Read e-book Die Wiener Moderne und ihre Beziehungen zur französischen Literatur (German Edition)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Die Wiener Moderne und ihre Beziehungen zur französischen Literatur (German Edition) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Die Wiener Moderne und ihre Beziehungen zur französischen Literatur (German Edition) book. Happy reading Die Wiener Moderne und ihre Beziehungen zur französischen Literatur (German Edition) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Die Wiener Moderne und ihre Beziehungen zur französischen Literatur (German Edition) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Die Wiener Moderne und ihre Beziehungen zur französischen Literatur (German Edition) Pocket Guide.

Albertine went down with scarlet fever or so it was believed. The banker Bethmann, once less welcoming to an impecunious Friedrich Schlegel, received her. Hers to Germany may be compared with his in the other direction, except that his was voluntary, hers enforced.

Both were driven by curiosity, he filled with the sense that the wealth of knowledge amassed in Paris should be made available to the Germans and on their terms , she with the awareness that the French needed to be made acquainted with the philosophy and literature of what was for so many an unknown country. For it needs to be said that the recital there of German institutions—literary, educational, political—had a marked slant towards those persons and those places that she actually visited; and as with England there was to be next to no reference to the lower orders.

The hope of meeting Jacobi 28 never came about. But Weimar 14 December to 1 March was different. We may pass lightly over her unconventional attire and headdress, her volubility, her receiving visitors in bed—for a celebrity need not be conventional. There was no love for the First Consul in Weimar, and everyone seemed to have read Delphine. Karl August and his duchess, Louise she would correspond with the duchess over a longer period , also the dowager duchess Anna Amalia 30 received her graciously.

There were visits to the theatre: To show her good will, she translated ballads by both into French. Then there was Kant. She also mentioned her search for a tutor for her sons. Goethe believed that Schlegel would be the right man, and Crabb Robinson went even further: One wonders what criteria were behind these sponsorships. Now, he was a professor.

The diminished party left for Berlin on 1 March She did not come unannounced. And she met August Wilhelm Schlegel. First impressions were more than favourable and she could write to her father on 23 March in these terms: I have met here a man who displays more knowledge and wit in literary matters than anyone I know; it is Schlegel. Benjamin will tell you that he has some standing in Germany, but what Benj. I am doing what I can to urge him to come with me.

Albert during the months he spends at Coppet, and I will gain a great deal for the work that I am planning. Benjamin will enjoy his conversation on the subjects close to his heart, and most importantly, I am sure that he will not displease you, as his manners are simple and discreet, and it will give you pleasure to see each one of us in his study hard at work. It was an arrangement that suited the situation of exile, where in his own way Schlegel would become indispensable. But there were lessons to be learned and manners to be acquired.

He would soon establish that she and her circle evinced a good deal of scepticism and worse for the cherished notions of poetry and art that he had been expounding in Jena and Berlin and were much more open in their judgments on things German and far less censorious. The Coppet circle was not to be a continuation of Jena, nor was it a salon. Dogmatism, over-eager insistence, intolerance, gratuitous acerbity and polemics were not part of this style, as they had been in Jena and still were in Berlin.

There would be time to think over the details of their working relationship. Assuming that she attended the very last part of his Berlin Lectures, and assuming that she was able to follow them, she would have heard his section on Italian poetry of which she was a ready recipient and on which she had already pronounced. Had they thought about their differences? Except, of course, that both authors had moved on since then, or were in the process of so doing. Clearly, their notions of human progress diverged irreconcilably. She in her turn had meanwhile been attacked by Chateaubriand and was allergic to the aesthetic Christianity that he was propounding.

They could not even begin to agree on most of the crucial points for which she stood. She had sought to extract from the French Revolution as much as might be beneficial for France and for humankind in general, even when this involved perilous engagement in politics. He knew from the bans and edicts issued against Caroline and from the Fichte affair that German professors had to steer clear of political entanglements.

For Schlegel at this stage was not interested in questions of liberty, the cosmopolitan connotations of literature, or the social values of the novel, in old issues that still echoed in France under new guise, such as the Querelle des anciens et des modernes or the divide between North and South, especially a notion of the North that had Bards, Skalds, Danes, Scots and Ossian in unhistorical hugger-mugger.

There would be time for their views to converge on some points: On French culture in general, there was his ostinato voice of hostility; and there was more to come in that Comparaison of and in the Vienna Lectures. Then there were the real red rags like her bracketing of Homer and Ossian! There would be time for both of them to become somewhat more accommodating. Like her heroine Corinne in Italy she would become more conciliatory towards Catholicism.

At most perhaps Benjamin Constant, who spent the rest of the years after agonizing over whether he should or should not marry her, saw Schlegel as a potential rival. Their relationship has been seen as slavish devotion his to her , but also an increasing dependence she on him. It has led to all kinds of speculation about his sexuality or its lack , his willing domination, his submission to women, pathological traits which he may or not have had, his failure to enter into any kind of lasting bond. It has permeated an old-fashioned vitalist literary criticism that sees Schlegel the translator or commentator as merely receptive, not creative.

It takes us into areas which the modern biographer treads at his or her peril. For Schlegel was not the only man who was to be driven to near-distraction by her. She overturns biographical certitudes; she is a phenomenon of nature. Thus in one sense Schlegel was bound, yet in another he was free, free of the pressing need for ready income.

He was no longer beholden to publishers and review editors, all and sundry, and could pick and choose, except of course when the subject was her Racinian roles or her novel Corinne. It gave him security in uncertain times. His movements in the years were determined by her itineraries and her exiles. There were none of the frantic peregrinations of his brother Friedrich or the Tieck family. He escaped the worst of the political turmoil in Germany after and indeed until Thus it was that Schlegel could provide a solid ground, a focal point, moral and financial support even, for an extended Romantic circle, a Jena in diaspora.

The real conditions of his service were set out before he left Berlin with her and her two children. If he were to stay for only six months, he would receive 60 Louis, if permanently Louis annually about francs monthly. That devotion was soon to be put to the test. This led to a hasty departure for Weimar on 19 April. Her father meanwhile had died in Geneva on 9 April.

Constant, hardly arrived back in Coppet, left at breakneck speed for Weimar, reaching there at midnight on 20 April. They left for Gotha on 1 May and again were received at court. He found Schlegel hypersensitive if one of his favourite theories or poets was challenged, taking it as a personal affront.

