Flight from the Given World and Return to the New: The Dialectic of Creation and Escape in Goethe's

Die Leiden des jungen Werther Author(s): Stuart Walker Strickland Source: The German Quarterly, Vol. 64, No. 2, Focus: 16th to 18th Centuries (Spring, 1991), pp. 190-206 Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Association of Teachers of German Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/407078 . Accessed: 13/04/2011 22:05
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Blackwell Publishing and American Association of Teachers of German are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The German Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

STUARTWALKER STRICKLAND Harvard University

Flight from the Given World and Return to the New: The Dialectic of Creation and Escape in Goethe's Die Leiden des jungen Werther
dessenwirkliche BefriediJedesBediirfnis, zum ist, gung versagt n6tigt Glauben.

Die Wahlverwandtschaften'

Formidable obstaclesthreaten frustrate to The tension between a completeand a any effort to developa compelling allegori- narrative readingcannotbe resolvedeasily. cal readingof a novel. As Fredric Jameson's Nevertheless,it may be renderedeasier to term "master narrative" the reveals,the project bear by making allegorical interpretation of looking the told beyond storyostensibly by bothmoremodestandmoreexplicit. Although a noveland seekingout other,more deeply this must be understood a tentativeand as embedded stories involves two potentially preliminary it formulation,seems worth trying An incontradictory assumptions.2 allegorical to state the allegoryin the formof a thesis. at of to terpretation least gives the impression Werther's storyappears recreatethe probthe a of telling wholestory,ofdiscoveringmaster lem of the possibility art, or perhaps more account narrowly fictional of in code, of givingthe mostfundamental creation, an emergent of whatis really stakeina novel.Thedensity bourgeoissociety whose primary--perhaps at andcomplexity evena relatively of shortnovel exclusive--interest lies in the factual world such as Goethe'sWerther a tremendous and whose constituents valuedfor their are puts burdenon attempts to constructanything usefulness. Werther'sresistance, his aloof even approaching such a completereading. posture,his negotiations, his ultimate and dethe closure of a definitivein- struction reflectthe dilemmas the artwork of Undermining is that terpretation ourawareness theallegory in a societythatvaluesit onlyforits marginal itself must be cast in the form of a narra- functionof escape fromthe painof socially Can art maintain tive, potentiallyas complex as the text it necessary deprivation. an claimsto explain.Although critic'stask autonomous critical the and on perspective a socione a it maywellremain of making explicit story ety thatrecognizes onlyas a formofescape? thatis onlyimplicit the novel,the resulting Myreading Werther haunted thisquesin of is by criticsmremainsopaquein its resistanceto tion and by the expectationthat Werther's effortsto state it in the formof a proposition. suicidemayyield a positiveanswer.On one It has becomeitself a story whose sense is level Werther certainly cathartic is a expresinits telling subject multiple and to sion of Goethe's frustration love. But Werin interpretations. The allegorical readingmay seek to ther also dies so that Goethe'svisionof art avoid violenceof reducing text to formal maysurvive.And,on this reading, the a Werther's or thematic of of analyses isolated moments,but characterization himselfas a sacrificial figthe narrative producesinvariably it implies ure maybe more thanmere delusion. a closure that, ironically, excludes the text The totalizingclaims implicitin the allegor3 itself. icalapproach mustbe tempered the recogby
The German Quarterly64.2 (1991)

190

STRICKLAND:

Goethe's Werther

191

I other that does notexclude nition one reading In particular, will I possible interpretations. of Werther frameshimselfwithina language to on haveoccasion draw the insights critics of whohaveadopted existential, of escape. Fromhis first declaration freepsychoanalytic, to dom ("Wiefrohbin ich, daBich weg bin!"4 social, historical,and formalapproaches Werther. will Someof these readings undoubt- May 1771 [7]) to his finalfarewell("Lotte, with and lebe wohl! lebe wohl!" [123]), Werther's edly seem more or less compatible and from the perspectivedeveloped rhetoricis that of flight, departure, esconvincing flees exclude cape.These arenotidlewords.Werther here. But the only view I explicitly is that whichwouldsuccumbto the ethical the company Wilhelm the wake of an of in love the to as being unhappy affair, bourgeoissociety of temptation see Werther a human thana literary character to attempt Albertand Lotte, the aristocratic and rather society of to use himas a positive negative model. the Count; flees fromennuiandinactivity, or role he I am interestedneither in diagnosing Wer- andfromthe busy workof the legation.Ultinor ther's allegedlypathological condition in mately flees fromlifeitself.Theprevalence he for wordsand seeing himas the spokesperson any sort of this theme, both in Werther's of explicit cultural socialcritique. case inhisactions,would or The seem tojustify critical the for suchreadings oftenbeen argued,but characterization Werther a novelof eshas of as thisapproach shedslittlelightonthedynamics capism.HansReiss advocatessuchan interof Werther's his within pretation his analysis Werther's in of development, position flightas a complex textualenvironment, the dialec- a solipsistic or withdrawal the self:"Werther into tical relation of art and society of which refusesto acceptthe external world loses and Werther an expression.4 is himselfin the apparent fullnessof his inner Thispapercarriesthe twinresponsibilities life."" Criticssuch as James Wilson,whose of bothtellingthe storyof an allegorical read- worksuggestsless of a stakein the demands in ing andpresenting arguments its favor.In of the externalworldand a greater affinity lieuof a totalreading the text or a marshal- forart, see Werther's of flightas anescapefrom of all the arguments mightbe made the constraints a finite, corporeal, that of mortal ling to support reading, havechosento look worldinto an infinite,ideal, immortal I this world at a singlemomentin the text that I of artisticexpression.6 Whilethe formerapclosely believe illuminates fundamental elements of praisal into stigmatizes escapeas a withdrawal the underlying structureof the a pre-existing the lattersignificantly unself, allegorical novel.I hadhopedto follow courseof the derscores the fact that whateverWerther the the must be actively allegorythroughout rest of the text by flees from, his destination the dynamic Werther's of relation- created.Whetheror not we acceptWilson's considering and betweentheimmortal world shipwithothercharacters the forcesthey radical dichotomy to of art and the mortalworldof life (andthe represent.Sucha task, however, appears be too greatforanarticleof thislength.Even abstract ratherthandeterminate relation that with the benefit of this initialself-restraint, it impliesis a pointwith whichwe willhave wouldrisk becoming diffuseif it to contend), the associationbetween Wermy reading were not focusedby the additional of a ther's flightand artisticcreationwill remain lens centralthematic concern.The triangular ten- an important one. sionof flight,restriction, returnis essenand If we step backto emphasize originof the tialto myunderstanding the novel.Ifunder- Werther's of flightratherthanits goal, we may stoodbothas an escape fromrestriction and findourselvesinpartial withPeter agreement as a necessary preparationfor a return, for an acceptance of restriction, Werther'sflight runs parallel to the ambivalent relationship between the artwork and society. Salm'sclaimthat Werther'ssuicide is "arebellion against his Einschriinkung,his incarceration behind thick walls of illusionwhich he is vainly struggling to break down."'There are

