju d itl

are h ere d e s p ite th e a lle g e d preponderance o f s i t u a t i o n

)
o v e r c h a r a c t e r ( 5 ), a c c e n t u a t e d by t h e c o m p re ssio n i n t o

th ree acts*
It is i n M a ria M agdalena w r i t t e n alm ost 4 y e a rs before

the c o m p l e t i o n o f J u l i a , t h a t we f i n d d e p t h o f c h a r a c t e ­

r i s a t i o n m erging p e r f e c t l y w ith a tau tn ess of stru c tu re

d i c t a t e d n a t u r a l l y by th e v e ry l i m i t a t i o n o f th e sphere

i n w hich t h e dram a m o v es. But t h e r e is no e v i d e n c e th at

H ebbel had c o n sc io u sly e n te r ta in e d th e p o ssib ility of a

1 * O f . L e t t e r to F l i s e L e n p i ; ^ . l ^ H c ^ . l 8 4 5 H I
2 . G S V p. 3 5 9 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 . - T . G x . IT 1 1 1 4 3 1 2 , 2 4 O c t . 1 8 4 7 .
 - 149 -

h a lf-w a y house b etw eei^ h ak esp eare and t h e G reeks at th is

tim e - though th e f i n i s h e d p l a y may w e l l h a v e p r o v i d e d

th e sta rtin g -p o in t for h is later t h e o r y . However t h i s m ay '

b e , H ebbel h e re a c h ie v e d what he l a t e r deemed p o s s i b l e on­

ly by a m ore r e s t r i c t e d k in d o f c h a r a c te r is a tio n , th ro u g h

a h ig h ly s k ilf u l use of a n aly tic al tec h n iq u e . In o th er

w ords, he com pressed th e a ctio n and a rra n g e d th e p lo t in

s u c h a way t h a t th e s i t u a t i o n p rev a ilin g at th e b eg in n in g

o f th e dram a c o n t a i n s a ll th e d ecisiv e facto rs lead in g to

th e developm ent and c l i m a x .- a m ethod w h o lly o p p o se d to

L u d w i g ’s c o n c e p t i o n o f s t r u c t u r e . I n t h e l a t t e r ’s o p i n i o n ,

such "E x p o sitio n sstü ck e”, as h e c a l l e d them , w ere s u i t e d

o n ly to th e purposes o f the G reeks and q u ite in co m p atib le

w ith th e ric h n e s s o f c o n te n t o f a m odern dram a:

" D ie e i n t i e i t l i c h e Form i s t n u r m 3 g l i c h b e i dem V e r f a h r e r

der A lten , wenn d i e H a n d lu n g e in fa ch und e ig e n tlic h

mehr b l o s s e in e K a ta stro p h e als e in e ganze H andlung i s t .

S o il sie re ic h e re n In h a lt haben, so muss d e r D i c h t e r

raffin ieren " (l).

But w h i l s t i n M a r i a Ma.g ;dalena t h e task of c o n ce n tra tio n

was n o t only f a c i l i t a t e d b u t, in d eed , e x a c te d by th e na­

tu re of its r e s t r i c t e d m i l i e u , i n H ebbel*s o th er p lay s,

w here th e h o r i z o n i s much l e s s lim ite d , it became a t once

l . G S V p . 4 5 o , 1 8 5 7 - 5 8 . C f . a l s o i b i d . n . 4 1 5 . 1 8 4 o - 5 1 . w h e re Lud­
w ig g i v e s p r e c e d e n c e o v e r t h e V e s t o f Sojphokles * dram as to
A nfeiS one. o n t h e g r o u n d s t h a t i t p r e s e n t s n o t o n l y t h e c a ­
ta stro p h e , but " g u ilt in a ctio n ".
 - 15o -

m ore d i f f i c u l t , and, in h is o p in io n , e v en m ore i n d i s p e n s ­

a b le . In a letter to Schumann o f 1853 H eb b el c h a r a c t e r i s e d

h is approach in th e fo llo w in g illu m in a tin g passage:

"S ie erw eitern den K re is d er M usik, ohne i h n zu z e r -

sprengen, und zwar w ie i c h es i n m e i n e r K u n s t e b e n f a l l s

v ersuche, a u f dem Wege g r d s s e r e r V e r t i e f u n g i n d ie g e-

gebenen S iem ente" (l).

I n H e r o d e s u n d M a r i a n n e ^ w h ic h c o m p a s s e s many a s p e c t s of

th e a n c ie n t w orld, H ebbel had , in d eed , stre tc h e d the lim it!

o f dram a to a co n sid erab le e x te n t, a p r o c e d u r e w hich i n ­

e v itab ly put a great s tr a in on t h e g e n e r a l s t r u c t u r e .

"A n statt das L e b e n ^ in u n m i t t e l b a r e r ^ n tb in d u n g v o rz u ffih re n

(2 ), H ebbel f e l t h im s e lf fo rc e d to n a r r o w down a n d t o con­

tract h is larg e -sca le a ctio n in to th e space o f fiv e acts ;

a v irtu a lly boundless c o n te n t had to be co m pressed i n to

extrem e com pactness o f form and t h e g r e a t w o rld o f h i s t o r y

m irro re d in s t r i c t scen ic lim ita tio n s of space (3)#

Such a m ethod w as, at le a st in th eo ry , d iam etrically

opposed to th at o f Ludw ig, who w o u l d h a v e t h e d ram a tist

sta rt from a n u c l e a r a c tio n h o ld in g to g e th e r t h e â a m e sm a3

number o f c h a r a c t e r s w ith in th e n a r r o w n s t p o s s i b l e qpace,

in o rd e r to be a b l e t o w ork o u t w a r d s , exp an ding and

1 . L e t t e r t o H o b e r t S c h u m a n n , l o May 1 8 5 3 p . l o 4 ^
2 . L e t t e r t o l î m i l P a l l e s k e , 25 May 1 8 5 o p^21.
3 . " . . d i e ungeheure K nappheit der F o rm ,d ie ic h [fu r H erodes
u n d M a rism n e j w S h lte ,u n d d ie m ich s o g a r t r o t z des f a s t
g r S n z e n lo s e n S t o f f e s , a u f a l l e u n d je d e V erw andlung v e r -
z i c h t e n l i e s s " - L e t t e r t o S m i l P a l l e s k e , 25 May 1 8 5 o IV
p.'221o
 - 151 -

creatin g v a ria tio n s upon th e c en tral them e. Above a l l , he

m ust n o t s o much s e e th e w hole o f h i s a ctio n in p e rsp ec tiv e

by r e d u c i n g it to s t r i c t u n ity of p lace, a s make t h e play

itse lf an e x e r c i s e in p ersp ectiv e g ro u p in g , w hereby d e t a i l s

and m ere "ex p ed ien ts" have t h e i r p lace, but are at th e same

tim e p r e v e n t e d from i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h t h e m ore i m p o r t a n t

lay ers o f th e a ctio n . One g l a n c e a t h m ilia G a l o t t i . he a s s e r t ­

ed, su ffices to show t h a t c o n ce n tra tio n in space a n d t i m e m ad e

j
su c h a m ethod im p o s s ib le and war s h o u l d , th erefo re, be de- j

d ared i n no u n d e r t a i n term s upon t h i s p a rticu la r type o f

stru c tu re (l).

I n L u d w i g ’s own p l a y s , th en , the co n stan t attem p ts to r e ­

duce t h e number o f s c e n i c chagges as far as p o s s ib l e - a t one

s ta g e he even r e g r e t t e d the im p o s s ib ility o f r e d u c i n g t h e m any

d ifferen t p laces i n w hich t h e s t o r y o f Agnes B e r n a u e r p l a y s

to one s i n g l e se ttin g (2) - w e re n o t made i n accordance w ith

a p articu lar th eo ry , b u t s e r v e d m e r e ly as an e x p e d i e n t for

sim p lify in g the c o m p lica te d s t r u c t u r a l m ach in ery , ^or th e in ­

flu en ce o f i^hakespeare and th e i m p o r t a n c e h e cam e t o a ttac h

to th e in d iv id u a l treatm en t o f m ilie u , in f a c t ra n c o u n ter to

the observance o f any g r e a t m easure o f u n i t y o f p l a c e , how­

ever b e n e fic ia l it m ig h t have been

l . C f . ( ^ V p . 272. - 2 . C f.L e t t e r to S duard L e v r ie n t, 2 June

1 8 5 4 ; œ VI p . 585.
 - 152 -
t o him from a p r a c t i c a l p o in t o f view .

But th e m ost im p o rta n t co n sid eratio n in th is m a t t e r was f o a

Ludw ig t h e g ro w in g co n v ictio n th at the q u estio n o f u n ity of

p l a c e h a d i n d e e d no r e a l v a l i d i t y f o r t h e m odern dram a - and

th at it depended upon th e i n d i v i d u a l d ram a tist to adapt h is

m ethod to h i s p a rticu lar needs. In essence, such a th eo ry

bears of n ecessity a c e r t a i n resem blance to th at o f H ebbel,

who was a s v i o l e n t l y o p p o s e d as Ludw ig t o any k in d o f n a tu r a ­

listic trea tm e n t, b e liev in g th at th e dram a m ust i n e v i t a b l y

conform to a rea lism of its ow n . Thus t o c ritic s who a r g u e d

ag ain st th e u n ity o f tim e and p la c e on t h e g ro u n d s th at so

much c o u l d n o t h a v e h a p p e n e d i n one p la c e and in one day, h e ^

r e p l i e d : "Selir w o h l, Ih r H erren, aber d e r e r s t e A ct d e r Kunst'

ist eben d ie v iJllig e N eg atio n der re a le n W elt" ( l ) . From t h e

po in t o f view o f s t r u c t u r e , th e danger o f d is ru p tin g h is

play s b y t o o m an y c h a g e s o f s c e n e was n e c e s s a r i l y less acu te

th an in th e c a s e o f L udw ig; o n ly i n D ie N ib e lu n g e n , w here h e

felt th a t n o th in g c o u ld be o m it t e d from t h e e sse n tia lly dra­

m atic o rig in a l, did he, in h is own w o r d s , p erm it h im s e lf a

few S h a k e s p e a r e a n l i b e r t i e s in re la tio n to space and tim e ,

lib e rtie s w hich n o r m a lly he u s e d to regard s t r i c t l y as "Ma-

j i e s t & t s - H e g e l n " ( 2 ) . On t h e w h o l e , h e a p p e a r s to have been

m ore
1 . 1 IV 5 7 8 8 , 4 ( ? ) M a rc h I 8 6 0 . - 2 . L e t t e r t o F r i e d r i c t i U e c h t -
r i t z , 21 N o v . 1 8 5 6 ; B r . V 5 4 9 . O f , a l s o L e t t e r t o A d o l p h § t e r n , 2 9
J a n . 1 865 V I I p . 296 : " I c h k a n n m ic h d u r c h a u s n i c h t zu S h a ­
k e s p e a r e ’s M e t h o d e d e s r a s c h e n S c e n e n - V / e c h s e l s e n t s c h l i e s s e n *
 - 153 -
purposeful i n h i s m eth o d t h a n L udw ig, and a com parisX on o f

h is treatm en t o f A^nes B e r n a u e r ^ w hich by t h e v e r y n a t u r e

of its su b ject t n ecessitated a g reater v a rie ty o f p lace,

w ith th at of h is co n tem p o rary , shows H e b b el* s g r e a t e r ma­

stery o f economy* B u t i t is c le ar t h a t H e b b e l ’s a ttitu d e

to th is q u e s t i o n was g o v e r n e d , n o t by any d e l i b e r a t e d esire

for form al p e r f e c tio n , but rath e r f o r what one m ig h t c a l l

"in n er sequence" - a c o n s i d e r a t i o n wkdch p l a y s a p ro m inen t

part also i n L u d w i g ’s t h e o r y of stru c tu re . B o th b e l i e v e d the

p reserv a tio n of th is sequence to b e of p a r a m o u n t im portance,

and b o th , m oreover, ten d ed to th in k o f i t in r e la tio n to

d ram atic illu sio n . Thus H e b b e l felt th at each change o f

scene in th e th ea tre co n stitu ted v irtu a lly th e b eg in n in g of

a new p l a y i n t h e m ind o f t h e s p e c t a t o r , and he a d v is e d th e

d ram atist to observe g re a t m o d eratio n in th is respect (l).

Ten y e a r s later, how ever, he had m o d ifie d t h i s view , and

w ith a p r o d u c t i o n o f Kin.g; L e a r fresh i n h i s m ind h e w r o t e :

"M ich s t S r e n je tz t a u c h d i e V e r w a n d l u n g e n a u f dem T h e a t e r

n i c h t m ehr s o , w i e f r t Ü r i e r . Hs i s t doch n u r s o , als w e n n zwej

Tr&ume i n e i n a n d e r f i b e r g e h e n , durch e i n e n Moment d e r H r n ü c h -

terung zusaramen g e k n t i p f t " ( 2 ). Ludw ig w ould even h a v e s a e r i ­

fied th e outw ard arrangem ent o f a p la y i f on ly th e d esired

effect on th e s p e c t a t o r w ere s a f e g u a r d e d . W ritin g Die P f a r r -

rose at th e b eg in n in g o f 1849 he s a i d : " D i e V e r w a n d l u n g im

l.C f. T i n 3597, 5 June 1845.

2o T I V 5 4 8 9 , 3o O c t . 1 8 5 6 .
 - 154 -
v i e r t e n A ufzug w ird i h r e g r o s s e n ,3 c h w i e r i g k e i t e n h a b e n . DqcI
mi’c h t ’ i c h d ie erste h â lfte d i e s e s A ufzugs n i c h t zum v o r i g e n

sch lag en , w eil i c h h ô c h s t u n g e r n z w is c h e n den b e i d e n H g.lf-

ten den s u s c h a u e r z u A t e m kommen l a s s e n mô’c h t e ” ( l ) . W ith

reference to th e q u e s tio n o f tim e in dram a, th e accent was

e v e n m ore o b v i o u s l y on i n n e r s e q u e n c e r a t h e r th an e x te rn a l

c a u sa lity ; when L u g w ig , for exam ple, let six years elap se

b etw een th e se c o n d and t h i r d act o f h i s Hermann y h e d i d i t

in th e hope t h a t th e co n tin u ity o f th e inner developm ent

w ould be su c h a s t o make t h e im a g in atio n o f th e s p e c ta to r

forget a ll tem p o ral d iv isio n , and t h a t t h e w hole dram a

w ould th u s b e t r a n s p o r t e d in to a r e g i o n w here "no c l o c k

strik es a n d m e n do n o t count the y ears" ( 2 ).

For th e m odern d r a m a t i s t , n u rtu red in th e tra d itio n of

p lay s such as I b s e n *s P e e r G ynt. t h i s problem of th e tim e

elem en t in d ram atic c o n s tru c tio n has ceased to b e a n im­

p o rtan t issu e, and i t is in te re stin g to r e f l e c t t h a t Heb­

bel and L udw ig, who, w hile, s t i l l much p r e o c c u p i e d w i t h i t ,

a d v o c a t e d a m ore r e a s o n a b l e approach to it, were p a r t l y

in stru m en tal in b rin g in g about th is sta te of affa irs.

H e b b e l* s Agnes B e r n a u e r . w here f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e s to tim e

in th e first two a c t s , to em phasise th e quick sequence o f

ev en ts and th e sw iftn ess o f th e w ooing, g i v e way t o less

exact references and lo n g e r in te rv als to denote th e slo w ,

but in ev itab le w orkings of d estin y , is a g o o d e x a m p l e djf

1 . C i t e d b y P . M e r k e r , SW V I p*}LXXVI.
2 oV. H . K r a e g e r , a r t . c i t # p .4. !
 - 155 -

th e way i n w hich l a c k of u n ity o f tim e adds to r a t h e r than

d ^etrao ts from t h e g e n e r a l im p re ssio n o f a u n if ie d organism

T im e, lik e p l a c e , lu d w ig w s rte betw een 1858 and I 8 6 0 , shoulj

p r o v i d e no m o r e t h a n a f r a m e w o r k a n d a m e a n s for th e c o n ti­

n u ity o f th e a ctio n :

" D ie Z e i t m i s s t n ich t nach a b s t r a k t e n M inuten, sondern

nach e r f ü l l t e n Moment e n , sie hat d a s G - e s e tz der S ^n ta-

sie und d e s m ens c h i i c h e n G e i s t e s . K i n e W e l t , die in der

M itte steh t z w i s c h e n d e r ob j e k t i v e n W a t i r h e i t in den B in­

g e n u n d dem G e s e t z e , d a s u n s e r G eist h in e in z u le g e n ge-

drungen i s t " (l).

W ith a s i m i l a r n o tio n of p o e tic t r u t h , Hebbel n o ted in

h is d i a r y o f 1 8 4 5 : S i n c e çla^^ks are not w o rld s, plays â la

L essin g cannot be tru e dram as (2). It is w orth c o n s id e r in g

th is c h arac reristica lly pregnant aphorism at th is p o in t;

for it t h r o w s m uch l i g h t on H e b b e l* s theory of to am atic

stru c tu re as a liv in g o rganism , w h ilst a t t h e same tim e

fo rm in g an i m p o r t a n t p o in t o f c o n ta c t w ith th a t o f Ludwig*

The l a t t e r , a s we h a v e a l r e a d y h a d o c c a s i o n t o observe,

was alw ays quick to dondemn t h e c o n ce n tra te d form o f L e s -

«
sin g es p l a y s , w h i c h f o r h i m was synon^/in ous w i t h "m echanism

It was E m i l i a G a l o t t i i n p articu lar w hich h a d to bear th e

brunt of th eir com bined c r i t i c i s m as g i v i n g , d esp ite the

flaw lessn ess of its e x ec u tio n , th e u n com fortable im pressic?,

o f clo ck w o rk * W hilst H ebbel gave due c r e d i t t o L e s s i n g ’s

1 a GS V p . 4 5 9 ^ 1 8 5 8 —6 0 ♦ — 2 *O f * % I I I 3 3 3 o ,2 1 F e b ,18 4 5 * ^f*
also T I 1496, I 6 F e b .1839.
 - 156 -

p recisio n (l), and th e c r a f t s m a n i n Ludwig c o u l d n o t h e l p

ad m irin g the "G e trie b en h e it" of h is work, th e p erfectio n of

o u tw a r d form 12), th ey both f o u n d him l a c k i n g in th at inde­

fin ab le q u a lity w hich t r a n s f o r m s a rtific ia l stru c tu re in to

an o rg a n ic w hole, w here a l l th e p arts are n a tu r a lly corre­

lated . O nly th e dynam ic e f f e c t of a n a tu ra l in te rp la y b et­

ween a l l the c h a r a c te r s , Hebbel b e lie v e d , co u ld ach iev e

t h i s , w h i l s t .c fe reiu l atten tio n to the a u c c e ss iv e s ta g e s of

developm ent o f the in n er a c t i o n m ust so inform th e dram a­

t i s t *s w o r k t h a t th e s tr u c tu r a l d e s i g n seem s to rest on

th is developm ent alo n e, w ithout r e s o r t to a rtific ia l con­

triv a n ce s and c a l c u l a t i o n s .

A p l a y w hich i s co n cern ed r a t h e r w ith th e c a r e f u l, lo g i­

cal s e q u e n c e o f one s c e n e and th e n e x t th a n w ith th e under­

ly in g tex tu re o f 'th e r e l a t i o n s h i p betvje-^^n g u i l t and p u n ish ­

m ent, h a d u p o n Ludw ig t h e sam e e f f e c t of su p e rfic ia lity

as a game o f c a r d s or chess, w here t r i c k fo llo w s upon t r i c f

move u p o n move w i t h c h illin g sym m etry ( 5 ) W ith a l l th e

h a r d won e x p e r i e n c e o f h is own c o m p l i c a t e d p r o c e s s e s of

d ram atic c o n s t r u c t i o n b e h i n d h .m, L u d w i g a t t r i b u t e d s u c h

a m ethod to an e x c e s s i v e r e g a r d to t h e m ere c a u s a l connec­

tio n o f the actio n . Reduced to its sim p le st p ro p o rtio n s,

th is "p rag m atisch e N exus", as he c alle d i t , form ed th e

l . C f . ”L i t e r a t u r b r i e f e " , 1 8 5 9 ; E X I I jo. 2 2 2 . - 2 . C f V p . 5 3o ^
1 8 6 0 - 6 5 ; C f . a l s o i b i d . p . 88 a n d G S . V l p . 3 9 4 . - 3 . Gf ÿ
n « 80 •
 - 157 -

e s s e n tia l b asis o f e v e r y d ra m a , b u t when u n r e l a t e d t o th e inner

actio n produced a t b e s t a k in d o f m ech an ical c a l c u l a t i o n and a t

w orst a com plete d isru p io n of d ram atic stru c tu re . How o f t e n h a d

th e o rg an ic u n ity o f h is own p l a y s been destro y ed in th is way!

