Goethe's 'Faust' and European Epic: Forgetting the Future
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Goethe’s Faust and European Epic Goethe has long been enshrined as the greatest German poet, but his admirers have always been uneasy with the idea that he did not produce a great epic poem. A master in all the other genres and modes, it has been felt, should have done so. Arnd Bohm proposes that Goethe did compose an epic poem, which has been hidden in plain view: Faust. Goethe saw that the Faust legends provided the stuff for a national epic: a German hero, a villain (Mephistopheles), a quest (to know all things), a sublime conflict (good versus evil), a love story (via Helen of Troy), and elasticity (all human knowledge could be accommodated by the plot). Bohm reveals the care with which Goethe draws upon such sources as Tasso, Ariosto, Dante, and Vergil. In the micro- cosm of the “Auerbachs Keller” episode Faust has the opportu- nity to find “what holds the world together in its essence” and to end his quest happily, but he fails. He forgets the future because he cannot remember what epic teaches. His course ends tragically, bringing him back to the origin of epic, as he replicates the Trojans’ mistake of presuming to cheat the gods. Arnd Bohm is associate professor of English at Carleton University, Ottawa. Studies in German Literature, Linguistics, and Culture Disclaimer: Some images in the printed version of this book are not available for inclusion in the eBook. To view the image on this page please refer to the printed version of this book. Men’s Bath, woodcut by Albrecht Dürer. Reproduced by permission of Philadelphia Museum of Art: SmithKline Beecham Corp. Fund for the Ars Medica Collection. Goethe’s Faust and European Epic Forgetting the Future Arnd Bohm CAMDEN HOUSE Copyright © 2007 Arnd Bohm All Rights Reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation, no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded, or reproduced in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. First published 2007 by Camden House Camden House is an imprint of Boydell & Brewer Inc. 668 Mt. Hope Avenue, Rochester, NY 14620, USA www.camden-house.com and of Boydell & Brewer Limited PO Box 9, Woodbridge, Suffolk IP12 3DF, UK www.boydellandbrewer.com ISBN-13: 978–1–57113–344–1 ISBN-10: 1–57113–344–5 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Bohm, Arnd, 1953– Goethe’s Faust and European epic: forgetting the future / Arnd Bohm. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978–1–57113–344–1 (alk. paper) ISBN-10: 1–57113–344–5 (alk. paper) 1. Goethe, Johann Wolfgang, 1749–1832. Faust. 2. Epic Poetry, European—History and criticism. I. Title. PT1931.B64 2007 831Ј.6—dc22 2006028323 Cover illustration: Men’s Bath, woodcut by Albrecht Dürer. Reproduced by permission of Philadelphia Museum of Art: SmithKline Beecham Corp. Fund for the Ars Medica Collection. A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library. This publication is printed on acid-free paper. Printed in the United States of America. Meinen Eltern Doch immer behalten die Quellen das Wort, Es singen die Wasser im Schlafe noch fort vom Tage, vom heute gewesenen Tage. Eduard Mörike, “Um Mitternacht” Contents Acknowledgments xi Introduction 1 1: Goethe’s Epic Ambitions 5 2: The System of European Epic 20 3: Faust and Epic History 36 4: The Roots of Evil 87 5: “Auerbachs Keller” and Epic History 111 6: Faust as a Christian Epic 138 7: The Epic Encyclopedia 169 Postscript: Lest We Forget 213 Works Cited 225 Index 265 Acknowledgments Y SINCERE THANKS go to all those who, whether they knew it or not, Mwhether they agree with the project or not, have contributed to the undertaking. Its flaws are mine; its strengths are ours. First I would like to acknowledge the support of colleagues from Carleton University: J. B. Dallett, M. J. Edwards, J. Goheen, R. Gould, B. Mogridge, and R. Herz- Fischler. The Department of German at Queen’s University has provided a welcoming refuge from internal exile, for which I am truly grateful. The staff in Carleton’s MacOdrum Library, especially the good folk at the cir- culation desk and the tireless team headed by Callista Kelly in inter-library loans, cannot be thanked enough. E. M. Oppenheimer shared his Goethe with me in conversation and generous gifts. Keith and Joan Neilson, Norman Gee and Moira Day, Christopher Head, Jennifer Head, Jean and Norman Strong, Richard Ruppel and Jutta Brendel, and Marc L. Harris have sustained me in countless ways. I am fortunate to have so many friends who gather under the auspices of the Canadian Association of University Teachers of German that listing them all is not possible here — Iris Bruce, Linda Feldman, Christa Fell, Hans Walter Frischkopf, Marianne Henn, Jean Snook, and Geoffrey Winthrop-Young come to mind