192

THE GERMANQUARTERLY

1991 Spring

that certainlymoments in Werther supportthe between flight and restricsharp opposition tion. In book II, for instance, after Frdiulein von B. shares with Wertherher interpretation of his dismissal from the Count's party, Werther's reaction seems to confirm Salm'sargument: ein Ach,ich hab'hundertmal Messer erHerzen griffen,um diesem gedraingten Luftzu machen.Manerzahltvon einer edlenArt Pferde,die, wennsie schreckund licherhitzt aufgejagt sind,sichselbst eine ausInstinkt Aderaufbeil3en, sich um zumAtemzu helfen.So ist mir'soft, ich m6chtemireine Ader6ffnen,diemirdie schaffte.(16 March1772 ewige Freiheit [70 f.]) As striking as such moments are, they should not lead us to overlook a fundamental ambivalence in Werther's expression of constraint and flight. Particularlyin book I, and fanmore specificallyin Werther'spatriarchal tasies, restriction (Einschrdnkung) is given manypositive connotations.It is, for example, associated with a kind of shelter: von Dukennst altershermeineArt,mich mir an anzubauen, irgend einemvertraulichenOrte ein Hiittchen aufzuschlagen unddamitallerEinschrinkung herberzu gen. AuchhierhabeichwiedereinPlitzchen angetroffen,das mich angezogen hat. (26 May1771[14]) The ambivalencein Werther'ssense of restriction is echoed in his frequent repetition of variations on the word "ringsherum"and in his images of comfortablevalleys surrounded and protected by hills, images that we will have an opportunity to examine in greater detail shortly. Restriction appears to function not only as an obstacle but also as a refuge. Werther's further identificationwith the limited perspectives of the young girl whose suicide he and Albert discuss (12 August 1771 [45 ff.]), with the naivete of children (especially in the letter of 6 July 1771 [35 ff.]), and with the delusions of Heinrich (30 November 1772 [88 ff.]) suggest that this ambivalent view of restrictionhas deeper implications warranting our closer attention. As we delve deeper into the text I will maintainthat these two

views of flight are neither isolated nor contradictorybut stand in a determinate relation. The oppressive connotationsof restrictionare never wholly absent from Werther'spositive havenin which sense of restrictionas a familiar he would willinglyimmerse himself. Werther's flight is further complicated by an equally prevalent theme of return and homecoming. In his patriarchal fantasies, Werther evokes images of a return to an epic past (especially 21 June 1771 [28 ff.]); in his pilgrimage to his birthplace, he attempts to satisfy the longingfor return expressed in his identificationwith childrenand with childhood innocence (9 May 1772 [72 ff.]). It is not difficult to see Werther's departure from Wahlheim and from Lotte at the end of book I as a necessary prelude to his return in book II. Even his suicide, while it resonates with a sense of escape, is also described by Werther as a kind of homecoming: Undwiirde Mensch,einVater ein zirnen kinnen, dem sein unvermutet rtickkehrenderSohnumdenHalsfieleundriefe: "Ichbin wieder da, mein Vater!Zurne abbrenicht, daBich die Wanderschaft che, die ich nachdeinemWillenlinger aushaltensollte." (30 November1772 [91]) Eric Blackallreads this passage as Werther's hubristic attempt to suggest an identification of his own situation with the return of the prodigalson.8But, as Blackallcorrectly points out, the prodigalson neither asks for nor expects forgiveness. This observationoverlooks a more importantdifference: Werther is not prodigal.He does not ask forgiveness for having strayedbut for havingreturned, for having renounced the father's command that he explore the worldandreturnedto the comfort of his home. The Biblicalmodel carries with it an ethic of linear or progressive development before which Werther balks. The opposing paradigmfor the recurrent theme of homecoming and for the circular structure it impartson the novel is, of course, the Odysseus story. If literature provides an escape for Werther, something to soothe his heart, it is significant that the only book he

STRICKLAND: Goethe's Werther

193

needs is Homer (13 May 1771 [10]) and that, although he owns both the Illiad and the Odyssey,we never find him readingor quoting from the Illiad. Werther'sflight is thus always a homecoming, a return with Odysseus to Penelope. But how closely does Werther's case resemble that of Odysseus? Can the dominant theme of return in Werther really be characterized as a homecoming? Is the world to which Werther would return the same world from which he fled? Or is it something else entirely? Robert Ellis Dye's interpretationof the religious issues raised in Wertherfuels such doubts: "Wertherexhibits clear signs of alienation,longingwithout real hope to regain that which is lost."' Dye's observations would lead us to pursue a closer look at the world to which Wertherhopes to return. Werther's return exists in the present less as a planfor his future action than as a recollection. When its moment of realizationarrives, when Werther visits his birthplaceand returns to Wahlheim, the impossibilityof return is exposed and the illusiondisintegrates. Werther'sfaith in the possibility of return-a faith whose precarious nature is mirroredin his alternate glorificationof childlikenaivete and derision of childishness-breaks down in book II.10 It is not Lotte's marriagethat blocks the realization of Werther'sreturn; the stress of its own internal tensions shatters Werther's world. The home to which Werther would return is one that he himself has created. It is not given but must be created, as suggested by its name: "Wahlheim" (literally, "chosen home")."The active role Werthermust take in his facilitating homecomingis made even more in his appeal to a created world, a explicit worldset off fromthe worldas it is immediately given. The world aroundhim ("das Leben des Menschen") he sees as a dream, a world of restriction (again,Einschrdinkung) which in the search for knowledge results not in liberation but inso manypaintingson prisonwalls: Das alles, Wilhelm, machtmichstumm. in selbst Ichkehre mich undfinde zuriick, eine Welt! Wiedermehrin Ahnung und dunkler und Begierals in Darstellung le-

alles bendigerKraft.Undda schwimmt vor meinenSinnen,undich lachledann so traumend weiterin die Welt.(22 May 1771[13;emphasis added]) Here Wertherfinds a world within himself, a kindof refuge from the restrictionof the given world, a prison withina prison. The apparent passivity of this formulation- the second worldis foundratherthanfounded- together with the admissionthat he turns inwardmore out of a sense of foreboding than out of any creative impulselend supportto the view that Werther'sflightis merely solipsisticescapism. But this turn inward, this discovery of a second world, makes possible a transition from silence to expression. The given worldmakes Werthermute, but in turninginwardhe finds the abilityat least to smile. The discovery of this second world is perhaps a prerequisite for artistic expression. Another important transition also takes place in this passage. The given world was first described as a dream world, but by the end Werthercharacterizes himself as one who is in a dream. The majordifferenceseems to be that the unreality of the given worldis externallyimposed, while the unreality of the second world, the world that allows the transition from silence to expression, is voluntarilyaccepted. Wertherexpands on this image later in this same letter. While the second world remains a response to the constriction of the given world, Werther now allows himself both a more active role in the creation of this world and a more ominous image of escape: Weraberin seiner Demuterkennt,wo das alles hinausliuft, wer da sieht, wie demes wohlist, sein artigjederBiirger, Gdirtchen zum Paradiese zuzustutzen und auch weif3, wieunverdrossen derUnunterder Biirdeseinen Weg glackliche sind, das Lichtdieser Sonnenoch eine Minutelinger zu sehn-ja, der ist still und bildet auchseine Welt sichselbst aus undist auchgliicklich, er einMensch weil ist. Und dann,so eingeschrlinkt ist, er halter dochimmerim Herzendas stille Geffihlder Freiheit,und da3 er diesen Kerker verlassen er kann,wann will.(22 May1771[14;emphasis added])
fortkeucht und alle gleich interessiert