In an e f f o r t to prevent h is co m p licated p lo ts from assu m in g

ever la rg e r p ro p o rtio n s, he w ould r u t h l e s s l y drop m o t i f s and

personages, th is o ften c reatin g gaps in th e cau sa l co n n ectio n

w h i c h h a d somehow t o b e f i l l e d a g a i n w i t h new o n e s - a process

w hich, if it d id not im p air th e s t r u c t u r e even m ore, at le a st

added to its a rtific ia lity (l). In th e v a rio u s stag es o f th e

H rb fflrster th is preponderance of th e outw ard a c t i o n over th e

in n er is p a i'tic u la rly r e g r e tta b le . In a d esire to abandon th e

k in d of in tr ig u e p rev alen t in e a rlie r v ersio n s, s u c h as D ie

W ild s c h û t z e n , Ludw ig h a d d e c i d e d t o drop H choche, a ch aracter

who h a d h i g h e r t o p la y e d an im p o rta n t r o l e in th e a ctio n , sin ce

it was h e w h o , out of a sense o f g rie v a n c e , had g iv en B erndt

(C h ristia n U lrich ) th e f a l s e news o f t h e m u r d e r o f h i s son. B ut.

w ith th e o m issio n o f th e p r i n c i p a l in trig u e r, however d e s ira b le

th is m ig h t b e from th e p o i n t o f v iew o f o l i a r a c t e r i s a t i o n , Lud­

w ig was f o r c e d t o in tro d u ce in to th e d ra m a tic m achinery a l l

those c o n triv e d m isu n d ersta n d in g s and

1 . C f . E d u a r d D e v r i e n t * s e n t r y i n h i s d i a r y , 9 ^ u g . 1 8 4 9 : "Das S t ü c k
( D ie V / a l d t r a g 6 d i e ) h a t an g e d r u n g e n e r K a r f t v e r l o r e n , d i e Verwidc
l u n g i s t e i n f a c h e r , a b e r a u c h k i l n s t l * i c h e r , u n w a l ' i r s c h e i n l i c h e r ge-
w orden" ;an d l ^ u g . 1 8 4 9 : " D a n n a r b e i t e t e i c h V o r-u n d N a c h m itta g
m i t L udw ig a n g e s t r e n g t an Umform ungen d e r V e r w ic k lu n g i n s e i ­
nem S t û c k ' i h m w u r d e z u l e t z t g a n z s c h w i n d l i c h d a v o n ”- c i t e d b y
P .M erker VI pp. x 5 c x v ii-x x x ix .
 - 158 -
c o in cid en ces w hich, by o c c u p y in g a larg e part of the l a t -

ter part of th e p lo t, im p air th e s t r u c t u r a l b a la n ce o f th e

p lay a s we now h a v e i t (l). It was o n l y t o b e e x p e c t e d ,

th erefo re, t h a t L udw ig s h o u l d s u b s e q u e n t l y h a v e l a i d great

stress on a c a i-e fu l i n t e g r a t i o n o f th e e t h i c a l problem

u n d erly in g e v e r y dram a - its inner a c tio n w ith th e o u t­

w ard p lo t such as S h a k e s p e a r e h a d a c h i e v e d (2). To t h e

la tte r, i . e . th e s o - c a lle d ’’K a u s a l n e x u s " , b e l o n g t h o s e

scenes of ex p o sitio n i n S h a k e s p e a r e ’s p l a y s w h i c h c o n t r i ­

bu te to t h e s p e c t a t o r ’s m o r e r a t i o n a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f th e

w hole w ith t h e u tm o s t c la rity , w h ilst th e form er, th e

”s o u l ” o f th e dram a, is la id bare in tho se g re a t ”S p i e l -

szenen" w hich a r e e sse n tia lly d ram atic and d e s ig n e d to

fu lfil a ll th e needs of th e th e a tr e . H ere th e accent is

e x c l u s i v e l y on c h a r a c t e r i s a t i o n , th e d ep ictio n o f p assio n

and th e expansion o f fe e lin g s (3).

F o r H e b b e l ’s t e s t i m o n y o n t h e s u b j e c t , w h i c h h a s a n im­

p o rtan t though n o t alw ays v e r y o b v io u s b e a r i n g on t h e pro­

blem o f s t r u c t u r e , it is in te re stin g to t u r n to h is pre­

face to M a ria M a/rdalena. H e re , at th e end o f a d i s c u s s i o n

o f the t y p e o f d ra m a commonly c o n s i d e r e d t o b e w o r t h y o f

p ro d u ctio n , he says th at th e tru e d ram atist w ill in ev i­

tab ly clo th e the in n er event in a ll its stag es o f develop-

1.^&ein 185o L u d w ig e n v i s a g e d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a n o t h e r
r e - m o d e l l i n g o f P e r F r b f firs t e r - v . i b i d . p p. 3 9 3 f f •
2 . C f . ^ V p . l o 5 , 1 8 5 1 " 5 5 Î ' Man u n t e r s c h e i de d e n K a u s a l n e x u s
zw isch en V ersch u ld u n g und K a ta s tr o p h e .d a s e th is c h e P roblen
d a s S c h i c k s a l , v o n d e r F a b e l o d e r dem a u s s e r e n G e s c h i c h t s -
u m rig e " *' e r s t e i s t d ie S e e le ,d a s zw eite der L e ib ” .
3 .Cf.A l l#
 - 159 -

ment in an o u t e r s t o r y or an ecd o te, w hich he w i l l then

raise to a clim ax i n a c c o rd a n c e w ith th e fo r m a l law o f g r a

d atio n ; in o th e r w ords, he w i l l re n d e r i t so t e n s e and i n ­

tere stin g th at even th a t p art o f th e a u d i e n c e w h ic h h a s no

n o tio n o f th e tru e actio n , w i l l be amused and s a t i s f i e d

(l). H ebbel thus seem s to im ply t h a t a d i s t i n c t i o n betw een

in n er and o u te r a ctio n co u ld e x is t only fo r th e sp e cta to r;

f o r him , the d i'a m a tis t, th e tw o w e w e r e j e x t r i c a b l y in terw o ­

ven a n d c o n s t i t u f e d no r e a l problem , t h e m e rg in g o f them

in to an o r g a n ic w hole w i t h i n t h e fram ew ork o f f i v e acts

b ein g a w holly sp o n tan eo u s process, n o t one c a l l i n g for

th e o re tic a l d e lib era tio n . It is, th ere fo re , not su rp risin g

th at on t h i s p o in t, though i t to u c h e s v e r y c l o s e l y upon an

im p o rtan t facto r in th e s tr u c tu r e o f h is drsm a^, H ebbel

h im self is alm ost w h o lly s i l e n t .

T his facto r, w hich i s at t h e r o o t o f L u d w i g ’s c ritic ism

o f H ebbel*s p lay s - th eir e p ic q u a lity , th e ir u n in te rru p t­

ed flow w ith o u t any s l a c k e n i n g o f t e n s i o n , reta rd a tio n or

clim ax — i s e sse n tia lly a p a rt o f th e l a t t e r * ’s c o n c e n t r a ­

t i o n upon th e deeper im p lica tio n s o f the a c tio n and th e in

ner developm ent o f th e ch aracters. Ludw ig draw s a tten tio n

to the in o rd in a te number o f a n e c d o te s i n t r o d u c e d b y H e b b e l^

l o C f . W XI p . 5 5 , 1 8 4 4 . C f . a l s o H e b b e l *s c o m m e n t o n H e r jp d e s .
und M ariam ne: "das S td c k s t e i g e r t s i c h s e h r u n d d arch d ie
e i n f a c h s t e n - M o t i v e ' ' — T* I I I 4 9 6 3 , 1 % v . 1 8 5 1 .
 — l6 o "•
but a fzT m ore s t r i k i n g rev elatio n o f t h e l a t t e r ’s approach

is h is c h a i'a c te r is tic a n d m uch c r i t i c i s e d u s e o f t h e mono­

logue - esp ecially in h is e arlie r dram as. Genoveva i n par­

tic u la r is a w a rn in g exam ple a g a i n s t too frequent a use o f

m onologues and H ebbel h im s e lf l a t e r referred d e p re cia tin g ­

ly to the " m o n o lo g is c h e Gepr& ge” o f t h i s p lay . H ere, in ­

deed, th e excessiv e c o n c e n t r a t i o n u p o n a c h a r * a c t e r ’s i n ­

w ard p r o c e s s e s and a c o rr e s p o n d in g l a c k o f d ra m a tic actio n

tax th e s tu r c tu r e o f each a c t as o f th e w hole a lm o st to

b reak in g p o in t, and H ebbel l a t e r m o d if ie d t h i s p rac tic e

c o n sid erab ly . Y et L udw ig w o u ld h a v e m a i n t a i n e d t h a t , id ea­

lly , the eth ica l and p s y c h o lo g ic a l co n ten t o f an e v e n t ,

w hich i t is th e e sse n tia l fu n ctio n o f a m ono lo gue t o r e ­

v eal, need not n e c e s s a r ily in te rfe re w ith th e s t r u c t u r a l

c o m p o s i t i o n o f a d r a m a . On t h e c o n trary , w ith h is eye on

Shakespeare and even L e s s i n g , he claim ed th a t t r u e dram a

sh o u ld c o n s is t of a series o f m o n o lu g u es, p ro v id in g the

h ig h lig h ts of th e in n er actio n f o r w hich a l l else is but

th e n e ce ssa ry p rep aratio n ( l ) . H a m l e t s n u m e ro u s m onologues

are th e k e rn e l, th e re m a in in g sc e n e s b e in g m erely b u i l t

a r o u n d t h e m , h e w r o t e some y e a r s e a r l i e r , b e t w e e n 1 8 5 1 a n d
n o t,
1855 -/h o w e v e r, w ith o u t c r i t i c i s m o f th e e x c e s s iv e i n t r o -

1 . "N ur f r e i l i c h % n o l o g im r e c h t e n S i n n e . D i e s e r w i r d n u r
e i n w a h r e r w e rd e n ,w e n n das Ganze des S t û c k e s d a r a u f a b g e -
s e h e n i s t , d . h . w e n n e s s i c h zum Z w e c k e n i m m t , d e n e t h i s c h e n
u n d p s y c h o l o g i s ch en I n h a l t o d e r G e h a lt e in e s E r e i g n i s s e s
d a r z u s t e l l e n , slo d a s s d i e s e r p s y c h o l o g i s c h d a r g e s t e l l t e e t h i
s c h e G e h a lt eben das S tü c k s e i n s o l l . S ^ i s t s b e i Shak© pea-
r e und i n N ach fo lg e d e s s e lb e n b e i L e s s in g ,d e r e n S tucke
e in e R eitie v o n M onojogen m it d a z w is c h e n lie g e n d e n V e r a n l a s -
s u n g e n sin d " -G S V p . 5 3 4 , 1 8 6 1 - 6 5 .
 - 161 -

sp ectiv en ess o f th e i r in c e o f Denmark ( l ). The f o l l o w i n g

passage, w ritte n at ro u g h ly th e same t i m e , r e v e a l s m ost

c le a rly th e dynam ic f u n c t i o n w h ic h Ludw ig a t t r i b u t e d to th e

m onologue i n th e c o n stru ctio n o f a dram a: ”N un s i e h t m a n

[ b e i ShJakespeare]) i n M onologen d i e i n n e r e H andlung a l s Ge-

fd til der S itu a tio n und T rieb des C h a ra c te rs d ie E n ts e h lü s -

se geb& ren, d ie dann i n S p i e la z e n e n v o l l z o g e n , in Susserer

H andlung zu T h a ts a c h e n w erden, die w ieder neue E n ts c h lû s s e

h erv o rb rin g en ? ( 2 ). B ut t h i s dynam ic f u n c t i o n o f t h e mono­

logue co u ld o n ly be f u l f i l l e d w ith in th e free form o f

Shakespearean dram a, and he b e l i e v e d t h a t exponents o f the

c o n c e n t r a t e d ty p e o f s t r u c t u r e w ere f o r c e d to r e s o r t to thm

u s e o f m onologues as m ere c o n v e n ie n t l i n k s in th e com press­

ed outw ard a c tio n o f h is dram as. Ear from r e c o g n i s i n g th e

re le n tle ss lo g ic w ith w hich H eb b el traces t h e human a n d

h isto ric a l processes u n d erly in g h is p lay s, h e saw i n them

but a su p e rfic ia l attem p t at calcu lated re g u la rity , w here

not th e in n er developm ent o f c h a r a c t e r , but th e ra p id

su c cessio n o f o u t w a r d e v e n t s was o f p r i m a r y i m p o r t a n c e *

H o w e v e r t h i s m ay b e , it is c le ar th& Ÿ f$0fA g^^im ply a m a t­

te r o f tech n iq u e, stru c tu re was i n fact fo r H ebbel and

lo G f.G S V p . 1 9 8 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 . Gf. a l s o L e t t e r to K a r l G utzkow ,

6 J a n * 1 8 4 9 ; ^ VI p . 5 4 8 , w h ere Ludwig e x p r e s s e s t h e o p i n i o n
t h a t m a n y o f t h e m o n o l a g u e s i n Das E r & u l e i n v o n S c u d e r i
m i g h t h a v e b e e n c u t # - 2 #GS V p . 9 2 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 .
 — 1 62 —

Ludw ig a h i g h l y com p ];ex p r o c e s s , in v o lv in g th e org an ic fu­

sio n o f many d i f f e r e n t lay ers and e le m e n ts. I n L u d w i g ’s

d ram atic p ra c tic e h is sense for th e “l i v i n g phenomenon”

o f t e n te n d e d to become b l u n t e d by h i s c o n tin u al search for

what he c alle d th e s e c re ts o f tech n iq u e l l ) , b u t h e wa s f o i

th is reason a ll t h e m ore a p p r e c i a t i v e of th e unsurpassed

o rg an ic stru c tu re o f th e p lay s o f Shakespeare. A dram a,

b o th a g re e d , m ust be an o r g a n is m whose i n n e r m o s t w o r k in g s ,

free from t h e c o n trad icy ftlo n s and e r r o r s o f the o rd in ary

w orld, are l a i d b are in a c le arly a rtic u la te d p a ttern 12).

The m eans b y w h ich t h i s can b e s t be a c h ie v e d and, ind eed ,

th e real test of tru ly d ram atic co m p o sitio n , is th e art of

m o tiv atio n . "D ie G rfisse d e s S h a k e s p e a r e ’s c h e n D r a m a s " ,

H ebbel w rote in 1858, " V / u r z e l t im B a u , u n d d e r Bau w i e d e r

in den M o tiv e n " (5 ), ad jin g s ig n if ic a n tly th at it was p r e ­

c ise ly in the art o f m o t i v a t i o n t h a t L e s s i n g was a m a s t e r .

T h is m o d i f i c a t i o n o f h i s f o rm e rly h e l d view about plays

s u c h a s E m i l i a G a l o t t i m ay p e r h a p s b e a t t r i b u t e d t o Heb­

b e l ’s own h i g h l y conscious p rac tic e in th is field , w hich

h a d shown him t h a t th e d i s t i n c t i o n betw een m e c h a n ic a l

and o rg a n ic s t r u c t u r e was a s u b t l e one to d ra w . From ^ -

d ith t o D e m e t r i n a no p r o b l e m o c c u p i e d h i s m in d m ore t h a n

l o V. A , S t e r n ’s i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e S h a k e s n e a r e s t u d i e n , (rj
j * ^ . n . l 4 . - - 2. ib id .. p. 80, an d * !"! 886, 3 S e p .1837.
5 . S h a k e s p e a r e ’s Z e i t g e n o s s e n u n d . i h r e W erke , 1 8 5 8 4 . 1 1
p .163.
 - 163 -

th at of c le ar, u n a s s a ila b le m o tiv atio n - in d eed , it was.

o ften th e la c k of it in h is raw m a t e r i a l w hich p r o v e d

th e i n i t i a l im petus t o new d r a m a t i c prod u ctio n * The t r u ­

ly creativ e d ram a tist, he c la im e d , m ust p o ssess th e facu l­

ty o f m o tiv a tin g , as i t w ere, th e m o tiv es th em selv es in

such a way t h a t h e l a y s bare "das N erv en - und A d erg e-

fle c h t, n ich t b lo ss i n s e i n e n H auptstSm m en, sondern b is

^ u m Ha&i'-Grewebe h e r a b ” - a q u a lity f o r w hich h e h a d l o o k ­

ed in v a in in Don C a r l o s ( l ), T h is is a ch aracteristical­

ly hig h sta n d ard , whose a p p l i c a t i o n i n H e b b e l ^s own d r a ­

m a s was t h a t th e m o tiv a tio n , in s t e a d o f b ein g "ro o ted ”

in th e s t r u c tu r e , not in fre q u e n tly tended to tak e pre­

cedence over it# In o rder not to n e g le c t any l i n k in th e

c h a in o f circu m stan ces l e a d i n g up to J u d i t h ’s f a t e f u l

d ecisio n , f o r exa^iple, H ebbel found i t n e c e ssa ry to de­

v o te th e g reater part o f th e second act o f t h e p l a y tfX

h-ea? a n a c c o u n t o f h e r p r e v i o u s ex p erien ces as t h e "m aider

w idow ", w hich, how ever n e c e s s a r y to the in n er a ctio n ,

does y e t im pose a c e r t a i n s t r a i n upon i t s stru c tu re as a

whole# But w h e th e r clo th ed in n a rra tiv e form o r i n preg­

nant a n ecd o tes, it was a m e t h o d w h i c h , in d ic ativ e as i t

is o f the h ig h ly c o n cen trated q u a lity o f h is w o r k , h e ne%

ver a b a n d o n e d . Hven w h ere m o t i v a t i o n i s part o f th e for­

w ard-m oving a c t i o n , the 'b a re b o n e s” are o f te n on ly too

c le a rly d isc ern ib le , rhe reaso n fo r th is, H e b b el w ould

1 . Cf. T i l 2966, l o 8f , 25 Dec # 1 8 4 3 .

 - 164 -

have s a id - a n d h e r e h e p r o b a b l y came t o feel h is k in sh ip

w ith L e ssin g - lay p rec ise ly in th e sim p le , unadorned

stru c tu re of h is p lay s, now i n f i n i t e l y e a s i e r was. i t for

Shakespeare, w ith h is w ealth o f d e t a i l , to conceal th e

a rtistic , c a i'e fu lly m o tiv a te d economy o f h i s dram as than

for L essin g , who c o m p a r e d w i t h h i m a s does t h e b a r e Germao

fir tree w ith the In d ia n banana covered in fo liag e! ( l ).

In each c a se , how ever, th e effect was o n e o f g r e a t a rtis­

try , and i n each case it is in te restin g to n o te , Hebbel

a ttrib u te d th is to the activ e p articip a tio n o f th a t great

but la tte rly much m a l i g n e d f a c u l t y o f r e a s o n , w hich, as

he had n o te d t e n y e ar's e arlie r, was t h e s a l t o f th e dra­

ma, conspicuous o n ly by i t s absence (2). In general p rin -

I

c ip le , Ludw ig w o u ld h a v e a g re e d w ith him , b u t th e p arti­

c u l a r u s e w h ic h L e s s i n g made o f h i s reason c o n stitu te d

in h is view a f a u l t , n o t, as i n S h a k e s p e a r e a n dram a, a

v irtu e . A cutely aw are o f h i s ovm r e f l e c t i v e t u r n o f m in d

and c a r e f u l n o t to o v errate its im portance in th e dram a­

t i s t *s s c a l e o f v a lu e s , fudw ig d efin es th e problem i n the

fo llo w in g co n crete term s:

" Der V e r s t a n d d a r f b l o s s n eg ativ b e i der p o e tisc h e n

A rb eit thS -tig s e i n . . .E r m acht sein en T eil ein für

allein al ab w i e \ d e r Baume i s t e r , und e n tf e r n t sich dann.