imme- diately — but all of them are important to me. Thomas Klepper, magus of the south, has never given up hope. Of the many scholars who make the conferences of the American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies a source of intellectual refreshment, I must single out Hans Adler, Charlotte Craig, Karl Fink, Wulf Koepke, Meredith Lee, Helga Madland, John McCarthy, Rudi Nollert, Hugh Ormsby-Lenon, J. G. A. Pocock and Karin Wurst for special thanks. I wish that Gloria Flaherty could read these pages and know she would have understood how they fit with her views on Goethe. The first results of my investigations were presented in 1983 to a Department Colloquium at Bryn Mawr College, chaired by C. Stephen Jaeger; I would like to thank him at last for that opportunity and for his suggestion to look at D. P. Walker’s book. Further findings were commu- nicated to the 1994 annual meeting of the American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies, in the Department of Germanic Languages, Literatures and Linguistics at the University of Alberta in 1996 and in the Department of German Studies at Michigan State University in 1999. The opportunity to present an analysis of “Gretchen am Spinnrad” at the Goethe Museum Düsseldorf in June, 2001 was most welcome; many xii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS thanks to the Director, Volkmar Hansen. The attentive reader will sense the Johns Hopkins Geist throughout; William McClain and Lieselotte Kurth inducted me into a select company, for which I will always be grateful. Funds from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada have supported the research and the dissemination of results; I acknowledge the support with gratitude, knowing how limited the money is. And last but not least, I owe much to the students who have asked ques- tions and encouraged me — figuratively, literally — to continue believing in the community of the mind. Without that first question, nothing happens. A. B. September, 2006 Introduction WO IMMODEST AMBITIONS DRIVE THIS STUDY: to fill what has been per- Tceived as a major gap in Goethe’s œuvre and to initiate a radical new reading of Faust. The means to both ends is showing that Faust properly belongs in the sequence of works — including Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, Vergil’s Aeneid, Dante’s Divine Comedy, Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso, Tasso’s Jerusalem Liberated, and Milton’s Paradise Lost — that together constitute the system of European epic. Attempts to define epic much more specifically than Aristotle did, who had described it as a long poem reporting the actions of “people who are to be taken seriously,” quickly become exercises in the fallacy of begging the question.1 A given work is an epic because it displays epic forms and features, but those are known from works considered to be epics. Trying to avoid the trap of logic, Franco Moretti opts for a deliberately vague definition of epic as “a hypothesis designed to introduce a little order into a question too import- ant to remain so confused.”2 Well, perhaps too little order. More useful is the pragmatism of Brian Wilkie’s solution when he proposes that we can best understand epic not as a genre governed by fixed rules, whether prescriptive or inductive, but as a tradition. It is a tradition, how- ever, that operates in an unusual way, for although, like any tradition, it is rooted in the past, it typically rejects the past as well, sometimes vigorously and with strident contempt. The great paradox of the epic lies in the fact that the partial repudiation of earlier epic tradition is itself traditional.3 Because the root metaphor of “tradition” (“to hand over”) is unidirec- tional, I refer instead to the epic system. System recognizes the possibility of mutual influences of the members of the system upon each other and of the parts upon the whole. Systems are dynamic and allow for expansion and transformation as new members are incorporated.4 1 Aristotle, Poetics, trans. Gerald F. Else (Ann Arbor, MI: U of Michigan P, 1973), 24–25. 2 Franco Moretti, Modern Epic: The World-System from Goethe to García Márquez, trans. Quintin Hoare (London and New York: Verso, 1996), 2. 3 Brian Wilkie, Romantic Poets and Epic Tradition (Madison and Milwaukee: U of Wisconsin P, 1965), 10. 4 Stimulating in this regard is Dieter Schaller, “Das mittelalterliche Epos im Gattungsystem,” in Kontinuität und Transformation der Antike im Mittelalter: 2 INTRODUCTION Goethe scholars have been uneasy about the fact that the greatest German poet had not produced a great epic poem. A master in all the other genres and modes, one felt, should have done so. Neither Hermann und Dorothea nor Reineke Fuchs, while epics of a sort, could compete with the Iliad or Klopstock’s Messias as major epics.