194

THE GERMANQUARTERLY

Spring 1991

No longerdoes Werther of simplyfindthe sec- concerns, the ambiguity Werther's flight ond worldwithinthe self, but he insists it should a pathtoward deeperprobthe provide mustbe builtoutof the self;the selffurnishes lem of Werther's willful self-decepapparently for of the materials the construction the sec- tion, his creation, through his letters to ond world.The word"still" raises againthe Wilhelm,of a kind of mythicworldset off of silence,but it evokesan imageof againstthe demands the actualworldsurof question withthe cynical him contrast over- rounding but neverthelessultimately recalm,inmarked tones of the "dreaming and ("trau- quiringits acknowledgment validation. resignation" mende Resignation" to the of [13]) associatedearlier Werther's inability maintain validity with adaptation the givenworld.The allu- his createdworld,togetherwithhisunwillingto sion to suicide as a possible escape from ness to abandon ultimately himapart. it, pull that the of prisonopens the possibility the created To understand courseanddynamic this worldmaybe a flightfromthe given world, trajectory to beginto approach problem is the a simplerejection it. But suicideis not the of the autonomy marginalizationfiction of and of suicide itselfdoes in a worldof fact. objectof the createdworld; not providethe sweet feeling of freedom. it that is Rather, is the realization suicide posII sible which, Wertherseems to intimate,allows him to cope with the restriction the of we First,however, mustgiveourattention concern.I havedrawn givenworld.As longas Werther's recognition to one finaltheoretical of the unreality the givenworldallowshim a distinction of betweenthe givenworldandthe the freedomto create a worldof his own, created worldin Werther, distinction a that however and unreal,suicideitselfremains requiressome justification clarification. equally an unnecessary As an initial intuitive we escape. formulation, maysay The tension between flight, restriction, that the given worldis all that Werther perandreturn reflectsa fundamental ambivalence ceives around order him;it is the established in Werther's of rejection society.Peter Salm, of things. The createdworldwouldthen be whouses the letterwe havejustexamined that whichhas its sourcein Werther: fanto his his of his If support comparison GoetheandCamus, tasies, his drawings, writing. we assume writes:"For Camus creative the of activity the that thereis a substantial betweenthese gap artistis tantamount the making 'counter- two worlds(anassumption to of manycriticshave an of condition universes,' archetypal, hopeless rebellion madeintheirdiagnoses Werther's in the face of an absurdworld."12 I wouldas- as pathological), anobvious then conproblem that ambi- fronts us. The epistolary form of the novel sert, however, it is onlyWerther's valentviewof the absurdity the givenworld makesWerther only sourcefor the conof our thatultimately as We exposes his rebellion hope- tent of boththe givenandcreatedworlds. less. Werther remains twominds of aboutthe can glimpse the given world only through valuesof the worldfromwhichhe turns.Al- the filter of Werther's utopiandesires. Eric flees fromsociety,he values Blackall argued--I believeconvincingly has thoughWerther and seeks the recognition its representa- - that even the third-person of narrator who tives: Albert,Lotte, the Count,andWilhelm. takes over in the finalpages is not a spokesEven in his apparently most solipsisticmo- personforthe givenworld insteadserves but one of whichwe willexamine detail, to throwintodoubtallattemptsto identify in ments, an Werther's inward is occupied fantasies objectiveperspectiveon the events of the turn by of a communal bya desireforacknowledg- novel.13 life, Evenif one rejectssuchaninterpretament from and integration into the given tion, Werther remains our only source for world. many events about which the narratoris comAs we turn to a closer treatment of the pletely silent. BenjaminBennett takes up the text and awayfromour preliminary theoretical challenge confrontingthe reader who would

STRICKLAND: Goethe's Werther

try somehow to get behindWerther'spresentation in order to perceive the features of an actual world. He concludes optimisticallythat the text furnishes sufficient evidence for the reader to overcome successfully "Werther's obvious failureto perceive any sort of objective clarity .. ." and to come to "anobjective idea of how things are."'4 More modestly, we might say that it is possible to read across the grain of Werther's presentations and to see that the situationsWertherdescribes are subject to interpretations other than those Werther gives to them. Wertherhimself seems to recognize a gap when he distinguishes between his historical mode of presentation- of which Wilhelmevidently approves- andhis more lyricalexpressions (17 May 1771 [11, for instance]). Many critics have taken this distinctionas a cue for interpretingthe dichotomyas one between an objective and a subjective perspective. Bennett, for example, sees in Werthertwo opposing points of view, which he identifies alternatively as "the ego" against "the necessary progress of the whole,""ourconfused perception of our own situation"againstan "objective orderliness in history,"and an "ego-oriented" against a "causality-oriented"perspective.15 But to draw this line between subject and object is to suggest a conflationof the given social and the given naturalorders. It is also to obscure the similaritybetween the created world and the given social world, a resemblance that arises from the fact that they are both human constructions. The given social worldderives a largemeasure of its legitimacy from its associationwith the naturalorder and fromthe perceptionthat it is radically different from the created worlds of individuals. If Werther at least in part a critique of this is process and if Werther's attempts to create a second world are to be taken seriously as a challengeto the given world'sclaimsto stand for nature and reason, then the critic should attempt to drawout this challengerather than cut it short with a vocabularythat tacitly sides against Werther and with the given world. Some light may be shed on this issue by recalling Lukics's use of the term "second

195

nature" to describe the world of convention and of human-madestructure- what I have here called the "given social world."His description of the world of second nature may help to distinguish it both from the natural world and from the created world: Sie bildendie Weltder Konvention: eine nur Welt, deren Allgewalt das Innerste der Seele entzogenist; die in untiberiiberallgesichtlicherMannigfaltigkeit genwirtigist; derenstrengeGesetzlichwie keit, sowohlim Werden im Sein, ffir das erkennende eviSubjekt notwendig dent wird, die aber bei all dieser Gesich setzmdi8igkeit wederals Sinnffirdas zielsuchende Subjektnoch in sinnlicher Unmittelbarkeit Stoffffirdashandelnals de darbietet. " In Lukics's view lyric poetry expresses an opposingforce that we maycomparewith Werther's created world: Die Lyrikkanndas Phdinomenalwerden der ersten Natur ignorierenund aus der konstitutiven Kraftdieses Ignorierens herauseine proteische Mythologie der substantiellen Subjektivititschaffen....7

Insofar as Werther's turn inwardreveals, on the one hand, the conventionalityand contingency and, on the other hand, the static-or rather, goalless -nature of the given world, it may stand as a critique of reification. But Lukics's declaration of the happy ignorance of lyric hides a dilemmafrom which Werther cannot escape so easily. Lyric'signorance is necessary because it too is a form of second nature. AlthoughWerther'screatedworldpresents itself in opposition to the given social world, it is equally artificial. Its disadvantage lies, ironically,in its inwardness, that is, in its self-consciousness of the fact that it is a created rather than a natural world. The raises, then, is whether any question Werther ideology honest and self-conscious enough to recognize itself as ideology can sustain itself long enough to mount a critique of ideology. The ignorance Lukics attributes to lyric must be a cultivated ignorance and, as such, it is far more precarious than Lukics will admit.

196

THE GERMAN QUARTERLY

1991 Spring

of his newly discovered happiness, with a patriarchal lifestyle that satisfies his Homeric does Werther find when he turns nostalgia, and with the parablehe gives of the What inward to create a second world? His letter vagabond who returns from his journeys to of 21 June 1771may providea basis for under- find happiness only in his fatherland: standingWerther'srelationshipboth with the So sehnt sich der unruhigste Vagabund given worldandwith the worldof his creation. zuletzt wieder nach seinem Vaterlande undfindetin seinerHiitte,an der Brust Ostensibly it is a letter of reconciliation, a seinerGattin,in demKreiseseinerKincoincidence of Werther's utopian vihappy der,indenGeschiftenzuihrer Erhaltung sions and his new life in Wahlheim.Here Werverdie die Wonne, er in derweitenWelt ther is "fullyestablished" ("v6lligetabliert"). gebens suchte. (29) He appears to enjoy a reprieve from the torments that will occupy so muchof his attention Werther clearly identifies himself with this in the months ahead: homecoming vagabondwhen he writes: "Ich eilte hin und kehrte zurtick und hatte nicht Ichlebe so gliickliche Tage,wie sie Gott gefunden, was ich hoffte."But there is cause seinen Heiligenausspart;und mit mir for uneasiness in this comparison. While the mag werdenwas will, so darfich nicht die sagen, dabich die Freuden, reinsten vagabond returns to his fatherland,Werther Freuden Lebensnichtgenossenhades has chosen a new home, and thus his homebe. (21June1771[28]) coming cannot yet be described as a return. that is Wahlheim near to heaven because it is near More disturbingperhapsis the realization the home of Werther's new love, Lotte. He when Werther turns backward, he does not celebrates the virtues of voluntarilyending find the breast of his wife and a circle of chilhis travels and settling down in his chosen dren; instead, he continues to miss what he home. And he describes his life as resembling had hoped for. There is an unhappysymmetry scenes from the Odyssey(29). Wahlheimap- in Werther's forward and backwardglances. pears to be a successful attempt to create a It is true that the image of a chain of hills world in which Werther can live. surrounding Werther's small house in a faBut a closer reading reveals internal ten- miliarvalley resembles the image of the vagasions in this utopian reconciliation, tensions bond'shomecomingand even invites comparithat in turn expose issues central to our al- son ("Die in einander geketteten Hiigel und legorical interpretation. Werther describes vertraulichenTiler!"). But Werther's condihimself as having chosen between a search tion is still one of longing, andhis descriptions for new discoveries and a world of limited are in the subjunctive mode that conveys a horizons in terms that convey a sense both sense of near desperation("Ok6nnte ich mich in ihnen verlieren!"). If we pursue the comof submission and renunciation: LieberWilhelm, habeallerlei ich parisonfurther,we findthat althoughWerther nachgedacht, uiberdie Begier im Menschen, begins by describing his somewhat contrived sich auszubreiten, neue Entdeckungen homecoming to Wahlheimas a joyful submiszumachen, und herumzuschweifen; dann sion to limitation,he ends with a rather more wiederfiberden inneren Trieb,sichder pessimistic view of restriction: Einschrinkung willigzu ergeben,in dem Gleise der Gewohnheit hinzufahren so Undach!wennwirhinzueilen, wenndas undsichwederumRechtsnochumLinks DortnunHierwird,ist allesvorwienach, zu bektimmern. f.) (28 undwir stehenin unsererArmut,in unserer Eingeschrlinktheit, unserer und Wertheris not explicit here about his choice, Seele lechztnachentschlipftem Labsale. but the context indicates that he has opted (29) for the latter narrowroute and renouncedthe former. This would certainly be consonant Is this passage meant to apply to the disapwith his description of Wahlheimas the seat pointment of travel to a new destination (this III