1 .R e v ie w o f "S hakes p e a r es Z e i t g e n o s s e n und i h r e W erke",

1858;W X I I p . 1 6 3 . B u t c f . a l s o L e t t e r to H erm ann H e t t n e r ,
31 B e c . l 8 5 9 ; H r . I V p . 3oo ; "Was i c h f i b e r s e i n e C ^ e s s i n g s j
M o t i v i ^ r u n g im A l l g e m e i n e n s a g t e , g a l t n i c h t s e i n e n Z w e k -
k e n u n d dem V e r h & l t n i s G s e i n e r Z w e c k e z u r e i g e n t l i c h e n
 - 165 -

ÏÏlDel l û t es, wenn e r m i t ©einem M a s s la b e u n d S c h u r z f e l l

uns d u r c h das B auw erk ] ÿ e g l e i t e t und u n s fiber a i l v o r r e c h -

n e t. Benn das H S c h s t e , was e r d ad u rc h bev^irken k a n n , ist

dass w ir am i^nde d e s G-ebSudes i h m e i n g e s t e h e n , es s e i

w irk lic h a ile s a u f das 2w e c k m S ssig ste e i ï i g e r i c h t e t , an

der iT e stig k eit und R ic h tig k e it des GebSudes s e i g a r n i ch

zu z w e if e ln " (l )

These and o th e r d efin itio n s by th e two d r a m a t i s t s p o in t,

w hether c o n s c io u s ly or u n c o n s c io u s ly , to an u n d e r l y i n g flaw

in th eir own m e t h o d s o f m o t i v a t i o n ; the failu re to d istin ­

g u is h s u f f i c i e n t l y betw een th e effect aim ed a t and th e p a r­

t i c u l a r means by w hich i t is ach iev ed . R eason, i n H e b b e l ’s

dram as, o fte n tend s to obtrude itse lf in to h is l o g i c a l mo­

tiv a tio n , and m o tiv a tio n i n its tu r n to im pose i t s in ev i­

ta b le c h a in o f c irc u m s ta n c e s w ith undue fo rc e upon th e

stru c tu re o f the dram a T h is is cle arly th e case in h is

m ost in te lle ctu a l p lay , A^nes B e r n a u e r ^ w here t h e d esire

to m o tiv a te A ike E r n s t ' s m om entous d e c i s i o n to h a v e Agnes

put to death r e s u l t s in len g th y argum ents about th e claim s

o f S o c ie ty over th e in d iv id u a l, a fact, w hich, however

e sse n tia l to H ebbel*s purpose, im pairs th e s t r u c tu r a l ba­

lance o f the l a t t e r part o f th e p la y . H is own i d e a l , on th e

o th er hand, was v e r y d ifferen t, an d c o n s i t e d in;^the a c t i o n s

o f h is ch aracters sp rin g not from c a r e f u l l y m o t i v a t e d d e - ,

G isio n s, b u t^in accordance w ith th e economy o f h i s p lay s,

l.G S V 5 1 1 ,1 8 6 1 -6 5 .
 - 166 -

d irec tly from t h e i r own i n d i v i d u a l n a tu re 11). T h is, he

rig h tly b e liev e d , c o u l d b e a c h i e v e d o n l y i f r e a s o n was i n

harm ony w ith t h e im a g in atio n and, above a l l , w ith th e power

to shape ("g esta lte n d e K ra ft" ), a ll o f w hich s h o u l d com bine

in th e art o f m o tiv atio n 12).

S i m i l a r l y , L udw ig dem anded t h a t c a re fu l m o tiv atio n

sh o u ld ^ b esid es com plying w ith the demands o f r e a s o n , also

stim u la te th e im ag in atio n and s a t i s f y the fe e lin g s, eq u at­

in g th is demand w i t h a need he felt to be v e ry stro p g i n h i s

own d r a m a t i c p r a c t i c e (3)*

"Nun e n d l i c h k e n n e i c h m e in e n F e i n d g en au v o n A n s e h e n

u n d Namen; e r h e i s s t : zu g r o s s e und fortw S h-

r e n d w irk e n d e N eigung z u r V e r t i e f u n g des V e r s t a n d e s ,

L am it h â n g t d e r Hang zusam m en, F i g u r e n u n d i h r H a n d e l n ,

den g a n z en V organg i n D e t a i l zu z e r le g e n , sta tt sie dar-

aus aufzuhauen. S ta tt d ie an sein an d erg eleg ten T e ile nun

zusam m enzufassen, zerleg e i c h s i e v o n neuem; nun h a b e

ich e i n e A nzalil v o n k l e i n e n M o tiv e n , so g r o s s , dass

m e in tT b e rb lic k n i c h t mehr d i e für d ie D a rs te llu n g w esent

lic h e n h e ra u sfin d e n kann. D e r F e h l e r kommt d a i i e r : M e i ­

nen e r s te n V ersuchen f e h l t e , dass d e r f ib e rb lic k e n d e V ere

stan d n ich t im H l e i c h g e w i c h t e m i t P h a n t a s i e u n d S m p f i n -

l . C f o T I I I 4 1 1 9 , 2 Q / l a r c h 1 8 4 7 : " D i e C h a r a i t t e r e im D r a m a w e r ­
den n ur dann m it der h ü c h s te n - M e is te r s c h a f t b e h a n d e lt,w e n n
d e r D i c h t e r , u m i n d e r O econom ie s e i n e s S t ü c k e s den n f i th i g e r
Gew inn v o n i h n e n z u z i e h e n y i h n e n g a r n i c h t e r s t b e s o n d e r e
E n t s c h l û s s e , d . h . A n lâu fe zu b e stim m te n T h a ten u n t e r z u le g e n
b r a u c h t , s o n d e r n wenn d i e s e u n m i t t e l b a r . aus i h r e r N a t u r h e r -

und in re
a tio n en ,
P h an tasie
 - 167 -

dung s t a n d . . . " ( l ). W hereas H e b b e l does n o t appear to have

b e e n aw are o f any d i s c r e p a n c y b e tw e e n h i s th eo ry and p r a c t i ­

ce o f m o t i v a t i o n , l u d w i g , l o o k in g b a ck on t h e havoc w hich

h is p re d ile c tio n for d e ta ile d m o tiv a tio n had caused in the

sh ap in g o f h is p lay s, co u ld not fail to be a p p a lle d by th e

g u l f w h ich so o b v i o u s l y s e p a r a t e d h i s m ethod from t h a t w hich

he adm ired i n S h a k e s p e a re . V/hen E d u a r d D e v r i e n t d r e w h i s

a tte n tio n to th e ex ag g erated m o tiv a tio n in "D ie W a l d t r a g ^ d i e

o f 1849, ludw ig co u ld o n ly a g re e , ex p lain in g th at it wa s t h e

consequence o f lo s in g h is form er s p o n ta n e ity 12).

B eing c e r t a i n o n ly o f th e m ost im p o rta n t of h is h e r o ’s

a c t i o n s , he s u b m itte d th e m o tiv es fo r th o se actio n s to con­

stan t a lte ra tio n s a n d s t i b s t i t u t i o n s . The g a n g e r s of such a

procedure are a g a i n shown o n l y t o o c le arly in th e chequered

c a re e r o f Per E rb ffirs te r, lea v in g its apparent tra c e s on th e

stru c tu re o f th e fin a l v ersio n (3). T he i n v e n t i o n o f s u b s i ­

d iary p lo ts for th e express purpose o f m o tiv a tin g a certain

a c t i o n was a p r o c e d u r e on w hich h e e x p e n d e d i n o r d i n a t e care

14). But i n s p i t e o f th e g re a t and c o m p a ra tiv e ly s u c c e s s f u l

e ffo rts at s i m p l i f i c a t i o n w h ic h c a n be o b s e r v e d i n t h e de­

v elo p m en t o f Per E r b f f l r s t e r , lu d w ig n e v er l e a r n t to ap p ly

to h is own w o r k w h a t h e k n e w t o b e t h e s e c r e t o f tr u e m o ti­

v a tio n : a sim p le p lo t w ith g r e a t sim p le m o tiv e s , d isp en sin g

l.GrS V I p . 2 2 2 , 1 8 5 8 - 5 o . - 2 . C f . l e t t e r t o E d u a r d P e v r i e n t , 1 4 ^ u g
1 8 4 9 ^ i b i d . p . 3 4 5 . P i e W a l d t r a g S d i e was t h e n a m e g i v e n t o t h e
i m m e d i a t e p r e d e c e s s o r o f P e r -^ £ ^ f f a s t e r . - 3 » E o r d e t a i l s
l é o n M i s . OP. c i t . I p p . 2 3 9 f f . - 4 . C f . l u d w i g *s n o t e o n t h e p l a n n ­
e d f u s i o n o f - b e s . P f a r r e r s T o c h t e r w i t h P i e W a l d b u i i g : H un mus
s e n N e b en h an d lu n g en e r f u n d e n w e rd eru rlie d ie s en C h a r a k te r zu
Ende t r e i b e n kSnnen — ^ ^ l p .2 2 p
 - 168 -

w ith a co m p licated ”s c a f f o l d i n g ” ( l ) . As l a t e as about

1862 he w ro te in c o n n e c tio n w ith D ie K a ia fto a n n s to c h te r v o n

M e ssin a ; "Ich v e rfo lg e iinrner d i e M o t i v e i n s o v i e l F& den

als sie sich nur irg en d s p a lte n la s s en, und w ill j e des

s i c h t b a r raachen. Das i s t , w ie i c h m ir s c h o n ta u s e n d m a l g e -

sa g t habe, ganz v e rk e h rt" (2).

In h is e a rlie r d ram atic th e o ry ludw ig draw s a ch aracte­

ristic a lly su b tle d i s t i n c t i o n b etw een " p ra g m a tic " m o tiv a ­

tio n , w hich i s p rim a rily co n cern ed w ith th e c o n ten t o f th e

dram a and t h e m o u ld in g o f t h e d ram atic s i t u a t i o n in gene­

ra l, and " a r t i s t i c " m o tiv atio n , w hich conveys th e effect

of a strict r e l a t i o n betw een cause and e f f e c t (5)* I h e l a t ­

ter, w hich he c a l l s m o t i v a t i o n i n t h e h i g h e r sense, co n sti­

tu te s trag ic in e v itab ility , th e c arefu lly c alcu lated in te ­

g r a tio n o f each p a rt in to th e schem e o f t h e w hole* The

prim e r e q u i s i t e is "E in lieit der d ic h te r i s chen I n te n tio n "

( 4 ), and t h i s purpose o f th e d r a m a ti s t m ust be c l e a r l y

ex p ressed in the c lo se c o n n ectio n o f p a ssio n , su ffe rin g ,

g u ilt and punistim ent (5)* Dut when one t u r n s to t h e m ass

o f L u d w i g ’s u n f i n i s h e d p l a y s , m an y o f w h i c h n e v e r p r o g r e s s

ed beyond th e second or t h i r d act, and i n w hich t h e au th o r

was f r e q u e n t l y u n d e c i d e d as t o the n a tu re of th e fin al

1.G& V p . l o i , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 * - 2 . C i t e d f r o m a n u n p u b l i s h e d MS o f
t h e S h a k e s p e a r e - S t u d i e n b y L ë o n M is . o n . c i t . . I I p . 1 7 3 .
3 .C f .G S V p. 4 1 ^ ^ 1 8 4 0 - 5 r . - 4 * i b i d . 0 . 2 6 2 . - 5 . i b i d . p . 412.
 — 169
c atastro p h e or dénouem ent. i t is a ll too ev id en t th at th is

much d i s c u s s e d g u i l t - p u n i s J r i m e n t t h e o r y n e v e r assum ed a con­

crete enough s h a p e i n L u d w ig 's m ind to produce a c le arly

a rticu la te d in n er stru c tu re .

T h is c h a ia c te ristic in d e c isio n and la c k o f pu rp o se s t a n d

i n m arked c o n t r a s t to th e d r a m a ti c work o f H e h h el who, as

he h im se lf a ffirm s, knew a t e v e ry s t e p w here he i n t e n d e d to

go (l). ij’o r h i m t h e p resen ta tio n o f tra g ic in e v ita b ility

was s y n o n y m o u s w i t h d ram atic form (2 ), and thaja t h e m o st

s a c r e d law o f th e d ram a tist. It was v e r y l a r g e l y th is w hich

pro m p ted th e r i g i d m o ti v a t i o n o f h i s own p l a y s , in ten d ed

as t h e y w ere to create an i m p r e s s i o n o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y

( 3)0 It was t h e g u i d i n g p rin cip le in the treatm en t o f h is

sources, whose a rb itrarin ess and n o t in frequent in eo n sis-

ten c ie s m ight have p ro v ed f a t a l to a d ram a tist le s s ab le to

"let th e end a r i s e out o f th e b eg in n in g w ith co n v in cin g in ­

e v ita b ility " (4 ). H is treatm en t o f H erodes ’ seco n d d e p ar­

tu re and th e consquent r e p e t it i o n of h is fatefu l command,

w hich h e h a d fo u n d i n t h e o rig in a l, is a case in p ain t ; in

th e th ird act the en v elo p in g a c tio n o f th e g r e a t b a t t l e

w hich c a l l s t h e K i n g aw ay o n c e m o r e , b u rsts in upon th e

in n er dram a b e tw e e n H ero d es and M ariam ne as som ewhat o f a

shock, b u t Hebbel turns it to th e advs^age o f th e fin al

l.C f. n i l 3 9 0 1 ,1 5 J a n . 1 8 4 4 .- 2 .C f.T I 1 3 9 5 ,5 D e c .1838.

3 . Of o H e b b el's'^ m iark on H e r o d e s u n d M ariam n e e i n e T r ago d ie
u n b e d i n g t e s t e r No t h w e n d i g k e i t I I I 4334 ,2 2 D e c .1847.
4 oH eview o f M a s s i n g e r ' s L u d o v ic o .1849.W ^ I p . 2 4 8 .
 - 17o -
catastro p h e w i t h s u c h consum m ate s k i l l , th at th e tw o p a r a ­

lle l ep iso d es become t h e v e r y p i l l a r s upon w hich t h e w hole

d ram atic s t r u c tu r e rests.

W hile e n g a g e d on H e r o des u n d M a ria m n e y H e b b e l w r o te i n

h is d iary : "has N othw endige b r i n g e n , aber in d e r F orm d e s

k ,u f % llig e n : das ist das g a n z e G-eheim niss d e s d ram atisch en

S ty ls"(l), thus u n w ittin g ly e c h o i n g o n e o f L u d w i g ’s f a ­

v o u r i t e maxims : " T i e f s t e i - ^ b s i c h t l i c h k e i t an j e d e r S t e l l e

m i t dem S c h e i n v b l l i g e r U n a b s i c h t l i c h k e i t des Ganzen zu

v erh ftllen " (2). In co n sid erin g th e im p licatio n s o f th ese

tw o s t a t e m e n t s , it is re v e a lin g to c o m p a re t h e two d ram a ­

t i s t s * th eo ries on th e p lac e o f co in cid en ce in dram a i n

general and as i t affected th e s tr u c tu r e of th eir own

play s in p a rtic u la r. The p a r a d o x i c a l m a n n e r o f f o r m u l a t i o n

w h ic h L udw ig freq u e n tly em ploys in th is co n n ectio n i s in

itse lf in d ic ativ e o f a dilem m a o f w h ich h e m ust h a v e b e e n

o n ly too co nscious ; e i t h e r , he sa y s , the d ram a tist - par­

tic u la rly th e d ram atist who d o e s n o t favour th e fre e Sha­

kespearean form - w i l l become f o r c e d and a f f e c t e d , or, if

h e w ould a v o id t h i s , he w ill fall in to th e op p o site trap

o f m aking c o in c id e n c e th e m ain f a c t o r in the a ctio n ip )

When o n e r e c a l l s to what an e x te n t t h e new m o t i f s o f de­

cep tio n and m is ta k e n i d e n t i t y co m p licate th e d ram atic

stru c tu re o f Dor F r b f f i r s t e r . i t is not s u rp ris in g th at

Ludw ig e v o lv e d t h e s e t h e o r i e s w ith p a r t i c u l a r r e f e r e n c e

1 , T 1 1 1 4 1 7 5 , 2o May 1 8 4 7 # - 2 . L e t t e r t o J u l i a n S c l i m i d t 1 4
S e p .l8 5 8 ;G S p . 4 1 2 . C f . a l s o GS V p . 4 5 6 , 1 8 5 7 - 5 8 . - 5# i b i d#.
 - 171 -

to th is p lay . Thus h e s e v e r e l y c ritic ise d th e m ista k e o f

h a v i n g made a p p a r e n t co in cid en ces a part o f th e very s tr u c ­

tu re, alth o u g h he hoped t h a t the id ea o f fa te w ould l e n d a

su p erio r k ind o f u n ity to what m ig h t o t h e r w i s e a p p e a r ex­

tran eo u s to the organism o f ' the a ctio n (l). If, how ever,

th is so -called ’’i d e a l c o n n e c tio n ” (2) i s n o t made s u f f i c i e n t

ly c le a r, th en co in cid en ce can only l e a d to th e underm ining

o f th e chain o f e a u s a l it y and m ust be a v o id e d as b e in g un­

dr am atic 13). H ebbel, on t h e o t h e r h a n d , f o r whom t h e ef­

fect of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y was p a r ' a m o u n t , d o e s n o t appear

to have en v isag ed th e p o ssib le activ e p a z 't i c i p a t i o n o f co­

in cid en ce in th e body o f th e dram a. O n ly as t h e in itia tin g

facto r o f th e trag ic co n flict d id he allo w for i t - a th e­

o ry w hich, alth o u g h not a c tu a lly put in to g e n e ra l term s

u n til 1847, he had a lre a d y co n scio u sly a c te d upon i n Geno-

veva: g e h t Golo S c h r i t t v o r S c h r i t t , w o lle n d und n i'c h t

w o llen d , w e ite r, der P re is w âchst m it d e r Mülie, n u r e i n

g ro s s e r H n tsch lu ss kann d ie tausend S tric k e zerreissen ,

w elche Z u f a l l und S c h ic k s a l aus einem ein z ig e n , w ahnsinni-

g e n A u g e n b lic k g e sp o n n e n h a b e n ” ( 4 ), A g a in one n o t e s the

Ju x tap o sitio n o f co in c id e n ce and f a t e , so s i g n i f i c a n t also

i n L u d w ig 's th eo ry o f tr a g ic in e v ita b ility , and p erhaps

l . V j J L e t t e r t o K a r l G u t z k o w , 1 5 M a r c h 1 8 4 7 ;H r i e f e , e d . c i t *
p o 2 l 6 . - 2 o C f . e s p . G S V p . 4 3 1 , 1 8 5 5 - 5 6 . - 3 . G f . L e t t e r t o ITu-
l i a n S c in n id t, 14 8 e p .l8 5 8 ;G S VI p .4 1 1 : " D e r s o g e n a n n t e Zu-
f a l l im D r a m a i s t n i c h t s An d e r e s - u n d d e s h a l b a u s k e i n e m
a n d e r n w e s e n t l i c h e n G r u n d e z u v e r r n e i d e n - a l s e i n e L fic k e
i n d e r K e t t e , e i n e N a t u r w x i ’k u n g , d i e n i c h t d u r c h A b s i c h t
d r a m a t i s c h g e m a c h t i s t . . ” . - 4 . Ï I 1 4 7 5 , 6 7 f . , 2 F e b . 1839#
 - 172 -

now here a p p lie d w ith g r e a t e r artistry than in the a n aly tic al

stru c tu re o f M a r ia M a;?dalena, H e re t h e d ra m a tist has evaded

the dilem m a o f m aking c o i n c i d e n c e th e le v e r o f th e trag ic

a c t i o n by p l a c in g th e s le n d e r m o tiv es f o r K l a r a ’s s u b m i s s i o n

in the e x p o sitio n and m ak in g them assum e t h e r o l e of fate

as th e clo sely k n it actio n u n fu rls to its clim ax .

That H ebuel su cceed ed in g iv in g to t h e t r a g e d y o f common

life a new l e a s e of life is c h ie fly due t o h i s m astery o f

form , f o r now here i s the in e v ita b ility o f th e ch ain o f c i r ­

cu m stan ces m ir r o r e d i n a m ore f l a w l e s s s t r u c t u r a l sequence

than i n M a r i a Ma: d a l en a . T h i s s e q u e n c e he c o n c e iv e d as t h r e e

ascending s ta g e s o f d ram atic e ffe ct, w hich he d e s c r i b e d i n

th e fo llo w in g fo rm u la:

"Iste S tu fe k i in s t i e r i s c h e r V / i r k u n g : e s k a n n s o s e v n !
2 te " " " : es i s t !
5te ” ” " : e s muss s o s e y n ! (l)

To t r a n s l a t e th is c h a i ’a c t e r i s t i c a l l y n o n -tech n ical fo rm u la­

tio n in to term s o f d r'a m a tic s t r u c t u r e m ig h t w e l l be to con­

stru e s o m e th in g w hich H e b b e l h i m s e l f n e v e r i n t e n d e d . B ut,

b ro ad ly sp eak in g , t h e y seem t o c o rre sp o n d to the th ree s ta ­

ges o f ex p o sitio n , c lim a x and c a t a s t r o p h e on w hich h i s own

dr'am a s are b u i lt . To t h e p re se n ta tio n o f th e p o ten tial fac­

to rs lead in g to th e ensu in g d ram atic c o n f l i c t H e b b e l obvioiB <

ly g a v e much c a r e f u l th o u g h t(2); a s we ha%e a l r e a d y n o t e d ,

l . T I I I 4 7 9 1 , 1 J a n . 1 8 5 1 . - 2 . C f . H e b b e l ’s n o t e o n D i e M i b e l u n -
g e n :"D e r e r s t e A ct(v o n zehnen v e rm u th lic h !)w ird b a ld f e r t i g
se y n -u n d v e r s p r i c h t e in e g u te E x p o s itio n ” - 11^ 5396, 18 Oct
1855.
 - 173 -
th e ex p o sitio n in Ju d ith a s s u m e d a l e n g t h w h i c h was d e t r i ­

m en tal to th e b a la n ce o f th e w hole, but in h is subsequent

p lay s one c a n n o t h e l p b u t b e im p r e s s e d by t h e in cre asin g

sk ill w ith w hich m o t i f s p o in tin g to a tim e p r e v io u s to th e

dram a a r e i n t e r w o v e n and l i f t e d in to th e forw ard-m oving

actio n * The c h a r a c t e r s t h e m s e l v e s may w a v e r a n d t e m p o r a r i ­

ly sw erve from t h e i r a llo tte d p ath , but th e ch ain o f c i r ­

c u m s t a n c e s m oves on r e l e n t l e s s l y , so th at even an u n e x p e c t­

ed tu r n in the in n er a c tio n o nly se rv es to enJriance t h e

m ounting se n se of trag ic in ev itab ility . T he s k i l f u l change

in th e m o tiv es le a d in g t o J l u d i t h *s m u r d e r o u s d e e d , m ay w e l l

h a v e b e e n i n H e b b e l *s m i n d w h e n h e w r o t e s o m e y e a r s later:

"Von g r o s s e r W irkung i s t e s im D r a m a , w e n n d i e M o t i v e

a u f e in ganz b e stim m te s, dem L e s e r u n d Z u s c h a u e r d e u t-

lic h es Z ie l h in zu w irk en sc h e in e n , und dann p l S t z l i c h

ausser diesem noch e in ganz anderes ung eah n tes und u n -

vorgesehenes erreich en . Do c h w i r d n u r dem G e n i e e i n s o l -

ch er D oppelschlag oder z u rû c k sp rin g en d e r B litz g elin g en

(1).
The c l i m a x h a v i n g b e e n r e a c h e d , th e fin al catastro p h e is

c le a rly and i n e s c a p a b l y f i x e d , and e v e r y th in g is d irected

tow ards i t w ith such te n a c ity o f purpose th a t even th e n o r­

mal r e t a r d i n g fu n c tio n o f the fo u rth act is g en erally ig n o r

lo T II 2688, 2o May 1 8 4 3 o
 - 174 -

ed by H ebbel (l). At t h e same t i m e , th e "so m uss es s e y n "

o f th e dram a t e n d s to re n d e r the fifth act o f H e b b e l *s

la te r p lay s, such as ü ^ n e s B e r n a u e r o r Gy^es u n d s e i n H i n g .

som ewhat to p h e a v y w ith l e n g t h y a r g u m e n t s . H ie i n c l u s i o n o f

a scene w ith c h a ra c te rs stran g e to th e p rev io u s a ctio n at

th e e n d o f H e r o d e s u n d M axiam ne h a s a sim ila r effect if re­

g a r d e d from a s t r i c t l y stru c tu ra l an g le. But by i n t e g r a t i n g

th ese elem en ts in to th e in n er actio n a n d m ak in g them p o i n t

to a N e ce ssity o u tsid e th e im m ed iate s p h e re of th e p a rtic u ­

lar dram a, H ebbel y e t succeeded in p reserv in g i t s e sse n tia l

u n ity .