Clearly the German professor and the Franco-Swiss private scholar had yet to find the measure of each other. Constant did, and found his person as unappealing as his philosophy. Nevertheless he could not be aesthetically indifferent to his physical environment, the park, the bosky landscape extending to the lake, mountains such as he had never seen before. It was his late equivalent of the Berliners Tieck and Wackenroder being overwhelmed by the Franconian countryside in , but this was on an altogether grander scale.

What did he mean? In fact he was to rely on two Genevan scholars, his fellow comparative linguist Marc-Auguste Pictet 71 and the immensely learned Guillaume Favre 72 to supply him with recondite antiquarian details. He had been allocated the bedroom formerly belonging to Madame Necker. He took his breakfast in his room at seven, not being required to appear with the rest of the company. At three-thirty was the midday meal, at ten supper. He had the mornings free until one, taught till three, with another hour later in the afternoon.

As said, we do not know exactly what was the nature of his tutoring, and with his views on education he may have needed to rein in his learning. True, Albertine later confessed that she failed to see the Homeric qualities in the Nibelungenlied , 74 which suggests a Berlin lecture scaled down for children. It is the human side of Schlegel, which tends to be lost sight of, the aspect that those many later testimonies to his vanity and self-importance either did not know about or chose to ignore.

Sophie, not surprisingly, wanted money. Schlegel in his turn saw an opportunity for Friedrich Tieck: It would not be done until Unger was hoping for volume nine of Shakespeare, 78 that was to contain King Richard III , a request Schlegel would be five years in fulfilling. It is difficult to place them in order of priority, for so often her schemes and plans opened up opportunities for him to make statements on his own native national literature. First he had to surmount some adjustments to the life-style of Coppet. How much Schlegel knew of the company that he would be sharing, is open to question.

He may not have been prepared for what seemed like a constant stream of visitors. Three figures who were or were to become major members of the Coppet group put in an appearance during the same summer. They would make Schlegel acutely aware of how different his background was from theirs and, despite his professorial erudition, how narrowly provincial in some respects. He was about to publish an account of his Italian journey.

Benjamin Constant had studied at Oxford, Erlangen and Edinburgh and had had a rapid career as a political publicist until Bonaparte put paid to it. Hardly any of the remarks about Schlegel in their journals or correspondence is respectful. A fourth, Mathieu de Montmorency, from one of the great French aristocratic houses, had served in the American War of Independence and had been deeply involved in the French Revolution.

It was to him that Schlegel later addressed the extraordinary letter of August in which he contemplated a return to the bosom of the church. Free social and intellectual concourse Coppet and its circle certainly afforded, yet it had occasionally also the atmosphere of a court presided over in regal style by One who yielded only to Napoleon—and that unwillingly.

But his dogged loyalty did not necessarily admit him as of right to the very inner circle in which Constant, Sismondi or Bonstetten found favour. Constant noted with some malice that Schlegel could afford to advance untenable theories because he had never lived in the real world i. Later, Bonstetten would blame Schlegel for the outbreak of religious mysticism to which Coppet succumbed in Predictably, they disagreed about French classical tragedy.

They did find common ground on India, not on the view that everything had its origin there, but on the awareness that Indian religion had advanced from polytheism to theism. And I answered straight: He, on the other hand, would be drawn out of his quarrels and learn more taste, etc. She also likes him, and he must feel very much at home there. He does not talk much, but when he does it is forthright and well-judged. But impar congressus [mismatch] the moment he strays from his scholarship. He is not adroit enough—perhaps language is part of the problem despite his generally speaking it well.

All half in jest, half with a certain tenderness. Asked whether Schlegel was an atheist and thus unsuitable as a tutor to her children, she replied: Faced with challenges to his most cherished ideas, and surrounded by her circle and its own historical and cultural emphases, Schlegel had various options at his disposal. But that was clearly not a satisfactory mode of existence, and even the material comfort that his tutorship or companionship afforded would be no compensation if he was always being belittled or disadvantaged by the company—all aristocrats as well as intellectuals.

Bonstetten and Sismondi moved between Switzerland and Italy as a matter of course, and Wilhelm von Humboldt was actually in Rome. He and his agents had her completely in their power, banning her from Paris, exiling her to Coppet, and capable of any arbitrary measure that they chose to implement.

Although much of Italy owed allegiance to Napoleon, he chose not to pursue her beyond the Alps, indeed Auguste later claimed that Joseph Bonaparte not yet king of Naples had provided letters of recommendation to make her stay in Rome more agreeable. Political and territorial differences apart, this Italian Journey conformed to certain patterns.

Again, her Italian Journey was different from theirs, in its scale and the range of experience. With his finances always limping behind his dreams, Friedrich was not to see Italy until , and then tagging along as secretary to the Austrian emperor and his chancellor, Metternich. How different, too, from the Tieck family, in Rome at roughly the same time , but dependant on money largely not theirs and disliked for their importuning. There had been great writers, but the disaggregation of Italy into small states had produced no national sense of a cohesive culture.

Here she was seeing Italy very much in contrast with France and England. Her taste in art was not yet highly developed. All this was to change as it found its expression in that extraordinary novel Corinne. But so much of his appreciation of antiquity, his aesthetic of painting, even his theory of language, was predicated on things Italian. He would inform Goethe that Rome, not Weimar, was where the emergent schools of German painting and sculpture were situated.

Being in Italy would add observed detail to his archaeological knowledge and his art criticism. To fill in the details of all this, one has to look at the works that are a direct reflection or result of his Italian Journey, his letter to Goethe about artists living in Rome, his review of Corinne , and his critique of Winckelmann, all of course carefully edited. The more extensive and informed remarks about architecture, painting and sculpture in his later Bonn and Berlin lectures on the fine arts are another direct reflection of the Italian experience.

On the one hand her journey was another royal progress. This account inevitably has several sides. On the purely physical, we hear of the floods that prevented them from coming directly to Rome; being in Rome itself in cooler February, but in Naples in a balmier March; the carnivals in both cities; climbing Vesuvius by mule and on foot, accompanied by Schlegel and Sismondi—the source of that hellish set-piece vision at the opening of Book 13 of Corinne —scrambling on to the acropolis at Cumae, her various excursions among the Roman ruins.

