data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d39a6/d39a63ac9db0ce86a4c491bb68bea681141bed57" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/490b8/490b861438c5b86559ace595fedf19962e8f005f" alt=""
Hauser recognizes Goethe's achievement: Wilhelm Meister is the "first Bildungsroman in the strict sense of the word." He also writes that it is "the first important criticism of romanticism as a way of life." Its message is the "absolute sterility of the romantic turning away from reality: he [Goethe] emphasizes that one can only do the world justice if one is spiritually bound up with it, and that one can only reform it from inside."
Goethe lacked, however, the recognition that there is no peaceful reconciliation of the individual and a given social situation. Thus, we do not find in Wilhelm Meister what we have come to expect in novels since the 19th century, namely, the portrayal of a character within a "realistic" social milieu. While there are realistic elements in Wilhelm's milieu, he is not in conflict with it. He experiences some stumbles on his path, but in the end he sloughs off his immaturity and unrealistic expectations and follows the counsels of his betters in worldly knowledge. The novel does not give expression to what Hauser calls "the cultural problem of the age -- the antithesis between individualism and society." It was, says Hauser, Balzac and Stendhal who "saw the prevailing tensions much more acutely and judged the situation with a greater sense of reality than Goethe."
Even Goethe's most interesting novel (in my view), Elective Affinities, is psychological rather than sociological. I recall when I first read it many years ago that I was expecting a German version of Jane Austen in whose novels, according to Hauser, "social reality was the soil in which the characters were rooted," though society was not a problem that Austen "made any attempt to solve or interpret." Having grown up on the canonical 19th-century English novels, I recognized that Elective Affinities represented a different beast.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0dec7/0dec71c45afe05b3eace28eb728cd5196bae1188" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/373a9/373a93a9a60181d30e6a9831521b2b3f18a3b272" alt=""
Goethe was in any case opposed to "naturalism" in the arts, and I wonder if this opposition arose from a sense that society was beginning to make claims on the arts. Goethe was not writing for "society," for the middle class, for the newly emerging reading public, which wished to see its interests reflected in the arts. (That would be Dickens' bailiwick.) In this respect, The Sorrows of Young Werther makes a great exception in Goethe's career. After Weimar, his reading public was restricted to a small segment of the cultured class.
Picture credits: The Guardian; WyrdLight; Bing Crosby Media Archive
1 comment:
Fascinating. Am reading WM and find it not hard but dull. The same way Moll Flanders is but Hamlet and The Inferno and Don Quijote aren't: nothing really compelling, no drama.
Post a Comment