T rag ic in e v ita b ility as an im p o rta n t elem ent in d ram atic

stru c tu re is a p r o b l e m much d i s c u s s e d a l s o in th e Shakespe-

a re stu à ie n , w here i t is n e a r l y alw ays co u p led w ith t r a g i c

atm o sp h ere (2). Ludw ig demanded t h a t it sh o u ld c o n sist i n

a ste ad ily risin g ten sio n , from t h e v e r y b e g i n n i n g o f th e

play , when t h e s p e c t a t o r m u st a lre a d y be a b le to se n se th e

trag ic outcom e, u n til th e fin al c a t a s t r o p h e becomes an i n ­

e v itab le certain ty . The w h o le p l a y , in f a c t , m ust c o n s t i ­

tu te a clim ax - " l a u t e r S z e n e n w ie i n d e n M a k k a b & e r n , k flh n

auf S te ig e ru n g g eb au t"(3 ) " w h ilst at t h e sam e t im e p r o v i d ­

i n g m oments o f r e s t w h e r e t h e t e n s i o n m ay s l a c k e n a n d t h e

1 . C f . T I I I 4 9 6 3 , 1 N o v . 1 8 3 1 2"D e n 4 . A c t d e r A g n e s B . b e g o n n e n .
Las S tü c k s t e i g e r t s i c h und d urch d ie e i n f a c h s t e n M o t i v e " . '
2 . ^ V p . 416 ; 1 8 4 0 -5 1 : " T r a g i s c h e N o tw e n d ig k e it i s t d i e Tr& -|
g e r i n d e r t r a g i s c h e n S tim m u n g ".- 3 . C ite d by E r ic h S chm idt ‘
f r o m a n u n p u b l i s h e d n o t e b o o k d e d i c a t e d t o K{jni^ A l f r e d
( 1 8 5 5 - 5 7 ) , GS I V p . 3 2 .
 - 175 -
s p e c ta to r pause for b rea th (l). The m o s t i m p o r t a n t facto r

in t h e b u i l d i n g up o f su c h t e n s i o n and, in d eed , th e s e c r e t

of trag ic n ecessity , according t o L u d w ig , is th e art of pre­

p a ra tio n , w hich, as i t w ere, o rien tates t h e s p e c t a t o r *s

m ind and s e t s h is ex p ecta tio n s in th e proper d irec tio n . The

way i n w h i c h L u d w i g d e s c r i b e s th e t e c h n i q u e b y w hich t h i s

can be a c h i e v e d and w hich he h i m s e l f c la im e d t o h a v e l e a r n t

from -B eethoven, is in itse lf sig n ific an t and i n d i c a t i v e of

h is se n sitiv e ap p ro ach to th e problem .

” Wie b e i S h a k e s p e a r e s c h e i n t b e i ihm li.e .B e e th o v e n ) d ie

b u n t e s t e F f i l l e von, M o d u l â t i o n e n zu h e r r s c h e m . . • T r i t t man

nSher h in zu , s o b e w u n d e r t m an d i e S i n J r i e i t , w i e v o r h e r

d ie M a n n ig fa ltig k e it, d i e N o t w e n d i g k e i t , w ie v o r h e r d i e

K fihnheit der W illkiir. Lange v o r dem w i r k l i c h e n L i n t r i t t e

der M o d u latio n i n d ie T onart d e r D om inante o d e r i n d i e

verw andte D u rto n art zeig t d e r K om pom ist d i e s e s c h o n .

( 2 ).
On t h e o th er hand, t h e ‘d i'a m a tis t m ust bew are o f r a i s i n g ex­

p ectatio n in ^ h e s p e c t a t o r w hich a r e n o t s a t i s f i e d in the

course o f the p la y or borne o u t by thefnature o f th e en d in g .

On t h e w hole, th e r ig h t k in d o f b eg in n in g for h is plays was

alw ays a m atter of great c o n c e r n t o Ludw ig - one t h i n k s ,

for ex am p le, o f th e d ifferen t op en in g sc e n e s en v isag ed fo r

Agnes B e rn a u e r o r T i b e r i u s O racchus — and a re o ften done

l . C f . G S V p. 4^26.- 2 . i b i d . n . B 2V 19,1 8 5 1 - 5 5 .
 - 17 6 -

in such a liv e ly and s u g g e s t i v e manner as to co n stitu te th e

best part o f h is d ram atic achievem ent. But t h i s very v a rie ty

p o in ts to the fact th at th ese scenes w ere f r e q u e n t l y w r i t t e n

w ithout an eye to th e g e n e ra l tre n d of th e actio n - a flaw

w hich L udw ig l a t e r rea d ily d e tected in h is own - S r b f i ü r s t e r (l )

A lth o u g h th e u n ify in g atm o sp h ere o f t h i s play c a n now h a r d l y

be d en ied , it grew g r a d u a l l y o u t o f th e s u c c e s s i v e v e r s i o n s ,

w ith o u t b ein g a preconceived fa c t or in the s t r u c t u r a l schem e

o f the w hole, and t h i s ex p lain s why L u d w i g was u n l i k e l y to

b rin g it co n scio u sly in to lin e w ith h is su b seq u en tly develop­

ed view o f t h e i d e a l ty p e o f co m p o sitio n : i

"In den m e i s t e n T ra g fid ie n S h a k e s p e a r es i s t ein e A rt Sona-

tenform a n z u tre ffe n ... Im e r s t e n T e l l e w erden d ie M otive

gegeben, d ie d a n n im z w e i t e n a u f L e b e n und Tod s i c h auf

den H als rû c k e n , d .h . d ie so g e n a n n te V erw icklung eingehen

u n d d ie Spannung l e i d e n s c h a f t l i c h m ach en ; a ls d ritte r T eil

fo lg t d ie A uflflsung d er k ram p fig v e r s c h l u n g enen M otive i n

der b eru iiig en d en G e w issh eit d eë^u sg an g es, d ie au sk lin g en d e

B eruliigung und V ers8liung, d i e hflJrirung u n d H r s c h ü t t e r u n g

fiter das s i c h auslebende Produkt des z w e ite n T e l l e s . L ie

Spannung w ird zu r r e i n t r a g i s c h e n Stim m ung" (2).

V ifith o ut g o i n g i n t o th e tec h n ic al a c c u r a c y o f L u d w i g ’s d e s c r i p

1 . C f e é è é - d . GS V p . Y 8 2 : " N u n h a t t e i c h a b e r d u r c h d e n u n t r a g i -
s c h e n A n f a n g a n d r e S r w a r t u n g e n e r r e g t , a l s i c h b e f r i e d i g e n woll
t e , d a n n w a r d i e H a n d l u n g e t was a b s o n d e r l i c h , a u c h | f e h l t e d i e Ge-
sch lo ssen lieit 2 . i b i d . p. 8 9 ,1 8 6 o -6 5 *
 - 177 -

tio n o f t h e s o n a t a form 11), it is im p o rtan t to re a lise

th at h is use o f m u s i c a l t e r m i n o l o g y wa s n o t p u r e l y m e t h a —

p h o rica l. h s we h a v e a l r e a d y s e e n , h e f r e q u e n t l y dr-ew a t t e n -
J
tio n , i n s e n s i t i v e and t e l l i n g o b s e r v a tio n s , to th e c lo s e

a n a lo g y b etw een th e tw o a rts o f m usic and d r an a , and w as,

m oreover, co n v in ced th a t a m usical train in g co u ld have a

very p o ten t in f lu e n c e upon th e d r a m a t i s t ’s m a n n e r o f c o n ­

stru c tin g h is p lay s. T h u s h e was o n e o f t h e first to draw

a tte n tio n to th e i m p o r t a n c e o f K l e i s t ’s m u s i c a l s t u d i e s for

h is d ra m a tic w ork, and, in d eed , traced t h e s o n a t a form i n

h is p lay s se v e ra l years b e fo re he fo rm u lated , in th e passage

quoted above, h i s t h e o r y o f S h a k e s p e a r e ’s art o f com posi­

tio n ( 2 ). On t h e o t h e r h a n d , it is n o t by v i r t u e o f a mecha­

n ical o b s e rv a n c e o f th e law s o f m u s ic a l c o m p o s itio n t h a t

L u d w i g ’s id e a o f d ram atic s t r u c tu r e can be c a l l e d a m u sical

one, but r a th e r because o f h is deeply s e n s i t iv e approach to

th e problem o f c r e a t i n g atm o sp h ere, w hich he felt to be

esse n tia l to b o th art form s alik e. T h u s , when h e d i v i d e d !

S h a k e s p e a r e ’s d r a m a s in to th e th ree stag es of ex p o sitio n ,

(p rep aratio n ), ten sio n and th e r e s o l v i n g o f t e n s i o n , h e was

but fo llo w in g th e d ictates o f o n e who w a s c o n s t a n t l y "on

th e track o f th e sp o n tan eo u sly c re a tin g m u sician ” (3)*

l * v . H a n s K l e i 4 , ”M u s i k a l i s c h e K o m p o s i t i o n i n d e u t s c h e r D i c h t -
k u n s t ” i n D e u tsch e V i e r t e l . i a l i r e s s c h r i f t ,V I I I p . 6 3 8 ,w here he
p o i n t s t o L u d w i g *5 c o n f u s i o n o f t h e s o n a t a f o r m p r o p e r w i t h
t h e 4 - p a r t s o n a t a c o m p o s it i o n .- 2 . v . L e t t e r to J u l i a n S chm idt
3 J u l y 1857;G S VI p p . 3 9 3 f . - 3 . i b i d . p . 394.
 - 173 -
"Dazu kommt” , h e h i i n s e l f e x p l a i n s , " l a s s i c h v o n d e r Musi k

h e r z u r P o e s i e kam, d i e , unbeküm m ert um a l l é s A n d e re a l s

d i e d e s O h i o s s e h h e i t d e r S tim m u n g , a l l e h i e m e n t e i n d i e s e m

e i n z i g e n b e a b s i c h t i g t e n Ton z u s a m m e n s tira m t" .

It was o n s u c h a b asis t h a t Ludw ig t r i e d to b u i l d h is

own p l a y s o f th e p erio d . H i s Kfini^ A l f r e d , f o r exam ple,

was t o co n sist of a series of scenes a ll stric tly co n n ect^

w ith one a n o th e r, but each w ith i t s own a t m o s p h e r e , w hich

a g a in l e d b a ck to the u n d e rly in g a tm o s p h e r e o f t h e w hole

1 ) . At t h e same t i m e , it s h o u ld be n o te d t h a t i n m an y o f

h is e a rlie r p lay s, he had in tro d u c e d a c tu a l m u sical ef­

fects such as so n g s and tru m p et c a l lu s , so t h a t the creatio

o f a tm o s p h e r e h a d become an en d i n i t s e l f r a t h e r than a

m eans o f d ra m a tic s t r u c t u r e . Thus h e i n t e n d e d a t th e end

o f denoveva to rein fo rce th e co n cilia to ry a tm o sp h ere by

d istan t sounds of relig io u s ch an tin g (2 ), w h ilst i n D ie

Torr^auer H e id e t h e r e is an im p re s s iv e o p e ra tic clo se, in

w hich, ag ain st th e background o f a s e t t i n g sun, o rch estra

and ch o ru s jo in in a g r a n d sym phony o f j u b i l a t i o n ( 5 )# f t

is, in d eed , a far c r y from t h i s t o L u d w i g *s l a t e r com pari­

s o n o f S h a k e s p e a r e *s p l a y s w i t h M o z a r t ’s o p e r a s , w here

every scen e, w ith its own k e y , its own i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n ,

its p e c u l ia r rhythm , its c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y m elodic and

l . Y . G S IV p . 3 2 . C f . a l s o GS V p . 7 3 , l B 4 o - 5 1 * - 2 . v . H , K r a e g e r ,
a r t . c i t .P|»3 2 3 f « - jo V o G S T V p . 7 6 . G f . a l s o W . S c h m i d t - O b e r -
i H s s n i t z ^ o p . c i t . f o r d e t a i l s o f m u s i c a l e f f e c t s i n D ie
M akkab& er#
 - 1 7 9 •“

harm onie tr e a tm e n t, is im p o rtan t not in i t s e l f , but only

i n so f a r as it c o n trib u te s to the org anic u n ity o f th e

w hole (l). I n t h e o r y , Ludw ig a lw a y s condemned t h e u s e o f

m u sical effects ( 2 ), a lth o u g h he n ev er q u ite abandoned

them , a n d was w e l l awace o f w hat h e c a l l e d t h e dangers of

h is own m u s i c a l n a t u r e ( 3 ). N ow here, in d eed , is th ere a

m ore o b v io u s g ap b e tw e e n t h e S h a k e s p e a r e s t u d i en and h i s

own p l a y s and fra g m e n ts , and w h ils t one c a n n o t h e l p adm ir­

in g th e co n sisten cy and i n g e n u i t y w i t h w hich Ludw ig t r a c e s '

c e r t a i n modes o f m u s i c a l s t r u c t u r e th r o u g h t h e w ork o f

o th er d ram atist, one m u st, on t h e w h o le , d ep lo re th e in ­

flu en ce o f m usic on h i s own d r a m a t i c p rac tic e.

The r e a s o n f o r th is d i s c r e p a n c y becomes c l e a r when one

com pares L u d w ig 's th eo ries o f m usical s t r u c tu r e w i t h Heb­

b e l 's m ore g e n e r a l v ie w s o f th e r e l a t i o n b etvæ en m u sic an^

d r a m a . As e a r l y as 1 8 3 6 , t h e l a t t e r h a d draw n a fu ndam en- j

tal d i s t i n c t i o n b etw een th e s p h e re o f m usic on th e one

hand and t h a t of p a in tin g , sc u lp tu re and p o e t r y on t h e

o th er ; w h ilst th e one e n d e a v o u re d t o m erge t h e p a r t i c u l a r

in th e g en eral and was, th erefo re, u ltim a te ly d e stru c tiv e ,j

th e o th er i n d i v i d u a l i s ed t h e g e n e r a l to a c le arly d efin ed j

l . G f , GS V p . 1 9 3 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 . - 2 . C f . a p a s s a g e t o t h i s
e f f e c t q u o t e d f r o m a n u n p u b l i s h e d MS o f t h e S h a k e s p e a r e — !
S t u d i e n b y L e o n M i s , p p . c i t . I p . 2 ’S 7 - 3* " D i e G e f a h r e n m e i
n e r e i g n e n m u s i k a l i s c h e n N a t u r " - c i t e d b y W. S c l r i m i d t -
O b e r l S s s n i t z , op. c i t . p . 91#
 — 1 8o

p articu lar (l), and th u s alo n e fu lfille d i n H e b b e l *s v i e w

th e c o n d itio n s for p e r f e c t i o n o f form : "A llés In d iv id u ali -

si^ ren f& irt z u r ew igen i n n e r e n F o r m /( 2 ) , A lth o u g h t h i s de­

fin itio n d ates from a tim e p r e v i o u s to H ebbel*s d ram atic

cy(8jceeXy it was o n e w h i c h h e was t o ap p ly c o n s ta n tly , bo th

in h is c ritic a l th eo ry (3 ) and w ith r e f e r e n c e to h is own

w ork, and w hich was l a t e r r e i n f o r c e d b y t h e new i n s i g h t h e

had g ain e d through h is own e x p e r i e n c e of w ritin g th e l i - j

b retto fnS an o p e r a (4), j

It is, u n lik e ly , th erefo re, t h a t H e b b el w ould e v e r h a v e

g iv en s e rio u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n to m usic as a p o ten t facto r in |

dram a, and i t was o n l y v e r y o c c a s i o n a l l y th a t he allo w ed

the in tru sio n o f m usical effects in to the c lo se ly k n it

stru c tu re o f h is own p l a y s . H o w e v e r , b e a r i n g i n m ind t h e

p a rticu lar f u n c t i o n w h i c h m u s i c was t o fu lfil and th e r e ­

stra in t w hich, if used in dram a, it m ust i n v a r i a b l y put

upon th e n a tu ra l in d iv id u a l l s ing ten d en cies o f th e dram a­

tist, he d id at t h e same t i m e en v isag e th e p o ssib ility of

a f u s i o n b e tw e e n o p e r a and dram a " i n v e r y s p e c i a l c ase s”.