There was the political and social: There was the emotional: It was at times hard to distinguish this from the literary, for Monti was but one Italian neo-classical poet who received her; in Rome she was admitted, as Goethe once had been, to the Accademia Arcadiana; in Padua she met the aged Melchiorre Cesarotti who had once translated Ossian the Countess of Albany had been the protectress of Alfieri. Schlegel needed to rein in his prejudices against Italian neo-classicism, and Monti took the opportunity of reminding him of the injustice of foreigners towards Italian men of letters.

They delayed their departure from Rome to meet Alexander von Humboldt. There were personal touches at all levels: The party was to wait in Rome until Alexander von Humboldt arrived at the end of April Such geological evidence would reveal a much more dynamic interaction between the cultures of the Mediterranean rim than previously entertained. This did not mean that Schlegel did not indulge in speculations himself. Meeting the scholarly antiquarian Luigi Bossi in Milan, he advanced views on the origins of the two lions in the Venice Arsenale, on the basis of inscriptions at their side.

Some said the inscriptions were runic; Bossi said they must be Etruscan. Schlegel, at this stage not yet conversant enough with Etruscan, opted wrongly for runic, eliciting from Bossi a learned riposte. It is significant, for instance, that Schlegel later only makes passing mention of Domenichino, who forms the basis of the famous set-piece section on painting in Tivoli in Corinne although he does praise George Augustus Wallis, the other artist in that passage, in his letter to Goethe.

His remarks would benefit from his having seen Mantegna, for instance, while Correggio, to whom they made the obligatory pilgrimage in Parma, would recede in significance. His observations on the development of painting in antiquity gained from him and his companions having actually been in Pompeii and Herculanaeum. In the Summer of ]. Nevertheless the sequence of his remarks indicates a strategy: In landscape painting he praises Johann Anton Koch for his heroic and monumental style: A section on writers in Rome appears relatively conciliatory until one notices the prominence given to the Middle Ages and its Christian culture, represented by the Nibelungenlied.

Rome, whether Goethe liked it or not, was becoming the centre of things Romantic. When later in the year the Tieck cavalcade arrived, with Ludwig and Friedrich, the borrowing was on a large scale. Friedrich was using the time in Rome to make a start on the Necker memorial. Mir schlug das Herz, es rasselte der Wagen: Ach nein, ach nein! Ich bin ein Mann, u[nd] sah schon manche Zeiten, Und litt wie mich mein Schicksal unterwies. Du wirst nicht mehr die Arme nach mir breiten: Leb wohl, mein Cherub, und mein Paradies!

Is it the art from now and days of old, The seven hills and the yellow stream, The phantom of the conqueror of the world, That I must now give up with broken heart? O no alas, if only it were this! I am a man experienced in time And taking what my fate dealt out. It is a babbling child I left behind. You will not stretch your arms out to me more, Farewell my cherub and my paradise.

Schlegel never published these verses, and it may be hard now to defend them on purely aesthetic grounds especially the borrowing from Goethe in the first line , but there is no doubting that the sentiments were heartfelt. Yet Schlegel was not the only one whom leave-taking moved to poetic utterance. I have felt it, that god, in the ruins of Rome that I have wandered through with you in the moonlight and almost at the moment of leave-taking.

My whole soul is pierced with longing, tenderness and admiration. Much of this would go into her novel Corinne. It is difficult to rescue much of the poem aesthetically even if we know that Schlegel would later declare those incursions into the Roman Empire to be the catalyst of modern European history. Not even the Renaissance, Raphael or Michelangelo, is spared these depredations of time: To show how heartfelt these sentiments are, he summons up the ultimate name in her personal configuration: Unlike Winckelmann for whom the male form was everything, Schlegel was here writing to a woman who would not let him go, while he was in the entourage of another woman whose imperious claims had brought him to Italy in the first place.

He was well advised to leave the former and cleave chastely to the latter. Already in the first full letter he had written from Coppet on his arrival in May , he had recounted how he had had to drop his own work and be present when visitors arrived, first Bonstetten, then the prefect.

Even Benjamin Constant, still making serious claims on her heart and hand, was similarly constrained. As we shall see, the large bulk of the work on those projects was not actually carried out at Coppet at all and seemed to be fitted into a peripatetic lifestyle that took in several venues. If that involved bringing to French-language readers what was now common knowledge in Germany, well and good.

He approached Cotta about a reissue of his poems. For the time being there was nothing Schlegel could do to help his family except send sums of money to his needy mother through the war zones. In practical terms, nothing. The letter had its symbolic side, for the bearer was Carl von Clausewitz, not yet the theoretician of war, but the aide-de-camp to Prince August of Prussia.

Friedrich had not succeeded in extricating himself from Cologne. He was to complain that circumstances were forcing them apart, where they naturally belonged together. He denied for instance the theory that the American peoples may once have crossed the Bering Strait from Asia and embraced instead wilder notions of Indian colonies in Peru and Germanic settlements in Mexico. Fortunately Friedrich was able to rein them in somewhat when writing his important Ueber die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier of The boy then left for Paris in August, and Napoleon in the event intervened to put a stop to his admission.

Things were not improved by Napoleon continuing his injunction banning her from Paris and restricting her to a precinct of forty leagues from the capital while graciously allowing her the provinces. For the life-style of Coppet continued unabated: But other visitors involved emotional tangles: Prosper de Barante, immediately falling in love, Monti, to whom she was platonically attached, while Benjamin Constant saw himself as the lover en titre.

When not thus engaged, she was writing Corinne. For Schlegel the shine was already wearing off Coppet. It is worth quoting it in the original:. Dispose of my person, of my life, demand, forbid, I shall obey you in everything. I do not aspire to any happiness but what you care to bestow on me; I do not wish to possess anything, I wish to keep everything out of your generosity. I shall of my own free will consent to think no more wholly of my celebrity, to devote exclusively to your own use whatever I have by way of knowledge and talents.

I am proud of belonging to you as your own possession. On that level, it is one writer addressing another, each aware of the conventions and proprieties. It is also an admission of resignation and defeat, of the powerlessness of resistance, the realisation that his life, for the time being at least, was to be determined by her movements, her preferences, her dispensations. He had in effect nowhere else to turn: Seen thus, it need not be read merely as the craven and obeisant act of submission that many have judged it to be. It does also suggest that an intervening letter or conversation had promised to make amends, to repair their relationship, and her solicitude for his welfare in the next years, and his willingness to undertake acts of sacrifice on her behalf, would bear this out.