STRICKLAND: Goethe's Werther

seems to be its explicit reference) or to the disappointment of homecoming? This ambiguity only exacerbates the tension associated with the fact that Werther'shomecoming, his actual return, lies not in the present but in the future. There is also room for uncertainty in the resemblance between Werther's account of his situation and the text of the Odyssey.18At one level Wertheris the Odysseus figure who, likethe vagabond,returns to his wife, presumably Lotte. This reading leaves no room for Albert, unless we are to associate him with Penelope's suitors. But Werther also compares himself with the suitors, whom he describes as wanton in their consumption of what rightfully belonged to Odysseus ("da Freier ffihl'ich so lebhaft,wie die fibermfitigen der Penelope Ochsen und Schweine schlachten, zerlegen undbraten").He does not, however, seem able to acknowledgefullythe illicit implicationsof his role in this image, for there is no allusioneither to an association of Albert with Odysseus or of Lotte with Penelope. Instead, Wertherindirectlycompares himself with Penelope when he remarks that he is fortunate to be able to weave the patriarchal life into his own without affectation ("Es ist nichts, das mich so mit einer stillen, wahren Empfindungausfiillte als die Ziige patriarchalischen Lebens, die ich, Gott sei Dank, ohne Affektation in meine Lebensart verweben kann" [29]). Penelope weaves and unweaves her tapestry to postpone her admission that Odysseus will not return, deceiving her suitors and possibly also deceiving herself. Werther likewise exposes his -perhaps unconscious- suspicions that although he would like to believe that he has successfully returned to the world of the epic, his fantasy is in fact total affectation. The tension upon which Werther dwells here, that between discovery and familiarity, indicates a fundamental difference between the Homeric world as it is evoked in Werther and its original context. A conflict between familiarity and discovery would indeed be wholly out of place in the world that originally gave rise to the epic. Werther's epic is not

197

the epic of a wide-open world, a world that is both a comfortablehome and the source of new discoveries, but instead an epic fantasy of enclosure and isolation. Lukaics's observations on the historical conditions that produced Homeric literatureshow a profoundincompatibilitybetween the spirit of the epic and the spirit of Werther: SeligsinddieZeiten,fiirdiederSternenhimmel Landkarte gangbaren die der und zu gehendenWegeist und derenWege dasLicht Sterneerhellt.Allesist neu der abenteuerffirsie unddennoch vertraut, lichunddennoch Besitz.DieWelt weit ist unddochwie daseigeneHaus,denndas Feuer,das in der Seele brennt,ist von derselben Wesensart die Sterne;sie wie scheidensich scharf,die Weltund das und und Ich, dasLicht dasFeuer, werden dochniemals einander immer fiir fremd; denn Feuer ist die Seele eines jeden Lichtsundin Lichtkleidetsicheinjedes Feuer.So wirdallestunderSeelesinnvoll undrundin dieserZweiheit: vollendet in dem Sinn und vollendetffir die Sinne; rund,weildieSeele in sichruhtwihrend des Handelns; rund,weil ihre Tat sich vonihrabl6stundselbstgeworden einen findetundeinengeeigenenMittelpunkt schlossenen Umkreis sichzieht."Phium losophieist eigentlichHeimweh," sagt zu Novalis,"derTrieb,fiberall Hausezu sein."19 What, then, is the significanceof the evocation of an epic image in the context of a worldthat can no longer support its expectations of harmony between the individualand the world? Werther's preoccupation with the Homeric worldandhis strainedattempts to reconstruct such a world in Wahlheimdemonstrate his perception of something lackingin the given world. It is the absence of epic harmonyfrom the given world that leads Werther to turn away and to try to create it in Wahlheim. Are we not readingtoo much into the internal conflicts of Werther'sepic fantasies?Fredric Jameson, in his discussion of Allesandro Manzoni'sI Promessi Sposi, argues that such conflicts are endemic to the novel's subsumption of disparate literary forms. "The novel," he writes, "is then not so much an organic unity as a symbolic act that must reunite and

198

THE GERMANQUARTERLY

1991 Spring

In his "Rede fiber die Mythologie,"Schlegel called for a new mythology, a self-conscious creation of an ideology capable of providing the basis for unitingexpression and communi-

harmonize heterogeneous narrative para- cation,justas the ancient mythshadprovided for Werther's turn digmswhichhavetheirownspecificandcon- the ground Homeric epic.23 tradictory ideological meaning.z20 specific to Homerfocuses our attentionon the fact The historicalcircumstances that producedthe thathe livesina world lackssucha mediatthat he in epic mayhavevanished,andyet "thefailure ingbase.Theworld constructs Wahlheim of a particular suchas epic, is an attempt bridgea gapbetweenhimself to genericstructure, to reproduceitself not only encouragesa anda largersocialworld. searchforthose substitute textual formations The depthof Werther's concernaboutthe in thatappear its wake,butmoreparticularly gap that separates individuals the given in alerts us to the historicalground,now no worldis apparent fromthe extentof its recurthe structure rence as a theme. The problemof genuine longerexistent,inwhich original was meaningful."'' discontinuities The result- communication between individuals the in fromthe juxtaposition an epic solution worldoutsidethe novelis implied the ediof in ing to a problem within narrative prohibits tor's prefatoryinstructionsto the reader a that suchan easy reconciliation in fact,trans- ("Und gute Seele, die du eben den Drang du and, formsit intoanact of renunciation reveal fiihlstwie er, sch6pfeTrostaus seinemLeimay the "social and ideological contradiction den, undlabdasBfichlein deinenFreund sein, aroundwhichthe novelwill turn."22 wenn du aus Geschickoder eigener Schuld Perhaps morehonestlythanWerther's overtcriticism keinen nfihernfinden kannst"[7]). Before of the givenworld,his epic fantasiesexpose Wertherbecomes involvedwith Lotte, the conflictsin the worldfrom whichhe would searchforcommunity seemsto be hisprimary flee. The tensions that threatento topple preoccupation. his first letter Werther In reWerther's creationof a second world-par- portsto Wilhelm he has struckupa relathat his that ticularly self-consciousness it is a sec- tionshipwith a local gardener(4 May 1771 world- revealjust [8]), but this apparently comes to nothing, ond, createdor artificial those contradictions whichhis creation since Werther for is never mentionsthe gardener an attempted resolution: lackof unitybe- again. A distancebetween Werther his the and tween the individual the worldand the new neighbors evidentin the letters that and is relatedabsenceof any basis for communica- follow. Werther claims theyare that Although tion andmutual understanding amongthe in- fond of him, he describesthem in a condehabitants the givenworld. of tone ("Diegeringen Leutedes Orts scending In the Homericworldnature-or rather kennenmichschon und liebenmich, besona mythicconception nature served as a ders die Kinder," May1771[10]).Werther of 15 mediator betweenhuman the of beings.It provided minimizes importance classdifferences, a commonreferencepointfor mutual under- but his awarenessof them is acute ("Leute Goethewasnotaloneingiving voice von einigemStande werdensich immer in standing. to the perception in the wakeof the En- kalter Entfernung that vom gemeinenVolkehalsuch had down. ten, als glaubtensie durchAnndiherung zu lightenment mediation broken Friedrich of Schlegel's philosophy historyand verlieren .. ."15May 1771).Even as Werther literature marked number ages in which denies his own tendencyto distancehimself a of this hadnot been the case. In addition the from ordinary to people, his languageemphacohesionof the Homeric mythic world,Schle- sizes the gap between him and the townshad people and indicatesthat he has not yet regel also pointedto the role Catholicism his played servingas a focalpointfora period solvedto throw ownlotinwiththeirs("Ich by of literaryandartisticexpressionin general. weiBwohl,daB nichtgleichsind,nochsein wir
kinnen.. ."15 May 1771[11]). Shortlythereafter Wertheradmits that he has been unsuccessful in his search for companionship("Ich habe allerlei Bekanntschaftgemacht, Gesell-