S u c h a c a s e wa s \ ^ ' 9 1 -. -

1 . C f. 2 ^ 5 5o ,5 S e p .1 8 3 6 :"M aler,B iid ln au er und H ic h te r b r i n ­

g e n n u r i n v e r e i n t e m W irken d as A b g e r u n d e t - V o r t r e f f l i c h e
z u r v o l l e n d e t e n Ans c h a u u n g ; d i e Mus i k h a t e i n e e n t g e g e n g e —
s e t z t e S p h S r e . i n d e m s i e , w e n n j e n e d a s A l l g e m e i n e zum B e ­
s t im m t-A bgegranz t e n i n d i v i d u a l i s i e r e n , das B estim m te i n e i n
A l l g e m e i n e s z u v e r s c i m e l z e n s u c h t . Darum i s t s i e v e r n i c h -
t e n d i n i t i r e r l e t z t e n V /irkung". - 2 . i b i d . l o l 8 , 7 M arch 1 8 3 8 .
3 # v . i n p a r t i c u l a r r e f e r e n c e s t o H i c h a r d Wagner - B r . V I p p .
1 9 1 , 1 9 6 ,2 3 3 e t c . - 4 . In 1858 H ebbel w rote P er S t e in w u f f . o f
w h ic h h e s a i d : " I c h h a b e e i n e n sch fln en Gew inn v o n H i n s î c h t
i n das V e r h S ltn is s d er P o e s ie zu r-M u sik davon g e tr a g e n " -
h e t t e r t o « t eh e r^-S eh u m 'A A A F r i e d r i c h U e c h t r i t z , 4 May 1 8 5 8 .
i b i d . p. 129. ’
 - 181 -
M oloch (l) - vvhich, b o t h i n t h i s respect and i n th e fact th at it

was n e v e r co m p leted , bears an i n t e r e s t i n g resem blance to a sim ila r

e arly p r o j e c t by L udw ig: " e i n T r a u e r s p i e l m i t M usi k , aber ganz e i-

g e n und neu angew andt" (2 ). Not t h a t H e b b e l i n t e n d e d to w rite any­

th in g approach ing an o p e r a - th e m u sic, he em phasised, was t o ser­

ve, not ru le (5 ) - but because o f th e very g ran d io se n a tu re of its

co n cep tio n the d ra m a was w i t h few e x c e p t i o n s to be t r e a t e d in a

"g en eral" rath e r than in an " i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c " m anner, and a p p ea r­

ed,^ t o w arrant a m u sical accom panim ent n o t u n l i k e th at o f th e b a l­

lad (4 ). The h i g h l y s y m b o l i c a l , w o r l d - e m b r a c i n g ch aracter o f th e

C h ristu s fragm ent su g g e sts a sim ila r approach, and a lth o u g h th ere

is no d i r e c t ev id en ce for th is , it is in te re stin g to n ote th a t

L m i l Kuli s p e a k s of it as a "d ram atic o r a to r io " (5)* H ow ev er, it

was a m e t h o d w h i c h H e b b e l was n o t to r e p e a t and h is next and l a s t

p lay , D em etriu s, b e a rs no a p p a r e n t trac es o f the a u t h o r ’s p r e o c c u

p a tio n w ith th e p r o b l e m o f m u s i c a n d drama*

D ifferen t a s L u d w i g ’s a p p r o a c h , both p r a c t ic a l and t h e o r e t i c a l

may h a v e b e e n t o t h e same p r o b l e m , h e y e t l a c k e d tw o b a s i c q u ali­

tie s e sse n tia l to any d r a m a t i s t a c tiv e ly

1 . "Ohne h i c h a r d W agners B uch (O p e r u n d D ram a)im Ganz e n o d e r im S i r

z e l n e n i r g e n d a c c e p t i r e n z u k 8n n e n , s c h w e b t d o c h a u c h m i r , u n d z w ar
v o n m einem e r s t en A u f t r e t e n a n , d i e M ÿ g l i c h k e i t e i n e r V e r s c h m e l -
z u n g v o n O p e r u n d Drama i n g a n z s p e c i e l l e n F h l e n v o r , u n d m e i n e n
M o l o c h , a n dem i c h s e i t z e h n J a l n r e n a r b e i t e , h a b e i c h m i r i m m e r ±i
B e z u g a u f d i e M u s i k g e d a c h t " . L e t t e r t o R o b e r t S c h u m a n n , 21 J u n e
1 8 5 3 ; ^ . V p . l o 9 # - 2 . L e t t e r t o C , G * S c h a l l e r , 2 May 1 8 4 o : B r i e f e , e d .
c i t . y P .4 5 . - 3 . O f .D # K r a e l ik u n d ^ .L e m m e rm e y e r,Neue H e b b e ld o k u m e n te
B e r l i n a n d L e i p z i g , 1 9 1 3 , p . 8 6 . - 4 . G f . L e t t e r t o h o b e r t " S c h u m a n n , 3o
N o v . l 8 3 3 ; ^ . V p . 1 3 b . - 3 . F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l s S g m m tlic h e W erke,H am bu%
1 8 f c ? 4 ^ In tro d u e tio n to v o l s .I V - V I , p . 3.
 - 182 -

in te ie ste d in th e art o f m usic# Fi r s t l g c , on accou nt o f h i s

n a tu ra l ten d en cies and o f h is claim th at c e r ta in asp ects

o f m u sical tech n iq u e co u ld be ta k e n over in to th at of th e

dram a U ), he failed t o make a w o r k a b l e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t ­

ween t h e tw o, th e r e b y la y in g h i m s e l f open to a certain

amount o f c o n f u s io n (2 ). ftco n d ly , he la c k e d th e a b ility

to seize upon th e e sse n tia ls o f m u sical s tr u c tu r e as r e l e ­

vant to th e dram a w ith^iut g i v i n g u n d u ly d e t a i l e d a tten tio n

to s p e c if ic m u sical d ev ices# Thus s i d e by s i d e w ith h is

co n stan t em phasis o n S h a k e s p e a r e *s p o w e r o f i n t e g r a t i n g

a ll t h e m an y e l e m e n t s o f h is plays in to a s i n g l e w hole

went a m in u te an aly sis of a ll th e se p a ra te p arts, lea d in g

him t o make s u c h acute but h ig h ly s p e c ia lis e d o b se rv a tio n s

as t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e tw e e n sym phonic and c o n c e r t e d ty p e s

o f scenè in th e p lay s o f Shakespeare 13 )* I n L u d w i g ’s d r a ­

m atic p ra c tic e , th is p red ilec tio n for d e ta il c le a rly pre-

U
d o m in ates, a n d a l t h o u g h ( s u c c e e d e d now a n d a g a i n i n t h e

c r e a t i o n o f what h e c alle d "p o ly p h o n ic fin ales" or a se­

ries of "m u sik alisch e S tim m u n g s m o m e n te th e "m ighty p o ly ­

phonies" and " d ra m a tic sym phonies" ( 4 ) o f w hich he dream t

w ere to rem ain p e r p e t u a l l y o u t of h is reach. -But t h e pre—

1 . "Was a n d e r m a l e r i s c h e n T e c h n i k d a n n n o c h f e h l t , k a n n
aus d e r p o ly p h o n ie c h en M u sik e n t l e h n t w erden.-der K o n t r a -
p u n k t , d ie Fuge d e r H a n d lu n g , d er F lu s s ,H h y tm ik ,-d y n am ik ,H ar-
m o n i k j M e l o d i k " — ^ V I p . 2 9 , 1 8 5 7 —5 8 #— 2 # i t w i l l b e c l e a r
from what h a s - g o n e b e f o r e t h a t Ludw ig d i d n o t , a n y m ore
t h a n H e b b e l e n v i s a g e a m e r g i n g o f t h e two a r t s . C f # G S V I p#
29 a n d i b i d . p . 3 4 4 . - 3 .Cf#GS V p . 1 1 1 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 . - 4 . v # B . F i s c h ë |
OP# c i t . p . 46
 - 183 -

ponderance of th e a n a l y t i c a l m ethod o v e r th e s y n t h e t i c a l is

o n e o f t h e h e il 1- m a r k s also o f L u d w g ’s d r a m a t i c t h e o r y , and

in p a rtic u la r o f h is th eo ry o f s t r u c tu r e . The v e r y t e n a c i t y

w ith w hich he ro b e d d eep er and d eep er i n t o the v ario u s ele­

m ents whic]TA c o n s t i t u t e the s t r u c tu r a l p e rfe c tio n o f h is ma­

s t e r *s d r a m a t i c art p r e c l u d e d him from e v e r fo rm in g f o r him ­

se lf a coherent and d e f i n i t i v e id ea of th at p erfectio n ,

e ith er in h is d ram atic th eo ry or in p ra c tic e in any one o f

h is p lay s.

" D er Gang d e r H a u p t s z e n e n a n a l y t i s c h , der In h a lt w ird

h e r a u s g e w i c k è i t ; d e r P la n s y n th e h s c h . M u s te r; H am lets S zen e

m it dem G e i s t . . ” ( l ) T h e s e w o r d s aieem t o p o i n t u n c o n s c i o u s l y

to two c h a r a c t e r i s t i c featu res i n L udw ig*s ap p ro ach to th e

p r o b l e m o f fir a m a t i c s t r u c t u r e ; firstly , th e im p o rta n c e w hich

he a tta c h e d to th e in d iv id u al scene, and, seco n d ly , th e r e ­

a lisa tio n o f th e need fo r a co h esiv e p la n . The n e c e s s i t y for

a rig h t rela tio n sh ip betw een th e two h a d becom e i n c r e a s i n g ­

ly obvious t o Ludw ig e v e r s i n c e h i s e a rlie st attem p ts at

w ritin g play s, and even o p e ra s : "La i c h v o n v o rrü rierein k e i - ;

nen P la n m a c h te ” , he w rote in 1846, "und m ir j e d e Zwiffl/cJrien-

und F d llsz e n e z u r mus i k a l i s c h e n Hummer a n s c h w o l l , w urden

m eine O pern U n g eh eu er. S c h n itt ic h nun davon ab, so v iel ich

zu m dssen g l a u b t e , urn d i e H o r m a l l & n g e h e r a u s z u b r i n g e n , s o -ws

war das k e in e o rg an isch e C e n tra lisa tio n - und das i s t ’s , was

m±x h e u t e noch (und b e s o n d e r s m it dem S n g e l ) p a s s i e r t " ( 2 ) .

l # i ^ V p .4 3 6 ;1 8 5 5 -6 .- 2 .L e tte r t o Z d u a r d D e v r i e n t , 5 Dec 1 8 4 6
G6 V I p . 3 4 4 /
 - 184 -

But th e subsequent th ree v ersio n s o f P e r i^ n ^ e l v o n Au^sbiir.s

f a r e d no b e t t e r , and th e p lan s and s k e tc h e s for h is p lay s c

co n tin u ed to d iffer i n no way f r o m t h o s e for h is n o v els,

except for a seem in g ly a r b i t r a r y d iv is io n in to acts and

scenes. H is stu d ies f o r A ndreas H p f e r . f o r ex am ple, show

at lea st six d ifferen t attem p ts at such a d iv is io n , w h ilst

in a ll h is p lay s t h e number o f a c t s , th e a d d itio n o f pro­

lo g u es and th e o f t e n arb itrary d iv isio n in to trilo g ies and

tetralo g ies rem ain ed a m a tte r for en d less d e lib era tio n and

change®

One i s rem inded in t h i s co n n ectio n o f a passage i n Heb­

b e l *s d i a r y o f 1354, w here he r e c o r d s h a v in g b e e n a s k e d by

Grutzkow w h e t h e r h e was i n t h e h a b i t o f m aking d e t a i l e d

p lan s for h is dram as: "Ich b e s t r i t t d i e s s , ich setzte ihm

das O e f & ir lic h e ein er zu g r o s s e n V e r tie f u n g in s D etail aus

e in a n d e r. . . ich b eh au p tete, e i n e g r ü n d l i c h e S k i z z e v o r dem

K unstw erk s e y n i c h t v i e l b e s s e r , w ie e i n e B i o g r a p h i e v o r

dem L e b e n ® . " (l). The f a c t is th a t Hebbel alw ays d en ied

th e n e c e s s ity for - and, in d eed , th e p o ssib ility of - sucl

a p lan (2 ), and i t is only in c o n n e c tio n w ith h is youth­

ful p l a y , M i r a n d o l a . t h a t We h a v e a r e c o r d o f some s y s t e -
I
m atic scen e-b y -scen e arrangem ent o f th e first tw o a c t s , |

though even t h i s was b y no m e a n s ad iiered to in th e execu­

tio n , ÿo anyone f a m i l i a r w ith th e c reativ e processes of

1 . T I V 5 5 3 8 , 39 f f , 14 A u g .1854®
2 . C f . T l 1 4 9 6 , 1 6 F eb . 1839#
 - 185 -

H ebbel, it is, how ever, c le ar th at, a l t h o u g h h e may n o t h a v e

conveyed h is plan s to p a p e r , h e n e v e r b e g a n a new d r a m a w i t h

out h a v in g a c le a r n o tio n , not on ly o f h is su b ject m atter,

but also o f th e g e n eral o u tlin e o f th e outw ard s t r u c t u r e .

Thus h e n o t e d i n 1 8 3 9 • "A ls m e in H a u p tw e rk muss i c h die Ju­

d ith b etrach ten , von der jetzt zw ei A cte fertig s in d und

d ie i n m ir b i s in s K lein s t e h in e in v o lle n d e t ist" ( l )3?.,

and i n 1858 he w ro te in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h D e m e tr iu s : " Die l e t z ­

ten zwei ^ cte j s i n d b e i m i r immer b l o s s e fig e r-S p rünge , de-

n en itire B edeutung gew iss ist" (2).

A lth o u g h , a s we h a v e s e e n , L u d w i g ’s p r a c t i c a l m e t h o d was

sad ly w an tin g i n th is resp ect, he b e li e v e d i n th eo ry th a t

t h e / arrangem ent o f th e acts sh o u ld arise n a tu ra lly out o f

th e developm ent o f a p a s s io n . The c o m p a c t n e s s o f a play

su c h as O th e llo se em e d t o him due t o t h e fact th at it was

b u ilt p rec ise ly on t h i s p rin cip le , th at, w h ilst the first

two acts co n ta in th e co n d itio n s u n d e r w hich jea lo u sy is

p o ssib le and p ro b a b le , the o th e r th ree present th is sam e

jea lo u sy in actio n (3). S im ila rly , he in te n d e d to co n stru ct

h is own A n d r e a s H o f e r in such a way t h a t e a c h s u c c e s s i v e -ae

a c t w ould c o n s t i t u t e a crescendo (4). Ln g e n e r a l , h o w e v e r ,

L udw ig g ave l i t t l e co n sid eratio n to the act as an im p o r ta n t

stu rc tu ra l elem en t, a dynam ic u n i t y w i t h i n t h e dram a as a

w hole. Throughout h is d ram atic th e o ry i t is rath er the

l . T I I 8 65 &3I D e c . 1 8 3 9 . - 2 . L e t t e r t o F r a n z D i n g e l s t e d t , 1 4
D ec. . 1 8 5 8 ; ^ . VI p . 2 2 1 . - 3 # C f . ^ V p . l o 2 , 1 8 5 1 - 5 5 # - 4 . C f.B .
F is c h e r , o n .c i t . . p . 65.
 — 186 —

n atu re and t r e a tm e n t o f th e s c e n e w hich i s param ount, th e

p a tien t d e v o tio n w ith w hich, to u se h is own t e r m , h e "ana­

to m ised ” th e s tr u c tu r e of scene after scene b ein g a recurr­

ing featu re o f t h e S h a k e s o e a r e s t u d i e n * The s c e n e is essen­

tia lly a u n it, com plete and p e r f e c t in i t s e l f , but one

whose r e l a t i o n to t h e w hole m ust alw ays be b o rn e i n m in d.

T h is s u p e r i o r w hole i s never re f e r r e d to as th e act, but

alw ays in term s o f th e dram a i t s e l f .

" h in ü h a k e s p e a i'is c h e s Stiick i s t ein e fortw & kirende V o r b e -

reitu n g a u f d ie K a t a s t r o p h e , und so h a t jede ein zeln e

Szene ih re eig n e k le in e K a ta s tro p h e , zu d e r d e r d b r i g e

D ialo g V o rb e re itu n g ist" (l).

'Ti/hen L u d w i g s p e a k s o f th e d r am a g e i n g d iv id e d in to sm all

scenes, each o f w hich form s a c o m p le te G e n r e b i l d o r M jm us,

w h ilst at th e same t i m e m a i n t a i n i n g th e c o n tin u ity of the

w hole, it is not su rp risin g , th erefo re, th a t he sh o u ld

m ention in one b r e a t h th e p lay s o f Shakespeare a n d G o e t h e ’s

Faust (2)* T h is d oes n o t mean t h a t every scene has the

same i m p o r t a n c e o r t h e same f u n c t i o n t o fu lfil/, for, as

has a l r e a d y b e e n m e n t i o n e d , Ludw ig alw ay s d istin g u ish ed

c arefu lly b e t w e e n two t y p e s of scene: on t h e one h a n d t h e

k i n d w hich form s th e r e a l stru c tu re or "skeleton" o f the

p la y by p la c in g a ll th e em phasis on t h e words and a c t io n s

o f th e hero - th e s o -c a lle d "S p iel" or "T h a th a n d lu n g s s z e -

l.œ V p . 99. - 2 .C f. ib id . p . 427.

 - 187 -

n e n " — and on t h e o th er th e s o - c a lle d "A u sleh eszen en " or

"S zen en des G le ic h g & ltig e n " w hich a r e c h ie fly concerned

w ith th e im pact o f th e actio n i n t h e m ind o f t h e s p e c t a t o r

by d eep en in g the e ffect, slack en in g th e te n s io n and p ro v id ­

i n g w hat L udw ig c a l l e d p o inty o f d e p a r t u r e , tran sitio n and

rest (l)*

" In S zenen ohne e i g e n t l i c h e T h athandlung, wozu i c h auch

B n tsch lû sse, P i âne usw. zS tile, i n w e lc h e n d i e Stim m ung

von e in e r Th a t h a n d l u n g s s z e n e w i e i n f ig u r ie r te n O rg el-

punkten a u s k l i n g t . • . f in d e t das polyphone A u sleb en m ehre-

rer k o n t r a s t i e r e n d e n Stim m en n e b e n e i n a n d e r , w orin d ie

P o esie am m e i s t e n S p i e l r a u m h a t , am b e q u e r n s t e n P i a t z " ( 2 ) .

The p r i n c i p l e h e r e in v o lv ed is e s s e n tia lly n o n -arc h ite c ­

to n ic , rely in g not on a rh ytlrim ical a rra n g e m e n t o f s c e n e

w ith in act and a ct w i t h i n dram a, b u t on a m o d u la tin g pro­

g ressio n of le is u re lin e s s and i n t e n s i t y , m oving l i k e a

sym phony t o its ap p o in ted tr a g ic clo se. It is, in d eed , es­

se n tia lly a m u sical p r in c ip le .

If a p lay such as P e r L r b f B r s t e r does n o t en tirely con­

form t o th is p rin c ip le (3), it yet rev eals th e unconscious

b e g in n in g o f an a t t i t u d e w hich r a t e d th e cum u lativ e effect |

o f a tm o s p h e r e m ore h i g h l y t h a n a l o g i c a l d iv isio n in to I

scenes and a c t s . The d i f f e r e n c e b e c o m e s c l e a r w h e n o n e oom-

I
pares w ith i t a p la y such as H e b b e l* s H e ro d e s u n d M a ria m n e ^

l . C f . G S V p p . 1 2 3 , 4 5 4 , 4 7 6 , 1 1 1 , a n d GS I V p . 4 4 * - 2 . i b i d . p . 94^
1 8 5 8 - 6 o . - 3 . O f . L u d w i g *s own c r i t i c i s m - i b i d . p . 1 2 2 - 2 3 >
1851-55.
 X88 —

w here th e outw ard p a t t e r n is alm o st one o f sym m etry, b u i l t

on th e p rin cip le of a n tith e sis w hich, in tu rn , was i n i i e r e n t

i n H e b b e l ’s i d e a o f d u a l i s m and c o n f l i c t . C o n flic t b ein g

th e essence o f dram a, th e d ra m a tis t m ust, Hebbel b e lie v e d ,

c ry sta llise its sa lie n t situ atio n s i n what i n a n o th e r con­

n e c tio n he c a lle d "p o in ts o f c o n cen tratio n " ( lf o rm in g

certain c le a rly -d e fin e d stag es in th e d ram atic stru ctu re#

In h is own p r a c t i c e , Hebbel u s u a lly r e f e r r e d to th ese as

"H au p t-S cen en ", im p ly in g t h e i r im portance fo r th e g en eral

actio n , but also freq u e n tly em phasising th eir re la tio n to

th e p a i'tic u la r act i n w hich t h e y s t a n d . Thus h e sp o k e o f

th e scene b etw een T itu s a n d M a r i amne a s th e c h i e f one i n

th e fin al a c t o f H e r o d e s u n d M a r i amne (2^, w h ilst it was

th e Jew - a su b sid iary ch aracter im p o rtan t only for the

u n d erly in g problem o f th e play - who p r o v i d e d i n h i s eyes

th e apex o f th e se c o n d a c t o f Genoveva (3). The a c t is

h e re se en to be b u i l t up on a p r i n c i p l e of g rad a tio n in

w hich m in o r and m a jo r s c e n e s aljk e are i n t e l l i g i b l e o nly

w ith in th e c o n tex t o f a la r g e r u n i t. T h is larg e r u n it is

th e a ct, w hich i n tu rn conform s t o no o u t w a r d p a t t e r n ,

but to an in w a rd p r i n c i p l e o f form i n an o r g a n i c w hole^

fu lfillin g a dynam ic f u n c t i o n w i t h i n the dram a. W hile en­

g a g ed on w r i t i n g M a ria M agdalena H ebbel d escrib ed th is

1 . L e t t e r to A rn o ld K ûg e,1 5 H e p .1832 V p . 2 6 . — 2.%" I l l

4461, 14 N o v .1 8 4 8 .- 3 .L e t t e r to F ra n z D i n g e l s t e d t 2 S e p .
1 85 1 ;B r IV p . 3 1 5 .
 — 189"

p rin cip le in th e fdlow ing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c terras:

’’Was ^ t y l in der K unst, das b e g r e i f e n d ie L eu te am w enig*

sten . So i n d e r T r a g i ’d i e , dass d ie I d e e ira 1 . Act als

zuckendes L ic h t, ira 2 . a ls S tern , d e r m it N e b eln kSrapft,

ira 3 , a ls dSm m ernder Mond, im 4 . a ls s tra h le n d e Sonne,

d ie k e in e r rae h r v e r l â u g n e n k a n n , u ^ t o 5* a l s v e r z e h r e n -

d e r u n d z e r s t j r e n d e r K om et h e r v o r t r e t e n rauss” ( l ).