While Schlegel went through these rites of acquiescence and homage, accepting his role in a court where all was free but by the same token all was subtly controlled, at his desk, in those hours when there were no conversations and no social duties, he was able to perform some small acts of insubordination. Caricature drawing, undated [?

When he reviewed the posthumous papers of Jacques Necker, he found the same hagiographical tone appropriate that Germaine always employed with reference to her father. He also started writing in French. It is a thirty-to-forty-page fragment that Schlegel never published in his lifetime, much of it derivative and not all of its arguments sustained.

We do not know for whom or for what occasion it was written. It has echoes here and there of Rom , from the same year. We have lost original unities—those of philosophy with poetry or law-making with cosmogony—and our scientific discoveries serve only to make the material world available. The old idea of a Golden Age expressed this in terms of a primal energy, organic forces at work in natural rhythms, traces of which can be found in most ancient cultures.

We know this, he says, through the discoveries made by scholars like Bailly and Sir William Jones: That is one side. Boredom was another form of melancholy and depression. Something had to be done to ward it off. Apart from writing frequent letters to Auguste in Paris, there was her other, slightly brainless, son Albert to consider. We know very little of this except what Schlegel tells us in a letter to his sister-in-law in Hanover, and a few lines to Sophie.

It had been a very serious diversion since her childhood, when she had some lessons in the speaking of verse from the celebrated actress Mademoiselle Clairon. In Germany, it had added to her reputation for eccentric celebrity, as it would later in Vienna and Stockholm. This also meant Schlegel. We can imagine him as a lecturer in Jena or Berlin reading verse with good accentuation and even with feeling; and we know of his concern—also shared by Goethe— that the actors in Ion in Weimar should speak their lines well.

Of his acting skills we know less. The ever-malicious Benjamin Constant claimed that he was comical in tragedy and not happy in comedy, but that we may largely discount. Schlegel knew, as probably no-one else present did, that Lessing had once subjected this play to one of his elegant demolitions in the Hamburgische Dramaturgie , and Schlegel had already made no secret of his disdain for French neo-classicism.

This was in the article that he sent to the Berliner Damen-Kalender for thus late in , Ueber einige tragische Rollen von Frau v. She had of course been romantically associated with Schlegel in Berlin, and he had paid court to her in verse —and, who knows, perhaps in other form. The context is crucial. Similarly, he would be careful not to display too many of the prejudices against French and to some extent Italian neo-classicism to which his Berlin lectures had most recently given expression.

Schlegel assured his German readers that she possessed the poise, the ease of movement and gesture, the mastery of spoken language, that the actor must have, but above all the ability to make the poetic character her own, to act from within the dictates of her own heart, to empathise, to draw the audience into her own pain and suffering. There was none of the alleged forced declamation of some of the leading Paris actors. Apart from its ability to move Schlegel found words in French verse , the play has the merit of breaking with the conventions of the French stage, being in prose, allowing for mime, and with instrumental interludes between the speeches.

Diana, Aurora, Atalanta, Althea—the gamut of mythological emotion, terror, dignity, fury, despair—came easily to Ida. Schlegel wrote a poem in her honour. First, they went to Lyon, then to Auxerre. She had little eye for its scenic position above the river: Paris itself remained out of reach: She disclaimed any interest in politics, only a wish to live in the metropolis, but Napoleon and his agents were inexorable.

She could at least send Schlegel and Albert to Paris for ten days, which happened in May. In August, however, Schlegel fell ill. There is something of the Wunderdoktor and charlatan about him, especially his magnetic cures; there is also no doubt that he was skilled at his profession. His approach to Schlegel was holistic, prescribing what was thought appropriate at the time and rightly warning him not to take too much quinine , also probing into his state of mind.

Could there not be some hidden cause for this persistent fever, some worry or anxiety or grief? She was to be there from the end of November until April The rest of the time was more disciplined, with museums, libraries, theatre. She in her turn was taking Schlegel more and more into her confidence, using him as a signatory on documents for loans with an eye to purchasing property in France Acosta was one possibility.

She signed a contract with the publisher Nicolle, and arranged with Cotta for the German translation to be done by Friedrich Schlegel in fact, by Dorothea. She was sending Auguste back to Geneva to prepare him for his confirmation, the religious education of her children being something that she took very seriously. His mother meanwhile was not making it easy for those around her. She was putting out feelers to Metternich if only by sending him a copy of Corinne and other Austrian grandees.

It was a novel about Italy, and essentially about two English characters in Italy, not French, and the main French character was largely unflattering. Its Anglophile sentiments, which admittedly did not extend to all the characters or all the moral situations, were another source of irritation.

She would not back down, and the price was further exile. The extended family made its way back to Coppet in May-June, He would follow it up with the longer and more sustained review of the novel which appeared later in the year in the Jena Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung. The first point could be dealt with in a few masterful and disdainful sentences; the second would require more circumspection.

While not being exactly the Oswald to her Corinne—far from it—he had been her companion through much that was here translated into fiction, and he had helped to ease the pangs of its creation. The Germans, who like no other literary nation had placed artists in the centre of their drama and fiction, might be expected to be sympathetic to a novel about an artist, Corinne the chosen vessel of providence.

They could take in their stride a many-stranded text that took a love story, a travelogue, and long passages of art criticism, and interlaced them into a successful whole, a balanced ensemble aspects that even well-intentioned readers today do not find easy to reconcile. He was perhaps on less secure ground with the emotional content of the novel, but he made his position on Oswald clear immature and unsteady , and hoped that his female readers would agree.

The envoi of the review was puzzling. Was he piqued that, say, Monti was directly quoted in the text, while he and his brother Friedrich, whose Romantic art appreciation from Europa certainly informed passage after passage of the novel, were sidelined in a note each? It seemed that he was. The real Corinne would have forgiven him this little touch of personal vanity. Others would soon approach the novel with a definite parti pris. They paused here long enough for Schlegel to meet the librarian and to be shown two Roman mosaics in the city.