STRICKLAND: Goethe's Werther

199

schaft habe ich noch keine gefunden,"17 May 1771 [11]). Although he encounters many people, soon their paths all diverge. In a world in which communionseems so difficultto establish, nature and literatureappear as potential grounds for understanding. Between Werther and a gardener nature seems to serve as the basis for a degree of understanding: Der Gartenist einfach,und man flihlt gleich bei dem Eintritte,daf3nichtein wissenschaftlicher sondernein Gdirtner, HerzdenPlangezeichnet, das flihlendes seinerselbsthiergenief3en wollte.(4May 1771[8]) Because the gardener- the deceased Count von M. -did not rely on scientific methods but instead arranged his garden out of the fullness of his heart, the garden itself may be an external groundin whichWertherimagines their hearts mingling.But this hope is cut off by a phrase that seems to suggest that outside of science there is room only for personal indulgence. Wertheralso shares a knowledge of Greek with a young man to whom he refers only as "jungenV."(17 May 1771 [12]). But for some reason- perhaps because, as Werther hints, the young man is too academicthis relationshipalso comes to naught. Thus neither nature nor literatureprovide a readymade ground for the communion Werther seeks.

IV
Although, as we have seen, nature and literature converge for Werther in Homer and in the patriarchal ideal he associates with the epic, Wertheralways reads his Homer in isolation. And although he invokes images of other people in his patriarchal fantasies, they always remain at a distance from him, as something he describes rather than engages in. A returnto the life of the epic wouldinvolve a renunciationof the modern world. But even a more modest integrationinto the quaintsociety Werther describes in the countryside would require a renunsurroundingWahlheim ciationof both his class and his level of educa-

tion. He can momentarilyindulgein fantasies about a simple life, but Wertherremainsaware of the values of the given world and these continue to exert a force; they pull him back and prevent his complete immersion. Werther'ssettlement in Wahlheim may appear to be a flight from the town and a return to nature. Hans Reiss has read it as a serene abandonment.24 But such a reading should arouse suspicion, for it minimizes both Werther's ambivalencetowardnatureandthe complex relationshipbetween flight, restriction, and return. The letter of 21 June 1771 certainly contains praise and admiration the naturalenfor vironmentaroundWahlheim. And at one level Werther does seem to escape from the demands of society in favorof a simpler life and a more harmoniousrelation with the land. As Arnold Hirsch points out, this respect for life on the landindicates some similaritybetween the position Goethe attributes to Wertherand Rousseau's ideal of nature, particularly exas pressed inEmile. AlthoughHirschrecognizes important differences between Goethe's and Rousseau's conceptions of nature, he does insist that in Werther's criticism of society and in his desire "to lose himself in the inexpressible beauty of nature" Werther reveals himself as a student of Rousseau.25 However,Werther'sattitudetowardnature is by no means as positive as Rousseau's. For Werthernature is not a reliablealternativeto the evils and artifice of society. This is not necessarily because Goethe differed with Rousseau on the need for social change but instead speaks more to his perception of a close connection between a wholly positive view of natureandLeibnizian theodicy.Robert Ellis Dye's suggestion that Werther'scritique of theodicy was partiallyresponsible for the shock with which the book was received in many circles offers one possible explanation for Werther's ambivalent conception of nature: evil in Natural is exemplified the flood which"vomWahlheim herunter mein all liebes Thal tiberschwemmt" and reflectedinWerther's horror the general at

200

THE GERMAN QUARTERLY

1991 Spring

transitorinessof things and the charof acteristicdestructiveness nature,of as which suchcalamities floodsandearthmanifestaare quakes onlyextraordinary tions. (18 August1771)26 The images of unreliable nature give even Werther'spositive descriptionsof naturea distrustful undertone. If we acknowledge this ambivalenceand yet recognize that, following Rousseau, Wertherdoes compare society unfavorablywith nature, we might be able to see Werther as having adopted Rousseau's critical understandingwithout being able to accept his utopian resolution. Werther seems aware that his critique of the given social worldcannotrely on an appeal to the given naturalworld but must create its own grounds. Goethe was not alone in having Werthervoice reservations aboutthe possibility of a return to nature. Schiller expressed similar concerns in his elaborationof a view of nature that retained Rousseau's critical spirit without denying the human source of his values: der sich Der Charakter ZeitmuB alsovon erst seiner tiefenEntwiirdigung aufrichten, dort der blindenGewaltder Natur sichentziehen,undhierzu ihrerEinfalt, und eine Wahrheit Fuille zurnickkehren; fur Aufgabe mehrals einJahrhundert.17 The return to the simplicity, truth, and fullness of nature must be accompaniedby the realizationthat nature, no less thanthe second nature described by Lukaics,is directionless and blind. Schiller's return to nature is a rather than a backward-lookforward-looking more oping return. Schilleris fundamentally timistic than Werther, or-paradoxicallymyopic, in that he does not insist on the limited perspective, the blindness, and self-delusion that always accompanyWerther'sreflections on his desire for return. The idea of return is a problematicimage within the Western tradition generally, contradictingthe most deeply rooted notions of progressive historical change. Werther's renunciationof the demands of late eighteenthcentury life, his disinterest in a world of new discoveries and- perhapseven more disturb-

ing- his refusal to explore the world empiricallyall go far deeper than Rousseau's reChristianrepresenversal of the traditionally tation of human nature as evil and societal restrictionas good. Werther'sreturnto nature appearsto be a reversal of history.The significance of this particularkind of return is the concern of Theodor Adorno'sand Max Horkheimer'streatmentof the dialecticof progress and regression: Rein natiirlicheExistenz, animalische und vegetative,bildete der Zivilisation die absoluteGefahr. Mimetische, mythiVerhaltensweisen sche, metaphysische als galten nacheinander uiberwundene mit auf Weltalter, die hinabzusinken dem das behaftetwar,daf3 Selbst Schrecken in jene blof3eNatur zurijckverwandelt werde, der es sich mit unsiglicherAnentfremdet hatte,unddieihm strengung eben darum unsiglichesGrauen einfl6b3an te. Die lebendige Erinnerung die Vorum zeit, schonan die nomadischen, wie vielmehran die eigentlich pripatriarchawar lischenStufen, mitdenfurchtbarsten aus Strafenin allenJahrtausenden dem BewuBtsein Menschenausgebrannt der worden. 2 In Werther'sformulationRousseau's reversal of the relation between nature and civilization realizes an historicaldimension.Adorno's and Horkheimer's observations cast serious doubts on the kindof return to naturewe may attributeto Werther.Even thoughhe appears - at least implicitly- to renounce a progressive view of history, in effect to turn his back on the present, Werther's renunciationis a threat to the present. The resolutionWerther attempts in Wahlheim lies somewhere between a nostalgic and a utopianresolution of the contradictionsof the given world. He cannot fully embrace a nostalgic return. Yet his utopian longings are modeled on such a return. The ambivalenceof Werther'sview of nature necessarily colors his flight from society and from the modern world. His flight itself is ambivalent. Werther confronts a fragmented world. In his flight from this fragmentation he paradoxicallybecomes ever more isolated and must invokean image of the com-