Such a s ta te m e n t m u st, h o w ev er, n o t be t a k e n too l i t e ­

rally , and th e s im p le fact th at it was w r i t t e n d u r i n g H e b ­

b e l *s c o m p o s i t i o n o f a d r a m a i n t h r e e acts, is a w arning

ag ain st o v e r-sira p lifica tio n ! It c a lls, m oreover, fo r th e

careful in v estig atio n o f a h ig h ly com plex p ro b le m , th at o f

the I d e a as t h e u l t i m a t e source o f form . T his is a facto r

common t o H e b b e l a n d L u d w i g a l i k e , and c o n s t i t u t e s an i n ­

te re stin g and im p o rta n t p o in t o f c o n ta ct in any c o m p a riso n

of th eir th eo ries o f d ram atic s t r u c t u r e . In the case o f

Hebbel i t is p a z 'tic u la r ly n e c e s s a ry , in o rd er to av o id

false or u n fa ir co n clu sio n s, not to lo se sig h t of h is dra­

m atic p ra c tic e . H is d e fin itio n in th e h a p le ss ’’M e i n W o r t

liber das Dram a” o f t h e Id e a as th e ’’A l l é s b e d i n g e n d e s i t t -

lic h e C entrum ” , f o r exam ple, has c a u s e d much f r u i t l e s s c ri­

tic ism , a n d may w e l l h a v e o c c a s i o n e d t h e fo llo w in g sta te ­

m ent by L udw ig: ”Die I d e e des lb: am a s m u s s m e h r k o n k r e t als

ab strak t, m e h r im k ü n s t i e r i s c h e n a ls p h ilo so p h isc h e n S in n e

genommen w e r d e n , sie ist d ie E in h e it des M ann ig fa l t i g e n ,

l.C f.T II 2897, 25 N o v . 1 8 4 3 . - V .

 — 19o —

der S tan d p u n k t, aus dem d a s M a n n i g f a l t i g e s i c h a l s SinJrieit

a n s c h a u e n 1 &s s t " ( l ). But H e b b el w ould h a v e d en ied w ith great

vehem ence any a c c u s a t i o n o f h a v in g trie d to tra n sla te th e

Idea in i t s ess n t i a l l y p h ilo so p h ic al or sp e cu la tiv e sense

in to th e sphere o f the dram a, b e in g co n v in ced t h a t , before

he can ex ecu te an y th in g , the p o e t m ust undergo a double pro­

cess: " Der g e m e in e B t o f f m uss s i c h in ein e Idee auflflsen und

d ie Id ee sich w ieder zur G e sta lt v e rd ic h te n 12). T h is d efi­

n itio n , f o r m u l a t e d m ore t h a n a y e a r b e f o r e H e b b e l ’s first

p lay , J u d ith , alre ad y r e f e r s to t h e two p r o c e s s e s w h i c h a l ­

ways se e m e d to him e s s e n t i a l for a tru ly d ram atic presen­

tatio n , a n d w h i c h h e was c o n s t a n t l ^ ^ n o t w i t h o u t e ffo rt,

try in g to com bine i n h i s ovjn d r a m a s - the process o f sym­

b o lisatio n and t h a t o f th e fin al appearance o f th e Idea in

th e perfect form . In re sp e c t of th e form er, it is p o ssib le

to trace a d e fin ite change, or ra th e r p ro g ressio n , in th e

th eo ry and p r a c t i c e o f h eb b el; in such e a rly w ritin g s as

h is e s s a y o n K l e i s t *s P r i a m . F r i e d r i c h v o n Hpmburg. ( 3 ) , th e

p r e s e n t a ti o n o f th o u g h t s t r i v i n g t o become d e e d th r o u g h t h e

a c tio n o f the h e ro , w hich h e t r a c e s through th e su c c e ssiv e

stag es of the p la y , is e sse n tia lly in agreem ent w ith L ud-

l.G H V p . 4 3 7 . - 2.T I 1232, June 1 8 3 8 .C f, a lso an i n t e r e s t i n g

c o m m e n t b y H u d w i g : "Man t h u t n u n w o h l , s t e t s b e i d e r A n s c h a u -
u n g z u b l e i b e n , d i e - V / i ^ k u n g n i c h t i n e i n e F o r m e l - I de e - a u f zu-
3 i & s e n , j b i d e r d i e A ns c h a u u n g u n t e r g e h t , u n d d i e d a s Aus d i c h -
t e n e r s c h w e r t , w e i l i m m e r w i e d e r d i e Mulie e r f o r d e r t w û r d e ,
G edanken, das h e i s i t a b s t r a k t e , i n G e fü h le und H andlung en r û c i
w S xts zu d b e r s e t z e n . . GS V p . 263#"- 3 . ”^ b e r T h e o d o r K f i r n e r
u n d H e i n r i c h v o n K l e i s t " " Y l 8 36 ; W I K p . 3 9 .
 - 191 -
v ; i g ’s th eo ry o f th e ”C h a rak terid ee " as i n f o r m in g and l i n k ­

in g to g eth er every part o f a dram a. But t h i s c o n c e p tio n be­

cam e i n c r e a s i n g l y m e r g e d w i t h H e b b e l ’s own s u b j e c t i v e th e­

ory o f th e I d e a as a?w orld p r i n c i p l e , u n t i l he even e n v is­

aged the p o ssib ility o f m aking t h e v e r y "ju stific atio n " of

the Idea i t s e l f th e su b ject o f a dram a (l). T h is in cre asin g

em phasis on t h e thou g h t co n ten t o f h is dram as, w hich i n e v i ­

tab ly put a great s tr a in upon t h e i r stru c tu re (2), puts one

i n m ind o f a p a s s a g e by L udw ig, in w hich he c la im s th at,

sin ce th e id eas o f th e "se n tim en ta l" poet act as c o n t e n t

C s t o f f ” ), o n ly th e " n a i v e " poem o r dram a c a n h a v e p o e t i c

form 13). N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h i s m arked te n d e n c y , how ever,

H ebbel e n d eav o u red to re m a in t r u e to h i s view o f th e clo se

c o n n e c tio n betw een c o n te n t and form , and c o n tin u e d to s t r i v

after a form o f dram a whose s t r u c t u r e w ould be i d e n t i c a l

w ith th e particu lai" id eas w ith w hich i t was c o n c e r n e d .

T his is seen, for exam ple, in h is view o f th e carefu lly

graded r e la tio n s h ip i n w hich t h e v a r i o u s p arts o f a dram a

w ere to s ta n d to th e Idea i t s e l f .

"Und o b g l e i c h d ie zu G runde g e l e g t e I d e e . . . d e n H i n g ab-

g ieb t, in n erh alb dessen s ic h A llés p la n e ta risc h regen

und bewegen m uss, so h a t der D ic h te r. . .s ic h wohl zu

h û ten , a lle sein e C harafetere, w ie d i e s s in den s o g e -

t o h i s A g n e s B e r n a u e r : N u r im l e t z t e n -act m u s s i c n x m r z e n .
A l l é s , was d e n b t a a ^ a n g e h t , l & s s t d i e Menge k a l t - L e t t e r t o
C h r i s t i n e H e b b e l , 26 M a r c h 1 8 5 2 :B r . I V p . 4 2 4 . * * 3# G f . GS V I p .
3 8 a n d GH V p . 2 7 o , -
 - 1 9 2 .-

n a n n ten ly r is c h e n S tû ck en S f t e r s g e sch ie h t, dem C e n t r u m g l e i c h

nah * zu s t e l l e n . Das v o l l k o m m e n s t e L e b e n s b i l d e n t s t e h t dann,

wenn d e r H a u p t c h a r a k t e r das fûr d ie Nebe n - und C e g e n c h a r a k te -

re w ird , was d a s C esch ick , m it dem e r r i n g t , für ih n i s t , und

wenn a i c h auf so lch e W eise A l l é s , b is zu den u n t e r s t e n A b s tu -

fungen h e ra b , in , durch und m it e in a n d e r e n tw ic k elt, b ed in g t

und s p i e g e l t ” ( l ) .

It is in te re stin g to n o t e t h a t L udw ig, to o , thought o f th e Idea

as the s u n r o u n d w hich t h e v a r i o u s ch aracters o f a dram a re^ ro lv e

lik e p lan ets in v ary in g degrees o f p ro x im ity , co n d itio n in g one

a n o th er w ith in an o r g a n i c u n i t y (2). B ut w h i l s t H e b b e l saw t h i s

re la tio n sh ip in an a sc e n d in g scale, w ith th e I d e a as the h ig h e s t

facto r, tran scen d in g th e im m ed iate sc o p e o f th e dram a, Ludw ig,

who m a d e t h e Idea re sid e w ith in th e soul;T o f th e h e ro h i m s e l f (3 )

ad v o cated a tec h n iq u e of p e rsp ec tiv e : ” G a nz im V o r d e r g r u n d e das

L eiden des a l t e n L e a r , m e h r im H i n t e r g r u n d u n d e b e n s o w e n i g e r

b reit au sg efd tirt d ie G lo s te rg e s c h ic h te , n o c h w e i t e r im H i n t e r ­

grund und f a s t b lo s s sk izziert d as V e r h S l t n i s Edmunds z u d e n

bo h w estern , W underbar w ie d i e L e a r g r u p p e und d i e G l o s t e r g r u p p e

in e in a n d e r v e r s c h r ânkt w erden” (4 ), ad d in g i n an o th er p la c e :

"D ie D o p p e lf a b e ln b e i S h a k e s p e a r e s i n d g le ic h s a m d ie

1 . " M e i n Y/ort i i b e r d a s D r a m a " , W X I p . 5 # - 2 . 0 f . G S V p . 6 2 . - 3 . C f .

i b i d . p . 4 4 1 : " E s i s t b e i S h a k e s p e a r e k e i n Neb e n e i n a n d e r 1 a u f e n d e s
Dr a m a t i s ch-eKhe a t r a l i s c h e n , d e r e t h i s c h - p s y o h o l o g i s c h e n I d e e u n d
des Stiickes s e l b s t ,s o n d e rn d i e s e r V /id e r s tr e it i n d e rs e lb e n P e r­
s o n i s t z u g l e i c h d a s t h e a t r a l i s c h - d r a m ^ i s c h e T hem a u n d d e r K e m
d e r I d e e " . - 4 . i b i d , p . 214
 - 19 3 -
z w e i A ugen, durch w e lc h e d i e E in e S e e l e der t r a g i s c h e n I d e e

uns sc h m er z b e z a u b e r n d a n s i e h t ” ( l ) .

Such o b s e r v a t i o n s may w e l l h a v e had t h e i r r o o t i n Ludwig's

own e a r l y d r a m a tic p r a c t i c e . I n Das Fr&%lein v o n S p u d e r i

f o r e x a m p le , t h e problem o f how t o j o i n two s e p a r a t e p l o t s

t o form a c o h e r e n t w hole had b e e n p a r t l y s o l v e d by r e l a t i n g
them t o t h e same u n d e r l y i n g i d e a o f S o h e in und S p i n , w h ich

o c c u p i e d Ludwig so much d u r in g t h i s e a r l y p e r i o d . C on verse­

l y , i n D ie Makkab&er. i t w ould seem as thou gh t h e p l o t con­
c e r n in g E l e a z a r ' s t r e a s o n had b e e n i n v e n t e d by t h e a u th o r

w it h t h e e x p r e s s p u r p o se o f e m p h a s is in g t h i s same i d e a a l ­
r e a d y p r e s e n t i n J u d a h 's c h a r a c t e r ( 2 ) . That t h e I d e a was

o f a c t u a l a s s i s t a n c e t o Ludwig i n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h i s

p la y s i s p ro v ed by s t a t e m e n t s s u c h as t h e f o l l o w i n g ; w h ich
r e f e r s t o t h e 1856 v e r s i o n o f Agnes B e r n a u e r : "Ich s t e c k e

b i s d b er d i e Ohren i n meinem S t û c k e ; e n d l i c k h a b ' i c h e s

s o w e i t g e b r a c h t , d a s s m ir m ein Ged& chtnis denyyon e i n z e i ­

n en Zflgen, woraus m ein P la n b e s t e h t , so l e b h a f t w ie d e r v e r -
g e g e n w & r t ig t , d a ss i c h i h n zu e i n e r Anschauung m it H i l f e

d es Eadens und LSmpchens der I d e e im M i t t e l p u n k t e , zusam -

m eSŸassen h o f f e n darf" (3 )# H e n c e , Ludwig l a t e r demanded
J

t h a t t h e I d e a s h o u l d c o n s t i t u t e t h e v e r y b a s i s o f d r a m a tic

stru ctu re, and r e f e r r i n g o n ce a g a in t o t h e a r t o f m u s i c ,

Woxt ttijcx ùfu ïi% ;i.7 ,1 8 5 1 -5 5 . |
2 . I n t h e B i b l e s t o r y E l e a z a r was n e v e r a d e s e r t e r , b u t d i e d
a h e r o i c d e a th a t t h e s i e g e o f J e r u s a l e m . - 3 # L e t t e r t o B e r t
h o l d A u e r b a c h ,11 A p r i l 1 8 5 6 ;GS VI p . 3 8 8 .
 - 194 -
c la im e d t h a t , j u s t as h e r e t h e many v a r ia tio n s and m o d u la t io n
r e f e r b ack t o a c e n t r a l th e m e , s o t h e u n d e r l y i n g i d e a o f a

drama must become i t s c h i e f c o o r d i n a t i n g f a c t o r , p r o d u c in g

a s e n s e o f u n i t y and n e c e s s i t y ( l ). I t i s i t s c e n tr e o f gra­

v ity , it s " p l a s t i c la w " , t h e d r a m a t i s t ' s c h i e f means o f

t r a n s f o r m in g h i s m a t e r i a l i n t o a l i v i n g o r g a n ism . " S ie i s t

d i e h i n h e i t d es M a n n i g f a l t i g e n , d er S ta n d p u n k t, aus dem das

M a n n i g f a l t i g e s i c h a l s -E in h e it a n sch a u en I d s s t " ( 2 ) . F orget­

t i n g f o r t h e moment h i s own p a i n f u l s e a r c h i n g f o r t h e I d e a
and t h e o f t e n c o l d l y i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o c e s s w hich accom p an ied

i t , Ludwig i s h e r e b a s i n g d r a m a tic s t r u c t u r e upon a p r in ­

c i p l e w hich t r a n s c e n d s t h e m e r e ly t e c h n i c a l , th u s l i f t i n g

drama on t o a p la n e where even t h e m ost a c c o m p lis h e d

" craftsm an " must i n e v i t a b l y f a i l . By c a l l i n g t h e I d e a " d ie

H a u p tb ed in g u n g a l l e r W irkungen, das Band ohne w e lc h e s d i e

Wirkung i n Wirkungen z e r f a l l e n m u ss, d i e s i c h g e g e n s . e i t i g

au fh eb en " ( 3 ) , he com es, m o r e o v e r , c u r i o u s l y n e a r t o an

i n t e r e s t i n g d e f i n i t i o n by H e b b e l, f o r m u la t e d two or t h r e e

y e a r s l a t e r , i n 1 8 5 9 : ”B ie I de en s i n d im ibrama d a s s e l b e ,
was d er C o n tr a -P u n c t i n d er M usik; n i c h t s an s i c h , ab er

O rundbedingung f ü r A i l e s " (4 )#
W ithout t h i s c o n v i c t i o n o f t h e s u s t a i n i n g power o f t h e

I d e a , n e i t h e r H e b b e l* s nor L u d w ig 's c o n c e p t i o n o f d r a m a tic

s t r u c t u r e w ould b e c o m p le t e , b u t i n e a c h c a s e t h e i r c o n - ^
l.C f.G S V p p . 4 5 6 f . , 1 8 5 7 - 5 8 .- 2 .ib id .p .4 3 7 ,1 8 5 5 - 5 6 .- 3 # i b i d 4 .
4.T IV 5 6 9 5 , 1 A p r i l 1 8 5 9 .
 - 195 -

c e p t i o n a p p r o x im a te s t o an i d e a l and i s o n ly t o o f r e q u e n t l y
o v ersh a d o w ed by o t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . The c h i e f s t u m b lin g -
b l o c k i n Ludwig*s own d r a m a tic p r a c t i c e was d o u b t l e s s t h e
p r e o c c u p a t i o n w it h h i s m a t e r i a l and t h e c o n s t a n t r e s h a p in g

of it w it h o u t a p p a r en t i n n e r n e c e s s i t y . H is v e r y f i r s t p la y s

s u c h as t h e e a r l i e r v e r s i o n o f A/^nes B e rn a u e r abounded i n

a l l t h e p a r a p h e r n a l i a o f Sturm und Lrang i n t r i g u e s , w ith

t h e a c c e n t e n t i r e l y on w i l d m a c h in a t io n s and e x t e r n a l i t i e s

o f p lo t. "Las w ild e L i n g ” , h e l a t e r c a l l e d one o f t h e s e im-^

m atu re a t t e m p t s , b e i n g p a i n f u l l y aware o f i t s d e p lo r a b le

l a c k o f form , b u t q u i t e u n a b le t o e x e r t any e f f e c t i v e con ­

t r o l o v e r t h e "M ateria p ecc a n s" w hich seem ed t o d e f y i t s
v e r y c r e a t o r and ta k e p o s s e s s i o n o f him l i k e a d i s e a s e (l).

I & is d r a m a tic p r a c t i c e c o n s i s t e d o f a c e a s e l e s s p r o c e s s o f
s e l e c t i o n from a mass o f p o s s i b l e p l o t s , w hich o u s t e d a l l

s e r i o u s a t te m p ts to endow them w it h d ram a tic form . With t h e

a b s o r p t i o n i n S h a k e s p e a r e a n drama, h e t e n d e d , as we h a v e
s e e n , t© become i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e more e t h i c a l c o n t e n t ©f

h i s own p l a y s , i n p a r t i c u l a r i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n
g u i l t and p u n ish m e n t. But t h e in n u m e r a b le d i f f e r e n t p la n s

and u n f i n i s h e d v e r s i o n s o f a l l t h e s e l a t e r pLays amply p ro v e

t h a t t h e p rob lem o f f i n d i n g a s u i t a b l e pl#it i n w hich t o

c l o t h e t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p s t i l l r e m a in e d , and w it h i t th e
need & f ir m d r a m a tic s t r u c t u r e and t h e u n f u l f i l l e d

c r a v i n g f o r form#

1 . Of . L e t t e r t o Lduard L e v r i e n t , 5 L e e . 184-6 :GS VI p . 342#

 — 196 —

Y et i n t h i s v e r y f l e x i b i l i t y o f h i s m a t e r i a l t h e r e can b e

d e t e c t e d an e l e m e n t , w h ich i n t h e s u r e r hands ©f a more accom­

p l i s h e d d r a m a t is t m ig h t h a v e p r o v e d o f p o s i t i v e v a l u e i n t h i s

c o n n e c t i o n - an e le m e n t which was t o some e x t e n t l a c k i n g ±n

t h e work o f H e b b e l. T h is i s t h e c a p a c i t y f o r what S c h i l l e r , i i
a n o th e r c o n n e c t i o n , c a l l e d t h e " S p i e l t r i e b ", o r , mere p r e c i s e

l y , what Ludwig d e s c r i b e d as t h e a b i l i t y t o d e ta c h s u b j e c t

m a t t e r from a l l e x t e r n a l c o n d i t i o n s ( l ) and t o p l a c e i t w it h ­

o u t r e s e r v e i n t h e s e r v i c e o f form . The " e t h i c a l s e r i o u s n e s s "

w it h w hich H eb b el a p p ro a ch ed h i s dram as, t h e s e n s e o f a h i s t o ­

r i c a l m i s s i o n w hich t h e y w ere t o f u l f i l , o fte n ten d s in h is

t h e o r e t i c a l w r i t i n g s t o c lo u d any c o n s i d e r a t i o n s o f t h e more

fo r m a l a s p e c t s o f drama and t o endow h i s dr ama ttic s u b j e c t s

t© s u c h an e x t e n t w it h t h e u r g e n c y o f a "message" t h a t t h e
m o u ld in g o f them i n t o a t r u l y d ra m a tic s t r u c t u r e c o u ld i n

f a c t , b e n© s i m p l e p r o c e s s . That H e b b el was n o t unaware o f

t h i s and y e t f e l t a b le t o j u s t i f y i t i s shown by h i s c l a im
i n t h e P r é f a c é t # M a ria M agd alena t h a t i n h e r o i c t r a g e d y (a s

o p p o se d t o t h e t r a g e d y o f common l i f e ) " d ie Schw cre d es S t o f -

fes, das G ew icht der s i c h u n m i t t e l b a r d aran k n ü p fen d en H e f l e -

% ionen"to a c e r t a i n e x t e n t made amends f o r d e f i c i e n c i e s i n

t r a g i c form ( 2 ) . At b e s t t h e p a r t i c u l a r q u a l i t y o f d r a m a tic
1 .C f.G S V p #4 1 2 : "Bin Drama muss vollkommen g e s c h l o s s e n und v©3f
kemmen d u r c h s i c h t i g s e i n . Das macht d i e vollkom m ene L o slU su n g
##m S t o f f e s v o n S u s s e r n B e d in g u n g c n n ë t i g . B g muss s e i n e B e d in
g u n g en a l l e i n s i c h s e l b e r h ab en und w ir m üssen das s e h e n " .
2.W XI p 6 3 f . C f . a l s o H e b b el *s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c rem ark: "Man w ir f t
m ir z u w e i l e n & o h w e r f & lli g k e it des D i a l o g s v o r und v e r l a n g t
i h n f l i e s s e n d e r . D a r a u f a n tw o r t e i c h : d a s Wasser w i r f t d i e weni,
s t e n B i a s en a u f , i n dem $(eine F i s c h e schwimmen"-T I I I 3 8 2 4 , ^
2 9 N o v .1846
 - 197 -

s t r u c t u r e must a lw ay s be d i c t a t e d by t h e n a t u r e o f t h e ma­

t e r i a l and s h o u l d o n ly be ju d g ed i n r e l a t i o n t o i t (l).
T h is d oes n o t , h o w e v e r , e x c l u d e t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r a p e r f e c t

f u s i o n b e tw e e n c o n t e n t and form , and H e b b e l, aware o f a

d a n g ero u s c l e a v a g e i n h i s own work i n t h i s r e s p e c fe , more

th a n o n ce r e f e r s t o t h e d i f f i c u l t y w hich h e e x p e r i e n c e i i n

r e c o n c i l i n g t h e tw o , im p ly in g t h a t i t was o f t e n overcom e

o n l y by a c o n s c i o u s a r t i s t i c e f f o r t ( 2 ) . Y et a lt h o u g h l i g h t
n e s s o f t o u c h , th r o u g h detactim ent from and e v e n a c e r t a i n

a r t i s t i c i n d i f f e r e n c e tow ards h i s m a t e r i a l a r e q u a l i t i e s
w h ich H e b b e l* s d r a m a tic s t r u c t u r e o f n e c e s s i t y l a c k e d , i t s

v e r y c o n e i s e n e s s and a b s o l u t e s i m p l i c i t y has a p e c u l i a r

appeal o f i t s own, w hich i s i n no s m a l l m easu re due t o t h e

s e l f - a s s u r a n c e , c o n s i s t e n c y and i n e x o r a b l e s e n s e o f p u rp ose
r e v e a l e d i n h i s t h e o r y o f d ra m a tic form .