It gave him the opportunity for his first piece of sustained archaeological description: Schlegel shows here that he can be technical and learned, while also giving a spirited portrayal of the scenes depicted. The two ladies made an excursion to the glaciers at Chamonix: The savant-traveller was also—how could it be otherwise? He kept his ears open for gradations in dialect: The journey on foot was also a progression through pristine nature and uncorrupted morals.

True, there were three set-piece descriptions that showed an eye for both nature and human customs; and there was disapproval of the tourism that had already sprung up. The dates of publication, , brought with them reminders that this was the land of ancient freedom: Prince August of Prussia, who was forced to spend six weeks in Coppet while waiting for passports for himself and Clausewitz, fell passionately in love with her during the time he spent at Coppet they later vowed eternal love, without marriage.

Closer in time, he would state to his sister-in-law Dorothea Schlegel that he merely wanted to stir things up, get people annoyed, and to Goethe he used a similar tone. That in its turn was somewhat disingenuous: When these lectures were available, first in German, then in French, the full extent of his thinking on the notion of the classic, on classicism, on neo-classicism, would be shown in its widest context. It was a question of how one approached revival or recrudescence, not the principle itself. By placing this passage in the centre of his treatise, Schlegel was aligning himself with someone who had entered the Greek world with heart and mind and soul and spirit.

Schlegel, like Lessing, cut corners in argument, overlooked inconsistencies that did not suit him, and was often plainly unfair once he had his teeth in an opponent. Schlegel, as was his policy, never mentioned Schiller in this connection, but readers of Europa , that recent work from the Schlegel circle, would be left in no doubt as to its position: She did not place Racine on a pinnacle for all time, as Voltaire had done.

Access Check

All the same, when directing the same notion of progress towards Greek drama, she placed the trio Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides in descending order of merit. There were further contradictions. While correctly seeing that Euripides and Racine are basically different, she was unable to suppress the insight that only a Frenchman, not a Greek, could have written.

He could be more outspoken before the audience of his Vienna Lectures a year later.

As said, it stands essentially between the Berlin Lectures and those in Vienna, rehearsing some insights of the one and anticipating views expressed later. In the Comparaison we have the same gradation of esteem but also for the sake of his argument an implicit equality. He does not bring out essential but equally valid differences, as Herder had done forty years earlier when comparing Sophocles with Shakespeare.

He notes rather how much Racine has borrowed from his Greek source and how much he has changed, not why a seventeenth-century dramatist would find many motifs from Greek tragedy unsuitable or why he would read them differently from antiquity or from the early nineteenth century , bound as he was by the conventions of his own theatre that called for a love intrigue quite impossible in Athens but permissible in Paris.

Schlegel cannot deny that the play has great beauty of verse and diction, but that is about all he is prepared to concede. Why this is so, he never discusses; there is no mention of the Jansenist doctrines of Port-Royal or of exemplary states of grace. There is another factor as well: It is not Christian: Here Schlegel is rehearsing arguments that inform the second cycle of his Vienna Lectures. Constant noted nothing in his journal. Performances of French tragedies, such as Lessing had objected to in Hamburg forty years earlier, were still by no means uncommon in Once Schlegel found himself in the imperial capital, these two enterprises became joined in one effort.

She continues, knowing his response in advance: This he already knew, and in a sense the rumour—for it was no more than that—of his sailing to America provided the answer. Switzerland, occasionally France, Austria and Germany, before the great flight to Russia and Sweden in Sophie of course wanted money: August Wilhelm had to hear promptings from his brother about his talent as a dramatist, about careers in new universities like Berlin, just being founded.

Dorothea, extending her rapt admiration for Friedrich to her brother-in-law, averred that the two would be the pyramids that would outlast everything of their age. We cannot of course overlook the litany of querulous and self-pitying communications from Friedrich, but two symbolic confraternal gestures do stand out: August Wilhelm was to give his poem a prominent position in the reissue of his poetic works that he oversaw in Was August Wilhelm the author? This is only one side. For this periodical Schlegel produced a corpus of learned reviews that must rank as a scholarly achievement almost commensurate with the more accessible Vienna Lectures.

The list does not necessarily end there. By the same token, it is also without doubt that Schlegel certainly gave advice on German literature and thought to his benefactress which she in fact acknowledged. The plan of a comprehensive work on Germany—its people, culture, letters, moeurs , in brief whatever the French needed to learn about this fascinating nation in the north that was paradoxically not yet a nation—had never left her.

Now, there was the south, and there was Austria. They had met in Venice in , and she had not forgotten him. The disparity in their ages was no hindrance, as other admirers and lovers knew or were to know. Her plans for Vienna now had a treble thrust: Schelling and Schlegel were on their best behaviour and discoursed amicably, while agreeing to differ in private. It was also to be the last time that he saw her. But Munich also had its drawbacks: This was granted, and the seventeen-year-old boy made his request: The Emperor, as so often, was forthright, blunt and rude; he then relented and adopted a more kindly tone.

Might not a little credit accrue to his tutor Schlegel? Within a week, she had been received by the Emperor Francis and two royal archdukes. Her letters are studded with other grand names—Lobkowitz, Lichtenstein, Lubomirski, Potocki. He, at her prompting, had joined them in March: The serious business in Vienna was threefold: It needs to be said that her every step was followed by the assiduous Austrian police, they having taken over from the equally zealous but more efficient Napoleonic surveillance system.

This was partly his own doing, and partly because, as so often, he was ahead of his times. There were however problems: Ever since their removal to Paris and then Cologne, Friedrich had been doing just that. Of his Germanic and patriotic sentiments there could be no doubt; his letters, such as the one that he wrote to his brother in , were beginning to express notions of spiritual authority and order—one church, one constitution, one faith—that suggested the hierarchy of Rome. Rediscovering his exiguous dramatic talents, he was drafting a historical play on Charles V. Could he consult the imperial archives in Vienna?

She temporarily lost custody of her talented son Philipp Veit, the later Nazarene painter. By the time of his arrival in Vienna Friedrich had seen the publication of a work that towered in significance over almost anything that he had produced that decade: Ueber die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier.

While it did not involve the very first publication in German of a Sanskrit text, it was the first comprehensive survey of comparative mythology, migration theory, and the principles and origins of language, that was also a chrestomathy, a selection of Sanskrit religious and poetic texts in a German translation. This Friedrich had, during the extraordinary six-month burst of creative energy—and sheer concentration—after their arrival in Paris.