Goethe's Werther STRICKLAND:

munityfromwhichhe fled in orderto reconcile himself with his escape. Thus, though Werther experiences his epic fantasies alone, he imagines scenes such as the return of the vagabond.Not only is a socialvignette invoked within Werther'sflight from the given world, but this story is itself one of return. It is the image of a man who has either traveled or fled, searched and been disappointed,only to return to the comfort of his family.The possibility of such a return is dim outside of Werther's fantasies. In the returns he describes as actually having taken place, there are no happyembraces. Considerthe husband who returns from an inheritancejourneywith a fever and no money only to find that his youngest son has died (4 August 1772 [76]); Werther's disappointing pilgrimage to his birthplace(9 May 1772 [72 ff.]); and his final return to Wahlheim, where everything appears to have changed for the worse (94 ff.). The weight of these frustratedreturns as well as the enormous gap between them and the image of the returning vagabond finally lead Werther to abandon the hope of return and to resign himself to escape. In his short letter of 16 June 1772, Werther admits his defeat: "Jawohl bin ich nur ein Wandrer,ein Waller auf der Erde! Seid ihr denn mehr?" (75). But even at this dark moment Werther's flight remains rooted in the given world through his correspondence with Wilhelm. Looking back at the letter of 21 June 1771, we can see that there too Werther confirms his connection, understanding,and communication with Wilhelmby asserting that Wilhelm "knowshis Wahlheim" ("Dukennst mein Wahlheim" [28]). And he even inserts Wilhelminto the letter and thus into Wahlheim describby ing the village from Wilhelm's perspective ("Achk6nntest du dich in seine Schatten mischen!" [29]). One further indicationof the unsuccessful link Wilhelm represents between the created and given worlds is that "Wilhelm" and "Wahlheim" almost-but are not quite- anagrams for one another. Werther is in flight, but he continues to insist upon communication with the world from which he flees and continues to describe the

201

created world in terms that Wilhelm, as a representative of the given world, can appreciate, understand, or perhaps even approve. V How might Werther's ambivalentattitude toward nature be related to his sense of alienation from the given social world? How far can we follow Lukaics his assertion that the in for a reunion with nature expresses longing an alienationfrom nature?Does this alienation result from the perception that the humanmade environment, the given social world, is not withinhumancontrol, that it exists not to meet human needs but as something dead or- to use the Hegelian term- positive? Die Fremdheit Natur, erstenNader der tur gegenfiber, moderne das sentimentaist lische Naturgeffihl nurdie Projektion des Erlebnisses, dieselbstgeschaffedaB ne Umwelt denMenschen Vaterkein ffir hausmehrist, sondernein Kerker.29 Wertherdoes indeed perceive the given world as a prison. But the situation seems to be still more complicatedthan Lukics's formulation would suggest; for here, again in the letter of 21 June, Werther's escape itself is characterizedin terms that implya voluntary imprisonment. The given world is described as a prison only indirectlyand in such a way as to focus our attention on the fact that Wertherhimself seeks out a kind of imprisonment. Besides the passages we have already considered, we mayaddWerther'sdescription of Lotte's father's house as locking up or enclosing all his wishes. This image of confinement is placed in sharp relief by its juxtaposition with Werther'sdescriptionof his own wide wanderings ("Wieoft habe ich das Jagdhaus, das nun alle meine Wuinsche einschlieJ3t, auf meinen weiten Wanderungen,bald vom Berge, bald von der Ebne iuberden FluBgesehn!" [28; emphasis added]). While Werther's view from the mountaintopindicates a privileged perspective from outside the prison, it equally suggests a great distance between himselfandthe object of his longings,

202

THE GERMAN QUARTERLY

Spring 1991

a distance made impassable by the river on whose far bank he stands. Werther's vision is one of beautiful and familiarvalleys surroundedby chains of protective hills. These valleys pull him in with a force portrayedalternativelyas an irresistible attraction and as something to which he willfully submits. The desire for restriction is an inner drive to which Werther nevertheless willinglysurrenders. He is drawnto the valley (". .. wie es mich rings umher anzog" [29]) and loses himself in it just as the ships in his grandmother's Mdrchen were drawn to the magnetic mountain (". . . die Schiffe, die zu nahe kamen, wurden auf einmal alles Eisenwerks beraubt, die N~igelflogen dem Berge zu, und die armen Elenden scheiterten zwischen den iibereinanderstfirzenden Brettern" 26 July 1771[41]). The contrastbetween thirst (a need to be fulfilled)and drowning (a selfabandonment to a more powerful environment) is also striking: Ganzeruhtvor Eingro8esdammerndes unsererSeele, unsere Empfindung verschwimmt darin unserAuge,undwir wie sehnen uns, ach! unser ganzes Wesen uns hinzugeben, mit allerWonneeines Geftihis ausherrlichen einzigen, grof3en, fiillen zu lassen. Und ach! wenn wir wenndasDortnunHierwird, hinzueilen, ist alles vor wie nach, und wir stehen in unserer Armut, in unserer Eingeschrinktheit,und unserer Seele lechzt nachentschliipftem Labsale.(29; emphasis added) Werther allows his lungs to be filled with the emotions in whichhe swims in orderto quench a thirst that cannotbe satisfied in the confinement of the given world. Werther'sgeneralization of his perspective, his substitutionof the first person plural for the singular pronoun, generalizes his longing. He makes his desire appear lawlike, beyond his control, a passive compliancewith generally recognized human conditions rather than something of his own individualcreation. He uses the pluralvoice to insinuate an impression of collective fate into a context of isolation. But Werthercannotblot out the knowledge of his creative role. Just as Werther chooses

a pot in which to cook his beans (". . . wenn ich in der kleinen Kiiche mir einen Topf wihle. . ." [29]), his fate is here only partially given. Werther's escape is not to a world of nature and his return is not to a fatherland; rather he must create his destinationfor himself. Perhaps because he associates the flight to nature with a return to a more primitive state, perhaps because he recognizes that from the perspective of the given world- a perspective he cannot shake off-his return appears as a renunciation,Werther's return itself takes on the characteristicsof imprisonment. The same image Werther uses to denounce the given world becomes the image he uses to celebrate his created world. A positive image of imprisonment is not uncommonin Romanticliterature.Indeed, the prison metaphoris a favoriteresolutionof the dialecticof flight andrestriction. VictorBrombert maintains that the essentially positive image of imprisonment arises from its ambiguity, from the opportunityit provides for working out a dialecticaltension between oppression and freedom." We may extract from his work a number of characteristics of the romantic prison against which we may measure Werther's self-imprisonment.The isolation of the prison provides both protection from a hostile external worldand an opportunity for self-definition. The prison image is often accompanied by a sense of timelessness. And it conveys an impression of a sentence imposed by a more powerful force, beyond the control of the poet but confirming the poet's own self-chosen withdrawal from society. Finally, the prison image contains the promise of escape and either a reunion with the world from which the poet has been separated or a relief from the pain of existence in general. Where and to what extent does Werther's image of imprisonment coincide with or depart from these general characteristics? What does this reveal about the tensions with which Werther is wrestling? Our readingof Wertherwouldtend to support Brombert'sclaimthat the romanticprison is as much a promise of isolation and refuge