The f r a g m e n ta r y c h a r a c t e r o f m ost o f Ludwig *s work t e l l s

a v e r y d i f f e r e n t s t o r y , w hich i s c h a r a c t e r i s e d by a con­
s t a n t t e n s i o n b e tw e e n h i s i d e a l o f d r a m a tic s t r u c t u r e and

h i s own e f f o r t s t o a t t a i n t o i t . On t h e one hand h e »aw

t h e m a s s iv e o rg a n ism o f a S h a k e s p e a r e a n p la y w hich seem ed

t o him n o t o n l y t o h a v e a c h i e v e d a t r u e u n io n o f form and

c o n t e n t ^ b u t t o h a v e , as i t w e r e , overcom e t h e o f t e n t r i v i a ]
1 . C f . r e v i e w o f H . ^ t n e r ’s A ndreas H o f e r , 1849:W XI p . 2 7 9 .
2 . C f .L e t t e r t o L . G u r l i t t .2® May 184-7tB r.IV p . 2 6 : " I c h t h e i l g
d i e SekwJlche S c h i l l e r s , d e r J a h r e b e d u r f t e ,u m S t o f f und Fora
m it e i n a n d e r zu v e r s S h n e n ”#
 - 198 -
o r u n p l e a s a n t subq^eot m a tt e r by a m a s te r y o f d r a a ia tic compo­
sitio n ( l ) ; on t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e r e was t h e s p e c t a c l e o f tlB

a c c u m u la tio n o f h i s own s h a p e l e s s p l a n s , g i v i n g r i s e t o one

a l t e r a t i o n a f t e r th e o t h e r . " W ill i c h n i c h t gan z neue A r b e i t

m achen, muss i c h m anches vo n jenem c o m p l i c i e r t e n G e t r ie b e

m it i n s Neue aufnehmen - und damit am Ende das G anze, denn

das Zeug i s t so v e r w a c h se n u n t e r s i c h , d a ss man n i c h t s è o s —

bekommt, ohne das Ganze zu z e r r e i s s e n ” ( 2 ) . Thus r a n Lud­

w i g ^ u s u a l argum ents a t t h e end o f a lo n g and w eary r o a d ,

and what i n 184o had seem ed s o e a s y , nam ely to c o l l e c t a

w e a lt h o f m a t e r i a l and t h e n t o u n i t e i t w it h b e a u t y o f form

( 3 ) , was to re m a in p e r p e t u a l l y o u t o f h i s rea ch *

However t h i s may b e , t h e problem o f d ra m a tic sh a p e was i ï

t h e c a s e o f b o t h d r a m a t i s t s a v e r y r e a l o n e , i f o n ly

b e c a u s e o f i t s v e r y i n t i m a t e b e a r i n g upon t h e i r own work.

A lth o u g h n e i t h e r o f them h a v e b e e n s e e n to o f f e r any c l e a r -

c u t d e f i n i t i o n s , b o th H e b b e l* s f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e s t o form

i n g e n e r a l and L u d w ig 's d i l i g e n t e x a m in a t io n o f i t s many

f a c e t s i n c o m p o s i t i o n do i n f a c t add up t o a c l e a r l y d i s t i n ­

g u is h a b le c o n c e p tio n o f th e q u a l i t y o f d ra m a tic s t r u c t u r e *

But t h e p o i n t s o f c o n t a c t b e tw e e n t h e i r t h e o r i e s a r e f e w ,
and n o t h in g i n f a c t shows more c l e a r l y t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c

d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e i r ap p roach t o t h e p r i n c i p l e s and m ethods

u n d e r ly in g the c o n s tr u c tio n o f p la y s .

l * C f , ^ V p . 2 7 o . - 2 * L e t t e r t o J .G .W e t z s t e in ,M a y /J u n e 1 8 4 3 ;
(B r i e f e . e d . c i t *p *7 5 » - 3 * O f . L e t t e r t o C h r .O t t e , 1 8 March
164-q : ~ i b i d *p*29*
 - 199 -

CONCLUSION

The g e n e r a l p i c t u r e w hich em erges from t h e p r e s e n t cemr-

p a r i s p n o f some m ajor a s p e c t s o f H eb b el and Ludw ig*s dra­

m a t ic t h e o r y i s a com plex o n e . # i i l s t f o r muck o f t h e tim e

t h e i r v ie w s have b e e n s e e n t o ru n p a r a l l e l , w i t h v a r y i n g

d e g r e e s o f d i s t a n c e b e tw e e n them , at some p o i n t s t h e y h a v e

a lm o s t c o n v e r g e d , and a g a in a t o t h e r s h a v e c r o s s e d s h a r p l y

and g o n e t h e i r s e p a r a t e w a y s, The q u e st a f t e r p e r f e c t i o n
on w hich t h e y w ere en g a g ed was ^ l o n g and d i f f i c u l t , and
a lt h o u g h t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e i r a c h ie v e m e n t d i f f e r e d g r e a t l y ,

n e i t h e r o f them would h a v e c la im e d to h a v e r e a c h e d t h e end

o f h is jounmey# A c o n c l u s i v e e s t i m a t e o f t h e i r d r a m a tic

th eory i s t h e r e f o r e d i f f i c u l t t o make, e s p e c i a l l y as i t

lie s i n t h e n a t u r e o f any a n a l y s i s , and i n p a r t i c u l a r o f

an a n a l y s i s ©f p o e t i c t h e o r i e s , th a t a f i n a l s y n th e s is i s

n o t e a s i l y a r r i v e d a t - u n l e s s i t be s o u g h t i n t h e c r e a t i v e

work from w hich t h e s e t h e o r i e s h a v e sp ru n g or to w hich

th ey are u lt i m a t e ly d ire cted #

For t h e w r i t e r o r d r a m a t is t h i m s e l f , o c c u p i e d w it h t h e

t h e o r y o f h i s a r t , t h i s p r a c t i c a l b a s i s i s o f paramount
im p o r t a n c e , b u t e v e n s o t h e prob lem o f s y n t h e s i s i s a very
r e a l o n e . The m easu re i n w hich H eb b el and Ludwig w ere a b le

to s o lv e i t r e v e a ls a n o t ic e a b le d iffe r e n t^ h ig h ly s i g n i f i ­

c a n t f o r t h e i r g e n e r a l ap proach t o drama. T o r tu r e d by h i s

own a c u t e s e n s e ©f v a l u e s , Ludwig h i m s e l f c h a r a c t e r i s e s
 — 20# —

t h e problem on a page o f t h e S h a k es pe a r e s t u d i e n ; "Der Ge-

f a h r an at ©mis Chen S tad iu m s fü r den K fin s tle r muss i c h e n t s a -

g e n , wenn n i c h t gen u g S a n z h e i t d er Anschauung mehr i n m ir

ü b r ig i s t , s i e zu ilb e r w in d e n ” ( l ) . W h ils t much o f t h e f a s ­

c i n a t i o n and i n t e r e s t o f h i s w r i t i n g s l i e s p r e c is e ly in
L u d w ig 's p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r d e t a i l and h i s k e e n a p p r e c i a t i o n

o f t h e more m in u te s u b t l e t i e s o f d r a m a tic a r t , t h e y l a c k
a c e r t a i n c o h e s i o n and do n o t alw ays s u c c e e d i n c o n v e y in g

a s e n s e o f t h e w h o le n e s s o f drama. U n c e r t a i n as he was o f

h i m s e l f a t e v e r y s t a g e , h e t u r n e d t o S h a k e s p e a r e , and p i e c i

by p i e c e exam in ed h i s p l a y s , t h e r e b y t e n d in g t o l ^ e sig h t
o c c a s i o n a l l y o f t h e m a r v e l l o u s l y com p lex m o s a ic o f h i s

m a s t e r ' s a c h ie v e m e n t as a whole#

"D ie K o n s t ”, H e b b e l w r o te t® h i s f r i e n d H ^ f h .h f it s c h e r ,

"mit der S i e d i e C o m p o sitio n z e r l e g e n und w ied er zusammen

s e t z e n , ohne d a ss s i c h d ie F&den e i n e i n z i g e s Mai v e r w i r -

r e n , j a , i c h m Schte s a g e n , ohne d a s s d ie N erv en und A dern

d es d er O berhaut e n t k l e i d e t e n O rganism us auch nur e i n e n

A u g e n b lic k zu zu ck en a u fh S r e n , i s t b ew u n d eru n g sw ü rd ig ” (2 )#

I f L u d w ig 's w r i t i n g s do n o t a lw a y s r i s e t o s u c h a s t a n d - i

a r d , h i s a p p ro ach was y e t n e v e r t h a t o f t h e mere c r a ft s m a n

'oad t h e manner o f h i s a n a l y s i s b e in g one o f g r e a t i n s i g h t

1 # C i t e d from an u n p u b lis h e d MS ©f t h e S h a k e s n e a r e s t u d i e n
by H#Lttcke,o p # c i t #p#)t^7#- 2 # 2 ? ^ e o #1 8 4 7 I V p # 7 o .
 — 2®1 —

and s e n s i t i v i t y , a lw a y s a v o id in g t h e danger o f g l i b generar-

lisa tie n ÿ * I t is c l e a r , on t h e o t h e r h an d , t h a t H eb b el *s

t a s k was g r e a t l y f a c i l i t a t e d by h i s l e s s mi nut A n a l y t i c a l

t u r n o f m ind. L e s s Hampered th a n h i s con tem p ora ry by m i s g i v ­

i n g s ab o u t e v e r y s t e p i n h i s own c r e a t i v e p r o c e s s e s , he had
from an e a r l y age d e v e l o p e d a more c o m p r e h e n siv e v ie w o f

h i s a r t , and t h e a b i l i t y to form g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n s i s th e
mark o f a l l h i s c r i t i c a l work. Even when h e c o n c e r n s him­
s e l f w it h t h e i n d i v i d u a l a s p e c t s o f drama, i t i s a lw a y s -

e i t h e r e x p l i c i t l y o r by i m p l i c a t i o n - w ith r e f e r e n c e t o a

l a r g e r w h o le , f o r t h e drama was f o r him c o n c e i v a b l e o n l y as

an i n d i s s o l u b l e e n t i t y . W hatever t h e t o p i c o f h i s d e l i b e ­

r a t i o n s , t h e r e f o r e , t h e c o n v i c t i o n t h a t i t had t o b e r e ­

duced t o fu n d a m en ta l p r i n c i p l e s i s e v i d e n t th r o u g h o u t Heb­

b e l *s d r a m a tic t h e o r y , endow ing i t w it h d e p th and a s e n s e

o f f i n a l i t y w h o l l y a b s e n t from L udw ig*s e n d l e s s s e a r c h i n g s .

I f H e b b e l* s t h e o r e t i c a l work show s l i t t l e regard for

m atters o f d e t a i l , i t i s b e c a u s e h e was c o n c e r n e d , n o t w i t h
t e c h n i q u e , b u t r a t h e r w it h t h e u l t i m a t e q u a l i t y o f drama

as t h e suprem e form o f a r t . P r o c e e d in g from a c l e a r c o n v i c ­

t i o n ab out t h e p r i n c i p l e s by w hich i t i s g o v e r n e d , he a?aw

h i s d u ty i n t h e p u r su a n ce and d e f e n c e o f i t s l o f t y aims and

i n t h e co n d em n a tio n and r e j e c t i o n o f e v e r y t h i n g , i n wkiat—
To
e v e r form i t m ig h t m a n i f e s t i t s e l f , w hich r a n c o u n te r ^ th e m .

The manner o f r e a l i s i n g t h e s e aim s m ig h t d i f f e r — and Heb­

b e l h i m s e l f , wkiile o u t l i n i n g h i s own m e th o d s , s t u d i e d c l o s e
 — 2o 2 —

ly t h e d i f f e r e n c e s o f approach a d o p te d by s u c c e s s i v e g e n e ­

r a t i o n s o f d ram atist», b u t t h e f i n a l e f f e c t - H ebb el *s m ain

c r i t e r i o n - m ust a lw a y s a p p r o x im a te t o t h e h i g h e s t s t a n d a r d s
o f a r t . T h ese were o f s u c h v i t a l im p o r ta n c e t o him and a re

s t a t e d w it h su ch r e p e a t e d em p h asis t h a t undue s i g n i f i c a n c e
a p p e a rs so m etim es t o be a t t a c h e d b y him to c o n s i d e r a t i o n s
o f an e s s e n t i a l l y a b s t r a c t n a t u r e . R e f e r e n c e s t o h i s own

p l a y s as w e l l as numerous comments upon o t h e r d ra m a tists, i t

is t r u e , show t h a t t h e demands o f d ra m a d c jp r e se n ta tio n w ere

a lw a y s paramount i n h i s m ind, b u t t h e s e a r e o f t e n t a k e n f o r

g r a n t e d and t h e danger o f o v e r - i n t e l l e c t u a l i s i n g c e r t a i n

p rob lem s i s n e t a lw a y s a v o id e d i n h i s t h e o r e t i c a l w r i t i n g s .
L u d w ig, on t h e o t h e r h a n d , r a r e l y a llo w e d h i s mind t o be

c lo u d e d by p r e o c c u p a tio n s » w ith t h e d eep er prob lem s r e l a t i n g

t© t h e m ean ing and p u r p o se o f h i s a r t . B u t , i n t e r e s t e d as

h e was i n t h e m ethods o f d r a m a tic a r t , h e was d o n t i n u a l l y

a l i v e to t h e p e c u l i a r c o n d i t i o n s o f drama. H is c a r e f u l d i s ­
t i n c t i o n s b e tw e e n t h e k in d o f t r e a t m e n t im posed by t h e no­
v e l and t h e drama r e s p e c t i v e l y g i v e ample p r o o f o f h i s acu­

t e d is c e r n m e n t . J u s t as t h e s e d i s t i n c t i o n s a r e b a s e d on t h e

judgm ent g a i n e d from p r a c t i c a l e x p e r i e n c e , so t h e w hole o f

Ludwig *s d r a m a tic t h e o r y i s c h a r a c t e r i s e d by h i s power o f

o b s e r v a t i o n and h i s c o n s t a n t r e g a r d f o r t h e demands ©f t h e
l i v i n g s t a g e . Mis p rim ary c o n c e r n was t h e a b i l i t y t o c r e ­
a t e th r o u g h t h e medium o f t h e t h e a t r e t h e d e e p e s t and m ost
v i v i d i m p r e s s i o n p o s s i b l e , and w h e th e r i n c o n n e c t i o n w it h
 - 2# 3 -

h i s wp&n w ork, w it h S h a k e s p e a r e , or w ith t h e drama i n g e n e ­

r a l, t h i s c o n s t i t u t e d th r o u g h o u t h i s t h e o r e t i c a l work h i s
c h ie f c r ite r io n *

The q u e s t i o n w hich Ludwig th u s c o n t i n u a l l y a s k e d h i m s e l f

was : how d o es S h a k e s p e a r e o b t a i n h i s p o w e r fu l e f f e c t s ? and
i n h i s own d r a m a tic p r a c t ix e e : how ca n I p r e s e n t my ch a r a c ­

t e r s i n t h e m ost d r a m a tic manner and w it h o u t l o s i n g any o f

th e v ig o r o u s q u a l i t y o f t h e i r i n i t i a l c o n c e p t io n ? In con­

t r a s t t o t h i s , H e b b e l* s d r a m a tic t h e o r y i s d evoted c h i e f l y

to t h e i n n e r c o n t e n t o f drama, i t s p r o b le m a t ic a s p e c t s #

H is d i a r i e s and c o r r e s p o n d e n c e i n p a r t i c u l a r p r o v id e t h e
answ er t o t h e q u e s t i o n a s t o how h e f e l t b e s t a b l e t o i n ­

c o r p o r a t e i n d r a m a tic form t h e i d e a s and problem s w hich

o c c u p i e d h i s mind and p r o v id e d t h e f i n a l im p etu s to drama­

t i c p r o d u c t i o n . That t h i s w a s, h o w e v e r , no p u r e l y i n t e l l e c ­

t u a l p r o c e s s , h a s b e e n b o rn e o u t a g a in and a g a in by t h e
fa c t th at h is t h e o r e t i c a l s t a t e m e n t s were alw ays made with^

c l o s e r e f e r e n c e t o h i s own p l a y s , and t h e f u l l i m p l i c a t i o n

o f c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e s became c l e a r to him o n l y as a r e s u l t

o f h i s d r a m a tic p r a c t i c e . As each s u c c e s s i v e s t a g e i n Heb­

b e l *s c a r e e r as a p r a c t i s i n g d r a m a t is t c o n s t i t u t e d a new

p h aye i n h i s d e v e lo p m e n t, t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s d e ep en ed and i n
t u r n made demands upon hj_s work w hich h e was n o t alw a ys

a b le to f u l f i l # But s u c h was H eb b el *s s e r i o u s n e s s and h i ^

s e n s e o f d u ty to w a rd s h i s a rt th a t he c o n tin u e d t o a ffir m
t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s w it h a l l t h e power o f h i s c o n v i c i t i o n s :
 — 2o 4 —
”w e i l e s n i e u n e h r e n h a f t s e y n kann, wenn e i n n i c h t ganz unr-
b e r u f e n e s In d iv ià u u m ohne e g o i s t i s c h e Neben—H ftc k s io h te n an
P r i n c i p i e n f e s t h S l t , b e i denen es s d b s t zu k u rz kommt" ( l ),

I n L u d w ig 's c a s e t h i s problem o f t h e in a d e q u a c y o f h i s
p r a c t i c a l a c h ie v e m e n t i n c o m p a riso n w ith h i s t h e o r e t i c a l

s t a n d a r d s was much more a c u t e , and h i s ex tre m e c o n s c i o u s ­

n e s s o f h i s #wn m i s t a k e s u n d e r l i e s t h e w hole o f h i s drama­

t i c th e o r y # I'h is t e n d e d on t h e w hole to make him b l i n d t o

t h e more v a l u a b l e a s p e c t s o f t h e p la y s b e l o n g i n g t o h i s
o
s p o n t a n e o u s p e r i o d , and i n s t e a d o f ack n ow led gin g th e im p o r t

a n t i n f l u e n c e upon t h e y were bound to e x e r t upon h i s g e n e ­

r a l v ie w o f drama, h e l o o k e d e x c l u s i v e l y t o h i s t h e o r e t i c a l

work to l a y t h e f o u n d a t io n f o r h i s r e a l i s t i c t r a g e d y o f

t h e f u t u r e # T h is t e n d e n c y to w a rd s b e l i t t l i n g h i s own e f f o r l
had i n t u r n a r e s t r i c t i v e upon h i s c r i t i c a l f a c u l ­

tie s, and meant t h a t h i s t h e o r y o f drama, th ou gh g i v i n g

t h e a p p e a ra n ce o f g reat er m a t u r i t y th a n h i s p r a c t i c e and

s e e m in g to mkke t o o h i g h demands upon h i s t a l e n t , d id i n

f a c t n o t a lw a y s k eep p a ce w it h t h e m ethods t o be o b s e r v e d

i n su ch c o m p a r a t i v e l y e a r l y p l a y s as Per E r b f f l r s t e r ^^

Y et i t w ould c l e a r l y b e f a l s e t o a s s e r t t h a t i n h i s pre.

o c c u p a t i o n w ith t h e g r e a t e s t d r a m a t is t o f a l l t im e s Lud­

w ig a l t o g e t h e r e f f a c e d h i s own i n d i v i d u a l i t y # S h a k e s p e a r e ,

it is t r u e , became more and more f o r him t h e o n ly p o s s i b l e

l # L e t t e r to Lm il P a l l e s k e , 23 June 1 8 4 7 :Br#lV p . 39#
 — 2o 5
m odel o f p e r f e c t i o n , and t h e m e a s u r i n g - s t i c k w ith w hich to

gauge th e d ram atic achievem ents of past and p r e s e n t . But h i s

w o r s h i p was n e v e r an end i n itse lf; it was t h e m eans o f f u l ­

fillin g a su b je ctiv e need, and th e q u estio n s d is c u s s e d w ith

such ceaseless d e v o tio n in th e S h ak e sp ea re-S tu d ie n are the

q u estio n s w hich w ere o f t h e u tm o s t u r g e n c y and r e le v a n c e for

L u d w i g ’s own d r a m a t i c w o r k , h i s w ritin g s are in fa c t no l e s s

th e e x p ressio n o f h is own p e r s o n a l aim s and p r e ju d ic e s than

th e s e e m i n g ly m ore i n d e p e n d e n t th e o re tic a l w ork o f h i s con-

te m p o ra i'y .