After approaches to Reimer and eventual successful negotiations with Zimmer, it was not to come out until Yet in many ways Friedrich had succeeded in bringing together in one volume aspects of India that would occupy August Wilhelm in what was ultimately a never-ending quest. The work had two major thrusts. It was a study in comparative grammar, which enabled two language groups or families to emerge, equally venerable as organs of sacred truths Hebrew and Sanskrit but divergent in terms of structure.

Human history could be traced to movements and removals, of place, language, belief and culture, away from the Centre, the simple and undivided Whole of primeval origins, as disorders and disruptions forced mankind in all directions. The work shows the comparative religionist, that Friedrich once was, in conflict with the believer on one faith and order. There is no hint of any preparatory work, but coincidences and overlaps between Berlin and Vienna suggest that he had to hand notes from the earlier series and that he used these, suitably adapted, for his new audience. There is evidence that he wanted his lectures to reach a wider public: There is also no doubt that the quickly-forged links with the literary world of Vienna gave some immediacy to his lecturing plans.

There was no attempt to present him as the voice of a faction, a school, as he had been in Berlin. But there was no overlooking the Schlegel presence in Prometheus , either: His own contribution to Prometheus was in itself not inconsiderable: It was in a sense the Vienna that August Wilhelm was poised to conquer. Otherwise, it seemed like a triumph of Kotzebue and Iffland and their dubious sentimentality; or a riot of frivolous comedy after the French, and, this being Vienna, lots of opera.

Her divorce from Bernhardi had been finally decreed, and the courts had awarded custody of her two sons to him. There Ludwig succumbed again to the rheumatic complaint that regularly laid him low in moments of stress; while Friedrich Tieck, his artistic career compromised and his finances exhausted, sent more and more desperate letters to the all-provident Schlegel. At the end of , Bernhardi appeared in person and took his elder son Wilhelm back with him to Berlin, leaving Felix Theodor, who Schlegel had once believed was his, with his mother.

Sophie and Knorring finally married in , but it was not until that she and Felix made the long journey to the Knorring estates in farthest Estonia. It brought odium to the name of Tieck, singly and collectively. Friendships and collaborations stood or fell according to their stance towards the affair: The medium to be adopted was another matter. Schlegel was there at the outset of an era that saw, Europe-wide, the great wave of public lectures associated with Cuvier, Humboldt, Davy or Coleridge, and his must take their place in that lineage.

But even as he was delivering his lectures in Vienna, others closer to hand were also using the public rostrum: Fichte, in Berlin, had been delivering his Reden an die deutsche Nation [ Speeches to the German Nation ] since the winter, and they represented in many ways the antithesis of what Schlegel stood for.

Even more was happening in Dresden. Title page of vol.

Site Google Books Download.

Image in the public domain. If Schlegel in his peroration commended the Romantic historical drama to the German nation—in its widest sense—it was in the awareness that this form of dramatic art had evolved in the crucible of other national cultures, the English and Spanish, and hence drew on both North and South for its inspiration, while appealing to the Germanic facility for assimilation and creative adaptation. There, one nation would be seen through the eyes of another; but here was a German claiming insights into the drama and theatre of the whole of Europe.

Words in season eventually secured Schlegel permission to lecture in the capital city, and the university was the first chosen venue. A princely twenty-five florins was charged for fifteen lectures, three per week. One notices also the state censor, perhaps making notes in the back row. Nobles jostled to secure tickets, including Count Wrbna-Freudenthal who later signed the letter granting Schlegel his imperial audience in April.

These were the people with the time and the leisure, who would not miss 25 florins.

  • The Life of August Wilhelm Schlegel!
  • El hombre de arena (Spanish Edition).
  • Site Google Books Download. | Page 4.
  • The Life of August Wilhelm Schlegel.

What he has to say, however, is very much to my liking, e. I can say that I attended the lectures with great pleasure. It suited his hearers better and was more appropriate to his subject-matter. He had now found the right medium, not academic discourse as in Jena, or that demanding section in Prometheus taken from his Berlin cycle. He would have to make concessions and keep technicalities to a minimum: Romantic doctrine would have to be made accessible to princes and counts of the Empire, a balancing-act that required considerable skill and tact.

In a sense, of course, he was not proclaiming Romanticism as something radically new or—the ultimate horror in Vienna—revolutionary. Much of his material was recycled from his own earlier lectures and publications. Very few, possibly none, of his audience would have been present in all three places, Jena, Berlin and now Vienna, and not many would have noticed how much had already been enunciated in those earlier venues, for instance most of the long sections on the Greeks. Much drew on existing published material, the Parny review in the Athenaeum on Aristophanes , the article on the Spanish theatre in Europa , or the recent Comparaison of that Heinrich von Collin also present was in the process of translating.

Schlegel had passed on but few of their insights in isolated publications, and Schelling, without acknowledgment, had done the same. In Vienna, Schlegel had to take a lot for granted, and he was sparing in his citation of sources. It was not the real point. While philology could never be an irrelevance for Schlegel, the circumstances of the Lectures required large generalisations, relativisms, eye-catching juxtapositions and sweeping conclusions, the most famous of which is this section from the Twelfth Lecture: Ancient art and poetry strives for the strict severance of the disparate, the Romantic delights in indissoluble mixtures: As the oldest law-givers proclaimed and set out their teachings and precepts in modulated harmonies, as Orpheus, the first tamer of the still wild human race, is praised in fable; in the same way the whole of ancient poetry and art is like a cadenced set of prescriptions, the harmonious proclamation of the eternal precepts of a world, finely ordered, that reflects the eternal archetypes of things.

The Romantic, by contrast, is the expression of the mysteries of a chaos that is struggling to bring forth ever new and wondrous births, that is hidden under the order of nature, in its very womb: The one is simpler, clearer and more akin to nature in the self-sufficient perfection of its single works; the other, despite its fragmentary appearance, is closer to the secret of the universe.

For instance, the images of biological organic growth as opposed to the mechanical and ordered, are common currency in the language of German idealism: Schlegel applies them to whole periods and styles. In matters of presentation and disposition, he had learned some lessons from Berlin; while in terms of his general attitudes, he had not greatly changed. Old enmities ran deep. Thus to introduce the essential Shakespeare, Schlegel reformulated the insight, not new or original, which the Germans Herder, Goethe, Eschenburg, Tieck, Schlegel himself had made their own: Read my Shakespeare, is the unspoken message of his Shakespeare lecture to his German audience, an instruction of less relevance for later French, English or other readers.