STRICKLAND: Goethe's Werther from a threatening external world as it is an image of oppressive restriction: The imageof immurement essentially is in ambivalent the Western tradition: the walls of the cell punishthe culpritand victimize innocent; theyalsoprothe but tect poeticmeditation religiousferand vor.The prisoner's andthe monastic cell cell lookstrangely alike.Thereexists no doubta nostalgia enclosure,as well for as a prisonwish.31 Although the metaphor of the prison is not explicitly stated in the letter of 21 June, the sense of confinementandmanyof the qualities Brombertassociates with the romanticprison are unmistakable.Nevertheless, there are important differences that set Wertherapart from the examples Brombertuses to support his thesis and that suggest an even deeper ambivalencethan the one Brombert finds. Wahlheimdoes appear to be a kind of refuge for Werther. It is a place of protection and isolation from the given world. In this respect we might compare Werther'sflight to Wahlheimwith another example absent from Brombert's analysis of the prison image: Thoreau'swithdrawal a solitary life on Walto den Pond. Thoreau'svoluntaryhermitage, his celebrationof self-sufficiency,and his meditations on Homer all seem to echo Werther's own concerns. But there is a decisively different tone in Thoreau'swork. His life does not appear to be one of desperate flight but of genuine contentment in isolation. Whereas Wertherseems boundto the worldfromwhich he flees- boundby his correspondence with Wilhelm,by his desire for community,and by his ideal of patriarchal life- Thoreau's ideolseems to save him from ogy of individualism the sense of loss that Werther experiences in his flight. Too sharp a contrast, however, would be misleading. In spite of Thoreau's apparentcontentment, he continues to be driven to write about his experiences and thus to share his flight with the world he has temporarilyleft behind.He also continues, in spite of his individualism,to value a sense of community,as is evident when he dwells uponthe inabilityof the townspeople of Concordto understand his decisions. Werther'sespousal of

203

an ideal of a happypastoral or patriarchal life is an attempt to resolve a contradictionin the given world. The image of a pastoral life Werther conjures up is not one of isolated with the conindividuals,yet it is incompatible ditions of life in the modern world of the late in eighteenth century. In fact, individuals the given world are even more isolated from one another than those in the worldto which Werther would withdraw.Thoreau'sindividualism seems to be just another,perhaps more intellectual, attempt to solve this contradiction. The isolationof the prison is also supposed to be part of a process of self-exploration and self-definition.In Brombert'sanalysis the prison is a kind of return to the self that provides an opportunityfor deep reflectionin the absence of the social gaze before which one would otherwise posture: unheroic heroism,or the (for Essentially heroicstance,requires audience), an the movementtowardthe internalcell of meditation to corresponds the questfor authenticity,which, at its extreme no leavesno points,tolerates histrionics, roomfor anypose.:3 It wouldbe difficult,to say the least, to reconcile this ideal with our reading of Werther. Histrionics seem to be characteristic of Werther'splight. But perhaps Brombert'sobservation does give us a constructive lead. Werther never achieves this "unheroic" ideal because he is never without an audience. Not views only is he constantlyawareof Wilhelm's on the situations he describes, but he seems to have internalizedhis audience. His escape into the epic world is never able to relieve him of the standardsof the given world. For example, when he comforts himselfby reading Homer followingthe incident at the Count's party in book II, he seems to have achieved a certain distance, but the effect of Homer is immediatelyshattered by the realizationthat people are gossiping about him: Dakommt ehrliche der Adelin hinein, legt seinenHutnieder, indem mich er ansieht, tritt zu mir und sagt leise: "Du hast Verdruf gehabt?"- "Ich?" sagte ich."DerGrafhat dichaus der Gesellschaft

204

THE GERMAN QUARTERLY

1991 Spring

ity, and the communicablepast of the chronicle. This integrationis achieved symbolically in the fully grown cabbage: Wie wohl ist mir's, daBmein Herz die simpleharmloseWonnedes Menschen auf fiihlenkann,der ein Krauthaupt seinen Tischbringt,das er selbstgezogen, und nun nichtden Kohlallein,sondern alldie gutenTage,densch6nen Morgen, die daer ihnpflanzte, lieblichen Abende, Werther's denunciation of the gossipers da er ihnbegoB,undda er an dem fortschreitendenWachstumseine Freude serves only to exacerbate our impression of wieder hatte, alle in EinemAugenblicke his internalizationof their values and judg(29 mitgenief3t. f.) ment. Homer may provide some temporary relief but cannot save Werther from the Werther's desire to bridge the gap between the experienced past and the communicable glances of others. Another characteristicfeatureof the prison past is certainly what is at stake here. The for history coiled in the head of the cabbage, like metaphor is its "stagnant atemporality," which Brombertfinds evidence in Byron'sThe the history coiled in the artwork, is a private Prisoner of Chillon.33This escape from the history for public consumption. It is a living constraints of time appears strangely twisted yet potentially communicable remnant of a in Werther'simage of imprisonment.A funda- world that is no longer present. While Wermental ambiguityin Werther'sunderstanding ther's fantasy is one of an expectation of reof the past gives rise to this twist. In the form turn, it is a return that-as he seems to be of personal memories, the past torments aware at this moment-must be cultivated. The prison image may also serve as an Werther. Memories of his earlier life overcome him, for example, during his soliloquy external confirmationof Werther'sself-willed on ill humor(1 July 1771 [34]). But in the form seclusion. It is a device throughwhich an act of history, as recorded in the style of a disin- of the will is recast as fate. This move helps terested chronicle,the past providesthe basis Werther to reify his created world, to set it for Werther'scommunication with Wilhelm(17 on the same level with the given world. But 1771 [13]). In the form of literature, the it is a move that is difficultto sustain, particuMay past comforts and calms him (13 May 1771 larlyin Werther'scase where there is no actual [10]). Werther'smemories cause him painbe- prison but only prison-likeimages to confirm cause they pointto a loss, to somethingabsent his creation. Let us return to our comparison from the empirically present world. Yet his of Werther and Thoreau and consider Thorhistorical accounts, though they are almost eau's statement: "The properplace today,the immediatelyreported, also represent what is only place which Massachusetts has provided no longer present. Werther'sview of epic lit- for her freer and less desponding spirits, is erature is not only a nostalgia for the life of in her prisons, to be put out and locked out a past age but also a utopianreconciliationin of the state by her own act, as they have alwhich memory and expectation are united in ready put themselves out by their princia kind of return. The image of history pre- ples."" Thoreau is fortunate enough to have sented in the letter of 21 June is an image of the state's actionlegitimize or confirmthe isopersonal history that can be contained, epito- lation that he has already chosen. Werther's mized, and consumed. Although narrated in dilemmais that his imprisonment, his desire the thirdperson, Werther'sdescription is ob- for a limitedperspective, his chosen enclosure viously that of a situationto which he aspires: within a comfortably familiar environment the abilityto integrate the richness of the past must remainin his consciousness as a creation as a personalmemory, the epic past of simplic- of his own making; it is not imposed by the sie sagt' gewiesen."- "Hol' derTeufel!" ich, "mirwar'slieb, daBich in die freie du's Luft kam."- "Gut," sagt' er, "daB auf die leichteAchselnimmst.Nurverherdrie8t mich's,es ist schon fiberall um."- Da fing mich das Ding erst zu wurmen.Alle, die zu Tischekamenund dachteich, die sehendich michansahen, darum Dasgabb6ses Blut.(15March an! 1772[69])

STRICKLAND: Goethe's Werther

external world. Werther compares himself often with those who are confinedby external circumstances: the suicidal girl, children in general, Heinrich in the double sense of one who believes his sorrow has an external source and who longs for his lost days of confinement in the asylum. But Albert will always be able to distinguish their situation from Werther's, as he does in the discussion Werther records in his letter of 12 August 1771 (45 ff.), and Werther will never be able to reject fully Albert's perspective. In the romanticimage of the prison, escape is always an implicitpossibility. Escape from the prison, crossing its threshold, is a means of achieving communionwith the world from which the prison itself serves as an escape. "For in its larger mythic dimension,"writes Brombert, "the carceralimagery implies the presence of a threshold, the possibility of a passage, an initiation- a passage from the inside to the beyond,from isolation to communion, frompunishmentandsufferingto redemption. . . ."" We have alreadynoted Werther's recognitionof the possibilityof an escape from the prison of the given world. His acknowledgment of the possibility of suicide is a promise of escape that accompanies his view of the given world as a prison. But the prison of the letter of 21 June, the prisonas a chosen refuge also holds the promise of a passage from isolation to communion.Werther,however, does not experience the joy of imprisonmentas an expectation of future communion. Rather, communionitself is brought within the walls of the prison in the form of the vagabond's homecoming. However, this communion remains a kind of self-delusion reflecting the close connection between the choice of imprisonment and the unrealizable desire for sympathetic understanding.Brombert sees a certain hopelessness in the prison image: Whatremains be stressed is the funto damentalgloom that hides behindthe and conquestof intimacy imagesof selfthe solpossession.Behind impregnable itude and convulsiveself-centeredness lurksthe secret awareness no relathat tion can exist between man and man. Therearenoechoesto thecriesofSade's

205

secret torturerooms- the cries cannot even be heard. And the walls remain mute." It is in response to this secret awareness that Wertherturns from the world. He constructs a second world that, as he seems painfully aware, resembles the prison from which he fled. His pain is redoubled when we realize that, although he turns away from the given world, he does so in the interest of overcoming the silence and isolation of solipsism. Although the letter of 21 June is but one moment in Werther's history, it exemplifies his epic ideal and the tensions embedded withinit. Here Wertherweighs his longingfor a familiar worldagainstthe openness andfreedom of discovery. I have tried to show how this contradictionbetween constraintand discovery becomes the source of Werther'sinstabilityas he strives to create a second, fictional world in which he might live. To resolve this dilemmaWerther tries to use the Odysseyas the narrativeform throughwhich to retell his own story. The contrast between Odysseus's struggle to return to a given home and Werther's own more problematicstruggle to create a home to which he might return signals the uncertainty as well as the importanceof Werther's attempt. The second world that Werthertries to create, and with it any possibility of a genuine homecoming, eventually buckles under the weight of the values of the given world, values to which he himself is ultimately committed.

Notes SGoethes 7th Werke, Hamburger Ausgabe, ed., 14vols. (Hamburg: 1968)6: 488. Allpagecitations in Wegner, the text referto this edition.
FredricJameson, The Political Unconscious,Narrative as a Socially SymbolicAct (Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1981).

See esp. 28 ff. for Jameson's defense of allegorical the of Althusser. interpretation against criticism Louis The anthropologist VincentCrapanzano testifies to boththe dangerandthe valueof allegorical readings: "Above all-and I writewithuneasiness a certain and Tuhamibothas text andas a fellowhuman regretof beingenablesme to raise the problematic the life Tuhami beencounter. historyand the ethnographic comes, thereby,a figurewithinan imposedallegory thatin a veryrealsense bypasseshim.Myownobtru-

206

THE GERMANQUARTERLY

1991 Spring

sive presence in his life enables Tuhamito tell his story; it also permits me the luxury of entering that allegory in the name of a science that is unknown to him." Vincent Crapanzano, Tuhami, portait of a Moroccan (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1980) xi. 4 Evaluationsof Wertheras a pathologicalfigure abound. See, for example, Hans Reiss, Goethe'sNovels (New York:St. Martin's,1969). Werther'sexplicit social critiZeitkritikund cism is treated in detail by Peter MiUller, (Berlin [DDR]: Riitten & Utopie in Goethes"Werther" Loening, 1969). ErdmannWarniekargues that the consignaled a yielding of temporary reception of Werther moralto aesthetic criteriain the evaluationof literature. Erdmann Warniek, "Wertherlesen und Werther als 1 Leser," Goethe Yearbook (1982): 74 ff. Reiss 29 (see n. 4). 6 James Wilson, "Goethe's Werther: Keatsian Quest A for Self-Annihilation," Mosaic 9 (1975-76): 105. Peter Salm, "Wertherand the Sensibility of Estrangement," German Quarterly46 (1973): 51 f. ' Eric A. Blackall,Goetheand the Novel (Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1976) 35 f. " Robert Ellis Dye, "Manand God in Goethe's Werther," Symposium29 (1975): 321. "'Comparisonwith Schiller's later and more explicit disand "childish"is hard to tinction between "childlike" resist. Consider also Schiller's admonishment: "Sie [Kinder]sind, was wir waren;sie sind, was wir wieder werdensollen. Wir waren Natur, wie sie, und unsere Kultur soll uns, auf dem Wege der Vernunftund der "Uber naive und Freiheit, zur Natur zurtickffihren." sentimentalische Dichtung,"Sdmtliche Werke,5 vols. (Munich:Winkler,1968) 5: 434. " Blackall(29) first drew my attention to this rather obvious pun. '2 Salm 52. '' Blackall, ch. 2 and passim. Reiss offers an opposing view stressing the discrepancies between the narrator's values and those of Werther,but he overlooks the tensions within the narrator'saccount: "The editor's account is to be objective. At first, the reader is merely assured that an event has been accurately reported. It is not suggested that a view of realityis being developed. But this very objectivity contains the whole essence of another view of the world. To describe the sorrows of Wertherwithoutan expression of sentiment is to suggest that reality is not what is felt, that feeling has to be subordinatedto reason, that external events take precedence over the movement of the inner life" (48 f.). Double Perspec4 BenjaminBennet, "Goethe's Werther: tive and the Game of Life," German Quarterly 53 (1980): 65. Other readers have sought an Archimedean of point in Werther's"misreading" literature. See, for example, Carol E. W. Tobol and Ida H. Washington,

ModernLan"Werther'sSelective Readingof Homer," guage Notes 92 (1977): 596-601; and Bruce Duncan, "'EmiliaGalotti lag auf dem Pult aufgeschlagen':WerGoetheYearbook (1982) 42-50. 1 ther as (Mis-)Reader," However attractive this project may seem, it errs in treating "our"readings of Emilia Galottiand the Odyssey as transparent. For a criticalperspective, see Warniek 61 ff. (see n. 4). '"Bennett 68 ff. '"Georg Lukacs, Die Theorie des Romans (Darmstadt: Luchterhand,1971) 53. 17 Lukics 53. 'X I prefer not to mark this uncertaintyas a "misreading" of Homer. For alternative interpretations, see Peter Goethe's NarPuitz,"WerthersLeiden an der Literatur,"

rative Fiction.TheIrvineGoethe ed. Symposium, Wil-

liam J. Lillymann(Berlin: de Gruyter, 1983) 55-68; TobolandWashington; Duncan;andWarniek (see n. 4). '"Lukics 21. " Jameson 144. "'Jameson 146. " Jameson 157. ": Friedrich Schlegel, "Rede iiber die Mythologie,"
2" Reiss

Kritische ed. Hans Friedrich-Schlegel-Ausgabe, Eichner

(Munich:Sch6ningh, 1967) 2: 311-28. 27 (see n. 4). 25 Arnold Hirsch, "Die Leiden des jungen Werthers: Ein biirgerlichesSchicksalim absolutischenStaat,"Etudes Germaniques13 (1958): 231. 2 Dye 317. 2 FriedrichSchiller,"Uber die isthetische Erziehungdes 5: Menschen,"Samtliche Werke 330 (see n. 10). I am using Rousseau's position as a familiartouchpointand am thus presentinghere onlya caricatureof Rousseau's ideal of nature. A more thorough comparisonof Goethe's and Rousseau's views on this subject would require a more subtle treatment of Rousseau. 1"Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, Dialektik

in derAufkldrung, Gesammelte Schriften, MaxHorkby

heimer, ed. Gunzelin Schmid Noerr (Frankfurta.M.: Fischer, 1987) 5: 54. " Lukics 55. 1' Victor Brombert, "The Happy Prison: A Recurring Continuities, ed. David Thorburn and Geoffrey Hartman (Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1973) 62-79. 1' Brombert 63. 32 Brombert 73. " Brombert 68. :1 Henry DavidThoreau, "Onthe Duty of CivilDisobedi(New York:Harper, 1958) 260. 1 Brombert 67; emphasis added. I Brombert 77 f.

Romantic Romanticism: Instances, Vistas, Metaphor,"

and ence,"Walden On theDutyof CivilDisobedience