In h is c o n c e p tio n o f a book i n rh a p s o d ic sty le on Shake­

s p e a r e H eb b el h a d e n v is a g e d t h e m ethod o f what he calle d a

"sp e cu la tiv e th eo lo g ian " in c o n tra st to th at of a "p riest at

th e a lta r". "Wenn i c h daran g in g e " , he d e c la re d , " s o w S r e mia

Shakespeare n a tiirlich n u r Neb e n - u n d d a s D r a m a s e l b s t H a u p t -

s a c h e " ( l ). It m ig h t be s a i d t h a t L u d w ig 's t h e o r e t i c a l w ork

com bined b o th k in d s o f approach, t h a t he e x a lte d Shakespea­

rean dram a above a l l e lse, w h ilst at th e same t im e - and a l ­

m ost w ith o u t know ing i t - p reserv in g h is personal sc a le of

v a lu es and h i s own c r i t i c a l judgm ent. H is concern fo r th e

d r a m a i n g e n e r a l was a s deep as t h a t o f H eb b el, though n e i ­

th er o f them - by v i r t u e of th eir personal p reo ccu p atio n

w ith th e problem s o f t h e i r art - co u ld la y claim to any r e a l

m easure o f o b j e c t i v i t y tow ards it.

The v a l u e of th e ir d ram atic th eo ry lie s in i t s co n sisten ­

cy o f p u rp o s e and i n th e v ery h ig h sta n d a rd s w hich i t esta­

b lish e d at a t i m e when t h e s t a t u s o f t h e German d ram a

!• T II 2414, 30. Dec- 1841.
 — 2©6 —

was r a p i d l y d e c l i n i n g . Jtt®©ted a s t h e y w e r e i n th e trad itie ié

©f th e p a s t and y e t b e a r in g w ith in them t h e u n m i s t a k a b l e

seeds o f a m ore m o d ern e r a , b o th in sp irit and form , th eir

com bined v iew s c o n stitu te an im p o r ta n t facto r in th e su b se­

quent developm ent o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e of th eir c o u n try . Thou^

t h e i r means w e re v e r y d ifferen t and th e m anner o f t h e i r

approach o f te n d iam etrica lly opposed, in th eir im m ediate

end o f p e r f e c t i n g th eir in d iv id u al ta le n t as w e ll as i n

t h e i r m ore g e n e r a l in te n tio n of p lacin g th e dram a on a s u ­

rer fo o tin g w ith o u t im p airin g i t s fun d am en tal v a lu e s , they

h a d n e c e s s a r i l y much i n common. C o m b i n e d w i t h t h e im ag in a­

tio n , v isio n and e x p e rie n c e of th e creativ e artist, the re ­

su lts of th eir p en etratin g judgm ent and s e n s i t i v e observa­

tio n throw i n a ll th eir d iv ersity an i n t e r e s t i n g sid e -lig h i

on th e problem s and d i f f i c u l t i e s facin g n o t on ly th e n in e ­

te e n th cen tu ry d ra m a tist, b u t, to some e x t e n t at lea st, anj

poet o f th e th e a tre .
 S E L E C T B I B L I Q G K A P H._ Y

I. W orks, D iaries, and C o rresp o n d en ce.

H ebbel, E . ;
S S m m t l i c h e 'W erk e. H i s t o r i s c h - K r i t i s c h e A a s g a b e b e s o r g t
v o n i i. M . W e r n e r . B e r l i n , 1 9 1 1 f f .
A b t . I : W erke. 12 v o l s .
A b t . I I : T agebdcher. 4 v o ls.
A b t.III;B rie fe . 8 v o ls.
Anlriang ( L e s a r t e n u n d A n m e r k u n g e n ) 4 v o l s .

Neue H e b b e ld o k u m e n te , e d . D . K r a e l i k and E. Lem m erm eyer.

B e r l i n a n d L e i p z i g , 1913*

L udw ig, 0 . :
N a c h l a s s s c h r i f te n O tto L udw igs, e d . M o ritz H e y d ric h .
L e ip z ig , 1874.
v o l. I : S k i z z e n u n d E rag:niente
v o l. I I : S h ak esp eare-S tu d ien

C e d a n k e n O t t o L u d w i g s ; Aus s e i n e m N a c h l a s s a u s g e w S h l t ; ^
u nd h e r a u s g e g e b e n v o n C o r d e l i a L udw ig. L e i p z i g , 190 3 .

S S m t l i c h e Werke^g U n t e r M i t w i r k u n g d e s G o e t h e - u n d S c h i l l e r —
A r c h i v s i n V e r b i n d u n g m i t H . - H . B o r c h e r d t , C. H 8 s e ,
J . P e te r s e n , E x p e d itu s S o W i d t , 0. W alzel, h e ra u sg e ­
g e b e n v on P. M e rk e r. 6 v o l s . M ünchen an d L e i p z i g ,
1912 f f .

W erke. K r i t i s c h d u r c h g e s e h e n e ^ u n d e r l â u t e r t e A usgabe v o n
V ik to r S ch w eizer. 3 v o ls . L e ip z ig an dW ien»», 1896.

G esam m elte S c h r i f t e n . H e ra u s g e g e b e n v o n A d o lf S t e r n . 6 v o ls.

L e ip z ig , 1891.

B r i e f e — im A u f t r a g e d e s G o e t h e — u n d S c h i l l e r - A r c h i v s h e r —
a u s g e g e b e n v o n K u r t V o g t h e r . v o l . I ( 1 8 3 4 - 1 8 4 7 ) . W eim ar,
1935.
L d c k e , H, : * M i t t h e i l u n g e n a u s O t t o L u d w i g *s l i t e r a r i s c h e m N a c h ­
l a s s * i n P r e u s s i s o h e Jaifirbftcher. X Z I I .B d ., 4 . H e f t . B e r l i n ,
1868.
 II. C ritic a l W o rk s d e l a t i n g to F r ie d r ic h H ebbel
and O tto L udw ig.

A d a m s , A* : O t t o L udwi;< s T h e o r i e des D ram as. L i s s . O reifsw ald ,

1912 .
A lt, C .: ‘S c h i l l e r ’s u n d O t t o L u d w i g s S s t h e t i s c h e G r u n d s & t z e
u n d L u d w i g ’s S c h i l l e r k r i t i k ’ i n L u p h o r i o n . X I I
(1 905) L e ip z ig .

H o rn stein , P . : F rie d ric h H ebbels P e r s ë n l i c h k e i t . G e sp râ ch e ,

U rteile, L rin n eru n g en . 2 v o ls . B e r lin , 1924.
B runs, F , : F r i e d r i c h H ebbel und O tto L udw ig. F i n V e r g le ic h
i h r e r A ns i c h t e n l ü b e r d a s L r a m a . B e r l i n . 1 9 1 3 *
L o s e n l i e i m e r , S . : Das z e n t r a l e P r o b l e m i n d e r T r a g é d i e F r i e d ­
r i c h H e b b e ls. H a lle , 1925.
F isch er, B. : O t t o L u d w i g s T r a u e r s p i e l p l a n ’P e r S a n d w i r t v o n
P a s s e i e r ^ u nd s e i n V e r h S l t n is zu den Sohkesneare-
s t u d i e n . P i s s . G reifsw ald ^ IQ I6 .
F r e s d o r f , H. : t p a e r L u d w i g ’s P r a m e n t e c h n i k (le ild ru c k ). P iss.
F tr a s s b u r g , 1915.
F r i e d e m a n n , K. : ’O t t o L u d w i g im xtahmen s e i n e r Z e i t ’ i n Z e i t —
s c h r i f t f ü r den d e u ts c h e n U n t e r r i c h t y X X lîII.B d .4 .H e f t .
(1 9 1 4 ) L e i p z i g .
G eo rg y , F.A . : P ie T r a g é d ie F r i e d r i c h H e b b els n a ch ih rem I de en
;? e h a lt. 2 te A u flag e . L e ip z ig , 1911.
G r all am, P . G . : ’T h e h e l a t i o n o f H i s t o r y a n d D r a m a i n t h e W ork s
o f F r i e H .H e b b e l ’ i n S m ith C o lle g e S t u d i e s i n M odern
L an g u a g e s. v o l . 15. n o .12. N ortham pton, M a s s a c h u s e tts ,
1934.
G r e i n e r , W. : O t t o L u d w i g . F i p c l e u t s c h e s P i c h t e r l e b e n . W e i m a r ,
1958.
H agen, W, : T h e o r i e u n d P r a x i s b e i H e b b e l . P i s s . F r l a n g e n , 1 9 0 9,
H o ll, K. : ’O t t o L u d w i g - P r o b l e m e ’ i n Ge r m a n i s c h - H o m a n i s c h e
M o n a t s s c h r i f t . V I . (1 9 1 4 ) H e i d e l b e r g .
K r a e g e r , H. : ’F n t w f l r f e O t t o L u d w i g s z u e i n e m H e r m a n n s d r a m a * ■
i n G erm anische S t u d i e n . H e ft 79. (1929) B e r l i n .

— *Otto L u d w ig s G e n o v e v a - F r a g m e n t e ’ i n F u u h o r i o n . V I .
(19Ô9) L e i p z i g .
K„b, E. : '« f-
K u l k e , E . : E r i n n e r u n j ^ e n a n i T r i e d r i c h H e b b e l , V /ien, 1878,

K u t s c h e r , A , : F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l a l s K r i t i k e r d e s Dramas - sein e
K r i t i k u n d i3rire B e d e u t u n ^ ^ B e r l i n . 1 9 ^ 7 .

— H e b b e l u n d G ra b b e . M ünchen and B e r l i n , 1913.

U nder, H. : Das t e c h n i s c h e P r o b l e m v o n Q r t u n d 2 , e i t i n den ftra-

m e n u n d d r a m a t i s c h e n T h e o r i e n Qtt) L u d w i g s . D is s «
B a s e l, 1918.

L oow enstein, A. ; T h e S o u r c e s o f H e b b e l *s 'A ^n es B e r n a u e r \

C am bridge, 1 9 0 9.

M einck, H . : F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l s u n d R i c h a r d W agners N i b e l u n ^ e n
T r i l o g i e ( B r e s l a u e r Beitjfcfr&^e z u r l i t e r a t u r ^ e s c h i cl
t e , 5 ) . L e i p z i g , 190 5.

M e y e r , K.M* : 'O tt o L udw igs S h a k e s p e a r e s tu d i u m ^ i n J a h r b u c h d e r

d e u t s ch e n B h a k e s j e a r e - G e s e l l s c h a f t , 2 7 » ^ akirg.
T IW l) B e rlin .

M is , L . : L es 'É tu d e s s u r S h a k e s p e a r e ' d 'O t t o Ludw ig - E x posées

dans un o r d r e m éth o d iq u e e t p r e c e dees dtune i n t r o d u c ­
t io n l i t t é r a i r e . L i l l e , 1922.

— Les O euvres D ram atiq u es d 'O tto L udvjig. 2 v o l s . L ille ,

1922 .
N a g l e r , A. : ' H e b b e l u n d d i e Mus i k ' i n V e r e i n s s c h r i f t e n d e r
C f ir r e s - C e s e lls c h a f t, n o .2 .~ 3 o n n , 1928.

P é tri, J . : D er A ^ n e s B e r n a u e r - S t o f f im d e u t s c h e n D ram a, u n t e r
b e s o n d e r e r B er&cï{s i c h t i ^ u n ^ v o n O . L u d w i ^ s h a n d -
s c h r iftlic h e m N a ch la ss. D iss. B e r lin , 1892.

P l a c z e k , H . Vc : ' D a s h i s t o r i é c h e B r a m a z u r Z e i t H e b b e l s ' i n
G erm anische B t u d i e n . H e ft 62. (1928) B e r l i n .

Purd ie, E , : F r i e d r ic h H ebbel. A S tudy o f H is L if e a n d W ork.

London 1932.

H eeS jG .B . : F r i e d r i c h H e b b el as a D ra m a tic A r t i s t .L ondon. 1930.

H i c h t e r , F. : O t t o L udw igs T r a u e r s n i e l n l a n 'T i b e r i u s G ra c c h u s *

u n d s e i n Z iu sam m en h an g m i t d e n B h a k e s p e a r e - S t u d i e n .
B iss . B re s la u , 1935.

H osenbusch, A. : D i e T a g e b ü c h e r F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l s . E in V ersu ch
j J a r e r B e u t u n g . W eim ar, 1 9 3 5 .
S c h a p i e r e , A. : *Zu H e b b e l s A n s c h a u u n g e n f i b e r K u n s t u n d k ü n s t
l e r i s c h e s S c h a f f e n ’ i n A r c h l y ffbr s v s t e m a t i s c h e P h i l o s o ­
p h i e ^ I I . A b t . X I I I . B d , H e f t 2. ( l 9 o 7 ) B e r l i n .

B c h e u n e r t, A . ; P e r P a n tr a g is m u s a l s B ystem d e r W e lta n sc h a u ­
u n g land A s t h e t i k F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l s . H a m b u r g a n d L e i p z i g ,
19© 3*

S c J r i m i d t - O b e r l S s s n i t z , W. : O t t o L u d w i ^ - B t u d i e n * I . B a n d . P i e
M Akkab&er. L i n e U n t e r s u c h u n g d e s I ' r a u e r s p i e l p l a n s u n d s e i ­
n e r u n g e d i'u c k te n V o r a r b e i t e n . . . L e i p z i g , 19o8.

B ch m itt, S .: H ebbels P ram atechnik, Portm und, 19o7.

5 ie b u rg , H .; P ie V o rg esch ich te der L rb fS rste r-T ra g B d ie v ea

O tto L udw ig. B e r lin ^ 19o5.

S o m m erfeld , k . : H ebbel und G o e th e. S t u d i e n z u r O e s c h ic h te

d e s d e u t s c h e n E l a s s i z i s m u s im 1 9 . J a l i r h u n d e r t . B o n n ^ 1 9 2 3 .

B t e r n , A. : B i o j g r a o h i e O t t o L u d w i ; < s . C o n t a i n e d i n G e s a m m e l t e
S c iirifte n T ed. A .^ te r n . v o l . I . ( y . s u o r L e i p z i g , 1891.

Tannenbaum , E. ; F r i e d r i c h H eb b el und das T h ea te r. B e rlin

Btnd L e i p z i g , 1 9 1 4 .

T h o m a s , IF. : F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l - L e b e n u n d W erk i n E i n z e l d a r —
s t e l l u n g e n heraus/<e;:ceben z u r t f i e n e r H e b b e l - W o c h e . W ien.
1942.

T y r o f f . E . : *Pas H e i m a t e r l e b n i s i n d e n W e r k e n O t t o L u d w i g s *
i n & erm anische S t u d i e n . H e ft l o 6 . ( l 9 3 l ) B e r l i n .

W alzel, 0 . : H ebbelproblem e. - S t t dâ e n . L e i p z i g , 1 9 o 9#
W ütschke, H . : F r i e d r i c h H e b b e l i n d e r z e i t g e n S s s i s c h e n K r i­
t i k . H e r a u s g e g e b e n u n d m i t A n m e r k u n g e n y e r s e h e n y o n H,
W flfschke. n o . 1 4 3 . P r i t t e F o l g e . N o . 2 3 . /?iO.
Z in k ern ag el, F . : P ie G rundla^en d e r H eb b elsch en T ra g S d ie .
S e r lin , 19o4.
 III. G e n e r a l C r i t i c a l Worlcs.

B erg, L. : Z w ischen zw ei Jai^irhunderten. G esam m elte -E ssa y s•

F r a n k f u r t, 1896.

B i J l s c h e , W, : D i e n a t u r w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h e n G r i m d l a ^ e n d e r
P p e s i e . P ro leg om ena e in e r r e a l i s t i s c h e n A s th e t ik .
L e ip z ig , 1887.

B rad ley , A .C , : O x f o r d L e c t u r e s on P o e t r v . L o n d o n , 19o9.

B r e c h t , VL : ’Wege u n d Umwege d e r d e u t s c h e n L i t e r a t u r s e i t
h u n d e r t Jaiiren * i n D e u tsch e V i e r t e l i a h r / s s c h r i f t . V I I ,
(1 9 2 9 ) S t u f t g a r t .

C r a i g H o u s t o n , G. 2 T h e H y p l n t i o n o f t h e H i s t o r i c a l Drama i n
Germ any. B e l f a s t , 19 2 o .

H i n s i e d e l , W .von: 'D ie d r a m a t i s c h e C h a r a k t e r g e s t a l t u n g b e i
H ein rich von K le is t, besonders in s e in e r P e n th esilea * in
G erm anische S t u d i e n . H e ft l o 9 . (1931) B e r l i n .

G o lz , B . 2 P f a l z gr & f in Genoveva i n der d e u ts c h e n D ich tu n g

D iss. L e ip z ig , 1897.

G ross, 2 'C . M . W i e l a n d s " G e s c h i c h t e d e s A g a t h o n ” — H n t s t e

h u n g s g e s c h i t h f e * i n G erm anische S t u d i e n , H e ft 86. ( l9 3 o )
B e rlin .

H e g e l , G. : V p r l e s u n g e n i l b e r d i e A a t h e t i k . e d . H . G . H o t h o ,
B e r l i n , 1843•

K err, A. 2 Da s n e u e D r a m a . B e r l i n , 1912.

K i n d e r m a n n , H . 2 ' D i e l i t e r a r i s c h e S n t f a l t u n g d e s 1 9 . Jalrir*-» ,
h u n d e r ts ' i n G erm anisch-A pm anische M o n a t s s c h r i f t .
(1 9 2 6 ) H e id e lb e rg .

'Horn a n t i k u n d H e a l i s mus ' i n D eutsche V ie r t e ln a k i r s s c ii r i f t

IV , (1 9 2 6 ) S t u t t g a r t .

K le in ,H . 2 'M u s ik a lis c h e K o m p o sitio n i n d e u t s c h e r D io h tk u n s t

i n D eutsche V i e r t e l i a h r s s c h r i f t . V I I I . ( l 9 3 o ) S t u t t g a r t .

M e y e r , H .M . 2 D i e d e u t s c h e L i t e r a t u r des 19. Jah rh u n d erts.

B e r lin , 19oo.
P e t s c h , XV.: • G -edanken ü b e r d e n A u f b a u d e s D r a m a s * i n Z w i s c h e n
sch en P h ilo so p h ie und K u n sty ed . J . V o lk e lt.L e ip z ig , 1925.

— ’V o n d e r D z e n e zum K k t ’ i n D e u t s c h e V i e r t e l i a h r s -
s c h r i f t , aI . ( 1 9 3 3 ) S t u t t g a r t .

— ^"^esen u n d P p r m e n d e s D r a m a s . H a l l e , 1945.

S c h e u n e r , D . : *Akt u n d S z e n e i n d e r o f f e n e n F o r m d e s D r a m a s d a r -
g e s t e l l t a n d e n Dr am en G e o r g B f l c h n e r ^ i n G e r m a n i s c h e S t u d i e n
H e ft 77. (1929) B e r l i n . /

S cholz, Ki/.von: G e d a n k e n zum D r a m a u n d a n d e r è i-vu fs& tz e f i b e r Bfjhne

u n d L i t e r a t u r . M ü nchen a n d L e i p z i g . 1 9 o 5.

S t a k i l , S . : ’(Dhe G e n e s i s o f S c h i l l e r ’s T h e o r y o f T r a g e d y * i n G e r m a n
S t u d i e s . P r e s e n te d to P r o f e s s o r H .G ,F ie d le r . O x fo rd , 1938.

V o lk e lt, J. : A sth e tik des T ra;< isch en . M ünchen, 1917.

W a g n e r , iv. ; O p e r u n d JJram a ( G e s a m m e l t e S c h r i f t e n u n d D i c h t u n g e n ,
e d . w. G o l t h e r . I V . B d . L e i p z i g , 1 9 1 1 .

W alzel, 0 . : G e h alt und G e s ta lt im K u n s t w e r k d e s D i c h t e r s . P o t s d a m ,

1929.