Certain Schlegelian preferences or prejudices nevertheless emerge: Shakespeare had links with both the intellectual Bacon and the political strivings of his age, but there was in his account of the English nation still some of that spirit of chivalry and feudalism, independence of mind and action, that had animated the Middle Ages. Not for the first time German ideas were being assimilated to the processes of foreign literature: Schlegel was clearly finding analogies with the Nibelungenlied , one of his current preoccupations.

Roman theatre was not like this: Aeschylus and Sophocles had been Athenian citizens, Seneca the court philosopher of Nero. Hence the amount of space, seemingly beyond all proportion three lectures out of fifteen , that Schlegel devotes to the disqualification of the neo-classical, the need to deny it houseroom in the wide scheme of European drama that he unfolds, one that also obliquely takes in the Indians, who with the Greeks were the only ancient people with a native dramatic tradition.

It reflected national characteristics and virtues love, honour. Much of this would take on a peculiar relevance as the Lectures appeared in print, the sections up to and including European neo-classicism in , followed in by the sections on Romantic drama. National drama would also be nation-building: These political aspirations as opposed to legal, military and educational reforms were of course not to be fulfilled in the German lands, and Prince Metternich, no doubt sitting in the front row of the lecture hall, would be the author of the later reaction that saw their frustration.

Their journey took them into the Bohemian lands: Goethe was rumoured to be in Carlsbad. This meeting never eventuated, but in Prague, where they arrived on 26 May, they hoped to meet Friedrich Gentz. He chose therefore to lie low in Prague. At their meeting, they got on famously: He had to borrow money from his brother to get this far, and more would be needed to see him to his ultimate destination.

His first communication from Vienna, in July , would inaugurate a litany recounting his tribulations, his waiting in the antechambers of the influential, his harassments, real and imagined, by the secret police. His first quarters were with Karl Gregor von Knorring: Wieland was gracious, even to Schlegel. Schlegel left the party at Weimar and made a quick dash across to Hanover. It was part of her discovery that the Germans were a profoundly religious people Protestant Germans, that is, for Catholics formed a disproportionately shorter part of the narrative.

She may not even have appreciated the differences inside German Protestantism. But the visit to the Moravian Brethren in Neudietendorf near Erfurt struck a different note. She described the communal life and worship of the Brethren, their regularity and tranquility, the harmony of their inner feelings and their outward conduct. In comparing them with Quakers, whom she knew from England or from Voltaire , she was showing her indifference in matters both of doctrine and observance: Hanover had in experienced occupations and troop billetings not least under Marshal Bernadotte: It was to be the last time that he saw his cherished and devoted mother.

Hanover had been swallowed up by this Napoleonic creation. Outside, Spain rose in revolt; later, Austria prepared for war. But one act of fealty towards Coppet stands out: He is more conciliatory in the matter of national dramatic styles, provided that none claims a monopoly of taste or excellence the second part of his Vienna Lectures, published later in the same year, would adopt a different tone.

Instead, he uses Constant to diminish Schiller. Schiller had not succeeded in containing his material in five acts; his trilogy was not, like those of the Greeks, the product of inner necessity, but of despair. Had Schiller been a more experienced dramatist, had he spent less time on philosophical or historical studies, he might have achieved the same five- act solution as Constant. This was the delayed critical voice of Jena. Reimer in his turn handed Schlegel over to Julius Hitzig in Berlin, a new publisher looking for copy and very glad to add the famous translator to his list.

Sophie Bernhardi had not forgotten her poetic ambitions amid her family affairs. Could Schlegel find a publisher for her verse epic Flore und Blanscheflur? He remembered Zimmer in Heidelberg. Zimmer was not interested, but he sensed a real prize when Schlegel offered him his Vienna Lectures. Schlegel had wanted them to appear in Vienna itself, but publishers there would only pay in paper money. Zimmer could offer proper currency, two and a half Carolins per sheet for a print-run of 1, Doubtless Schelling had a hand in this.

There was an academy project on standard German grammatical usage. Could he be persuaded? In fact Schlegel was far more interested in borrowing the Munich manuscript of the Nibelungenlied. Schlegel had remained behind while she, Sabran and Montmorency set out for the event, which took place on 17 August. It was the only folk event that she in fact seems to have seen and it suited her purposes admirably.

There were other spectators of note at Interlaken. As consumption of the first category of goods reaches the satiation point, he or she will move on to pursue the second and then third categories of goods. Menger found no arguments on value in general in the English Classical School:. What is important for the Smithian School is the concept of exchangeable value, which is not equivalent to the concept of value itself. The starting point of our research must be the latter concept, as argued by Menger. Furthermore, the critique would also be valid for future economists.

Recent economists have the habit of directly taking on the measurement of exchangeable value, without having discussed the concept and measurement of value itself. Menger believed that this procedure was a fatal error. These critical comments show that Menger used the same theoretical framework in the Fragment as the one used in his work. As far as his relationships with the English Classical School and other economists are concerned, one does not find any substantial differences in his evaluations. One thing that might be relevant to our understanding of the Fragment is the fact that Menger himself crossed out his famous Table.

Unfortunately, we do not have any information whatever about the meaning of these lines, as Kauder already pointed out. Or did he do so because he did not believe in the maximization model of economic science any more? If the latter was the case, does it mean that Menger gave up his position as a shining star of the Marginal Revolution? This remains a puzzle.

Lorenz von Stein was a major figure in the field of Staatswissenschaften when Menger was recruited as a Privatdozent Private Lecturer at Vienna University. He continued to be an important player in the faculty even after Menger was given a chair of economic science. As indicated elsewhere, Stein attempted to block him in the process of habilitation. Given the relationship between the two, one reads understandably harsh comments about Stein in the Fragment. One further comment quoted below is also worth mentioning:.

Economics cannot be generally accepted as far as it is not free from too much philosophy in its discourses; one of the negative examples is Stein, Mohl argued. On the basis of these arguments, Menger continued his critique of Stein:. To him, Stein obtained with great efforts and by unnecessary detour research results that were simple facts of a well-known daily experience.

Sahra Wagenknecht, DIE LINKE: Beenden Sie Ihr Konjunkturprogramm für Politikverdrossenheit!

Nothing shows the difference between the two scientists more clearly than the above quote. Languages are designed to obscure thoughts, so the poem goes. Then, Menger returned to German literature. The following comment is reminiscent of the remark cited above by Mohl, but it is based on another source:. As Menger indicated in the Fragment, this statement is based at least partially on the following remark by Albert Schwegler:. While Menger was critical of the scholastics, Schwegler suggested that it had come out of the sincere and rational motivation to understand the natural as well as social phenomena.

A brief summary of this section: As one can easily tell, these comments cannot be seen in the official obituary by him. As Yagi emphasized, the Fragment does include new arguments that do not exist in the edition, such as an attempt to include a section on ethics and economics.

Furthermore, Menger had begun to interpret economic phenomena from a teleological viewpoint. These were new elements, to be sure. But my overall impression is that the general tone was the same as that in his previous book, as far as the more narrowly understood economic theories are concerned. Much more work needs be done in the near future. This is relatively unimportant, but let me give some examples in what follows.

The same problem can be found in the three cases below: See the following example: As is often the case with the writers in the 19th century, Menger did not make any substantial distinction between c and k. If we try to keep the original spelling, c is better than k. Below are more examples: These cases above are rather minor compared to the mistakes in transcription, as I will show in what follows. In the marginal notes, Menger sometimes referred to Cairnes writing out of his own interest in methodological problems.

See the following mistake in transcription: Menger It is by such knowledge that man becomes the minister, and interpreter of Nature, and learns to control Nature by obeying her. Somehow Kauder inserted this word in the Hitotsubashi edition, without giving any reason. I must say that this is a serious error in transcription.

ogozoqosolym.tk: Norbert Bachleitner: Books

Let me list some below: Indeed, Kauder did a good job during his stay of several months in Tokyo. I have no intention of underestimating his contribution. However, the above mistakes should be eliminated. I thank all the participants for their critical comments, which have deepened my own understanding of the later Menger after the publication of his book.

The usual caveat applies. Campagnolo has already mentioned the relationship between Cairnes and Menger. Still my conclusion remains tentative; much more work is needed to put his liberalism in the appropriate historical context. Those without the command of the German language may turn to Campagnolo He quotes from the original, accompanied by English translation. His detailed explanation deserves to be quoted: Schmoller, on the other hand, was only indirectly criticized.

The following part of this section draws heavily on Yagi Presses Universitaire de France. New Perspectives on Austrian Economics, London: Kauder, Emile , Introduction to and Comments on Menger Kauder explained the chronology of the Fragment as follows: Apparently he wrote down the greatest part between and , for most of the books of references and all the enclosed newspaper clippings have been published before Some notes have been added much more recently. A few pertinent facts make it likely that Menger may have ceased working on this fragment between and On the original title page the book carries an advertisement for the case of los.

The honest finder is promised crowns for returning this copy to the owner. Austria-Hungary introduced the crown currency in In the posthumous edition no traces of the Hitotsubashi fragment can be found. In his own words: The second stage of the attempt at revision seems to have occurred in the mids, after the pause in the Debate on Method Methodenstreit enabled Menger to return to theoretical investigation When Was the Fragment Written? Let me quote the following, which occurs at the beginning of the Fragment: Carl Menger I Schottenbastei No.

The following quote occurs soon after the above: Menger and the German Historical School It is an established fact that Menger was deeply embedded in the tradition of the German Historical School, although he did not share every point with its members. Dass das Princip des Laissez faire keine wissenschaftliche Basis habe ibid.

The above summary corresponds to the following part of the essay: It follows that there is no security that the economic phenomena of society, as at present constituted, will always arrange themselves spontaneously in the way which is the most common good. In other words, laissez-faire falls to the ground as a scientific doctrine. I say as a scientific doctrine; for let us be careful not to overstep the limits of our argument.

It is one thing to repudiate the scientific authority of laissez-faire , freedom of contract, and so forth; it is a totally different thing to set up the opposite principle of State control, the doctrine of paternal government. For my part, I accept neither one doctrine nor the other; and as a practical rule, I hold laissez-faire to be incomparably the safer guide. Only let us remember that it is a practical rule, and not a doctrine of science; as a rule in the main sound, but like most other sound practical rules, liable to numerous exceptions; above all, a rule which must never for a moment be allowed to stand in the way of the candid consideration of any promising proposal of social or industrial reform.

Comte bei Cairnes p. Er findet dass die wirtschaftlichen Tatsachen von verschiedenartigen andern Tatsachen durchwoben sind und die Gesellschaftswissenschaft deshalb als ein Ganzes betrachted werden muss. Such an opinion, proceeding from a philosopher of M. Comte, moreover, has supported this unfavourable judgment by a train of elaborate argumentation; but, so far as I know, his arguments have not yet been seriously grappled with. After telling a story about the development of the natural sciences, Cairnes now turned to political economy: This has been the course of development in physical science, the method by which the secrets of external nature have been unlocked.

It has been a method, not of study in the ensemble, but of study through the elements of analysis followed by synthesis. He proposes to break them up into their elementary groups, and he takes one of these groups-the phenomena of wealth-as the subject of his special investigation. Das ist eine falsche Methode. Bastiat ist ein Advocat. It matters not what the proposal be, whether wide or narrow in its scope, severely judicious or wildly imprudent, - if its object is to accomplish definite practical ends, then I say it has none of the characteristics of a science, and has no just claim to the name.

Dieser Mangel zeigt sich in den mangelhaften allgemeinen Lehren. Arbeit ist ihnen bei der Preistheorie was wesentlich anders als eine commodity, ebenso Capital und Bodennutzung. Menger has already mentioned this problem in his book: Man lasse sie aber 3 Tage dursten und stelle sie dann vor das Wasser, ein grosser Theil, alle aber am 4 u 5 Tage werden zu den Nahrungsmitteln greifen. Menger found no arguments on value in general in the English Classical School: One further comment quoted below is also worth mentioning: Unsere Nationalliteratur kann nie zur vollem Anerkennung und Wirksamkeit gelangen, so lange sie nicht die barbarische Geschmacklosigkeit unserer angeblich philosophischen Sprachweise ablegt.

On the basis of these arguments, Menger continued his critique of Stein: